ATC speakers / Monitors

[czt]

I am guessing your next line will read something like “Trinnov” etc. Another product that does not actually work in practice, but only shifts problems

An ATC and Trinnov fan :

Spoiler

 

[DSJR]

It’s a pity ATC can’t/won’t make a contemporary loudspeaker design, is it simply not having the skill set or pandering to their traditional user demographic?
Keith

They make a more modern one, it's called SCM11!!! Flatter balance and more trendy looks, the basic responses I've seen do look flatter than the 19/20 which I still maintain were balanced that way deliberately to match other monitors of that era (2000 thereabouts).

I wonder what speakers @Ilkless recommends and uses as their preferred playback speaker system?

Got so say I've never seen a full dispersion job done on 50ASL or 100ASL models, but my 100A's measured pretty darned flat. I was given a copy of the response they did (and kept) when newly assembled and also a couple of years after (same basically). The 100SL bass driver replacement done by the subsequent owner involved a total redesign of the port behind the hole in the baffle and again, no idea how the bass response altered by the update (current 100's have radiused baffle holes).

 

[SoundGuy]

They do wave guide the tweeter and 3” dome. They could crossover lower on the tweeter but the mid actually works well pushed towards the upper limit of its range. I think the intent is to push the crossover outside of the more critical (musically important) mid range. B&W often do the same (high tweeter crossover point) but B&W use a 6 inch mid and the mid range beaming leaves a serious off axis mid range hole in their response

See, that's the thing I don't get. They already do use waveguides on the mid dome, why not on the tweeter? It makes crossing the tweeter and mid easier by matching the directivity, it minimizes tweeter beaming above 10k, it improves tweeter sensitivity by providing something resembling horn loading....

If you look at the SCM25A's horizontal off-axis response behavior from Sound and Recording (if you want to read the whole review, it has to be paid for - I sourced this from another site where someone else posted it)...

It's overall quite even if you look at the -6dB (yellow) - minus the tweeter mid crossover, which is a touch messy because of a combination of a relatively high crossover point (~3.5k) and a lack of waveguide loading on the tweeter. Then the tweeter beams starting around 8k.

Honestly for a speaker sans waveguide loading on the tweeter this is pretty good.

Compare that to the KH310...

The tweeter and mid on this cross around 2KHz is totally even, and the tweeter doesn't beam. This is a result of the waveguide loading of the tweeter.

NB: The flare around 1k is a "one toothed comb" from Neumann's kind of head-scratching choice to cross the midrange and woofer quite high, around 650hz - shift that 150hz lower and it wouldn't be an issue.

Interesting. ATC has slightly wider dispersion like they are aiming for 90 degrees rather than 75 - at least across the mid. It may be a trade off between more natural vs a more horn loaded sound (ultimately a wave guide becomes a horn and has an associated certain sound as the directivity narrows and how a deeper throat affects wavefronts). On paper the Neumann plot looks technically better but will it sound quite as natural with a narrower dispersion overall. Their choice seems governed by the beaming of the woofer at the lower crossover point and that then determines the dispersion for the rest of the design. Both are reputable respected speakers. I believe ATC go so low on their lower crossover because their super mid can - it is a monster of a driver and ATC lower mids are quite a bit clearer in comparison to most designs.

 

[goat76]

I wonder what speakers @Ilkless recommends and uses as their preferred playback speaker system?

Also, I like to know about all the blind testing he did to come up with that choice.

 

[YSC]

This website, which I love btw, is a great source of knowledge. But it also has an almost religious focus on directivity and radiation patterns, while anyone in the pro industry and a good room will be substantially more interested in phase response, impulse response, lack of distortion and on axis balance. Producing quality drivers in a sufficiently large cabinet, with huge headroom and precise analog active filter and amp design is not outdated, it is just a different design goal and user in mind. My ATC’s has wiped the floor with Genelec 8351, Ex Machina Pulsar, Meyer Sound Amie, Neumann 310, Burchardt a500, Kali IN-8 and quite a few others. I have tested them all. The Dutch 8C and JBL LSR708p are the only ones that was really up to the challenge and did not disappoint with considerable margin. I am awaiting my PMC 6-2, which I have bought and hope they can prove an adequate 2nd monitor.

Feel free to come and listen. It does not sound anything close to what you seem to believe ATC is about.

View attachment 224154

Really wonders what the in room, mixing location measurement for the Sofit mounted ATC vs Genelec/Neumann/Buchardt.

it seems like
1) the ATTC is much larger, capable for much lower distortion
2) the room is optimized for the ATC, others maybe in much less optimal placement and calibration was/wasn't done? I really wonders how the Sofit mounted ATC compared to similar class Genelec installation in a designed room.

 

[dfuller]

Interesting. ATC has slightly wider dispersion like they are aiming for 90 degrees rather than 75 - at least across the mid. It may be a trade off between more natural vs a more horn loaded sound (ultimately a wave guide becomes a horn and has an associated certain sound as the directivity narrows and how a deeper throat affects wavefronts). On paper the Neumann plot looks technically better but will it sound quite as natural with a narrower dispersion overall. Both are reputable respected speakers.

I own KH310s and have used SCM25As quite a bit. They're both good - my opinion, the KH310 is better on its own. The SCM25s need a sub, they don't extend low enough.

re: "horn loaded sound" - these don't sound like any horn loaded compression drivers I've ever heard. They don't have that shouty horn thing - just sounds like a very good direct radiator.

 

[Phorize]

It’s a pity ATC can’t/won’t make a contemporary loudspeaker design, is it simply not having the skill set or pandering to their traditional user demographic?
Keith

It smells like what organisational change practitioners call founder syndrome. Organisations go through strategic phases, and it's possible for organisations with very hands on founding leadership to get stuck on a paradigm. Alan Shaw is explicitly talking about the post-Shaw era of Harbeth, and has been putting systems in place and recruiting senior people to make it possible to produce new product lines and for him to eventual step back from the business. With out knowing more I'd speculate that ATC needs a clear vision for the 'what next', which I can't see that it has, or is concerned to develop. However, and I say this very respectfully given the circumstances, these sorts of circumstances often lead to a step change.

 

[Phorize]

I'd add that one doesn't need a Nobel prize in behavioral economics to see that whatever the reasons are, they aren't likely to be technical. From a consumer point of view quite often 'better is worse if it's different', meaning that it's totally possible to shitcan a 50 year old family business by releasing a fundamentally better product. I wouldn't expect the barriers of entry into best practice loudspeaker design to be so high that ATC couldn't organise technical development (I had a quick look at their published accounts and they are in good financial shape) so it's going to be about prioritisation, and why take a risk when your customers aren't asking you to?

 

[DSJR]

Billy was very fixed in his views I admit, but seeing as I believe the drive units they make are pretty damned good and now Billy's sadly gone, what I feel they need now is a dsp expert electronics engineer (or a pair, one to update the electronics if necessary and one to digitise the electronic crossovers) and maybe an investment in the Klippel system (if they haven't already) to update their models. This takes massive financial investment though and I suspect that like Harbeth, the domestic side will need leading by the hand into the next generations of products. Just sticking a fancy 'modern' waveguide on the tweeter isn't enough and I remember with the 19/20, quietly wondering if that heavy cone/coil really couldn't have done with a longer coil to increase efficiency a little bit (drivers probably aren't designed that way, so forgive my ignorance). The tweeters now suit the rest of the speaker very well in the models I've heard, so I still feel the main thing is refinement rather than massive re-design - imo of course.

 

[dfuller]

Really wonders what the in room, mixing location measurement for the Sofit mounted ATC vs Genelec/Neumann/Buchardt.

it seems like
1) the ATC is much larger, capable for much lower distortion
2) the room is optimized for the ATC, others maybe in much less optimal placement and calibration was/wasn't done? I really wonders how the Sofit mounted ATC compared to similar class Genelec installation in a designed room.

Yeah - comparing what look like SCM110s to KH310s is a false comparison. KH310s are quite SPL limited below about 60hz.

Better to compare the KH420 instead, which seems to genuinely not care about high SPLs. 106dB/1m for one speaker anechoic is really bloody loud and they're still pretty clean at that volume.

Billy was very fixed in his views I admit, but seeing as I believe the drive units they make are pretty damned good and now Billy's sadly gone, what I feel they need now is a dsp expert electronics engineer (or a pair, one to update the electronics if necessary and one to digitise the electronic crossovers) and maybe an investment in the Klippel system (if they haven't already) to update their models. This takes massive financial investment though and I suspect that like Harbeth, the domestic side will need leading by the hand into the next generations of products. Just sticking a fancy 'modern' waveguide on the tweeter isn't enough and I remember with the 19/20, quietly wondering if that heavy cone/coil really couldn't have done with a longer coil to increase efficiency a little bit (drivers probably aren't designed that way, so forgive my ignorance). The tweeters now suit the rest of the speaker very well in the models I've heard, so I still feel the main thing is refinement rather than massive re-design - imo of course.

I don't even think they need DSP - Neumann's stuff is more or less SOTA without (KH80 and 150 notwithstanding). Analog actives are in terms of fidelity absolutely not the limitation, it's the cabinet design and driver integration.

Re: a Klippel NFS, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect them to buy one - they don't have to sell too many sets of speakers to pay for that.

 

[SoundGuy]

Interesting. ATC has slightly wider dispersion like they are aiming for 90 degrees rather than 75 - at least across the mid. It may be a trade off between more natural vs a more horn loaded sound (ultimately a wave guide becomes a horn and has an associated certain sound as the directivity narrows and how a deeper throat affects wavefronts). On paper the Neumann plot looks technically better but will it sound quite as natural with a narrower dispersion overall.

I own KH310s and have used SCM25As quite a bit. They're both good - my opinion, the KH310 is better on its own. The SCM25s need a sub, they don't extend low enough.

I believe you when you say KH310 would be a better choice on it’s own. Experience trumps all.

 

[Pearljam5000]

The main complaint I read about ATCs on Gearspace is that they lack bass, even the bigger models.

 

[SoundGuy]

Billy was very fixed in his views I admit, but seeing as I believe the drive units they make are pretty damned good and now Billy's sadly gone, what I feel they need now is a dsp expert electronics engineer (or a pair, one to update the electronics if necessary and one to digitise the electronic crossovers) and maybe an investment in the Klippel system (if they haven't already) to update their models. This takes massive financial investment though and I suspect that like Harbeth, the domestic side will need leading by the hand into the next generations of products. Just sticking a fancy 'modern' waveguide on the tweeter isn't enough and I remember with the 19/20, quietly wondering if that heavy cone/coil really couldn't have done with a longer coil to increase efficiency a little bit (drivers probably aren't designed that way, so forgive my ignorance). The tweeters now suit the rest of the speaker very well in the models I've heard, so I still feel the main thing is refinement rather than massive re-design - imo of course.

Great ideas. DSP was eschewed by Billy. I have dabbled in DSP extensively. I thought Billy was wrong. I ended up coming full circle. Now I would only contemplate DSP below 150Hz. There is something ugly that happens to phase response when you muck around too much with DSP. So ugly I won’t touch it. I would sound treat the room first and foremost and then just a wee super gentle bit of tone control if needed. DSP can sound more evenly balanced but it doesn’t sound as natural - of course many recordings aren’t good to begin with so it may be just me nitpicking.

 

[tw99]

I think "founder syndrome" is probably very relevant here. The company now, due to a sad event, has more choice about future direction, it'll be interesting to see what, if anything, they do differently over the next few years.

 

[Pearljam5000]

I think "founder syndrome" is probably very relevant here. The company now, due to a sad event, has more choice about future direction, it'll be interesting to see what, if anything, they do differently over the next few years.

I think they would never change their designs and philosophy, things are going OK for them so I guess their attitude is
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it"

 

[maverickronin]

Can't we find some common ground?

ATCs may not be SOTA by 2020's standards, but there are still plenty of worse speakers for more money.

 

[dfuller]

The main complaint I read about ATCs on Gearspace is that they lack bass, even the bigger models.

Yeah, they just don't extend particularly low for their size. It's an active consequence of their design choices - they tune for better transient response (read: quicker decay) in the low end rather than maximal linear extension.

This is the CSD waterfall for the SCM25 courtesy of Resolution Magazine - apologies for the low res, this is what is available. It dies off quite quickly for a ported design.

In contrast, Neumann went for maximal extension, with a longer decay time (Genelec does this too).

Again, CSD from Resolution, for the O410 (not identical to the KH420, but a generally similar design).

There's nothing inherently wrong with either approach, just different goals.

ETA: @Rick Sykora can explain better than me, I'm particularly unversed in vented enclosure design.

 

[SoundGuy]

The main complaint I read about ATCs on Gearspace is that they lack bass, even the bigger models.

Agreed. ATC’s really need a high quality subwoofer for true full range (apart from their 150 and larger).

 

[SoundGuy]

Yeah, they just don't extend particularly low for their size. It's an active consequence of their design choices - they tune for better transient response (read: quicker decay) in the low end rather than maximal linear extension.

This is the CSD waterfall for the SCM25 courtesy of Resolution Magazine - apologies for the low res, this is what is available. It dies off quite quickly for a ported design.

View attachment 224204


In contrast, Neumann went for maximal extension, with a longer decay time (Genelec does this too).

Again, CSD from Resolution, for the O410 (not identical to the KH420, but a generally similar design).

View attachment 224205


There's nothing inherently wrong with either approach, just different goals.

I agree - different goals. It is probably not only transient response but also the way extended bass output will mask adjacent frequencies above (because of the way we hear). Perhaps ATC want to shine a light on the lower mids and therefore prefer a tight transient response in the bass with a Q of 0.7 or less. This means their customers can make more informed decisions about upper bass and lower mids…at the expense of a having a more limited range speaker in the bass. It also means ATC can go louder before limiters or distortion sets in. So users have a design that can generally go louder. A basic box and woofer design trade off - higher output vs increased bass extension.

 

[Purité Audio]

I am continually baffled by their refusal to even bother waveguiding the tweeters. I think it probably wouldn't even be an issue if they crossed the mid and tweeter maybe 500-700hz lower, but here we are.

That said - their speakers are not by any stretch bad, just not state of the art.

I was discussing digital crossovers with Ben ( we had been discussing the then newly released Kii Three) and he said that ATC used a MiniDSP processor to prototype crossovers but would never be allowed to release a production speaker with a digital crossover, PSI are much the same making ( or trying to) something positive out their obsolescence.
Keith