Image vs involvement and PRaT
Posted by: Arye_Gur on 02 August 2001
(If you are interested with names, I can put them later, I don't remember now).
It was a good demonstration and a nice dealer I didn't know him before.
While listening, I noticed that there is not a great image - and compared to the astonishing image of ML and Krell, I started to wonder if a good imaging destroys involving and PRaT (as I think Naim is far far better than ML and Krell in these points) - or with other words, manufacturing an involving system means bad imaging.
Is there a system that makes the both good, sounds like a Naim and gives imaging like a Krell ?
Arye
But not my usual dealer....
I was wrong, the issue was about centeruing the pack - members said that in order to center it they drop it instead of resting it on the disc.
Arye
many thanks. ah, now i understand.
i never bother doing anything special with puck position. i can usually centre it without needing to do a double somersault first.
enjoy
ken
What a great discusssion. To me, whole imaging thing is a band-aid for lack of musicality. So many high end brands are one-trick-ponys. Sure they image, but no tune and no real sense of PRAT.
A firend of mine has a mega b uck system based around a pair of Wilsons. This system is known for imaging, but I swear that my old active NBL system imaged more and did all of the tune/PRAT thing to add. While I can appreciate his system, I get board listening to it.
DBLs are a different beast all together. The DBL is flat earth to the extreme. They ar best described as a wall of sound--no imaging, but who cares because the sound is so complete and whole. The Naim literature describes the sound as emotional--which is accurate. The DBLs literally breath, and their sound takes a few minutes to accept. Not that they are bright, edgy, or slow--which they re not in any way. Once you have converted to their sound, everything else sounds broken. (sorry, DBL snobbery)
In the end, N aim speakers makes you appreciate the "real" attributes of music. And if your pair happen to image, think of it as icing on the cake. You're getting the best of both worlds: round and flat.
Chris Bell
CDS2/52/500/DBL55
In the end, N aim speakers makes you appreciate the "real" attributes of music.
couldn't agree more. although you could easily start another long discussion on what the "real" attributes of music are. i sort of know what you mean without you having to explain in any more detail.
enjoy
ken
quote:
They ar best described as a wall of sound--no imaging
Chris, my DBLs do the stereo thing surprisingly well. The sound envelopes the speakers so the stereo goes either side of the speakers. They also the scale is right (ie the 'images' are big). Its more realistic than anything I got out of SBLs.
You are right though, the music the DBLs pour out nails your ass to the seat it grabs your attention so much.
One of the problems I've found with 'imaging speakers' is that this trick is only found in one small area only. The DBLs on the other nail the music wherever I am in the room. In fact I've taken to lazing on a sofa to the side of the speakers. The music is great and uts very comfortable!
i suppose i could claim that my system is now "imaging" better (sort of flat and round earth in one) -- but i guess i am never entirely sure precisely what is meant byt imaging -- so i will just say, system is more enjoyable, much more so...
enjoy
ken
last saturday afternoon, i was playing my system with the door to my office open so i could hear some music while sitting in the garden "enjoying" the good weather.
later that evening, nina asked me "ken, what jazz were you paying earlier? -- it was so good i actually sat down in the gdn to listen"
"oooops, i hope it wasnt too loud nina"
"no, it was very pleasant music ken, i enjoyed it thoroughly. i look fwd to some more!! "
oh, the records were charlie haden private collection vol 1 and 2, and also lee konitz 'alone together'.
what a nice neighbour to have!!! she could hear my system across the hedge into her garden -- and i swear, i wasnt playing that loud.
moral of the story. i doubt if nina was concerned about stereo image or soundstage. she just enjoyed the music and wants to know a bit more about charlie haden.
enjoy
ken
Colin Shelbourn
Are you quite sure her name's Nina? I wouldn't like you to get off on the wrong foot with your appreciative new neighbour.
yes, i am sure, why? did you think i had mis-spelt that?? ha ha ha
enjoy
ken
It stood for
Timing and relative dimension in soundstaging.
Nobody paid any attention though!
BTW, did you ever get
Doctor Who on the telly in the States?
It's always a nice day for it! Have a good one 
Steve.
Yes it is possible to design a system to sound one way or another. Systems do better in some areas than others and occassionally even deliberately exaggerate some elements of the musical performance.
In my experience, a live musical instrument or instruments (not synthesizers) sound so much better than any hifi I've heard that I believe there is still a long way for the designers to go. A live saxophone, for example, just sounds fantastic - dynamic and oozing 3D subtelty.
So both PRAT and image and other things that don't fall within these adjectives are needed in the correct proportions to make music.
It turns out Naim does some things well and some badly and Krell does others well and not so well. As NAim forum members I encourage us all to express a desire for Naim to improve their systems to be more whole in their performance and provide Naim with advice as to what needs to be improved.
Perhaps if Naim and D'Agostino got together over a beer they could come up with the best of both!
BA