ATC speakers / Monitors

[Atc4ever]

I was engaged to be married in 1996 and we had to combine two small 2-bed modern houses into one. Absolutely NO room for the deep in profile 100As and as they're so difficult to slide on their stands (she didn't call them 'fridges' for nothing!), it was impossible to house them. Got to say my life changed forever that year and this weekend, looking at albums of 1990s photos at work which need to be thinned out a good deal, it's come back to me just how much it all changed for me that year. Thirty years on and in my 70th year, I'm still trying to adapt to it

My living room is about 20m2.
That was ideal for my scm20.
Now, with scm50 the room is maybe too small.
BUT...scm50 is far better speaker then
scm20 and no room will ever change that fact.
To me, scm50 is excelent sounding speaker even from 1m distance, they could serve as a near field monitor in horizontal arrangement !
So, I'm going to do some acoustic treatment of the room, which, I believe, will lift scm50 performance for some percentage.

 

[goat76]

So, I'm going to do some acoustic treatment of the room, which, I believe, will lift scm50 performance for some percentage.

I would like to add that an acoustically well-behaved listening room will boost the overall performance way more than just a few percentage points. I've would say that the room acoustics is probably around 70-80% of the overall performance.

 

[Atc4ever]

I would like to add that an acoustically well-behaved listening room will boost the overall performance way more than just a few percentage points. I've would say that the room acoustics is probably around 70-80% of the overall performance.

Yes, but it all depends on how radically and thoroughly the room will be treated.
The living room is first of all a living room, it is a multi-purpose room used by all members of the household (in my case many members)
I don't like the idea that my living room is spatially and visually dominated by panels, traps, diffusers, etc. Everything must be done discreetly and unobtrusively, so that the room still maintains its basic function.
So I don't believe I can get close to such high percentages of sound improvement of 70-80%
Will see...

 

[goat76]

Yes, but it all depends on how radically and thoroughly the room will be treated.
The living room is first of all a living room, it is a multi-purpose room used by all members of the household (in my case many members)
I don't like the idea that my living room is spatially and visually dominated by panels, traps, diffusers, etc. Everything must be done discreetly and unobtrusively, so that the room still maintains its basic function.
So I don't believe I can get close to such high percentages of sound improvement of 70-80%
Will see...

Yes, it is a challenge to acoustically treat a living room without making it look like a studio environment, but there are ways to do it. You can come a long way by using a large rug, and thicker curtains where you can also hide acoustic panels behind them. There are also acoustic panels where you get to choose your own motives, making it look like art on the walls.

But don't do it randomly as the aim is an even decay time, and over as large portion of the frequency spectrum as possible. Use REW measurements to know what the room needs, and then look for acoustic treatment material that has the coefficients for the frequency range that needs to be treated.

 

[DSJR]

My living room is about 20m2.
That was ideal for my scm20.
Now, with scm50 the room is maybe too small.
BUT...scm50 is far better speaker then
scm20 and no room will ever change that fact.
To me, scm50 is excelent sounding speaker even from 1m distance, they could serve as a near field monitor in horizontal arrangement !
So, I'm going to do some acoustic treatment of the room, which, I believe, will lift scm50 performance for some percentage.

No ATC I've ever heard has suffered boomy bass and the 100As were in a small room (corners too) where for example, the larger 'BeeBeeCee' models (said in a chesty bass voice) wouldn't have worked at all. Due to the hall door being in the way, I couldn't bring them forward (they sounded really wonderful when I did), but there was a seating position in the room, where the 'bass' was flattest and I tended to listen there - to the music played, not the imaging, deeeeetails, soundstage and other audiophile things...

I started off with passive 20s in a red lacquer (don't go there) and used them with a freshly updated Quad 405-2 which nearly melted the way I was using it, bless it and then AVI S2000 mono amps which were rated at 140W each and which ran barely warm under similar 'enthusiastic use.' The lack of deep bass was an issue and, hooligan that I am, I wanted the larger sound from the 100A rather than the excellent and better-for-my-room 50As, which could have been slid forward and back as needed (spikes totally unnecessary as the mass of the speakers flatten carpet pile nicely)

My preference for the 50A over the more compromised 50PSL remains, the passives sounding rather 'dead' to me and for the money, way off the case now. The good looking Audio First Cadentia 3 passives being far more of interest in a domestic setting and for a far lower price currently -

Cadentia 3 — Audio First Designs

audiofirstdesigns.uk

I mean, £5680pr inc VAT

​

 

[Atc4ever]

No ATC I've ever heard has suffered boomy bass and the 100As were in a small room (corners too) where for example, the larger 'BeeBeeCee' models (said in a chesty bass voice) wouldn't have worked at all. Due to the hall door being in the way, I couldn't bring them forward (they sounded really wonderful when I did), but there was a seating position in the room, where the 'bass' was flattest and I tended to listen there - to the music played, not the imaging, deeeeetails, soundstage and other audiophile things...

I started off with passive 20s in a red lacquer (don't go there) and used them with a freshly updated Quad 405-2 which nearly melted the way I was using it, bless it and then AVI S2000 mono amps which were rated at 140W each and which ran barely warm under similar 'enthusiastic use.' The lack of deep bass was an issue and, hooligan that I am, I wanted the larger sound from the 100A rather than the excellent and better-for-my-room 50As, which could have been slid forward and back as needed (spikes totally unnecessary as the mass of the speakers flatten carpet pile nicely)

My preference for the 50A over the more compromised 50PSL remains, the passives sounding rather 'dead' to me and for the money, way off the case now. The good looking Audio First Cadentia 3 passives being far more of interest in a domestic setting and for a far lower price currently -

Cadentia 3 — Audio First Designs

audiofirstdesigns.uk

I mean, £5680pr inc VAT

​

Well, it seems that the two of us share some similar experiences from our hifi past... I really liked the bbc monitors (spendor, rogers...) they are neutral and musical but those speakers ultimatelly lack the power and dynamics to sound like real music.

I also had AVI monoblocks with an AVI preamp. Nice devices, but they are still only solid mid-range amplifiers.

When you mention the legendary quad 405, one of my favorite amps of all time were the Quad 510 pro monoblocks. They worked incredibly well with both the scm20 and the scm50. I replaced them last year with the wonderfull atc P2.

If the scm50psl sounded "dead" to you, then you were the victim of a bad presentation. Be sure of it. The sound of the scm50psl, when driven with a suitable amplifier (and this is crucial!) is very reminiscent of a live concert.

Martin colloms reviewed thoroughly scm50psl in 2018, if I am correct.
I deeply agree with his conclusions.

 

[goat76]

If the scm50psl sounded "dead" to you, then you were the victim of a bad presentation. Be sure of it. The sound of the scm50psl, when driven with a suitable amplifier (and this is crucial!) is very reminiscent of a live concert.

I think that might be the case with the demos @DSJR has attended of the passive SCM40’s as well, a bad presentation where the speakers may have been driven by a weak amplifier, or just set up in a way to exaggerate the differences between the active and passive versions of this loudspeaker.

 

[Soniclife]

I think that might be the case with the demos @DSJR has attended of the passive SCM40’s as well, a bad presentation where the speakers may have been driven by a weak amplifier, or just set up in a way to exaggerate the differences between the active and passive versions of this loudspeaker.

When I compared the 40s I was surprised by how much gain and power they need to match the other speakers in the dem, and the active versions. From memory they needed about 3db more than I was expecting based on specs alone. Precisely matching levels across active and passive in a dem room is beyond me, I just used an spl meter. My results were consistent with small level differences, rather than actual differences, has anyone tried to compare active and passive under more precise conditions?

 

[DSJR]

Well, it seems that the two of us share some similar experiences from our hifi past... I really liked the bbc monitors (spendor, rogers...) they are neutral and musical but those speakers ultimatelly lack the power and dynamics to sound like real music.

I also had AVI monoblocks with an AVI preamp. Nice devices, but they are still only solid mid-range amplifiers.

When you mention the legendary quad 405, one of my favorite amps of all time were the Quad 510 pro monoblocks. They worked incredibly well with both the scm20 and the scm50. I replaced them last year with the wonderfull atc P2.

If the scm50psl sounded "dead" to you, then you were the victim of a bad presentation. Be sure of it. The sound of the scm50psl, when driven with a suitable amplifier (and this is crucial!) is very reminiscent of a live concert.

Martin colloms reviewed thoroughly scm50psl in 2018, if I am correct.
I deeply agree with his conclusions.

You'd prefer the actives if you go to a lot of live unamplified jazz gigs as I once did. The PSL was made for domestic customers as pros almost always bought the active ones for their work. This is becoming a circular argument for me and peeps here will get totally fed up with it. I had chats over a few years with the two original physical and electronics designers of the sodding things and did listening of my own, so remain convinced my vibe on this is correct, for reasons oft repeated in earlier posts. Best I shut the heck up now.

AVI 'solid mid-range amplifiers?' What's that supposed to mean - You mean mid priced amplifiers from olden times? The performance was tested as very good indeed for the type of amp they were (AB) and prices weren't too silly-high either at the time. Difference today is that your Quad 510s can easily be serviced here, but getting an AVI amp serviced may be more difficult perhaps?

 

[Atc4ever]

You'd prefer the actives if you go to a lot of live unamplified jazz gigs as I once did. The PSL was made for domestic customers as pros almost always bought the active ones for their work. This is becoming a circular argument for me and peeps here will get totally fed up with it. I had chats over a few years with the two original physical and electronics designers of the sodding things and did listening of my own, so remain convinced my vibe on this is correct, for reasons oft repeated in earlier posts. Best I shut the heck up now.

AVI 'solid mid-range amplifiers?' What's that supposed to mean - You mean mid priced amplifiers from olden times? The performance was tested as very good indeed for the type of amp they were (AB) and prices weren't too silly-high either at the time. Difference today is that your Quad 510s can easily be serviced here, but getting an AVI amp serviced may be more difficult perhaps?

Well, ok...
I will make an assumption... if I had the chance to compare the active and passive versions of the scm50, I would probably prefer the active version, even though I don't go to live jazz gigs. The active version is a better technical solution, which inevitably leads to a cleaner and more accurate sound, which again results in a better conveyed musical message to the listener. And that's it.

On the other hand, another much more important event happened : I sumbled upon a scm50psl which is the most beautiful, and overall the best speaker I have ever seen and heard in my entire hifi lifetime. Supported by atc P2, that speaker gives me much more joy than if I bought an super expensive, new car!
And I really don't mind knowing there are better things out there. Peace of mind!

Regarding the AVI, I meant the upper middle-class amplifiers. That was their rank back in 90ties. I think the preamp was the better device of the two.
In the modern hifi business, it is no longer clear what belongs to which class, there are only price classes.

 

[DSJR]

The AVI preamp in later forms with 'gold coloured' backplate, worked best driving long interconnects several metres long to the remote power amps, either active amp packs, or positioned close to the speakers with short speaker cables (damping factor was high however, so said amps could be used whichever way the end user wanted). Designer Martin Grindrod knew a few things about being able to keep power supplies 'clean' and in the area I then lived, with hideous mains quality on some days, the amps had no temperament, warm-up, burn in or whatever. One simply plugged them in, turned them on (no switch-on pop and instant 'sound'), used them at all manner of output levels (the separate power amps soft clipped too if pushed too hard) and turned them off after use with no worries whatsoever. The black cased Lab series models which came after my time, were also very highly regarded and looked posher too in an 'audiophile' kind of way. Only the built-in phono stage of the S2000MP+P phono stage needed 45 minutes to warm up, the subjective 'opening' of the sonic window on this input after this time easy to hear and repeatable over many demo and personal samples. No idea why and it of course was never measured. HiFi News did tests at the time (I think by David Berriman) but they're not online so cannotlink to them. Also I suspect, a UK-centric product range.

P.S. Not sure anyone here classes amps by price at all. In face some of the cheaper amps tested here out-perform very expensive audiophile confections quite comfortably, even of the cheaper casework isn't in the same 'class.'

 

[Atc4ever]

P.S. Not sure anyone here classes amps by price at all. In face some of the cheaper amps tested here out-perform very expensive audiophile confections quite comfortably, even of the cheaper casework isn't in the same 'class.'

Measurements seem to be the main consideration here? If so, it is a strong point no doubt.

And maybe classes aren't even exist anymore. Price overpowered all other criteria.
If something is cheap it can't be good, if something is expensive, it can't be worth that money. Middle ground is shrinking.

So, what can we do?
Probably get out of the house and try to find the truth by ourselves.

 

[Purité Audio]

Look and understand a component’s measurements?
Keith

 

[Atc4ever]

Look and understand a component’s measurements?
Keith

Yes, and then go and listen

 

[DSJR]

I can't remember the full details as the service sheets and plots went with the speakers, but there is a procedure of calibrating the bass and mid drivers on a three way active ATC and not just their relative levels. I think it involved inverting the phase of the mid dome, playing noise or tones at the crossover frequency and adjusting for them to null out. Once done, the drivers were put back in correct phase, relative levels confirmed and that was that! This can't be done on the passive versions, but maybe it doesn't matter for various reasons?

Apologies folks, been having an emotional time going through 1990s photos, these work and hifi related rather than family which are in a different set. Feeling deeply nostalgic, wallowing in the memories of good music and good times.

 

[Purité Audio]

Yes, and then go and listen

Listen to well engineered amplifiers not really.
Keith

 

[Atc4ever]

Listen to well engineered amplifiers not really.
Keith

Maybe you should because all well engineered amplifiers do not sound the same.

 

[Purité Audio]

Uh-huh
Keith

 

[DSJR]

Maybe you should because all well engineered amplifiers do not sound the same.

Mine all do!!!* ... And they're from different eras and makers as well, designed to amplify a signal fed them with absolute minimal distortion and ability to drive reasonable speaker loads from ~4 ohms upwards. None however, are lavish audiophool confections designed to have a 'signature sound' to them and with wild response variations with a speaker load hanging on the end!

You won't believe a word of the paragraph above until you've done some testing yourself, level matched and not knowing which is which. It's a real ear-opener I assure you and changes one's entire view of the high end domestic audio industry

* Well, maybe my rebuilt Quad IIs and original 303 sound softer as there's an impedance drop at hf in my current speakers which I believe they're tracking response wise (justifying Quad's claim that all *their* amps sounded the same ).

 

[Palmer]

Current article in Mixonline...

ATC is well on track to follow the NS-10M, to show up in World Class Studios for many, many years to come. Like it or not - in my working environment, that's saying something.

Cheers