Flat earther?

As an ex ES14 owner I wouldn't call it world class but it can be extremely good in the context of home audio.

The driver itself is superb and very well engineered. Leagues ahead of most 8" drivers of the day and still excellent today.
The problem is that Epos didn't last long - the real Epos that is - and it was soon swallowed by larger outfits and the original design modified. I honestly believe that when the ES14 was later modified, those doing the work didn't quite understand or appreciate what the speaker was trying to do.
Early mid 80s ES14 with the factory bungs in place have crisp, well timed and very articulate bass. True it doesn't plumb the depths but it'll go as low a medium sized Spendor or Proac which is fine for most listeners.

 

how about kensai's?

 

You mean plots?

 

plot's not plod's yes, rob i will get mine soon.

 

> We can discuss what is and isn't PR&T all day long on these forums and you wouldn't really be 100%
> sure if what you read was correct.

The responses here and reading one or two similar threads on other forums has given me a pretty good idea of how the term is used, by what type of home audio enthusiast and in what context. I am perfectly happy to accept that it does not necessarily map onto something that I would consider physical although one or two are suggesting that it is a characteristic NAIM/Linn/Flat Earth/whatever sound.

> However, one ten minute comparison at a dealers with Naim vs a piece of gear which compromises PR&T
> moreso and you'll know for sure.

If it is a characterisitic sound then surely it would be necessary to listen to a range of PRaT labelled products in order to pick up on what, if anything, they have in common that is not shared by non-PRaT labelled products. In the past I have taken no interest in Linn and NAIM products because they are poor value for money unless you place value on the "intangibles". In future I probably will take some interest but not to the extent of seeking them out.

> h.g.,
> Try this. All will become clear.
> Joe

Thanks. Clearer indeed although I am not sure I fully understood all of it.

 

H.G.,

PR&T is like anything thing else in life that makes you scratch your head until the guy next to you points it out. You'll then laugh at how such a fundamental aspect of determining musical pleasure has been overlooked for judging reproduction devices yet applied subconsiously by all of us when we listen to the real thing. I suppose it's just too simplistic for some who fret over or require validation for everything they experience in life hence the scoffing you read about in some of these forums.

I don't know if this will help but think in terms of evaluating a musical performance as a normal person would instead of analyzing bits of sound like an audiophile does. For example, do the musicians sound like they are in tune with other? Do they sound like they are having a good time? (Are you having a good time while listening to their record?) Does the bass player or guitarist sound drunk as if they're lagging behind with the beat? Can you hear all of the musicians all of the time or do some of them fade in and out? I'm not sure about you but I have no idea whether more or less bass is "accurate" because I don't have access to the master tape. However, I do know if the band sounds like it's having a good time (or I am) or if they're in tune assuming I'm evaluating with musical selections created by artists from my own culture. In every case, the piece of gear that did best with these types of questions ended up being my best choice for the long-haul.

Once you discover what kind of questions work best for you and what to listen for, you can use it as a tool for evaluating whether the device under test makes you want to stay up all night spinning records or CDs or watch TV instead.

...and if judging with PR&T doesn't help, forget about it, just use whatever method works best. It's simply a more relevant tool for some of us who have no idea what's actually supposed to be on the record or CD.


regards,

dave

 

There are many makes and models of Hi-Fi that do just this, and most of them better at it than Linn and Naim. The difference that created PRaT was the imposing of a *timing* on all music as opposed to leaving it up to the musicians

 

Some music has the fine interplay of keenly skilled musicians bending notes and timing for effect, playing off beat to give a sense of vigour or falling asleep at the wheel. They can tip the pace forwards and backwards as they see fit for effect, to communicate intent.

If your hifi is incapable of recreating this, then it's not hifi. If your equipment highlights the timing in everything is plays by spotlighting the leading edge of notes, then it's not hifi.

Richard is spot on.

 

I'm not entirely sure I've heard any equipment that couldn't do this.

 

> PR&T is like anything thing else in life...

Thanks for the input Dave but, as far as I understand it, your view of PRaT does not map to anything physical that can be defined and measured. Is that correct?

> The difference that created PRaT was the imposing of a *timing* on all music as opposed to leaving it
> up to the musicians

For people that consider PRaT to be a physical property, I am curious what it is to do with timing they consider to be altered/improved in the hardware? Perhaps it is necessary to consider the question irrelevant if one is to believe in PRaT as an explantion for what is perceived?

 

PRaT is a sonic characteristic that accentuates certain properties in the music at the expense of others - full stop!

It is not natural, it is an artifice.

 

Despite the naysayers the flat earth way of thinking spawned a multi national industry out of cottages! The flat earth way was a reaction against other ideas at the time; big speakers are best and it's all about detail.
Linn and Naim reversed this thinking and in the process made a vibrant industry. Think back, in the mid eighties even comet had a proper hi fi section.
Far from bring the Antichrist linn and Naim championed a new hi fi pardigm.
At the end of the day they are still here and have adapted.
I love em for it. Naim got a Queens award this year, yes, this year. When the world was in the shit a small British company done good.

 

They did well in getting people to think differently and to give proper consideration to the source component, but it stops there and they (Linn and the aligned FE dealer machine) did a great deal of harm.

While focus on the source was all well and good they went completely OTT in propagating the notion that horrid little squarky speakers were fine.
In so doing they helped damage a superb, established british loudspeaker industry.

We also lost some superb Japanese kit which could frankly run rings around much of the home grown FE kit. Such kit sold well in other countries but became almost extinct in the uk thanks to the bias in the uk press and dealers.

Many uk cottage start-ups went to the wall as they simply couldn't get passed the prevailing bias. it is quite instructive to read old 80s mags such as News and Answers.
Note that every other issue contained news of some exciting new uk product, then wind forward a year or two and they'd vanished.
A few specially approved products were allowed some room, so for example Onix amplifiers were fine but only because they fitted the dealer upgrade hierarchy model which culminated in a big Naim amp.
Or you could have a Planar 3 or Mantra on the way to LP12 nirvana.

I feel quite ashamed to have defended it all back then and for a good few years afterwards.

From where I was standing this was mainly a Linn and dealer thing. Naim (and even more so Rega) appeared to be swept along by this brave new world, and you can't really blame them for making hay while the sun was shining.

That doesn't mean there were not many worthy FE products. I think the LP12 is a fine TT but it was never the best. Naim made very good amplifiers but then so did plenty of other people, they just didn't get a look-in. My main criticisms of that period were not that the kit was poor, just that bias and mis-selling was rife.

 

This post is a classic example of someone who got sucked in and is still stuck in the overpriced bullshit brainwash.

 

Couldn't agree more.

And remember this was all based on a design and product ripped off from a gentleman who stupidly happened to drink too much, they didn't even design that turntable for heaven sake!!

JV at naim wasn't in the slightest bit interested in the hi-fi market, he was building PA amps for the studio and radio station monitor market he got talked into it by Linn to complete the marketing bullshit. They had *nothing* going for them but their marketing, if you ever saw (or I should say heard) Ivor T and Charlie Brennan haranguing customers and dealers in the early days you would have no doubt of that fact.

The time and the circumstances were ripe for this and the more people who got sucked into it the more the "Emperors new cloths" syndrome applied and the more who were sucked in, to the point that the industry even after all this time and so called progress is still polluted by these sheep, just a few minutes reading PFM will show them to you.

 

I stumbled across some magazine articles from the 70s covering that story a few weeks ago. Went on over serveral months and focused on the court patent adjudication for Robertson/Linn bearing. The upshot was that Robertson won the case but Linn had it overturned after appeal. Lots of not very nice accusations were made against Robertson and it seems like the judge joined in. Interesting but unpleasant reading.

 

I will give you a classic example of the facts of this. In the early 1980's I was using a Trio L07D direct drive turntable, the *finest* engineered and sounding turntable produced at that time that was available in the UK, as the Pioneer (Exclusive Range) P3 and P3a were never made available here.

I had to stop using it because it caused derision amongst the sheep and the reviewing fraternity that I wasn't using a Linn LP12 at shows, so I lost credibility. So I had to use a worse turntable in order to gain credibility - how stupid and daft can you get!!? but that was the *golden age* of UK hi-fi according to Flatty.

Even now a small UK speaker manufacturer has virtually admitted he uses naim amps for shows, not because they are better, but to get credibility and a way into the market - *even now*!!! surely we should have grown out of this by now

The decision for Albarry to go back into production for me is enough satisfaction that what I have been saying for the last 5 years on forums is finally coming home to roost. The companies that were killed by the Linn bullshit and foul and in some case illegal marketing tactics should all look again at doing the same as Neil Burdett, by selling direct and marketing on line, there is a flat field at last where product sonic excellence can decide which products and companies succeed.

 

Not quite, 'they' (ho ho ) as you know are of the view that all competent SS amplifiers sound the same which changes things more than a little
Under those circumstances you quite rightly use what others will most want to hear.

I certainly agree that you shouldn't knowingly use something you believe to be inferior.

 

He was stomped on, there were some serious miscarriages of justice involved in this of stripping a man of his life work and love, by a self centred scheming egotist. There was more manipulation of the judicial system going on here than anyone will ever be able to prove, but the whole thing was sick! Plus Hammish Robertson paid the ultimate price, many people called it suicide even if the courts decided otherwise. The man basically drunk himself to death in a fit of depression, he died drowning in his own vomit?

I knew the man as I was working for Acoustic Research at the time and he based the design on the AR turntable (which he owned) not the Thorens TD150 as many people think. Though the TD150 according to people I have spoken to was also based on Ed Vilchers work conceptually which is why the story evolved.