Two terms I don't understand - please explain


Hello...

I've read through this forum as well as forums on other sites and there are two (2) terms that I don't understand: "Slam" and "Prat" when discussing turntables, cartridges, etc.

Could someone kindly explain to this idiot what they actually describe?

Thanks and regards,

Jan
jsmoller
I thought "slam" referred to midbass energy, and "PRaT" to speed stability. Clock jitter in a digital source affects PRaT, so that when you try to tap your toe to a jittery player you keep losing the beat. It's a weird experience the first time you notice it.
I'm really curious about those of us not able to tap their toes with a CD player. I have tons of play-along CDs from Music Minus One and Jamey Aebersold and this has never happened to me. What are some CDPs that that will exhibit this problem? I'd like to find one to see what you guys are talking about.

Dave
"Please explain how an amp alters either Pace, Rhythm or Time."

Thought I did that, to an extent. Another shot: having microdynamics that do not slur attack and decay.

But I'm no electrical engineer, so won't pretend to play that game.

Anyway, some amps -- Naim in particular -- are famous for having PRaT, and are even (with Linn Sondeks) the source of the whole concept. I think what PRaT refers to is essentially pegged to whatever it is they do that people identified in the sound and called "PRaT. Not sure what it exactly is, or what they do that accounts for it, but whatever it is, it's PRaT", and Naim amps do it. Krells and CJs, in comparison, I gather, don't.
04-29-08: Rnm4 said:
""Please explain how an amp alters either Pace, Rhythm or Time."

Thought I did that, to an extent. Another shot: having microdynamics that do not slur attack and decay."

Ok, so we agree, it's about dynamics, not Pace or Rhythm or Time, right? That's my whole point. People call it PRaT when it's really dynamics.

Dave
Well, transient response too; but I don't think you can fully distinguish transient response from dynamics. Anyway, nobody ever said PRaT was reducible to any one separable factor. It's more complex than that. So the fact that it clearly has to do with dynamics and isn't clearly exactly one other thing doesn't mean it's just dynamics.