ATC speakers / Monitors

[dfuller]

Don't some of the more trustworthy makers allow proper third party testing of their wares (not just speakers)? The on;y bugbear in one maker's case is that the reviewers don't get in touch with the manufacturer to get an idea of usage cases and so on. I can think of one speaker maker where the test axis (nowhere near as thorough as a Klippel) in two iterations of the same model, one a descendant of the other and several years apart, used the wrong tweeter driver for on-axis tests (best not say more) and giving a potentially 'dirtier' result in the top octave. It kink-of came correct in the vertical dispersion testing, however...

You know, I really with Amir had been able to test the SCM11 instead of the dated 19 model, as the 11 does appear to measure rather better in ASR terms...

The 19/20 is so out of the norm for ATC - lacks bass, mid humped vs generally neutral-ish - that judging the entire brand on that is insane

 

[Mart68]

Don't some of the more trustworthy makers allow proper third party testing of their wares (not just speakers)?

A fair few manufacturers of 'design by ear' speakers seem happy to send their product to Stereophile, knowing they will be measured and the results published. I suspect that's considered a worthwhile trade-off, since they also get a 2 page subjective review that will be at least ostensibly favourable regardless of what the graphs show.

Valuable free exposure/advertising plus the added cachet and credibility of being featured in a high end magazine.

Probably worth losing a few potential customers from the more 'objective' group to gain many more from the subjective side who don't understand the graphs and don't even look at the measured performance section.

If they were just to publish the measurements and no subjective review I suspect Stereophile would have to buy such speakers from a third party if they wanted to test them.

 

[dfuller]

A fair few manufacturers of 'design by ear' speakers seem happy to send their product to Stereophile, knowing they will be measured and the results published. I suspect that's considered a worthwhile trade-off, since they also get a 2 page subjective review that will be at least ostensibly favourable regardless of what the graphs show.

Valuable free exposure/advertising plus the added cachet and credibility of being featured in a high end magazine.

Probably worth losing a few potential customers from the more 'objective' group to gain many more from the subjective side who don't understand the graphs and don't even look at the measured performance section.

If they were just to publish the measurements and no subjective review I suspect Stereophile would have to buy such speakers from a third party if they wanted to test them.

FWIW, the ATCs that stereophile has measured were in the "fine to very good" category.

 

[Mart68]

FWIW, the ATCs that stereophile has measured were in the "fine to very good" category.

I wasn't talking about ATC just responding to DSJR's reply to me.

I agree those that have been measured there have acceptable performance, I'm not in the 'ATC bashing' camp. However I agree with those who say that for a professional monitor manufacturer not to publish their measurements isn't really acceptable and does them no favours.

 

[DSJR]

I wasn't talking about ATC just responding to DSJR's reply to me.

I agree those that have been measured there have acceptable performance, I'm not in the 'ATC bashing' camp. However I agree with those who say that for a professional monitor manufacturer not to publish their measurements isn't really acceptable and does them no favours.

I'd just like to add, hopefully without mis-typing this time (cough), that some makers simply don't see the point in posting measurements of their models, for reasons others have given above. It honestly doesn't mean that really serious loudspeaker businesses don't test and listen very thoroughly, even though they don't publish it all.

ATC *used to* publish 'White Papers' on their designs, back in the day, with rather detailed explanations of them.

Has anyone here 'heard' or 'used' the newer version of the SCM25, with their own tweeters and 'taller' lateral enclosures to accommodate them?

 

[Pearljam5000]

New dual 15 inch sub

 

[Puddingbuks]

Ugly design with all these visable screws.

 

[Nopiano]

Ugly design with all these visable screws.

I’ve read before that continuity and availability is vital in a studio, due to the cost of every minute of studio time. Hence in the unlikely event of a replacement or repair being necessary, immediate access is vital, hence the screws. (Personally, I like this at home too, so tightness can occasionally be checked, without fastenings being hidden under a stuck on trim!)

 

[G|force]

Ugly design with all these visable screws.

It's a feature in a pro product.
Maybe not so much in a domestic one.

 

[TheDichotomist]

... Good lord, I came here for measurements and found nearly 300 pages of discussion. I think I read 12 before I jumped to the end to find.... No detailed measurements.
The few I saw in those first few pages weren't really for the models most folks I know are interested in, like the SCM 25 and 40. No idea how the directivity or frequency response linearity or even dynamic range is on those... I just wanted to know what it is about them that makes them dozens of times better than a 1-4k/pair monitor system.

Biggest benefit I've seen so far is "wow factor" and the unrelated ability to drop them on someone from high above without really worrying about damaging the speaker cabinet.

TL;DR, did I miss the measurements of the current SCM 25/40?

 

[dfuller]

TL;DR, did I miss the measurements of the current SCM 25/40?

@goat76 has measurements of the 40 around; there are measurements of the 25 somewhere in here.

TLDR: They're fine. Pretty low distortion, neutral enough tuning. Off axis response isn't great, but could be worse.

 

[goat76]

... Good lord, I came here for measurements and found nearly 300 pages of discussion. I think I read 12 before I jumped to the end to find.... No detailed measurements.
The few I saw in those first few pages weren't really for the models most folks I know are interested in, like the SCM 25 and 40. No idea how the directivity or frequency response linearity or even dynamic range is on those... I just wanted to know what it is about them that makes them dozens of times better than a 1-4k/pair monitor system.

Biggest benefit I've seen so far is "wow factor" and the unrelated ability to drop them on someone from high above without really worrying about damaging the speaker cabinet.

TL;DR, did I miss the measurements of the current SCM 25/40?

The part I bolded in your post makes me wonder if you are genuinely interested, as I don't think anyone has said ATC speakers are "a dozen times better" than other speaker brand offerings.

What can be said is that ATC speakers measure well enough in all parameters to be considered neutral-sounding speakers, and what is left to do is to listen for yourself and decide if you think they stand out, and if you think they will suit your personal preference better (or not) than other brand offerings, in a similar fashion as some people prefer Genelec speakers over Neumann speakers or the other way around (even if they both are concidered neutral loudspeakers).



What I can say subjectively is that I find the SCM40s exceptionally "clean-sounding" speakers. That was the first thing I immediately noticed when setting them up in my listening room, especially heard with piano notes, which have this top-to-bottom full-bodied clean sound (hard for me to describe in abetter way). This has probably to do with ATC's aim of keeping the distortion at very low levels all the way down to the bass frequency range. And speaking of bass, the speakers have this "dry" quality, as in the opposite of a bloated kind of "one-note-bass".
Another thing these ATC speakers also excel at is how easy it is to hear the different instrumental layerings in an otherwise dense music mix. No matter how much overlapping is going on, it's still easy to hear a fairly good separation between instruments depth-wise. This is something many loudspeakers struggle with, which results in a flat and thick mess of "wall-of-sound", but with a loudspeaker that can handle it, there is still a kind of "calmness" preserved in the overall sound, even if the music itself is highly chaotic.

I have never listened to the SCM25s, but based on the measurements I've seen, they seem to be the studio version of the SCM40s with very similar measurements. They have the same speaker drivers except for the tweeter driver, which I think is an S-spec version. Another difference is that the SCM25s are ported speakers, but ATC tends to use the bass port to keep the distortion down, rather than use it as a bass extension.
I have never seen anyone doing a listening comparison between these speakers, but I would guess they sound quite similar to each other.


But subjectivity aside, here are my measurements of the passive SCM40s. The first picture shows the gated response from 0 to 90 degrees, and the second picture shows the distortion levels (except for the disturbance between 5kHz and 6kHz, which is a room resonance).

I also want to add a more separated graph of the same directivity measurements, which I think may better visualize the perceived levels at my listening position, as the first reflection points in my room are down close to -20dB. And the second picture shows the average directivity curve, which may or may not be of any importance, but I think that graph is pretty interesting to see.

I hope you appreciate seeing these measurements, and you are free to read what you like out of them. But I suggest you have a listen to a pair of ATC speakers sometime, if and when you get the opportunity to do so. Maybe you will appreciate the sound quality too, even if they are not "a dozen times better" than other loudspeakers you've heard before.

 

[TheDichotomist]

The part I bolded in your post makes me wonder if you are genuinely interested, as I don't think anyone has said ATC speakers are "a dozen times better" than other speaker brand offerings. ...

...I hope you appreciate seeing these measurements, and you are free to read what you like out of them. But I suggest you have a listen to a pair of ATC speakers sometime, if and when you get the opportunity to do so. Maybe you will appreciate the sound quality too, even if they are not "a dozen times better" than other loudspeakers you've heard before.

Hey, thanks! Everything you said about mid range clarity and chaotic multilayered signals being well represented is exactly the kind of thing i'm trying to figure out how to quantify in measurements. Sorry if what I said was confusing; interested in was more, "what sets this apart from neumann, since they're so much more expensive and neumann seems to have similar drivers?" No way I'll be able to afford anything ATC makes for myself. The "dozens of times better" was deliberately vague and hand wavey -- half joking Based mostly on price vs other speakers. (and the acclaim they get on gears pace)

I appreciate you sharing these measurements though. I was never under any doubt they were good speakers, despite my flippant tone. Just wondering which part of them makes them substantially better and if that can be seen in measurements or frequency response. (masking from resonances or room reflections tends to be what messes up clarity in speakers my mere mortal self can afford, so I thought I could correlate something in the measurements and hazard a guess.) Hope that clears my intentions up at least a little. (if nothing else, I hope I'm now identified as non hostile and curious? )

 

[Berlin]

Sorry if what I said was confusing; interested in was more, "what sets this apart from neumann, since they're so much more expensive and neumann seems to have similar drivers?" No way I'll be able to afford anything ATC makes for myself.

I had the Neumann KH 150 and the ATC SCM11 and SCM40 in the same room. I sold the ATCs and kept the Neumanns because they just sounded much better to me. I wish I could compare my Geithain speakers with the larger ATC active models...

 

[dfuller]

Everything you said about mid range clarity and chaotic multilayered signals being well represented is exactly the kind of thing i'm trying to figure out how to quantify in measurements.

This is generally from very low distortion and a linear enough frequency response in my experience.

 

[TheDichotomist]

This is generally from very low distortion and a linear enough frequency response in my experience.

That's what I would have to conclude so far as well... the legendary ATC/Neumann mid range dome and equally low distortion woofers and tweeters... The Kali IN-8's I'm looking at don't hit those numbers. I figured they'd be more than good enough considering what I can already hear just fine through headphones and some cheap edifier RT1700BT speakers.... Buuuut, some measurements of a kit speaker here on ASR kinda make me wonder if I can't build 80-90% of the transducer quality for around the same money as the kali's.... Still looking into all that to see how much harder this project will be than i'm expecting, but so far, finding ultra low distortion drivers in that price range is not difficult. In fact, if you go with a dome style mid-range driver, it has its own enclosure built in, as do most tweeters, so you basically only have to build a subwoofer and append these other two drivers to the face. (I'm skipping over things that ATC doesn't bother with, like big waveguides or... even the most optimal spot to place a driver in the box. (I'm kidding! Kinda~ :3 ... ) Directivity will be the weakest link by a country mile, if I were to undertake such a project.... And I didn't even mention crossovers, amplification, etc. The parts I suspect will make me stop looking into this sinkhole project~ ... It didn't stop my modular synthesizer project though, only delayed it so... I'm probably doomed!~ :3

 

[Ultrasonic]

@goat76 your graphs above would be more informative if you could edit the curve names so it was clear what each one was?

 

[dfuller]

That's what I would have to conclude so far as well... the legendary ATC/Neumann mid range dome and equally low distortion woofers and tweeters... The Kali IN-8's I'm looking at don't hit those numbers. I figured they'd be more than good enough considering what I can already hear just fine through headphones and some cheap edifier RT1700BT speakers.... Buuuut, some measurements of a kit speaker here on ASR kinda make me wonder if I can't build 80-90% of the transducer quality for around the same money as the kali's.... Still looking into all that to see how much harder this project will be than i'm expecting, but so far, finding ultra low distortion drivers in that price range is not difficult. In fact, if you go with a dome style mid-range driver, it has its own enclosure built in, as do most tweeters, so you basically only have to build a subwoofer and append these other two drivers to the face. (I'm skipping over things that ATC doesn't bother with, like big waveguides or... even the most optimal spot to place a driver in the box. (I'm kidding! Kinda~ :3 ... ) Directivity will be the weakest link by a country mile, if I were to undertake such a project.... And I didn't even mention crossovers, amplification, etc. The parts I suspect will make me stop looking into this sinkhole project~ ... It didn't stop my modular synthesizer project though, only delayed it so... I'm probably doomed!~ :3

If you want to build something along the lines of an ATC, I'd recommend using a Bliesma M74S-6 and T25S-6, with your choice of woofer (I like the Satori WO24P, but if you're made of money the Purifi PTT10 would be worth a shout).

Tweeter and mid both need waveguides but I believe there are open source designs available on diyaudio for them.

 

[goat76]

@goat76 your graphs above would be more informative if you could edit the curve names so it was clear what each one was?

Yes, maybe I do that later.

From top to bottom in the directivity graph, it’s 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, and 90 degrees in the horizontal plane. All the measurements were done at the height of the loudspeakers' acoustic center, which is the mid-dome driver. All 10 measurements in that graph are gated.

 

[AudioJester]

I had the Neumann KH 150 and the ATC SCM11 and SCM40 in the same room. I sold the ATCs and kept the Neumanns because they just sounded much better to me. I wish I could compare my Geithain speakers with the larger ATC active models...

I have heard that comparison before in a store demo. I just cant imagine anyone would pick SCM40 over KH150 in a listening test.
Then factor in KH150 is about half the price, is active - no need for dac/amps, has a room dsp system available, can easily integrate subs etc.

Unless you are hung up on the brand, I dont get it? I mean the limited ATC measurements dont look terrible, but theres nothing special there?

By the way, would be nice to see vertical directivity, distortion at higher spl, and bass performance.