ATC speakers / Monitors

[Chrise36]

That can't be generalised, in a non gated and non smoothed measurement there are a huge peaks and dips due to room influence which can hide fine details, also such a measurement mixes sound from several directions thus can hide effects which appear just in some angles. It would be great if non gated room measurements would show much about the measured perfomance of a loudspeaker, than people wouldn't need to do all the effort and costs like huge (anechoic or non) chambers, outside ground plane measurements and Klippel NFS.

In this case of a treated room with low resonance the measured performance should be validated with listening

Does it really matter when personal choice applies?

ATC's are still very good at what they do, but they seem to cost up to 50% more in real terms than inflation alone (I put it down to survival in a world where large studios lapping up 200's and 300's aren't around as prolifically as they once were and a far eastern status-symbol led domestic market where price is almost everything) and they're by no means the only ones here (all the 'BBC derived' family of makers are silly priced now too and I think it was Spendor post refinancing ten or so years ago that started this particular family price hike). It seems that above a certain threshold in pricing, the audiophile market starts to take notice of the status-enhancing aspects of a particular product line and this allows profit margins to increase.

I think it's sad the middle market over here has all but collapsed, taken over by used gear which obviously still has merit.

Looks as if Genelec and Neumann have had recent price increases (using the 310 as a kind of reference). They're still good value compared to other domestic speaker fare, so why not just go for those and leave ATC alone now? In the UK, I just look at Dynaudio Confidence, bigger Focals, Majico, Wilson (FFS), bigger PMC and B&W's and chuckle, as active three way ATC's out-perform them all in my opinion and cost less but including amps too. I'd just ask you lot look at the market as a whole and not just a miniscule part of it. How many have heard of D&D away from here, at least in the UK? - Not knocking it at all, far from it, but it'd take me as a total stranger to that brand some convincing they'd see me out and be easily repaired if they needed to be.. One of ATC's UK charms is that once upon a time, you could arrange to take them there late morning, get 'em fixed up if necessary, get a vibe-enhancing factory tour and then bring them back with you the same day.

Neither produced an affordable 3 way home speaker (about 2500 euro a couple of years ago) like ATC did. Their target is the pro market only.

 

[YSC]

Does it really matter when personal choice applies?

ATC's are still very good at what they do, but they seem to cost up to 50% more in real terms than inflation alone (I put it down to survival in a world where large studios lapping up 200's and 300's aren't around as prolifically as they once were and a far eastern status-symbol led domestic market where price is almost everything) and they're by no means the only ones here (all the 'BBC derived' family of makers are silly priced now too and I think it was Spendor post refinancing ten or so years ago that started this particular family price hike). It seems that above a certain threshold in pricing, the audiophile market starts to take notice of the status-enhancing aspects of a particular product line and this allows profit margins to increase.

I think it's sad the middle market over here has all but collapsed, taken over by used gear which obviously still has merit.

Looks as if Genelec and Neumann have had recent price increases (using the 310 as a kind of reference). They're still good value compared to other domestic speaker fare, so why not just go for those and leave ATC alone now? In the UK, I just look at Dynaudio Confidence, bigger Focals, Majico, Wilson (FFS), bigger PMC and B&W's and chuckle, as active three way ATC's out-perform them all in my opinion and cost less but including amps too. I'd just ask you lot look at the market as a whole and not just a miniscule part of it. How many have heard of D&D away from here, at least in the UK? - Not knocking it at all, far from it, but it'd take me as a total stranger to that brand some convincing they'd see me out and be easily repaired if they needed to be.. One of ATC's UK charms is that once upon a time, you could arrange to take them there late morning, get 'em fixed up if necessary, get a vibe-enhancing factory tour and then bring them back with you the same day.

well as I said multitple times before, when it's down to personal choice, it's perfectly ok even if one say, pay a large sum even to buy something really bad performing, as long as he/she is happy, but that 's another subject. obviously there are worse performer in same or even higher price bracket. (IMO B&W in recent years is definitely one). Bigger focals I would say are in similar shape as ATC, good driver tech which evolves, pricey, good on axis frequency if not more extended bass than ATC, but directivity is meh at best, they used the inverted dome tweeter though which seems having somehow a different dispersion than others but not sure it will be better.

But afterall when ppl ask about particular brand, ATC just like B&W or some Focal models will get recommended against for some more niche vendor with better price &/or performance. For the not cost and design passive brands. AFAIK I appreciate the KEF blades (even before the meta ver. which gets even more SOTA), and Vivid Giya G1. sure I am out of that market, but seeing that market segment having some really can compete with SOTA offerings are a nice thing. and I think, as loyal ATC customer, no one will really hope ATC don't improve in bass extension and directivity?

 

[DSJR]

In the UK, THERE'S NO REAL BASS ISSUE! In other markets with more bass-absorbant room builds, this may well not be the case and Billy knew this thirty years ago when US studios wanted more bass level (easily eq'd in the big models though, if not the 50 and lower). At the time, ATC launched an effective sub, but I admit I never had use for one and the store wasn't big enough to justify such a thing. Their ports don't woof away with massive air flow as many other speakers do (at least my 100A's didn't at all)..

Anyway, I think it's all been said. If you want neighbour threatening bass, get a couple of subs and spend some time and effort integrating them. I still remain to be convinced that the raved-over mini-speakers here with quite flat levels of bass down to 50Hz or so, actually make bass instruments sound convincing and lord knows what bass-intensive music does to midrange distortion in smaller two ways, no matter how good they are. I'll keep an open mind on this though...

 

[Purité Audio]

Could be better and with better margin for you...

Higher margins with ATC certainly on the consumer line kii/D&D are semi ‘pro’ so aa good deal less, sadly.
We used to have two dedicated rooms, seven RPG ‘modex’ panels in the larger which suffers from a huge 37.5Hz bass reinforcement.
Really I feel it far more valid for customers to hear the speakers in their own space, ideally in direct comparison to their current set-ups, so I encourage them whenever possible not to take their equipment down, I bring a complete system, the 8Cs are practically a complete system anyway, set them up and leave them with the client.
Keith

 

[Chrise36]

An excellent track to test how well they reproduce voices:
Beautiful Life by Chantal Chamberland

 

[turnip_up]

Does it really matter when personal choice applies?

Well... its the most cited criticism of the measurement model, isn't it? Preference based testing that gets distilled down into what is essentially a recipe for making speakers using the most 'popular' characteristics... but what happens if you were one of those people who weren't necessarily aligned with the majority in the original preference testing? Or your room doesn't really match that of the original testing criteria?

The rubber needs to meet the road somewhere along the process. Otherwise you end up in obscure territory like where personal computing currently is at. So much hype about performance based on benchmarks... yet so many disappointed users that get their computers home and realize they don't really meet the hype or expectations.

 

[YSC]

Well... its the most cited criticism of the measurement model, isn't it? Preference based testing that gets distilled down into what is essentially a recipe for making speakers using the most 'popular' characteristics... but what happens if you were one of those people who weren't necessarily aligned with the majority in the original preference testing? Or your room doesn't really match that of the original testing criteria?

The rubber needs to meet the road somewhere along the process. Otherwise you end up in obscure territory like where personal computing currently is at. So much hype about performance based on benchmarks... yet so many disappointed users that get their computers home and realize they don't really meet the hype or expectations.

I think this is going to blurring the subject.

For a speaker to be "better" as a general terms, it can be better in 2 ways IMO:

1) being a more neutral speaker, with parameters like directivity and say, in room issue countering measures etc. being better.

• the more anechoically neutral, and better say bass mode attenuation methods implemented, especially those similar to say, GLM can get one closer to what the recording actually sounded like, no extra colouration to the music, hence, more High Fidelity.
• more even directivity makes EQ in room more even and less prone to weird effects

2) having a tuning where in a "typical" room (well, I think we know that no room is really typical), or in a controlled environment, most ppl would prefer.

if a speaker failed in both, it is by definition not a "better" one objectively, but then it's another issue for individual choice, say if I am old and almost deaf to highs, a massivly sloping up highs profile will sound more realistic to me, just like using hearing aids, but then that tuning, is tailored for me, so not really a better speaker as it will sound like crap and off to those with normal hearing. or say I am tone deaf, anything making a sound would work, so I treasure a fancy design over anything, that's not a wrong choice.

So it's not bashing one who owns and loved their ATC being (please forgive me if it sounded rude) "stupid", "trowing cash into the sea" etc. still, it's not SOTA but still very good, yet not really the top performer at the most competitive pricing, both are facts that ATC are fine tools or entertainment, but also true if purely looking at performance and price, there is something better out there, period.

 

[Frgirard]

What you don't understand about the pro world is that a pregnant is like a partner. The partner with whom you get along the best is chosen.

In The audio world, the neutrality is a myth like the cable sound. Everyone has their own beliefs.

 

[YSC]

if that the more pro choose the tool is a goal post for a better speaker, I will just withdraw all those comments and recommend a pair of Yamaha NS10 to everyone..

 

[Frgirard]

if that the more pro choose the tool is a goal post for a better speaker, I will just withdraw all those comments and recommend a pair of Yamaha NS10 to everyone..

You need to learn what is the mastering, what is the mixing.

 

[goat76]

if that the more pro choose the tool is a goal post for a better speaker, I will just withdraw all those comments and recommend a pair of Yamaha NS10 to everyone..

Why?

If you prefer the sound of Genelec, get a pair of Genelecs. If you prefer ATC, get a pair of ATC monitors.

Yamaha NS-10 was normally never used as a main monitor, more like a secondary monitor for checking the mid-range while mixing. According to people who used it, it was a brutal tool for checking for faults in that particular range, a “looking glass” that revealed problems in the mix.

 

[YSC]

Why?

If you prefer the sound of Genelec, get a pair of Genelecs. If you prefer ATC, get a pair of ATC monitors.

Yamaha NS-10 was normally never used as a main monitor, more like a secondary monitor for checking the mid-range while mixing. According to people who used it, it was a brutal tool for checking for faults in that particular range, a “looking glass” that revealed problems in the mix.

I always said that whatever one prefers have no right or wrong, didn't I? but still, if asking for whether a speaker is better SCIENTIFICALLY than another, there are studies and parameters for objective performance, at least for "faithfully reproducing" or "deliver the sound as recorded" or "Hi-Fi", then not adding colouration by the speaker is the goal, then we all know that anechoic flat FR, smooth directivity, low distortion, phase are the factors to go for.

And as always, something good =/= must be SOTA or best, it's like stating the Ferrari F430 don't go around the track as fast as a Nissan GTR, so a GTR is a faster sports car (fact), but the F430 is still a really good sports car.

Just not again the statement that since a lot of pros choose X brand, it must be better than Y (where still a lot of pros don't use X) arguement. pros use the tools available which is usually more dependant on service availability, contractor preference, price, company policy, discount, adaptance/familiarity to the drawbacks for years etc. rather than solely on performance. so if widely used by pros = better, then the Yamaha NS-10 is the single model used most by studios, yea they are known for that looking glass/harsh effect, but that's what the tool more pros chose to get the job done, be it second or third monitor.

 

[Torbachkristensen]

ATC110 in room response, same smoothing as reviews.

Magic cardioid design in-room response.

Another magic cardioid in-room response

The ATC even is even measured at LP and with all sorts of reflective surfaces in the mid to mid-high and overdampened HF since this was before any diffusion and reflection control (hence the fall above 10k). NO DSP. Below is even 10-300hz for reference. Not much "magic" in those cardioid responses afterall - the ATC wipes them out with not even the slightest competition. This is not to say the other designs are not better in a lot of application, but even in a well treated environment they would have a hard time getting this level of flat, in room at LP (I have certainly never seen it), since they base their cardioid off of boundary properties and hence are dependent on the hard surfaces behind them and on the sides. They would never be able to be implemented into a halfsphere acoustic environment, they are not build with the ability or thought of mounting, and that's fine. But they are simply not ultimately better, they are different and designed for a different implementation. Factor in the quite substantially better headroom from the ported design and low distortion from the drivers, and it is not really odd why audio pro's like this kind of speaker. I think all this appraisal of the current design trend is great, it encourages evolution - but please stop thinking it is a big audio revolution. We are still using bandlimited drivers and woofers to move air. There's no free lunch, and it is up to each and everyone and their ears to deem what they think are the best design compromises in their room.

 

[Torbachkristensen]

Why?

If you prefer the sound of Genelec, get a pair of Genelecs. If you prefer ATC, get a pair of ATC monitors.

Yamaha NS-10 was normally never used as a main monitor, more like a secondary monitor for checking the mid-range while mixing. According to people who used it, it was a brutal tool for checking for faults in that particular range, a “looking glass” that revealed problems in the mix.

It has a limited frequency bandwidth and sealed design with great impulse response. It made you focus on the midrange and transients. 2 most important aspects of the mixing process. There are better tools now IMO, but they had their place as a tool

 

[DSJR]

NS10's on bookshelves as originally intended were actually not bad at all. brightly lit definitely, but clean and clear with the bass there was, not at all thuddy or boomy. used as they were (and still are?) in studios, all you'd probably hear is the upper mids, but again they were used as a very capable 'tool' to do a particular job. I doubt many engineers would use them for music listening at home though

 

[YSC]

ATC110 in room response, same smoothing as reviews.

View attachment 226333


Magic cardioid design in-room response.View attachment 226324
Another magic cardioid in-room response
View attachment 226326

The ATC even is even measured at LP and with all sorts of reflective surfaces in the mid to mid-high and overdampened HF since this was before any diffusion and reflection control (hence the fall above 10k). NO DSP. Below is even 10-300hz for reference. Not much "magic" in those cardioid responses afterall - the ATC wipes them out with not even the slightest competition. This is not to say the other designs are not better in a lot of application, but even in a well treated environment they would have a hard time getting this level of flat, in room at LP (I have certainly never seen it), since they base their cardioid off of boundary properties and hence are dependent on the hard surfaces behind them and on the sides. They would never be able to be implemented into a halfsphere acoustic environment, they are not build with the ability or thought of mounting, and that's fine. But they are simply not ultimately better, they are different and designed for a different implementation. Factor in the quite substantially better headroom from the ported design and low distortion from the drivers, and it is not really odd why audio pro's like this kind of speaker. I think all this appraisal of the current design trend is great, it encourages evolution - but please stop thinking it is a big audio revolution. We are still using bandlimited drivers and woofers to move air. There's no free lunch, and it is up to each and everyone and their ears to deem what they think are the best design compromises in their room.

View attachment 226334
View attachment 226336

scale matched and overlain on top of one another, both inroom response, not sure about the D&D room treatment level or with/without sub, are you sure it is that far from one another? p.s. the 10db dip beyond 10khz is still there

 

[FeddyLost]

Just to illustrate my opinion regarding some newer lifestyle products that can require more power at LF
Composition almost as PMC Fenestria with 4x6,5" ~ 1x13" with little more low-end than usual.

 

[YSC]

View attachment 226339

scale matched and overlain on top of one another, both inroom response, not sure about the D&D room treatment level or with/without sub, are you sure it is that far from one another? p.s. the 10db dip beyond 10khz is still there

And this is the actual room Erin measured that in room response. No bass trap whatsoever, just a living room.

That’s what I call part of what SOTA speakers can do. Is it perfect? Of course not, one could simply eq it for even better results, bass distortion can be better with say some aid of sub to kill off room mode.

 

[Torbachkristensen]

View attachment 226339

scale matched and overlain on top of one another, both inroom response, not sure about the D&D room treatment level or with/without sub, are you sure it is that far from one another? p.s. the 10db dip beyond 10khz is still there

Yes that is very, very far from one another. Especially taken into account the waterfall plot I posted earlier + the distortion figures. They will not sound even remote close to the clarity of the ATC’s. But I seem to have found out that measurements are only praised, when they tell the favourable side of the truth in these forums. I have already, on multiple occasions, even in the quoted post explained the HF Rolloff. The same can be seen in Erins Kii measurement, and he explains the same thing in his room, excess damping of HF.

 

[YSC]

Yes that is very, very far from one another. Especially taken into account the waterfall plot I posted earlier + the distortion figures. They will not sound even remote close to the clarity of the ATC’s. But I seem to have found out that measurements are only praised, when they tell the favourable side of the truth in these forums. I have already, on multiple occasions, even in the quoted post explained the HF Rolloff. The same can be seen in Erins Kii measurement, and he explains the same thing in his room, excess damping of HF.

the D&D in Erin's room overlay shows it's actually flatter than the ATC above 50hz by quite a bit. take aside the roll off past 10khz, this is a heavily treated mixing room of yours vs. an audiophile's living room, which, all that furnitures and furnance etc. don't have those massive bass traps etc. clarity wise I can't comment for sure, but taken into account of the total cost one would need, and in the listening environment required, don't you think the D&D do quite some amazing achievement for the tech?