ATC speakers / Monitors

[Sokel]

The colouration added by my active 50’s was obvious, when compared to contemporary active designs.
Keith

I'm not a fan of 50's, too lean for my taste, but colouration???

It's probably the opposite that defines them in a good room, even at very high (for their size) SPL.
Nothing obvious at least.

 

[Purité Audio]

Have you compared them side by side in the same room with multiple contemporary active designs?

 

[goat76]

For me it looks like they don't show their measurments because other manufacturers have better concepts and better results. Their smaller models have lack of bass and wonky FR compared to state of the art Neumann or Genelec.

Their lineup looks since years exactly the same. I cannot see any innovation.

This thread can be closed in my opinion. It's like ATC himself, no progress after 6500 posts.

So, who do you think makes this thread repeat itself, the persons who can’t stop themselves from repeating the same request over and over again about Klippel NFS measurements (which ATC might consider to share if they asks them instead), or the members who share news, measurements, and suggestions on setting up their ATC loudspeakers?

I find continuity to be a good thing, but ATC have made many differences to their loudspeakers “under the hood” over the years. As an example, the SCM20 has gone through 4 major changes in drivers and crossovers. It’s quite obvious that much of the idea behind the continuity is about ease of serviceability which is important in the studio world. They had to make some changes to the cabinet of the SCM25 to fit their in-house made tweeter, because the older tweeter went out of production.

Many “innovations” in loudspeaker designs are often made to make you feel the need for an upgrade, while very little has happened to the actual audible performance.

 

[goat76]

Have you compared them side by side in the same room with multiple contemporary active designs?
View attachment 542180

Maybe loudspeakers with wood veneer sound more colorful than black boxes?

 

[zonk]

I find continuity to be a good thing, but ATC have made many differences to their loudspeakers “under the hood” over the years. As an example, the SCM20 has gone through 4 major changes in drivers and crossovers. It’s quite obvious that much of the idea behind the continuity is about ease of serviceability which is important in the studio world. They had to make some changes to the cabinet of the SCM25 to fit their in-house made tweeter, because the older tweeter went out of production.

Vendors like Neumann or Genelec have continuity as well, but have for example updated/are currently updating their speakers by DSP functions and room correction tools like MA1 and GLM.
The new models were test for example by serious magazines like "Sound & Recording".

The ATC speakers are very popular in forums where the importance of measurements were denied. Forums where cable sound, power cord and power supply upgrades and DACs for 30000$ were promoted and the only accepted measurement tool are their golden ears.

In my opinion every manufacturer has to prove the capabilities of their products (even more in professional environments) and not being a black box.

 

[goat76]

The ATC speakers are very popular in forums where the importance of measurements were denied. Forums where cable sound, power cord and power supply upgrades and DACs for 30000$ were promoted and the only accepted measurement tool are their golden ears.

And Neumann and Genelec had also been more popular in those forums if they had a HiFi range of loudspeakers, with a more living-room-friendly design.

I’m quite surprised how some of you want to spin things in these discussions, it becomes way too childish for my taste.

 

[Ultrasonic]

From a purely business perspective, ATC choosing NOT to go the DSP route likely makes sense as there is still a market for those who don't want this. Hedd introduced models without DSP to target a similar market for example.

 

[goat76]

The ATC speakers are very popular in forums where the importance of measurements were denied. Forums where cable sound, power cord and power supply upgrades and DACs for 30000$ were promoted and the only accepted measurement tool are their golden ears

And Neumann and Genelec had also been more popular in those forums if they had a HiFi range of loudspeakers with a more living-room-friendly design.

 

[Atc4ever]

There's little point in poring over ATC's spinorama data. Anyone who has simulated speaker designs or dabbled in driver/waveguide work already knows ATC cannot measure great. It's physically impossible given their design choices.

A deep, narrow waveguide around the tweeter, paired with a large, deep waveguide around the midrange? Soft domes expected to deliver great directivity control above 10kHz? And on top of that, the wide acoustic offset between midrange and tweeter(and woofer)? None of this adds up to great measurements. It can't.

ATC can measure good, even very good. But great is off the table. The physics simply won't allow it.

Anyone who expects ATC to measure miraculously good, is either ATC fanboy or has no idea how physics work.(maybe both)

Note: When I say, it won't measure good, this doesn't have to necessarily align with Toole's work or Sean Olive's work. The very basics to make a speaker great: on-axis linearity, directivity smoothness, controlled directivity index from the first octave to the last. ATC can't perform great in any of these.

I don't think anyone has ever said, at least not on this thread, that atc measures anything "great".
But what owners, as well as countless reviews say, is that atc speakers have generally very good and sometimes outstanding sound. You can't talk about atc without mentioning it. This also explains their presence in so many studios, in my view.

And this is exactly what confuses those who believe that only the speakers that measure great have the right to sound great. They don't understand why atc, that don't measure up to "great", are so popular in both the pro and hifi worlds. For them, it is something "mysterious".
That's why atc sticks like a bone in their throat.
My assumption is that this cause-and-effect relationship, between measurement and perceptive sound, has not been sufficiently studied yet.

 

[Blockader]

I don't think anyone has ever said, at least not on this thread, that atc measures anything "great".
But what owners, as well as countless reviews say, is that atc speakers have generally very good and sometimes outstanding sound. You can't talk about atc without mentioning it. This also explains their presence in so many studios, in my view.

And this is exactly what confuses those who believe that only the speakers that measure great have the right to sound great. They don't understand why atc, that don't measure up to "great", are so popular in both the pro and hifi worlds. For them, it is something "mysterious".
That's why atc sticks like a bone in their throat.
My assumption is that this cause-and-effect relationship, between measurement and perceptive sound, has not been sufficiently studied yet.

This is a textbook case of argumentum ad populum: people like it, therefore it can't be bad. I fell for that reasoning myself for a while. I bought the SCM20 ASL, and ended up preferring the sound of the KH 120 over ATC speakers costing almost five times as much.

Argumentum ad populum - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[a4eaudio]

argumentum ad populum is a fallacy related to the validity of an argument/hypothesis not a physical object. It doesn't apply to subjective preferences. If someone thinks a speaker is subjectively good, they are correct. If I think anchovies taste good I am correct. Even if 52% of people strongly dislike anchovies (which appears to be the case, because I Googled the most disliked foods for that example).

 

[Avp1]

This is a textbook case of argumentum ad populum: people like it, therefore it can't be bad. I fell for that reasoning myself for a while. I bought the SCM20 ASL, and ended up preferring the sound of the KH 120 over ATC speakers costing almost five times as much.

Argumentum ad populum - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

For that size Dynaudio Confidence 20A is probably the best choice. At least they sounded best to me out of many in this size bracket. SCM20 are a good choice for surround speakers in Atmos setup, but not as a standalone for stereo use.

 

[dfuller]

TBH I don't think I'd bother with any of the two way ATCs (maybe the SCM11 is okay).

Also - the "2 way ATCs don't have as much low end as Neumann or Genelec" bit - no shit, Sherlock! They're sealed boxes. Pretty much by definition unless you boost the hell out of the low end with a Linkwitz Transform or similar shelving EQ, they don't extend low.

Vendors like Neumann or Genelec have continuity as well, but have for example updated/are currently updating their speakers by DSP functions and room correction tools like MA1 and GLM.

Genelec yes, Neumann no. Getting parts for Neumann speakers is awful, Sennheiser's repair and parts policies are terrible.

 

[goat76]

Genelec yes, Neumann no. Getting parts for Neumann speakers is awful, Sennheiser's repair and parts policies are terrible.

I’m sorry to hear that.
Is that something you have experienced yourself with your Neumann speakers?

 

[Leeken]

The colouration added by my active 50’s was obvious, when compared to contemporary active designs.
Keith

Could you see it or hear it
Seriously blind level matched multiple speaker shoot outs has probably only ever been done by Toole,name someone else who done it properly.

 

[dfuller]

I’m sorry to hear that.
Is that something you have experienced yourself with your Neumann speakers?

Thankfully no, not yet. But mine are rather more similar to ATC in the electronics department (analog crossovers, class AB amps) so there's just less stuff to fail. The ones with elevated failure rates seem to be the ones using class D amplification, and it generally seems to mostly be the amplifiers that have trouble and not anything upstream. The real problem of course is that Neumann pretty much will not allow servicing of any of their speakers without it being first party. KH420s weigh almost 80 pounds each, they are a 0/10 time to ship anywhere.

But for those who have K&H O300s or O410s, you pretty much can't get parts for them - Neumann/Sennheiser don't have them. If you blow a woofer (which does seem to happen on the O300s...), you're cooked. Genelec and ATC keep stock around for older speakers, I can't say I've seen the same from Neumann/Sennheiser.

I have no idea how the """"contemporary design"""" companies do on this one.

 

[Avp1]

Thankfully no, not yet. But mine are rather more similar to ATC in the electronics department (analog crossovers, class AB amps) so there's just less stuff to fail. The ones with elevated failure rates seem to be the ones using class D amplification, and it generally seems to mostly be the amplifiers that have trouble and not anything upstream. The real problem of course is that Neumann pretty much will not allow servicing of any of their speakers without it being first party. KH420s weigh almost 80 pounds each, they are a 0/10 time to ship anywhere.

But for those who have K&H O300s or O410s, you pretty much can't get parts for them - Neumann/Sennheiser don't have them. If you blow a woofer (which does seem to happen on the O300s...), you're cooked. Genelec and ATC keep stock around for older speakers, I can't say I've seen the same from Neumann/Sennheiser.

I have no idea how the """"contemporary design"""" companies do on this one.

I liked when B&W had replacement drivers for 20 y.o. speakers. Looks like ATC is at the same category. I am not that sure you can get replacement class D amp pack for 10 y.o. speaker from any maker. Class D amps and DSP are probably first thing to fail. Component level repair for DSP is not really heard of ( with very few exceptions).

 

[Sokel]

Have you compared them side by side in the same room with multiple contemporary active designs?
View attachment 542180

You know better than proposing that, to compare two pairs of speakers properly one has to have Harman-grade procedures, let alone a random room like the one in the pic.

So no, my anecdotal data come from various rooms and setups, 50's are as common as bread around, you have to try so to avoid them.

 

[Purité Audio]

You know better than proposing that, to compare two pairs of speakers properly one has to have Harman-grade procedures, let alone a random room like the one in the pic.

So no, my anecdotal data come from various rooms and setups, 50's are as common as bread around, you have to try so to avoid them.

Uh-huh.
Keith

 

[Sokel]

Uh-huh.
Keith

That should be always come with measurements, we still wait for some in-room ones (THAT room) by your side.
Then we will know if its suitable for comparing gear.