ATC speakers / Monitors

[Chrise36]

Seems plausible, sure. But doesn't change that the Neumann is objectively better.



Neither I'm comparing drivers' objective performance.

Not the mid but as a speaker maybe. The objective finding is that the Neumann mid is used higher than the ATC.

 

[andreasmaaan]

Not the mid but as a speaker maybe. The objective finding is that the Neumann mid is used higher than the ATC.

The Neumann mid produces 5-10dB less distortion.

I don't know at which frequency it's crossed over or whether it could or couldn't be crossed lower.

I do know that there are drivers on the market that produce lower distortion than the ATC, play to a lower frequency, and cost less.

Anyway, that's it for me. Conversation is going round in circles now...

The ATC is a great driver, but there are better and cheaper out there. Not much more to it than that IMHO...

 

[Frank Dernie]

Genelec supports their monitors for about 30 years and are also able to innovate and and improve the SQ, so I don't think these things are a contradiction

Whilst this is historically true my concern would be the DSP, and maybe the class-D amps, the longevity of which is not known since it is less than 20 years since they started being used.
DSP is a concern in case even if the hardware remains available new software and updates may make a product hard or impossible to service and no longer possible to receive updates. This has already happened to me with a super product, which still works well, that can no longer receive the latest updates or use the latest OS for hardware reasons.
I may well still choose the Neumann KH420 over the equivalent Genelec for simply this reason.

 

[Purité Audio]

I don't think it's audiophile BS at all. They've just chosen a super-conservative approach, and are totally upfront about it. There's plenty of choice of other options out there for those that want slightly flatter measurements, modern dsp technology or whatever. The overriding philosophy is to be able to support the products for 20 years plus. That's different to the "hey we have a new speaker this year that's 29x better than last year's" that is more common in the industry.

If I was looking for new speakers today, I'm not sure I'd be looking to get scm50s because they're soooo expensive, but it doesn't stop me respecting what they've chosen to do.

A manufacturer can still support older products and innovate , ATC for reasons best known to themselves have chosen not to.
Keith

 

[richard12511]

I have not seen one review where a perfect loudpspeaker wasn't lauded, please give one.

Obviously there have been no "perfect" loudspeakers measured(so you got me there), but there have been a few really good ones that didn't get recommended, as well as a few great ones that didn't get the top rating.

SVS Ultra: measurements were almost identical to Revel M106(side by side you could almost say it's a different sample of the same speaker). The biggest difference is maybe the distortion profile. They weren't recommended, while the M106 received the highest score.

Genelec 8341b: measured noticeably better than the M105/M106, but still received a lower score. BTW, I agree with Amir's criticism there. Running full range, even the 8351b runs out of steam well before I'm satisfied. That said, I also own the M105, and it's far more limited on that front, so who knows.

I'm not saying there weren't measurement differences in those examples, but looking at measurements alone, I think you'd have a hard time justifying a huge score difference between the SVS Ultra and Revel M106. Likewise, by measurements alone, I think you'd have a hard time justifying a higher score for the M105/M106 than the 8341a.

I don't think there's anything we can hear that we can't measure, but I do think we have room to grow when it comes to interpreting what we can measure.

 

[q3cpma]

Obviously there have been no "perfect" loudspeakers measured(so you got me there), but there have been a few really good ones that didn't get recommended, as well as a few great ones that didn't get the top rating.

SVS Ultra: measurements were almost identical to Revel M106(side by side you could almost say it's a different sample of the same speaker). The biggest difference is maybe the distortion profile? They weren't recommended, while the M106 received the highest score.

Genelec 8341b: measured noticeably better than the M105/M106, but still received a lower score. BTW, I agree with Amir's criticism there. Running full range, even the 8351b runs out of steam well before I'm satisfied. That said, I also own the M105, and it's far more limited on that front, so who knows.

I'm not saying there weren't measurement differences in those examples, but looking at measurements alone, I think you'd have a hard time justifying a huge score difference between the SVS Ultra and Revel M106. Likewise, by measurements alone, I think you'd have a hard time justifying a higher score for the M105/M106 than the 8341a.

I don't think there's anything we can hear that we can't measure, but I do think we have room to go when it comes to interpreting what we can measure.

SVS Ultra was the strangest one, but I believe the on-axis broad mid peak followed by broad HF dip coupled with wonky directivity might be the cause. Anyway, hard to argue about even minimally flawed speaker, but I've never heard of tonally perfect speakers displeasing someone; except gear fetishits who're bored by anything without fault, but that's not really the same question anymore.

About the 8351B, I'm a bit surprised, they should be able to get quite loud; especially for their size. Of course, important listening distance and room volume can trip even the mightiest speaker.

 

[q3cpma]

I may well still choose the Neumann KH420 over the equivalent Genelec for simply this reason.

What's keeping you from using DSP speakers when the updates run out? You still have analogue and AES in, whatever the outcome.

 

[richard12511]

About the 8351B, I'm a bit surprised, they should be able to get quite loud; especially for their size. Of course, important listening distance and room volume can trip even the mightiest speaker.

On some music, they do get hearing damage loud, but with content that has super deep bass, they give up surprisingly early(at least I was surprised).

For context, I've got them far out into the room with big bass traps right behind them(also out into the room) and I'm at a distance of ~3.5m.

 

[Vintage57]

Seems plausible, sure. But doesn't change that the Neumann is objectively better.



Neither I'm comparing drivers' objective performance.

Exactly, how do you say. Full range. The Neuman’s have bass, the ATC lack bass, and I’m speaking from experience.

 

[Chrise36]

Exactly, how do you say. Full range. The Neuman’s have bass, the ATC lack bass, and I’m speaking from experience.

The ATC scm50 and above does not lack bass

 

[Vintage57]

The ATC scm50 and above does not lack bass

‘compared to what?

 

[thewas]

The ATC scm50 and above does not lack bass

Well surely they don't lack, but for example a -3dB point of the passive one around 40 Hz isn't also as deep as of many other monitors in that price range.

Source: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ased-speaker-designs.6441/page-51#post-398021

 

[Chrise36]

Less distortion than the tweeter at 100db
http://www.studio-hifi.com/images/Stereoplay_2010-08_ATC_SCM100A_SL_TowerFF-.pdf

 

[Chrise36]

‘compared to what?

To the 40- 20 -19 and lower

 

[Pearljam5000]

I've read numerous times on Gearslutz about their lack of bass which is pretty weird because the SCM50/100 are gigantic

 

[Chrise36]

I've read numerous times on Gearslutz about their lack of bass which is pretty weird because the SCM50/100 are gigantic

I heard them all 19 v1 and v2 -20 v1 and v2 -40 v1 and V2 and the 50. In a normal room the 50 would have plenty of bass. The 40 not so much.The 20 and the 19 needs a sub.

 

[Vintage57]

I had the 150’s and the Neumann KH420 are more full range. To me.

 

[Chrise36]

I had the 150’s and the Neumann KH420 are more full range. To me.

Why not add a sub?What other difference did you notice?

 

[Mimeyar]

Established speaker company has a particular sound that people buy. They continue to produce that even they know it's not correct because they're a business to make money. It's their brand. The company survives on its own inertia of being the most known in the market. If everyone else is using these speakers then it must be good and if there was an audition those speakers may have more of a wow factor combined with brand power. A headphone or speaker gets better preference ratings when people know that it is from a supposedly good brand. Professional audio has all the problems that the audiophile world has.

With defined standards, marketing and measurements that may change. Look at how the Harman target curve has gained notice in the headphone space and that happened because Sean Olive had a blog which others found and read. Without that it's likely that it would become an AES curiosity. That initial marketing mattered a lot and now a frequency response near the Harman preference target is a selling point that can get your product noticed.

 

[Vintage57]

I had an ATC C6 15” down firing sub, but it never integrated well for me.
The KH420’s are smoother to me and have better bass than the sub combo.
My recommendation, if you’re interested, is to give the Neumann’s an audition