A belief in Tune Dem (or Tunedem) as the key measure of sound quality is a shibboleth of the Linn faithful. There’s a well known UK dealer (not on this forum, to my knowledge) who has made comments such as (paraphrasing) “component X wasn’t developed using Tunedem, so it can’t be any good.”
1 Like
And that is the same as when you feel love. You can’t sit still and timing is everything 
This encapsulates for me the meaning of PRaT.
Every part of every component in a Naim system has been chosen and used by a small group of audio engineers over 50 years to develop and hone a sound focussed on PRaT and making recordings of live musical performances sound alive in your home.
2 Likes
I once got tucked up with a Linn Tune Dem (at this point I’d absolutely say this was my fault) where I went to a London based dealer with the intention of buying a new Audiolab pre power combination.
Instead after a demo I came away with a used Linn Lk1, Dirak power supply and a new Lk100 power amp.
The track was “Everybody Hurts” from REM and the dealer kept playing the soaring guitar piece and the Linn made this sound more exciting than the Audiolab.
I never got on with that setup, it could have its moments but I ended up listening to certain types of music that suited it and not me.
Anyway it was replaced with my Densen Beat B100 integrated amp (after I’d gone further down Linn route with Wakonda pre), on paper should have been a downgrade.
It wasn’t , the Densen destroyed the Linn in every aspect, I then added the B300 power amp and for many years bi-amped.
Still have both of them on a system today, still sounds great. Densen don’t talk of PRAT but their original motto was “Life’s too short for boring hifi”.
Now the Densen to my mind doesn’t exaggerate anything and can play all genres, it certainly helped me expand my listening repertoire. Its strengths are things that I also like in my Naim gear, just it also has a certain liquidity (whatever that is) to the flow of the music as well, a certain ease without needing to force things.
I think their motto highlighted a lot of what I heard from many manufacturers at the time and there were many products that I’d read about that I was interested in but upon listening just didn’t do it for me.
3 Likes
For sure,Pace Rhythm and Timing works well for many things in life 
1 Like
Rega amps/sources or Rega amps plus Naim sources has that same PRAT as all Naim gear. There are more brands out there which do PRAT justice.
It was no more than Linn’s marker for good sound. Different dealers would have had different interpretations. Many years prior to it, Linn claimed to focus on pitch…this was understandable, as the TTs of the day (pre CD) were nowhere near as speed stable as they are now.
The interesting thing for me is that Naim owners seem to think that their gear has better PRaT than some equaly good sounding competitor’s offering.
Linn still talks about pitch…from their website : "For example — since the perceived pitch of a note consists of the sum of its fundamental plus its harmonics, a distortion that adds extra harmonics will shift the pitch of that note up slightly. Likewise, a distortion that results in the rolling-off of higher frequencies (thus reducing the amplitude of some harmonics) can lower the perceived pitch.
Well, did not think that they would still be droning on about that!
Pitch is a bit easier to define though.
…and yes, Naim will be ‘good at pitch’ too!
1 Like
I had Moon, Nad, Rega, Luxman and Cyrus but when I first heard the Nait 5i I knew there and then that was the sound I was looking for.
It prioritizes the music itself, rather than highlighting the intricacies, separation or painting the most vivid holographic image.
1 Like
All i will say is
Pr@t is a great word to use if you think only naim can do it
But for many of us music is about the exquisite intricacies rather than some homogenous wash. Listen to a work by Mahler or Shostakovich and you can hear the motifs and themes intricately woven into the works. Listen to an accompanied folk singer, listen into the voice you can hear the emotion, whether it be sorrow, anger or joy, as opposed to just listening to the ‘tune’.
If all my system could do was give an overall musical impression as opposed to details I would sell it immediately. Luckily Naim with the right speakers is about exquisite details and not just the ‘music’. Music means nothing without people … it’s the people in the crowd that are interesting, not just the crowd.
I have had (and still have some) systems or components from Arcam, NAD, Audiolab, Yamaha, Chord and Cyrus, and they can absolutely render musical engagement like Naim… they might have slightly different balances or compromises, but they get to the emotional heart if setup properly, just like Naim.
4 Likes
Agree…if your gear is really excellent, it will do everything well. Otherwise it will, sometimes over time, leave you disppointed.
1 Like
I had demoed a pair of Linn 800 mono w klimax, cables are chord . My oh my , the prat is so good … for once at that moment , t though I am listening to naim
I have no idea what makes PRAT but I think it takes a lot of energy to amplify low frequencies as fast as high frequencies. Naim amplifiers power supply are large in relation to their low wattage output.
Reducing the bandwith can help the speed it takes to amplify. That could be why Naim preamplifiers limit the bandwith.
One way you generate PRAT and in the other you reduce harmonics, thus reducing air and spaciousness. A compromise that many would endorse…
All IMO of course!
People are all over the map regarding how to judge music and what is important to them regarding HiFi music reproduction in the home. PRaT is but one way to evaluate. For me, even the best of systems struggle to create music that comes close to what we hear in a performance space with good acoustics. Sometimes it is not about cost. Cheaper systems can, at times do this better. For me, it is about engagement. Am I consistently engaged when I listen at home, across a variety of recordings or am I just selective in choosing music that plays to my system’s strengths.
3 Likes
Someone on this forum once gave a great description of the “Naim” sound. I can’t find it now, but it was basically something like this:
Imagine you’re in a concert hall listening to a band. If you’re right at the front of the gig, the sound is powerful and raw. Leading edge of notes are prominent etc. The detail might not be there, but you’re full engaged and loving the sound.
Now imagine you’re at the back of the concert hall. The notes have now rounded a bit, but you’re get a more filled picture and perhaps picking up more detail etc. The sound just isn’t quiet as engaging though.
Some people like to be at the front of the gig, some at the back. The Naim sound is the front of the gig.
This analogy isn’t perfect, but I like it all the same.
6 Likes
But that is all about reflections of the sound. If you are at the back or edges of most halls you are getting a very diffuse and muddled sound… it can give people terrible headaches, others are less affected, however your brain is working hard to decode. At the front of the hall near the sound sources the reflections are far less prominent, your brain can work less hard, a far more enjoyable and engaging experience, and if too loud put party ear protectors in, that protect audible frequency eq, whilst attenuating.
If a hifi or speaker / room combination produces the sound like at the back of a hall, I’d suggest it’s not even hifi.
2 Likes
I didn’t know about the focus on live recordings - whilst in some ways it makes sense, it depends so much on the recording! I generally have not been a fan of live recordings of rock music, because my experience was that many were quite poor recordings (this is going back to the seventies, which of course is when Naim started). I can understand it would take some emphasis of something in the sound to get over the recording limitations.
And some at a good position a third of the way back in the middle, with balanced sound and good view… But there is a difference - live a good view is important, and poorer sound might be, and often is, tolerated, whereas at home the sound is all important.
IIRC Steve Sells said recently on here that he used Neil Young ‘Live at Massey Hall’ as a test track.
I generally prefer recordings of concerts played with (mainly) acoustic instruments.
When you can hear the interplay between the musicians, especially when they are improvising.
And you can hear the sound of the space of the venue.
That’s over half of my listening.
Almost always instrumental music, without vocals.
And if recorded in a studio, preferably done with minimal overdubs and compression, and often recorded with all or most of the players playing together at the same time.
But obviously there are quite a few exceptions to these general preferences.
1 Like