"Pace", it's importance for enjoyment?

David, I think unwanted vibration *drains* energy from the machine, energy lost to music reproduction. Aren't our efforts focused on extracting that last ounce of energy from our system as a whole (cords, ICs, isolation tweaks...)? Perhaps the Neuance does just that -- protect agaist energy loss?

Whatjd: IMO, pace is largely (not exclusively) a function of correct/constant speed and tracking/"clocking" ability. In a TT you can influence this ability; in a cdp you're limited to mechanical devices again, unless you happen to be qualified for electronic experiments. TTs are mechanical devices so, if the speed remains constant despite the groove-stylus friction fluctuations, you get the rythm/pace -- when it's there... BTW, Mr T, of Lynn fame, prides himself for having introduced the term "pace" -- hence the british mags -- to world vocabulary! (I'm not doubting it & I like Lynn gear.)

In my *limited* experience with SACD (only the Sony-1) the pace was no better than my redbook S-Line. But the resolution, space and 3dimensionality was! I attribute the differences to the software: cd was introduced ages ago! Can you remember the (abysmal) performance level of your '80s personal computer? Bet you don't even want to think about it!

Cheers!

whatjd; I think that many factors in a stereo system can affect "pace" (also called PRT, or Pace, Rhythm and Timing). For example, when I used a Levinson AES/EBU digital cable between ML 37 transport and ML 360S DAC, music was tremendously detailed-- to the point of analytical, but it was not "musical". So I tried A Cardas AES/EBU cable and lost some detail but music was much improved as PRT was much better. I greatly preferred the Cardas. Cheers. Craig

OTOH, putting a Townshed Sink under my tubed pre-amp increased detail in a positive way while maintaing (or improving) PRT.

I also find "Pace" is most noticeable with a digital source. This is why we debate cables a lot on Agon, especially digital cables from transport to DAC. The digital signal is just 1's and 0's so you would think any cable would do. However, if the cable does a bad job of transfering the 1's and 0's to the DAC (too slow, etc) it will affect the Pace of the music.

I cannot explain digital from a technical stand point, however there are things in the circuit like the "clock" that will certainly affect the Pace if not doing their job well (jitter?).

Phew!...interesting posts. I too have to report much pleasure from the use of a Neuance platform under my old CDP. Is the fine "pace" a function of the improved coherence from perceiving harmonics as better "attached" to their fundamentals? Is it the ABSENCE of distorting spurious vibrations that I then take as cleaner...and therefore quicker (more musical) information?
I used to think of PraT as being more a function of impulse
response and group delay in the gross aspects of the reproduction chain, meaning of course the speaker drivers.
Bass "lag" is a horrendous problem in pro audio. I have a friend who manufactures powered monitors for musicians. He purposely rolls the response off below 70Hz (!) specifically to eliminate that lagging sensation of "the bass following you around the room!". Initially I thought this design was a consequence of sloppy implementation, but then I found that opinion to be seconded by acoustic bass players, too.
If their fiddles require reinforcement they prefer a very quick, rolled-off monitor over a more extended one that is slovenly or overhangingly "ripe". "Don't worry...all you have to hear are the harmonics; your mind will fill in the fundamental." is their rejoinder.
Along this point I have to say that my system PRaT improved
MUCH more when listening to a 3-way speaker with a very fast, tight woofer (Verity Audio) than with others less
"coherent" temporally (Nautilus 803, for example); the effect of the Neuance seems to be to improve the snap of the midrange/treble instead.
I remember how surprised I was when demoing an ARCAM 9 last year: MUCH less rythmic than my old Rotel 855! Why was this?
The Rotel has a much older, simpler DAC, but indeed a beefier transport. Sure the ARCAM sounded cleaner, smoother, more detailed, and bloomier, but certainly possessing less PRaT! Now I wonder if the Neuance could do wonders for an FMJ23?....
So it's becoming clear to me that jitter-reduction, for example, is a component in preserving music's temporal integrity, but only in the context of excellent loudspeaker transducer impulse and phase response as a prerequisite!
"If ya can't dish it out right you might as well not heat up the stove" or some other lame analogy.... Good night, guys.