• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

ATC speakers / Monitors

There is mainly emphasis on even frequency response and dispersion both have which have been shown to be subjectively important in auditions in discussions.
I am not sure where low distortion and high power handling (linearity) stand on audition in relation to these but ATC are probably class leading in these parameters.

In the end the "conclusion" which measurement parameters matter most have been pretty thoroughly evaluated using subjective comments on controlled comparison. I would certainly use measurements to make a realistic short list to audition for myself were I to be in the market for speakers.

I have twice had an in depth audition of speakers with ATC drivers, both a long time ago. The first was in around 1981 when I heard ProAc EBS speakers and they were by a considerable margin the best speakers I had heard up to then but way more expensive than I could afford. They were the ATC mid dome with ATC 9" bass driver and the tweeter ProAc/ Celef used back then.
I eventually bought a used pair on ebay which are in my study and little used (I hate background music).
The second was 10 years later when I was convinced the 50 litre ATCs would be my best bet for last ever speaker and I arranged a demo at a dealer in Dunstable iirc but they had Apogee Duettas on demo in the same room and I preferred their spatial effect and went home confused...

I own a Genelec 8341 which is fine fwiw.
According to this: https://www.stereophile.com/content/apogee-duetta-ii-loudspeaker-measurements Duettas are complete opposite to ATC in bass region. That will definitely be a source of confusion in audition.
 
All the ASR measurements for the kh120 are better than any ATC scm25a measurements I have found.
Am I missing something in all the ASR measurements that show why the kh120 ii sounds muffled compared to the lesser measuring ATC scm25a mk2?
Are there other measurements that would show why the ATC sounds so much clearer with more details?

Modulation distortion is also significant in listening preference.
 
Last edited:

''COL. KLIPSCH: It is a matter of fact, not opinion, that a single direct radiator of small size will give a more nearly flat
response over a wider range than some larger and more complicated systems. But likewise it is a fact that a small direct - radiator speaker, say six inches in diameter, would have to perform an excursion of several inches to produce a barely audible fundamental output at a few feet distance at some low frequency like 60 cycles, which, even if possible, would result in distortion many times the fundamental output. It is also a fact that when two or more frequencies are mixed in a single piston radiator, the lower frequency amplitude will modulate the upper one, which causes the oft -referred -to inter - modulation distortion. The result of recognition of these facts is that the best loudspeaker systems now employ at least
two loudspeaker elements. The design problems entail minimizing the frequency anomolies and interferences between a pair of speakers radiating the same frequency
near a crossover point. At present, only multiple speakers have been capable of duplicating the sound to a high degree of accuracy.''
 
It wouldn't surprise me at all if I preferred the sound of the SCM11s over both those KEFs, even if one of them is way more expensive. :)

The ATCs are also likely more robust and can handle more beating before the tweeters are blown. I have had some occasions when I mistakenly played a very loud signal while mixing music, which I’m sure many other speakers wouldn't handle, including the KEFs tweeters who seem a bit fragile.
It only seemed like yesterday that the 11s were around £1200pr. Last I looked they were £1650pr, which is deemed extremely high compared to Chinese made alternatives in the UK. Sad, but that's why so much audio production had moved to the far east - cheap labour and overheads I believe.
 
It only seemed like yesterday that the 11s were around £1200pr. Last I looked they were £1650pr, which is deemed extremely high compared to Chinese made alternatives in the UK. Sad, but that's why so much audio production had moved to the far east - cheap labour and overheads I believe.

When looking at the price history for the ATC SCM11 and the KEF R3 spanning to the R3 Meta in my country, they have followed the same rise in price over the last 3 years, going up from about €1850 to €2560. So outside the UK, the made-in-China KEF R3 isn't any cheaper than the UK-made ATCs.
 
When looking at the price history for the ATC SCM11 and the KEF R3 spanning to the R3 Meta in my country, they have followed the same rise in price over the last 3 years, going up from about €1850 to €2560. So outside the UK, the made-in-China KEF R3 isn't any cheaper than the UK-made ATCs.

Subjectively...

The KEFs and SCM11s seem to be offering different pros/cons to each other. I was very impressed with the R3 Metas when I listened, great bass extension and very nice imaging. I did find the midrange lacked a degree of transparency and the overall tonal balance felt a bit... bright, to my ears. But that's a comment more on my personal preference, and in some rooms I can see this being an advantage.

The SCM11s are a mellower presentation, less heft in the bottom end but it seems to go deeper and feels... 'faster' (is the only way I can put it). Low-end articulation feels good. Also, they hold things together well at high volumes. You might find you want the additional low-end heft from the KEFs though, depending on taste.


Having both of these priced around the same mark makes sense from my listening experience.
 
Subjectively...

The KEFs and SCM11s seem to be offering different pros/cons to each other. I was very impressed with the R3 Metas when I listened, great bass extension and very nice imaging. I did find the midrange lacked a degree of transparency and the overall tonal balance felt a bit... bright, to my ears. But that's a comment more on my personal preference, and in some rooms I can see this being an advantage.

The SCM11s are a mellower presentation, less heft in the bottom end but it seems to go deeper and feels... 'faster' (is the only way I can put it). Low-end articulation feels good. Also, they hold things together well at high volumes. You might find you want the additional low-end heft from the KEFs though, depending on taste.


Having both of these priced around the same mark makes sense from my listening experience.

The SCM11s are really great loudspeaker. I already own a pair that I use as surround speakers in my system, complementing the SCM40s as the main speakers. When they were completely new, I used the SCM11s for about 2 months as front speakers, and they worked great for that but need subwoofers for the lowest bass.
 

''COL. KLIPSCH: It is a matter of fact, not opinion, that a single direct radiator of small size will give a more nearly flat
response over a wider range than some larger and more complicated systems. But likewise it is a fact that a small direct - radiator speaker, say six inches in diameter, would have to perform an excursion of several inches to produce a barely audible fundamental output at a few feet distance at some low frequency like 60 cycles, which, even if possible, would result in distortion many times the fundamental output. It is also a fact that when two or more frequencies are mixed in a single piston radiator, the lower frequency amplitude will modulate the upper one, which causes the oft -referred -to inter - modulation distortion. The result of recognition of these facts is that the best loudspeaker systems now employ at least
two loudspeaker elements. The design problems entail minimizing the frequency anomolies and interferences between a pair of speakers radiating the same frequency
near a crossover point. At present, only multiple speakers have been capable of duplicating the sound to a high degree of accuracy.''
I read the Klipsch paper many years ago. I used to love horns even with their problems, so clean sounding. I've had Altec A7, a custom 3 foot mouth Edgar horn and I copied Geddes Nathan speaker, a 2 way, with an oblate spheroid waveguide, using this "horn" for 14 years, it sounded the best by far. Downsized, got the Neumann kh120 ii and loved the flat respose etc. But after a while it reminded me of some speakers I built using inexpensive drivers with fairly flat passbands but ultimately dull sounding because a few good measurements are only part of how a speaker "sounds". Ask mixing engineers.
If what I hear in the the kh120 is IM distortion because it is a 2 way, then that ought to be measurable. Any decent 3 way should have less IM distortion.
Having heard different ATCs all using the dome mid in some NYC mix studios several years ago and in peoples homes, that dome mid clarity always stood out as being remarkable. And using the ATC SCM25a mk2 with the dome mid range it is still remarkable.
 
I read the Klipsch paper many years ago. I used to love horns even with their problems, so clean sounding. I've had Altec A7, a custom 3 foot mouth Edgar horn and I copied Geddes Nathan speaker, a 2 way, with an oblate spheroid waveguide, using this "horn" for 14 years, it sounded the best by far. Downsized, got the Neumann kh120 ii and loved the flat respose etc. But after a while it reminded me of some speakers I built using inexpensive drivers with fairly flat passbands but ultimately dull sounding because a few good measurements are only part of how a speaker "sounds". Ask mixing engineers.
If what I hear in the the kh120 is IM distortion because it is a 2 way, then that ought to be measurable. Any decent 3 way should have less IM distortion.
Having heard different ATCs all using the dome mid in some NYC mix studios several years ago and in peoples homes, that dome mid clarity always stood out as being remarkable. And using the ATC SCM25a mk2 with the dome mid range it is still remarkable.
I think we have mentioned a couple of factors if you go through the thread.
 
All the ASR measurements for the kh120 are better than any ATC scm25a measurements I have found.
Am I missing something in all the ASR measurements that show why the kh120 ii sounds muffled compared to the lesser measuring ATC scm25a mk2?
Are there other measurements that would show why the ATC sounds so much clearer with more details?
I am not certain of the measurements of the ATC, but Neumanns are known for sounding a bit dark in the farfield compared to an "average" speaker due to the slightly narrow beamwidth/steep DI. If you're using them in the farfield, that could be a possible explanation for it.
 
I am not certain of the measurements of the ATC, but Neumanns are known for sounding a bit dark in the farfield compared to an "average" speaker due to the slightly narrow beamwidth/steep DI. If you're using them in the farfield, that could be a possible explanation for it.
This is true for the 2 ways, especially the KH150, but not so much for the 3 ways.
 
The KH310 does have nice wide dispersion. I have them placed around my SCM50s, and with both sets of speakers you can move around the room and still make good decisions about things.

The 310 suffers from major headroom issues however, and the IM distortion is very noticeable compared to the ATC. I find the stock sound a little dark up high and a little thin down low but EQ fixed that very easily. They're a great speaker for sure.

I'll be selling them off them soon however as the bottom has fallen out of the Atmos mixing market and it's not generating money the way it once was. A lot of engineers are doing it on headphones (which sounds terrible).
 
The 310 suffers from major headroom issues however, and the IM distortion is very noticeable compared to the ATC. I find the stock sound a little dark up high and a little thin down low but EQ fixed that very easily. They're a great speaker for sure.

Out of curiosity, in your setup, does the 310 IM distortion happen when they are used full range? And IM distortion remain even if a subwoofer is used.
 
And IM distortion remain even if a subwoofer is used.
Neumann used to have a paper on their old website showing that even for a 3-way loudspeaker the IMD can be reduced significantly with a sub (at least for the region before the mid driver operates):

1747129068690.png
 
Out of curiosity, in your setup, does the 310 IM distortion happen when they are used full range? And IM distortion remain even if a subwoofer is used.
It is much more apparent when used full range for sure.
 
Pity they never share any measurements of those rooms.
Keith
 
Back
Top Bottom