ATC speakers / Monitors

[Geert]

wish everyone dealing with loudspeakers (from engineer to interviewer) would have read Toole's book, that would save the world a lot of time and misunderstandings.

Exactly:

Most near perfect on paper designs don’t sound natural or real - often phase challenged with poor soundstage, neutered, boring and robbed of dynamics.

 

[goat76]

You are completely wrong about my hopes about speaker measurements. The interview goes non further than laymen's level. Maybe you learned something, I didn't. I didn't hear a good explanation of the point they're trying to make, a point that was flawed from the start. Everything is thrown on one pile. And very funny, different aspects of speaker sound we supposedly can't measure, ... he illustrates with a measurement ...

Again, it's not about not being able to measure everything, it's about not being able to sum all those measurements to a whole that is the problem. That's the reason we still need to use our ears to figure out how a pair of speakers really sound.

 

[goat76]

Exactly, already the title "Why do speakers sound different when they measure the same?" is nonsense as with a necessary state of the art set of measurements (full spinorama, HD, multitone, decay spectrum, group delay) no two different loudspeakers measure the same.
Also the priority which measurements matter audibly more is long known and clear, wish everyone dealing with loudspeakers (from engineer to interviewer) would have read Toole's book, that would save the world a lot of time and misunderstandings.

I already explained the somewhat provocative title of the video, it just clicks bate to get your attention, but the content is not. Did you watch the video or are you just assuming what it's all about?

 

[YSC]

Again, it's not about not being able to measure everything, it's about not being able to sum all those measurements to a whole that is the problem. That's the reason we still need to use our ears to figure out how a pair of speakers really sound.

Which, is mostly how the room and speaker placement sounds, and without proper measurement in room, you can’t fix the room issues and is a random gamble of the combo being good

 

[goat76]

Which, is mostly how the room and speaker placement sounds, and without proper measurement in room, you can’t fix the room issues and is a random gamble of the combo being good

So you do acknowledge the fact that you still need to listen to the speakers before you know how they sound? I think you are stuck in the circle.

 

[thewas]

I already explained the somewhat provocative title of the video, it just clicks bate to get your attention, but the content is not. Did you watch the video or are you just assuming what it's all about?

I had watched in spring when it was released and had even given it a dislike back then, the reasons are analysed above.

 

[thewas]

So you do acknowledge the fact that you still need to listen to the speakers before you know how they sound? I think you are stuck in the circle.

With some enhanced past experience you can get a good feeling how different dispersion patterns of classic neutral forward radiating loudspeaker designs sound and yes, I have bought many of my loudspeakers by just looking at enhanced measurement sets and never had a nasty surprise.

 

[Geert]

Again, it's not about not being able to measure everything, it's about not being able to sum all those measurements to a whole that is the problem. That's the reason we still need to use our ears to figure out how a pair of speakers really sound.

That's exactly what's wrong with the perception of measurements aversed audiophiles. They expect this one graph illustration of how a speaker will sound in all conditions and locations. That's completely unrealistic. What we do have is a set of measurements that allows an educated person to get a pretty decent understanding of different aspects of the sound and performance of a speaker. It's difficult to get your head around all that info and translate it into an exact representation of the sound, which is why I never suggested you shouldn't listen.

 

[goat76]

With some enhanced past experience you can get a good feeling how different dispersion patterns of classic neutral forward radiating loudspeaker designs sound and yes, I have bought many of my loudspeakers by just looking at enhanced measurement sets and never had a nasty surprise.

"A good feeling", I buy that. But I'm sure that even if they showed similar dispersion patterns and other measurements, they still sounded fairly different from each other. Or was your aim to buy a new speaker with the exact same sound?

To not have a nasty surprise, yes, that's what measurements are good for. How the speaker really sounds is a whole different animal.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Would be interesting to compare a 1237A(without using GLM) for example to an SCM50 because they are both very old designs.

 

[goat76]

That's exactly what's wrong with the perception of measurements aversed audiophiles. They expect this one graph illustration of how a speaker will sound in all conditions and locations. That's completely unrealistic. What we do have is a set of measurements that allows an educated person to get a pretty decent understanding of different aspects of the sound and performance of a speaker. It's difficult to get your head around all that info and translate it into an exact representation of the sound, which is why I never suggested you shouldn't listen.

Sorry, I thought you were one of the guys thinking they can judge how a loudspeaker sounds just by looking at some measurement parameters. I got the impression there are a few guys doing that in this thread.

 

[thewas]

"A good feeling", I buy that. But I'm sure that even if they showed similar dispersion patterns and other measurements, they still sounded fairly different from each other. Or was your aim to buy a new speaker with the exact same sound?

No, when they sounded fairy differently to each other they had usual some significant differences in the dispersion, even small frequency regions are enough, see for example the sound power of 2 very similar looking monitors like KH120 and 8030.

To not have a nasty surprise, yes, that's what measurements are good for. How the speaker really sounds is a whole different animal.

As said with some extended experience also no real surprises there too.

 

[YSC]

So you do acknowledge the fact that you still need to listen to the speakers before you know how they sound? I think you are stuck in the circle.

Nope, I acknowledge that in my room, if done nothing, I won’t know how a specific speaker sound, but a better measuring speaker is still: better. As above Schroeder Freqency eq is not easy with in room measurement. With measurement and known room modes it can be know will it sound good or bad by measurement. If you put a speaker with whatever measurement data into a random space, nobody will know how it will eventuall Sound in room.

In simpler terms: with a well measured speaker in a room, I can be sure with eq taming the modes it will sound good, and in the same spot a worse measuring speaker will sound worse, but if you ask how good it will be in a random room, you can’t tell and without in room measurement you can’t fix it reliably

 

[Purité Audio]

Sorry, I thought you were one of the guys thinking they can judge how a loudspeaker sounds just by looking at some measurement parameters. I got the impression there are a few guys doing that in this thread.

I don’t think anyone would suggest purchasing before listening, measurements ( and understanding them) are a really good way of separating the wheat from the chaff.
Keith

 

[Geert]

Sorry, I thought you were one of the guys thinking they can judge how a loudspeaker sounds just by looking at some measurement parameters.

On the other end I also see a lot of assumptions about the sound of different speaker design attributes while I guess most people never researched or heard the differences in a way that assures all other conditions remain the same and the observations and conclusions are not affected by other effects. Examples:

• Difference in sound between dome midrange versus cone speaker versus ATM
• Number of crossover bands (2 or 3 way speakers)
• Crossover frequency in the critical midrange or not
• Different port alignments
• Size of low range drivers (e.g. 6" versus 12")
• DSP correction of minimal phase anechoic response issues
• Differences in step response
• Effect of directivity in different acoustic conditions and listening distance
• ....

Take for example the question about driver size. In the video they talk about a small Bluetooth speaker versus an 18" driver. Who ever heard that difference assuring frequency response, directivity and distortion profile are exactly the same, because that's the premise of the video?

 

[goat76]

On the other end I also see a lot of assumptions about the sound of different speaker design attributes while I guess most people never researched or heard the differences in a way that assures all other conditions remain the same and the observations and conclusions are not affected by other effects. Examples:

• Difference in sound between dome midrange versus cone speaker versus ATM
• Number of crossover bands (2 or 3 way speakers)
• Crossover frequency in the critical midrange or not
• Different port alignments
• Size of low range drivers (e.g. 6" versus 12")
• DSP correction of minimal phase anechoic response issues
• Differences in step response
• Effect of directivity in different acoustic conditions and listening distance
• ....

Take for example the question about driver size. In the video they talk about a small Bluetooth speaker versus an 18" driver. Who ever heard that difference assuring frequency response, directivity and distortion profile are exactly the same, because that's the premise of the video?

I can happily admit there's no chance in the world I will totally dismiss any speakers, just based on a few measured parameters like some folks here seems to do, and I'm sure many of them don't have the experience to do so. There are simply too many parameters for anyone to be certain a speaker is good or bad overall.

There is no such thing as the perfect speaker and some compromises will be found in all speaker designs, and I think ATC has done some sacrifices for other things they see as more important. Their mid-range dome works almost end-to-end for reasons we must assume sounded best to the team at ATC, but by doing so, some linearity has probably been sacrificed. I'm sure they tried different crossovers before they ended up with the 380-3500 Hz working range of the mid-range driver.


I don't think you should put too much weight on the small Bluetooth speaker versus an 18" driver, that was just some loose talk about the general differences that normally can be heard.

What do you think about the dynamic capabilities speakers have in general, do you think Klaus Heinz was wrong about that too when he says much more development is needed on that front? Just playing a single accord on his grand piano tells him there's a lot of work needed, a long way to go before loudspeakers will be able to reproduce that.

 

[Flak]

By the way that the direct sound dominates our perception doesn't mean that the directivity isn't as important, as like Toole writes, the reflected sound should be similar to the direct sound, which is also the reason why DRC/EQ do not really work well with poor loudspeakers and cannot really transform them to something better.

My understanding is that loudspeakers with frequency response issues (there are many at many price points) can be very effectively corrected provided that the directivity index is reasonably good in the region of frequencies that needs some "digital speaker correction"

 

[thewas]

My understanding is that loudspeakers with frequency response issues (there are many at many price points) can be very effectively corrected provided that the directivity index is reasonably good in the region of frequencies that needs some "digital speaker correction"

Sure, but those corrections are better and easier made based on anechoic/windowed instead of steady state listener position measurements (do this for example for my old LS50 pair).

 

[Pearljam5000]

I wish ATC would send a pair of SCM50 to Amir and this whole mystery would be solved

 

[Geert]

What do you think about the dynamic capabilities speakers have in general, do you think Klaus Heinz was wrong about that too when he says much more development is needed on that front? Just playing a single accord on his grand piano tells him there's a lot of work needed, a long way to go before loudspeakers will be able to reproduce that.

I happen to have speakers that blow Klaus and is grand piano out of the window so I'm not sure what to think of that. Grand piano's can reach close to 110dB. Although that's extreme and when nearby, not at audience distance. Speakers can easily reach 110dB at 1m. Not the average bookshelf speaker of course, but a grand piano is also a bit larger and heavier than that.

How a piano is recorded and how it sounds behind the keyboard is a totally different experience, so challenging to compare.