ATC speakers / Monitors

[Geert]

And with that approach there’s no reason hunting better and better gear either, because you will mostly hear your room anyway.

You believe people can't hear differences in distortion, frequency response or directivity in a normal living room? Or maybe it's not so black or white as you suggest?

 

[bo_knows]

Hi, first message here

I think something is a bit overlooked about controlled directivity. Except a few cardioid speakers, the directivity is controlled gradually and only in the upper registers.
Low mids will still radiate omni or hemi depending if free standing or flush mounted. That means in a normal sized room, the SBIR (speaker boundary interference response) will dominate the response in that zone and gives you big boosts and dips in the bass to low mids. Theses are not due to reverberation but only from destructive interference mostly from the first bounce of reflections.

See all comparisons with the PIR estimation and real measured steady state responses. It usually matches pretty well in the mid to high frequencies (as the off-axis and on-axis curves are more or less adding statistically), but in the lows it's a mess (because of room modes) and above the modal zone in the low mids it's a mess (because of SBIR).

Any sound engineer would tell that : balancing highs is kind of easy, balancing bass and low-mids is another deal. To be able to balance bass and low-mids properly, you need the time domain under control, and if you did, the frequency response will also follow. That means huge amounts of treatment. So Side walls and all early energy would have to be absorbed in the lows and lows mids. To keep it consistent, you need the upper registers absorbed in the same way. At that point, speaker directivity after +/- 30° is not top priority, and after +/- 45° is irrelevant. And the consistence of the response in that usable directivity is not for PIR, it's only for off-axis listeners. In a proper studio, the on-axis gated and long term steady state responses are mostly the same.

The discussion after that is about the acoustic comfort in the room :
- If going with non-environment, you use the self noises to activate an environmental psycho-acoustic response from the room, uncorrelated from the direct signal. After around +/- 45°, everything will go straight to absorbers.
- If going with a Haas kicker (aka LEDE / RFZ), you use the direct signal, with enough time delay, to add psycho-acoustic cues in the room, hoping they are late and diffuse enough to not alter positioning cues nor do destructive interference. In that case and if side wall redirection instead of absorption is used, a wider, uniform directivity (not restricted in the upper register) is a big plus.

This is pretty specific to studios, or should I say, deeply treated rooms. In theses cases, controlled vertical directivity can help to minimize desk/console reflections and if controlled down enough, minimize the first floor bounce null which usually resides between 100 and 250 Hz.
Now in less than perfect rooms, controlling directivity as Neumann & Genelec makes undoubtedly the speaker behave better. Easier to sell to more different listening scenarios.

Another topic, in my experience, the widest larger-than-speaker sound field I heard were in non-environment room, where the brain could focus the most on the out of phase cues coming from the speaker, not masked and ankered down to the specific size of the listening room. For the record, I'm a mastering engineer working in a non environment room, flush mounted speakers, and do not own ATC Speakers.

Here is a small sketch of directivity in my room. +/- 15°, 30° and 45° drawn.

This is your first post and WOW, what a post! Thank you for sharing this.

 

[goat76]

Didn't you have SCM 40's? Maybe you can tell us a bit about how you treated your room?

Speakers pretty far out from the boundaries, small listening triangle, absorption panels on walls, and bass traps in corners. EQ for the lowest bass problems.

At the moment early reflections are almost 20dB down, but it's a work in progress and it gets better with every acoustic treatment I add.

 

[Geert]

Speakers pretty far out from the boundaries, small listening triangle, absorption panels on walls, and bass traps in corners. EQ for the lowest bass problems.

At the moment early reflections are almost 20dB down, but it's a work in progress and it gets better with every acoustic treatment I add.

Nice that you have the room to create such a setup, unfortunately most people don't. And often the rare exceptions that do have some room still manage to get into trouble because they want their speakers out from the walls and end up in locations which create terrible low frequency SBIR issues.

 

[goat76]

semi OT, maybe, but I thought I'd throw this in here . . . .
looking to upgrade my front L/R speakers in my home theater setup- I generally have always liked ATC since using a studio that had them for monitors, and I like the way my scm11v2's sound in my office. There's a set of scm40v2's for $4500 on craigslist near me . . . .what other options could I be looking at in that price range that would beat the 40's? amp driving them would be a benchmark ahb2 but powered options are fine too.

I bought my SCM40v2 for $3500, a demo ex from a store, I guess ATC speakers are in general cheaper here in Europe. I think they like powerful amps but I have never tried them with anything less powerful than my amp at 200W (8 Ohm).

I like the sound of the Revel F228Be, but I prefer the ATC sound and the Revel is far more expensive.

 

[Berlin]

semi OT, maybe, but I thought I'd throw this in here . . . .
looking to upgrade my front L/R speakers in my home theater setup- I generally have always liked ATC since using a studio that had them for monitors, and I like the way my scm11v2's sound in my office. There's a set of scm40v2's for $4500 on craigslist near me . . . .what other options could I be looking at in that price range that would beat the 40's? amp driving them would be a benchmark ahb2 but powered options are fine too.

I upgraded from ATC SCM 11 to ATC SCM 40. I kept the ATC SCM 11 and sold the 40s after 2 years. I think that the midrange of the bookshelf speakers sounds better. Objectively it measures flatter. The ATC SCM 40s have a dip at around 3500 Hz. I think there are better options for $ 4500. Maybe a pair of Genelecs plus sub..?

 

[DSJR]

I upgraded from ATC SCM 11 to ATC SCM 40. I kept the ATC SCM 11 and sold the 40s after 2 years. I think that the midrange of the bookshelf speakers sounds better. Objectively it measures flatter. The ATC SCM 40s have a dip at around 3500 Hz. I think there are better options for $ 4500. Maybe a pair of Genelecs plus sub..?

Did you ever compare with the actives? Three way *passive* ATC's are quite compromised (by their admittance) and I despair at amateur dealers pushing them still

 

[dfuller]

This may be ignorance on my part, but the only proof I know for strong side walls reflections being detrimental is limited to the transitional region where you find SBIR.

SBIR is absolutely a problem no doubt. I noted that side wall reflections are less offensive sonically - because they tend to (with a well-designed speaker) not sound bad. But they are a form of distortion nonetheless, and one that can interfere with mixing.

 

[elvisizer]

Did you ever compare with the actives? Three way *passive* ATC's are quite compromised (by their admittance) and I despair at amateur dealers pushing them still

the problem with actives in the US is price- for instance, new scm40's here in the US are $8000, active 40's are $15,000. 2x the price in general for the active versions.

 

[elvisizer]

Maybe a pair of Genelecs plus sub..?

I like the sound of the Revel F228Be

genelec and revel are the other 2 brands I've tended to look at, yeah . . .

 

[YSC]

genelec and revel are the other 2 brands I've tended to look at, yeah . . .

depends on what you want IMO, I assume one won't have a (major) studio like room treatment and big room dedicated to HiFi only, so the directivity would play significant effect, for Genelec the ones you get the built in GLM for quick and easy improvement in room, for Revel you likely get more SPL in larger space, but if you need to treat SBIR you need to do manually, SCM40 with the uneven FR curve in a normal listening room I believe would likely be more probematic

 

[Curvature]

SBIR is absolutely a problem no doubt. I noted that side wall reflections are less offensive sonically - because they tend to (with a well-designed speaker) not sound bad. But they are a form of distortion nonetheless, and one that can interfere with mixing.

Considering them a form of distortion is very contentious. I'll repeat that without a good perceptual model this question can't be settled.

 

[Berlin]

Did you ever compare with the actives? Three way *passive* ATC's are quite compromised (by their admittance) and I despair at amateur dealers pushing them still

I have never listened to active and passive ATCs at the same time in the same room but I would like too. I got in touch with the ATC customer support (which is excellent btw) and one of the ATC engineers explained the differences between their actives and passives to me. I therefore think that the actives are better. However, the frequency range of the passives and actives 40s is the same and the price of the actives is >10.000 EUR. I really like the look of the active 50s that go down to 38 Hz but they are >20.000 EUR here in Germany. Eventually the passive 40s were replaced in my living room by a pair of active Geithains. They also have an old fashioned design (that I like very much) but compared to the ATC actives they are more reasonably priced. I also like their cardioid characteristic which makes the positioning in my room easier. Another important difference between e.g. Geithain and ATC is that Geithain publishes data on their website. Why doesn't ATC do this..?

 

[Grotti]

Another important difference between e.g. Geithain and ATC is that Geithain publishes data on their website. Why doesn't ATC do this..?

That is one of the unsolved mysteries of the last 118 pages of this thread..... To be continued I guess.

 

[DSJR]

depends on what you want IMO, I assume one won't have a (major) studio like room treatment and big room dedicated to HiFi only, so the directivity would play significant effect, for Genelec the ones you get the built in GLM for quick and easy improvement in room, for Revel you likely get more SPL in larger space, but if you need to treat SBIR you need to do manually, SCM40 with the uneven FR curve in a normal listening room I believe would likely be more probematic

Define 'normal listening room.'

SCM40A's in a UK living room (25' x 12' or 'squarer) with 7' 6" ceilings 'sound' absolutely fine I feel. A friend has 35's (the ancestor model) bi-amped with two Quad 606's (very capable, cheap here used and easy to service long term if necessary) and is also happy, but then he's a music lover not a recording or mastering engineer.

I think (please) that 'we' need to accept that different rooms exist in size *and construction* around the world and where our brick and plaster boxes here can do all manner of things in the bass, the often larger timber constructed rooms in the US for example may well absorb bass more and make smaller ATC's sound bas slight or bass-overdamped - measurements be damned.

It's all very well getting the Klippel side of things right, but speakers need to be listened to as well and half a dB at the mid to tweeter crossover can be audible - maybe sorting dispersion there is also what we're hearing, but I firmly believe it's still a juggling act as regards tweeter power handling if crossed over too low and obviously dispersion of the driver handling upper mids.

So easy for armchair 'experts' to dive in and criticise and/or praise. I'm sure ALL the top makers/designers of monitors are fully aware of the above and tweak accordingly. ATC make a domestic CD/preamp which I think works well (bench performance unknown), so they must have someone there (hopefully) who's aware of digital tech in pro monitoring these days. Mind you, back in my Jurassic times with the brand, of most speakers out there, you 'plonked 'em down,' plugged 'em in and off they went, with mercifully little anal positioning worries compared to the fussy inferior domestic speaker-fare out there in the UK market.

 

[DSJR]

I have never listened to active and passive ATCs at the same time in the same room but I would like too. I got in touch with the ATC customer support (which is excellent btw) and one of the ATC engineers explained the differences between their actives and passives to me. I therefore think that the actives are better. However, the frequency range of the passives and actives 40s is the same and the price of the actives is >10.000 EUR. I really like the look of the active 50s that go down to 38 Hz but they are >20.000 EUR here in Germany. Eventually the passive 40s were replaced in my living room by a pair of active Geithains. They also have an old fashioned design (that I like very much) but compared to the ATC actives they are more reasonably priced. I also like their cardioid characteristic which makes the positioning in my room easier. Another important difference between e.g. Geithain and ATC is that Geithain publishes data on their website. Why doesn't ATC do this..?

ATC contracted hugely as a business in the noughties (I was told thirty years ago by their then sales director that big studios only really used the huge monitors for show a lot of the time - to impress the artists - ) and prices started to climb alarmingly even in the UK. I did active and passive dems and they even made a 20 Tower demo unit where the demonstrator could compare active or passive use. That damned mid dome needs POWER to fully open up but give it that juice and I still feel it's effective, even if simpler units are around now doing a darned good job.

I suspect the pro market isn't as big now as it was in the 80's and 90's, smaller monitors being sold now more usually I suspect. Pro engineers get to 'know' their monitors too as tools for the job and I'm sure they can adapt to different models as well (producer Trevor Horn used ATC's I gather, but pics of him in his main studio over the years show several different monitors behind him). Not sure these choices are sponsored, but travelling engineers may find a monitor 'system' they like and go with that perhaps?

 

[Berlin]

That is one of the unsolved mysteries of the last 118 pages of this thread..... To be continued I guess.

Well, one might be inclined to say that it would be good for business to publish good data. On the other hand, it would also be good for business not to publish moderate data either...

 

[Tangband]

Define 'normal listening room.'

SCM40A's in a UK living room (25' x 12' or 'squarer) with 7' 6" ceilings 'sound' absolutely fine I feel. A friend has 35's (the ancestor model) bi-amped with two Quad 606's (very capable, cheap here used and easy to service long term if necessary) and is also happy, but then he's a music lover not a recording or mastering engineer.

I think (please) that 'we' need to accept that different rooms exist in size *and construction* around the world and where our brick and plaster boxes here can do all manner of things in the bass, the often larger timber constructed rooms in the US for example may well absorb bass more and make smaller ATC's sound bas slight or bass-overdamped - measurements be damned.

It's all very well getting the Klippel side of things right, but speakers need to be listened to as well and half a dB at the mid to tweeter crossover can be audible - maybe sorting dispersion there is also what we're hearing, but I firmly believe it's still a juggling act as regards tweeter power handling if crossed over too low and obviously dispersion of the driver handling upper mids.

So easy for armchair 'experts' to dive in and criticise and/or praise. I'm sure ALL the top makers/designers of monitors are fully aware of the above and tweak accordingly. ATC make a domestic CD/preamp which I think works well (bench performance unknown), so they must have someone there (hopefully) who's aware of digital tech in pro monitoring these days. Mind you, back in my Jurassic times with the brand, of most speakers out there, you 'plonked 'em down,' plugged 'em in and off they went, with mercifully little anal positioning worries compared to the fussy inferior domestic speaker-fare out there in the UK market.

Good writing, as always
My take on speaker position, rooms and also room correction:

Sound correction systems like my own ( GLM ) is not a 100% solution if the room is bad and if the speaker position is not perfect . Every correction in GLM, DIRAC and ROON messes up the direct sound from the speaker . A room correction system is the last possibility to improve the sound of a system - a perfect set up of the ATC speakers using tunemethod in a good, treated listening room dont need any roomcorrection at all.

In a less than perfect setup, room corrections can only make the sound less bad - if used with sense.

With a really good sound source, the perceived pitch of each tones gonna be clearer , thus lessening any need for room correction systems. A really good active loudspeaker setup also gonna play the perceived tones in a clearer way, and the results are the same as using a good source - the need for room correction is less with a good active system .

Sometimes people seems to try correcting the room when the problem was in the sound source.

 

[Berlin]

That damned mid dome needs POWER to fully open up but give it that juice and I still feel it's effective, even if simpler units are around now doing a darned good job.

According to ATC 75W (8 Ohm) should be enough to drive the 40s. I did not hear any difference in sound quality when connecting them to a Hegel H120, a Musical Fidelity X150 or boXem Arthur 3409/N2. However, I am only listening at moderate levels. I never had the feeling that the 40s are bad speakers I just think that they are too expensive...

 

[goat76]

genelec and revel are the other 2 brands I've tended to look at, yeah . . .

I don't know which model from Genelec you should go for in a home theatre setup which I guess will be a "midfield" setup, and it will probably not be cheaper than the ATC speakers you have looked at if you are going for a model that can handle the SPL for that task.

Revels are nice speakers but the build quality and the QC seem to be somewhat questionable. I've seen threads here at ASR about drivers that are glued to the cabinet in an F208, and strange distortion behaviors in a pair of M126Be. And their support doesn't seem to be that helpful if something goes wrong after the warranty period. I hope those are just isolated incidents.