ATC speakers / Monitors

[boxerfan88]

Ooo … the SCM7 is quite bumpy in the 500-800Hz area.

 

[dfuller]

Ooo … the SCM7 is quite bumpy in the 500-800Hz area.

Not great, I agree. Looks like a resonance of some sort - probably a cabinet wall.

 

[ernestcarl]

Not great, I agree. Looks like a resonance of some sort - probably a cabinet wall.

J.A. says:

“… some kind of enclosure resonance at that frequency. However, when I investigated the vibrational behavior of the cabinet walls with a simple plastic-tape accelerometer, I found nothing untoward at 600Hz. I did find a strong mode at 715Hz on the sidewalls (fig.2), as well as three slightly less intense resonances centered on 410Hz. The 410Hz mode was also present on the ATC's top panel, but at a much lower amplitude (not shown). Given the relatively high frequency of this cabinet behavior and the small radiating areas of the affected panels, I doubt they will result in any coloration.”

It’s there clearly, yet not likely a huge issue.

*Would be more interesting if we were to actually find anything clearly broken from a current ATC design.

 

[YSC]

Ooo … the SCM7 is quite bumpy in the 500-800Hz area.

Much better than the old SCM19 though, that’s just one resonance, curious of the distortion and directivity plots

 

[ernestcarl]

Much better than the old SCM19 though, that’s just one resonance, curious of the distortion and directivity plots

I don’t expect anything out of the ordinary. Stereophile’s vertical plot view is not the best due to the overlapping slides. But, if JA is right then vertical dispersion is better than expected for such a configuration. The mid-woofer looks pretty beefy and nice, though. Still, it’s likely not gonna outperform a purifi driver — not sure anyone would be claiming that this model is SOTA today.

 

[Pearljam5000]

I wonder how the beast of the SCM300 measures
But I guess we'll never know lol

 

[dfuller]

I wonder how the beast of the SCM300 measures
But I guess we'll never know lolView attachment 338117View attachment 338116

Meh. I've heard the 150s (the single woofer version of the 300)... it's fine, but "lumbering" would be a good representation of the bass.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Meh. I've heard the 150s (the single woofer version of the 300)... it's fine, but "lumbering" would be a good representation of the bass.

I thought you were an ATC fan

 

[dfuller]

I thought you were an ATC fan

The 150s aren't my favorites. 50s and 100s and 110s are neat.

 

[574stereo]

150s have the lowest group delay of the entire range, I’ve always really enjoyed the bottom octave in a decent room.

SCM7s, I have a pair and only measure a +/- 1dB wiggle around that range. Otherwise, mine look quite similar to JA’s. The off axis is very good for a 2-way.

 

[Purité Audio]

I wonder how the beast of the SCM300 measures
But I guess we'll never know lolView attachment 338117View attachment 338116

I went to visit Mike Skinner ‘the streets’ with a pair of 8Cs he had a pair of ( I believe the 300’s) ATC no longer make them and Mikes were passive with a huge ATC amp, this was a while ago though.
Keith

 

[YSDR]

I went to visit Mike Skinner ‘the streets’ with a pair of 8Cs he had a pair of ( I believe the 300’s) ATC no longer make them and Mikes were passive with a huge ATC amp, this was a while ago though.

So what happened? Or I missed something?

 

[DSJR]

I wonder how the beast of the SCM300 measures
But I guess we'll never know lolView attachment 338117View attachment 338116

I heard the standard studio-issue 200As once and it was an experience NEVER to be missed, with dynamics a typical domestic system simply does NOT have, not even the 100A's were as capable in this aspect!!! I even measured up for a pair as they were almost affordable back then, but my life changed completely after that experience and the stereo gear sadly took a back seat



ATC 19 and the 20 drivers (don't think they're the same as the 20 main driver has the SL update) use the oversize dust-cap as an upper mid dome, which is probably what is is and grafted onto the cone. Even the original 1990 SCM 20 had ' ripples' at the 600hz region (ATC once published a paper by Billy Woodman explaining how the driver worked which I may still have in the loft somewhere). Not sure about the 7 driver, but those curvy cabinets are a cost-saving/styling exercise over the more substantial cabs of the pro and trad three way models.

@Pearljam5000 - the 300A TOWERS are NOT proper speakers - have you seen how huge they are, with mid dome way above a seated listener? I'm sticking my neck out to suggest they're for far eastern showoffs who probably bought them in passive form too as the actives are so boring in that you can't chop and change the amps (one reason why I left the ATC Facebook group ). In my day, the trad 300A's could also be got in wood veneer faced enclosures (with the thick front baffles black) and with the properly designed grilles which back then were recommended to be used I recall.

 

[WillBrink]

Not great, I agree. Looks like a resonance of some sort - probably a cabinet wall.

ATC adds little for insulation nor any cross bracing in the SCM series. Is it possible that's part of the issue? It costs them nothing to do so, so I'm assuming they have their reasons based on measurements.

 

[574stereo]

I’ve been inside SCM11s and 19s which both had large braces + stuffed cabinets. Haven’t opened my SCM7s yet.

 

[WillBrink]

I’ve been inside SCM11s and 19s which both had large braces + stuffed cabinets. Haven’t opened my SCM7s yet.

Maybe I will take a look in my 19s sometime, Only using that vid for discussion of lack of insulation, no bracing, and thin cabinets in the SCM v2 line vs support for his recs, or opinions, etc:

 

[Tangband]

Can you actually prove your ability to hear DSP artifacts?

Actually, for well under $1000. Or for free if you already have a computer.

Sorry, trained ears can't even tell a Futterman from a Pioneer mid-range receiver, see page 80.

https://americanradiohistory.com/Archive-HiFI-Stereo/80s/HiFi-Stereo-Review-1987-01.pdf

Anecdotes from golden ears don't count.

Can you show some measurements to back up this statement ? Or is it all anecdotes ?

 

[MAB]

Can you show some measurements to back up this statement ? Or is it all anecdotes ?

Tangband,
I think you missed the point. Or didn't read. Trapped in an odd loop. This is the test, it was in my post. Page 80.

https://americanradiohistory.com/Archive-HiFI-Stereo/80s/HiFi-Stereo-Review-1987-01.pdf

It's quite famous. The ability to differentiate amps was measured. And people did indeed fail to differentiate. It's not an anecdote.
You saying what you said doesn't make this or any other scientifically conducted test go away.
Perhaps you can read some of the other links I included.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Can't ATC just send an SCM50 to Amir for measuring ?

 

[Tangband]

Tangband,
I think you missed the point. Or didn't read. Trapped in an odd loop. This is the test, it was in my post. Page 80.

https://americanradiohistory.com/Archive-HiFI-Stereo/80s/HiFi-Stereo-Review-1987-01.pdf

It's quite famous. The ability to differentiate amps was measured. And people did indeed fail to differentiate. It's not an anecdote.
You saying what you said doesn't make this or any other scientifically conducted test go away.
Perhaps you can read some of the other links I included.

Thanks for bringing me something to read tonight. It bring back memories from old times in my youth, reviews of some gear I have own ( Denon dp47f ) and a lot of nostalgica. Happy holidays.