ATC speakers / Monitors

[prestigetone]

Tangband,
I think you missed the point. Or didn't read. Trapped in an odd loop. This is the test, it was in my post. Page 80.

https://americanradiohistory.com/Archive-HiFI-Stereo/80s/HiFi-Stereo-Review-1987-01.pdf

It's quite famous. The ability to differentiate amps was measured. And people did indeed fail to differentiate. It's not an anecdote.
You saying what you said doesn't make this or any other scientifically conducted test go away.
Perhaps you can read some of the other links I included.

Really good read. Would love to see a speaker shootout and I think the results would be similar. High end vs flat and flat vs non linear FR. Bet the results would be near the same.

 

[dfuller]

Can't ATC just send an SCM50 to Amir for measuring ?

Much more likely they'd send one to Erin, IMO. Amir is very steadfast in his beliefs that only Toole/Olive preferred speakers are worth buying.

 

[robstalllion]

this whole board is based on consistent measurements of audio gear, D&D, Genelecs and one ATC were measured, there's no need to do it again but this time with random methodology, what we need is other ATC models (at least any active one, preferably 3 way) to be measured by Amir or Erin

There's not much point in doing research on a speaker that will go into a room that isn't treated and has horrible bass response. Even Trinnov cannot fix room acoustic problems. That's why you have serious audiophiles building out entire rooms/outdoor buildings just for a controlled environment.

Truth be told, just get something under $1000 if the speakers are going into an untreated room.

 

[lowkeyoperations]

^the room is a major impact on speaker response. I’m always slightly amused when I see the Predicted In Room frequency response in reviews here. Like sure, in a room with a shed load of acoustic treatment and Trinnov or Dirac live and then a bit more EQ perhaps.

But in room measurements are rarely if ever as flat as those PIR graphs predict are they??

 

[Deleted member 21219]

But in room measurements are rarely if ever as flat as those PIR graphs predict are they??

Of course not. The purpose of the PIR graphs is to compare characteristics between speakers on an equal basis. You probably don't get the mileage that the EPA posts on a car, either. (As they say ... YMMV). It's just meant for comparison on an equal basis, just like the PIR.

Jim

 

[lowkeyoperations]

Yes, but can’t room modes be predicted? Why are they left out? Or are there too many variables?

Anyway I think PIR curves lead to wildly inflated expectations

 

[Purité Audio]

Room modes are dictated purely by the dimensions of the room so infinite possibilities and their severity by the construction, having said that a well engineered loudspeaker will ime always sound better than a poor one despite the room.
Contemporary speakers can sound superb if one spends a little time considering placement, listening position, acoustic measurement and implementation of any necessary eq.
Keith

 

[goat76]

There's not much point in doing research on a speaker that will go into a room that isn't treated and has horrible bass response. Even Trinnov cannot fix room acoustic problems. That's why you have serious audiophiles building out entire rooms/outdoor buildings just for a controlled environment.

Truth be told, just get something under $1000 if the speakers are going into an untreated room.

It's quite funny when you think about it. Some parameters that are considered to be important when it comes to the measurements of loudspeakers are things that are important when placing them in an untreated room, but the thing is that an acoustically untreated room is not a very good starting point for Hi-Fi anyway. If a person is truly interested in maximizing the sound quality of the reproduction of music he should do something about the room acoustics, and by doing so, many of those “important" parameters no longer hold the same importance as they may have been in an untreated room.

 

[Purité Audio]

That rather depends upon the design and capabilities of the loudspeaker in question.
Keith

 

[MKR]

The future is speakers that adapt to the room, not adapting the room to the speakers

 

[YSC]

The future is speakers that adapt to the room, not adapting the room to the speakers

It have no conficlt IMO, no matter how you do treatment, there will be and always is reflected sound, so directivity still gets a lot to do with tonal balance etc. same goes for distortion, GD, it will always be there, thing is how to achieve all to a good enough level that the rest doesn't matter.

 

[RobL]

The future is speakers that adapt to the room, not adapting the room to the speakers

Yes, or adapting and adhering to some sort of standard for acoustics in monitoring spaces. Genelec studied the monitoring listening position in 164 profesional studios, this was the variation in frequency response:

 

[Torbachkristensen]

Room modes are dictated purely by the dimensions of the room so infinite possibilities and their severity by the construction, having said that a well engineered loudspeaker will ime always sound better than a poor one despite the room.
Contemporary speakers can sound superb if one spends a little time considering placement, listening position, acoustic measurement and implementation of any necessary eq.
Keith

Absolutely false. All speakers can sound absolutely terrible in a bad room. There is absolutely no way to predict, what speaker design choices will be best in a poor room.

 

[DSJR]

Can't ATC just send an SCM50 to Amir for measuring ?

You've not seen the packaging even the small 50's come in? Last pair I saw came on pallets and these were the stand mounted ones (active of course).

They've been tested and shown what's what. Why submit them to Amir for yet another annihilation when the results are there over the years (HFN tested pre SL versions and I believe EU reviewers have done pretty accurate SL models)

 

[Torbachkristensen]

The future is speakers that adapt to the room, not adapting the room to the speakers

What an unambitous statement. A good room will win over a smart design any day of the week. Unless someone comes up with another way of transmitting sound, that does not involve putting transducers into an acoustic environment.

Oh wait that is headphone. That settles it then. Headphones are the best speakers in the world. Yup, end of discussion.

 

[Torbachkristensen]

Yes, or adapting and adhering to some sort of standard for acoustics in monitoring spaces. Genelec studied the monitoring listening position in 164 profesional studios, this was the variation in frequency response: View attachment 338506

Frequency response doesn’t really matter much, if it not followed by even decay. I will take a room with even decay over FR any day.

 

[MKR]

What an unambitous statement. A good room will win over a smart design any day of the week. Unless someone comes up with another way of transmitting sound, that does not involve putting transducers into an acoustic environment.

Oh wait that is headphone. That settles it then. Headphones are the best speakera in the world. Yup, end of discussion.

 

[Torbachkristensen]

Nonsense

Exactly.

People have stopped using their ears and common sense in search of perfect FR. Trinnov is a great example. Measures fine, sounds like shit.

 

[RobL]

Frequency response doesn’t really matter much, if it not followed by even decay. I will take a room with even decay over FR any day.

Methinks that would also fall under an “acoustic standard”.

 

[prestigetone]

It needs to be a twofold approach. You can’t just eq your way out of a bad room. It looks like you can bend the fr like putty but you can’t just adjust one region without affecting others. I think you can do a lot with good furniture and some acoustic treatment.