ATC, Neumann, K+H 3 way monitor mid discussion

[robwpdx]

What is the audio science experience on 3-type large mids crossing over at 380/3500 or 500/2000 in ATC and Neumann?

Some argue that moving the crossover outside some vocal ranges improves things. My recording engineer friends prefer listening on conventional British-style monitors but switch to their ATC 25 to listen for mixing problems. The studios around here use ATC 25 on up three-ways for critical monitoring as mains. Neumann and K+H may be similar.

What is similar in other makers? What does Audio Science measure in distortion? What is the listening experience?

My experience is JBL 43xx series where I found mid-range listening fatigue and Westlake four way 4350-like with wood horns in a 1/3 eq conditioned Hidley room. Westlakes sounded accurate in their room and with no fatigue, mid- to far- field.

 

[thewas]

I know from Neumann that they chose the crossover frequencies purely based on having a smooth directivity, making of course sure the drivers have low distortions in the regions they are used. For example the higher crossover frequencies of the ATC mid to tweeter shows in a less smooth directivity.

Some argue that moving the crossover outside some vocal ranges improves things.

In my experience this is only a problem when your crossover, drivers and directivity have problems, so you try to place them at a region where they will be less audible according to human psychoacoustics and common music. If they are well engineered you can have the crossover frequencies anywhere as you won't hear the different ways.