The thing about objectivists is...

I always liked Eleanor Roosevelt.
Very underrated unless you've read up on her.

All the best,
Nonoise

How many times can a phoenix rise from it's ashes? He'll have to use a plucked chicken for his avatar if he keeps this up.

The last two comments go completely contrary to the OP's intent and question. 
Is there a thread highjacking in progress?

I'll let the others here simply read my post without the hassle of going back to the 1st page and judge for themselves instead of relying on your take:

"Rhythm and Pace" is a term that's been in use for many, many decades and how you don't see it having any meaning in "this context" is baffling to me, unless you're under, say, 20 years of age, and have no appreciation for what's gone on before you.

What you say could be the factors are some of the factors in determining "rhythm and pace". If it comes across more realistically, then it will have that "rhythm and pace."

That, and the contradictions in what you describe in your scenario with one system versus another shows that one system is better at it than another and is, therefore, responsible for the difference.

"Rhythm and pace" aren't something you can plug into a system. It's the result of the system, in toto.

All the best,
Nonoise

Oh, and do keep up with the childish retorts....they're amusing.

All the best,
Nonoise

@tylermunns

Wow. Your quotes don’t apply to me so why direct them at me? Or do you just like putting things in quotation marks to add some sort of brilliance to your blather?

Must have caught you off guard with your off handed and not well thought out remarks in the first place. Have you been harboring a grudge over this debate on PRaT is and what constitutes it from before?

PRaT is a term that has meaning and always has, and will continue to despite your hatred of people who can actually describe what they hear to others. Have fun at whatever it is that do when listening, because it’s not for the reasons anyone I know does.

All the best,
Nonoise

@tylermunns ,

If you believe that, then you are in a very small minority of audiophiles who do so. Like I said before, the term PRaT has been around for decades and shouldn't even be doubted unless someone is so new to this game that they need to look it up.

If a piece of gear is/was poorly designed, then it couldn't convey the PRaT in the music, so yes, undoubtably, it's inherent in the design of the gear as the maker of said gear knows it and made sure it could reproduce it. 

It may all boil down to just being a hell of a lot more accurate but being so allows it to sound all the more realistic, and that, my friend, is in the gear and not in someone's head.

When they hear it, they recognize it, and then express it, and then people like you and others fly off the handle about it, dancing on the head of a pin. 

All the best,
Nonoise

@tylermunns ,

Your response makes about as much sense as your statement that I tried to address. Kind of nonsensical. There's nothing vague in what I said, nor was it rude. 

Rhythm and pace, or as the British use to call it, PRAT, has always been known to refer to just how realistic the sound is to the point where it has you actively participating with it as you listen. You know, moving your feet or bobbing your head. 

It's just another perfectly acceptable way of saying it sounds more realistic and I don't see what the problem is with anyone using it.

All the best,
Nonoise

"Rhythm and Pace" is a term that's been in use for many, many decades and how you don't see it having any meaning in "this context" is baffling to me, unless you're under, say, 20 years of age, and have no appreciation for what's gone on before you.

What you say could be the factors are some of the factors in determining "rhythm and pace". If it comes across more realistically, then it will have that "rhythm and pace."

That, and the contradictions in what you describe in your scenario with one system versus another shows that one system is better at it than another and is, therefore, responsible for the difference.

"Rhythm and pace" aren't something you can plug into a system. It's the result of the system, in toto.

All the best,
Nonoise

It's too bad we can't get the sound to show itself on the cave walls so we can debate on what is really real, the people around the fire or their shadows.

All the best,
Nonoise

I like this guy. All of the discussions that followed remind me of Haykawa's admonition that the symbol is not the thing being symbolized, the word is not the thing, and the map is not the territory. Actually, it was Korzybski who came up with the map saying but Hayakawa is the one I read all those years ago.

Experience is a purely subjective thing. Reconciling after the act, can be done objectively if one wishes, but it's done afterwards.

All the best,
Nonoise