ATC speakers / Monitors

[larevoj]

There are so many speakers in this studio but the main and biggest rig is still ATC…I am all for change and innovation but I don’t think change for change sake makes sense. Neither is new necessarily meant better.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

Hey Tim,

It's their policy not to publish more data than needed. They are also very conservative with their published data. They're not exaggerating anything. ...They also don't owe anybody anything...

They are completely up to modern standards - but their choice is to constantly optimize and improve drivers and amps performances rather than correct with DSP. Their speakers are fully analog. I love that. DSP correction is the source of a number of issues in studios and around the speakers, including processing time delay, blocking the choice of D/A in mastering and mixing chains or adding an extra conversion stage etc. which are crucial.

When I mix (I'm a hobbyist) like a lot of other engineers I quickly start listening through the AD and DA stereo master chain (DAW -> Analog console & processing-> Master AD -> Master D/A -> Monitors.)

Using converters like BURL that are colored is one of these essential chains in the mix process - you really need to hear what they do / how you "hit" them.

ATCs measure beautifully phase, FR, distorsion, dispersion. Other brands measure well too. But it won't tell you how well they translate. E.g. higher end Genelecs often measure well too, but in my experience don't translate nearly as well.

I have a lot of measurements on my drive from various speakers, I've also worked with quite a few speakers and drivers OEM manufacturers. ATC is always their target. That's who they look up to. This wasn't a surprise.

One guy that I very much trust in Audio aside ATC is Bruno Putzeys. He knows what he's doing.

One trick to separate the man from the boys is to see how vertically integrated the speaker manufacturer is. Those that produce everything in-house tend to be a lot more performant than those that buy OEM drivers, OEM amps, put them in a box and brand them. You'd be very surprised at how many "Pro" audio brands do the latter with a very high price tag. Which dealers like and push because they offer higher margins. Sadly.

If studios care a lot of the '' true '' why not start to selling things and buy Kef blades? fully analog flat response ?, much more '' truth '' than any atc

 

[807Recordings]

I am not saying anything against anyone or firm here but to date we have seen on ASR ATC speakers measured with poor performance.
designers who claim they are the best who happened to partner with them. From a science side there has not been anything to prove the ATC is superior or as good. There is also many other well designed studios with other brands.

 

[dfuller]

Can you elaborate please? I don't see anything done about these in ATCs - no time alignment of drivers (maybe they are somehow arranged inside, but it doesn't look so on the surface), no some kind of phase response control (with a bunch of all-pass filters or digitally, at least not the model I've seen measured)

The actives use adjustable op amp based all pass filters to align phase response. It's part of why ATC tends to prefer them over passives - that and the crossovers aren't affected by changing t-s parameters from the voice coil heating, and the driver protection limiters.

I am not saying anything against anyone or firm here but to date we have seen on ASR ATC speakers measured with poor performance.
designers who claim they are the best who happened to partner with them. From a science side there has not been anything to prove the ATC is superior or as good. There is also many other well designed studios with other brands.

We've seen all of one ATC, and an old sealed passive design not indicative of their ported active designs. In fact, measurements from other places (Stereophile and Resolution, among others) indicate most of their designs are pretty flat. Are they necessarily class leading? Meh, maybe not. But they certainly aren't bad and the distortion performance of the SCM25As according to the Resolution review is nothing short of impressive - this is a ported 6.5" 3-way speaker that manages about 1% distortion at 40hz at 90dB/1m free field. That's damned impressive, in my book.

 

[aac]

The actives use adjustable op amp based all pass filters to align phase response. It's part of why ATC tends to prefer them over passives - that and the crossovers aren't affected by changing t-s parameters from the voice coil heating, and the driver protection limiters.

To me this looks like "typical" phase behavior you usually see in the passives or actives that does not use any kind of phase manipulation. Do you think it is not, can you show where I am mistaken? This is an active model, of course. Lets not argue about FR flatness here and focus on the phase.

Spoiler

(Amplitude Linearity (±2dB): 74Hz-17kHz on the ATC site. Can't really even argue with that, but they should've at least notified that they have drawn a line somewhere that doesn't touch a major portion of the FR graph. The choice of 74 Hz instead of 60 is just plain disgusting to make it fit into their +-2. Was it a "conservative with their data" thing Northward was talking about? Also funny how this review isn't mentioned on ATC website despite this speaker was probably sent to Sound and Recording by manufacturer (serial number 8) and the only ones mentioned are without measurements

Here is the model from another manufacturer that uses analog circuitry to do something to phase for comparison

 

[Northward]

Thomas, measures and we will believe. The FrankDandrea thread on GS show a speaker not flat.

How many other articles and threads about ATC show the opposite?

The GS thread shows a guy that has literally no idea what he's doing and does not know much anything about acoustics - let alone how to measure a speaker properly - and why would he need to? He hired a company so he wouldn't have to learn about all that but got ripped off. I feel sorry for him.

Yet, it's for ATC - who are providing loudspeakers to the absolute highest quality mixing and mastering facilities in the world and a very large number of A list engineers that specifically requested those speakers be used - to prove their speakers don't have a massive hole in the midrange? I have a lot of mostly in-room measurements from speaker fine calibration and room certification. They show none of what the guy on GS reports. The engineers we calibrate our rooms for will hear the tiniest variations (in the 1/10th dB range) between two drivers in a pair. There is no way a defect like that would fly.

ATC tells us what the amplitude linearity is. It's exactly the range within which they measure.

E.g. for a 110A SL: Amplitude Linearity (±2dB): 50Hz-17kHz

This is the problem with the internet today - and why I'm not so active. The word of just any guy on a mostly anonymous forum weighs as much as the equivalent of over a century of accumulated engineering knowledge by one of the most highly regarded speaker manufacturer on the planet. And a really honest company too.

The death of real expertise.

Not to say there aren't dysfunctional companies around claiming things that are completely insane. Especially in the field of acoustics (Quantum acoustics... that was a good recent one) and loudspeakers design.

I get what you're saying. It's good to pay attention - and I certainly do. My job relies a lot on the quality of the speakers we work with.

But usually snake oil products and poor quality designs are very easily discerned by anyone with a high school maths diploma and some basic understanding of physics. And the bad products/brands that somehow go through the cracks don't last. There is a hype and then you find them all over Reverb and Ebay a couple years later.

Are you located in Paris?

 

[tw99]

I would say that ATC succeed because their products are good (although not world leading technically these days), they know their business and the products are well supported. I hope they continue in this way and don't get bought out by some international conglomerate like so many others.

With the increased noise these days about "right to repair", they will have to change literally nothing in their business model to adopt it, because it's what they already do, in contrast to most of the rest of the industry.

 

[Frgirard]

E.g. for a 110A SL: Amplitude Linearity (±2dB): 50Hz-17kHz

Hello,

In this post with Measurement given by ATC, the +/- 2 dB is not reached.

Gearspace.com - View Single Post - Home Studio Build: Sharing my step by step build done by Professional Acoustic Engineers

Post 15559927 -Forum for professional and amateur recording engineers to share techniques and advice.

gearspace.com

For me, an acousic axis at the mid level and a verticaly diffusion equal to 10° are strange design

I remember Ted Jansen, Greg Calbi used B&W speakers https://www.atlanticrecords.com/pos...ic-making-mastering-engineer-ted-jensen-22066
For me, listening and measurements overlap only partially. So I am not surprised that ATC is a reference for many. I suppose you know the difficulties experienced by the engineers at Radio France in using their ATC and the use of a headphone to help them.

I located in south of France (Neumann KH420, K+H O300 for listening music)

 

[Scholl]

To be clear about the post above, it is said that the measurements were done by ATC themselves. The models are apparently SCM100ASL Pro.

ATC just sent me the measurements they did in their lab. These are not generic measurements, they're specifically about my two monitors, I gave them my serials and they sent me this :

 

[thewas]

Many decent loudspeaker manufacturers do such quick on-axis measurements for every unit they produce as a part of their QC, just many don't store it or send per request.

And the on-axis dip shown there is one thing, the off-axis/sound power dip due to not optimal directivity match another.

 

[Northward]

Hello,

In this post with Measurement given by ATC, the +/- 2 dB is not reached.

Gearspace.com - View Single Post - Home Studio Build: Sharing my step by step build done by Professional Acoustic Engineers

Post 15559927 -Forum for professional and amateur recording engineers to share techniques and advice.

gearspace.com

For me, an acousic axis at the mid level and a verticaly diffusion equal to 10° are strange design

I remember Ted Jansen, Greg Calbi used B&W speakers https://www.atlanticrecords.com/pos...ic-making-mastering-engineer-ted-jensen-22066
For me, listening and measurements overlap only partially. So I am not surprised that ATC is a reference for many. I suppose you know the difficulties experienced by the engineers at Radio France in using their ATC and the use of a headphone to help them.

I located in south of France (Neumann KH420, K+H O300 for listening music)

They are within +/-2dB! The maximum amplitude there is 4dB = +/-2dB.

Between 91 and 95dB SPL 50Hz-17kHz. How is that not clear?

Most brands don't even reach the +/-3dB mark without heavy DSP.

Also those aren't anechoic chamber measurements, they are factory QC measurements before packing and shipping. To double check the drivers are well matched and all is OK / functioning. They are nearfield measurement likely with a short adaptative time window to avoid too much environment influencing the results, they are definitely not anechoic lab grade or high precision measurements. They are QC and are put up against similar type and model reference speaker measurements in the exact same space/setup/configuration to check for abnormal deviations.

What they are looking for is a deviation. The drivers are tested separately during production before assembly and matched by pair, as well as the amps. ATC does not process each speaker in an anechoic chamber. Not a single manufacturer does outside R&D work. It would be insanely time consuming and expensive to do so.

See it this way : when we calibrate systems/speakers, we don't care if the measurement microphone we use has +/-0,25 or +/-1dB response because the Microphone / Chain / SPL / Setup used is the exact same for both speakers. So these aren't variables, they are constants. What we are doing at that stage is fine matching drivers levels - the difference we see will be what difference there is between the drivers and amp setting (the only variables) we call the delta between the amplitudes.

It's the same there. They are looking for unusual deviations before shipping, not for pure speaker performance such as those measured in an anechoic chamber.

Context is everything.

What this graph shows is that within the QC check on the factory floor before packing, the speaker does not show any particular deviation from the standard target response for that model within that setup.

And even outside an anechoic chamber measurement, it's still within the +/-2dB range stated.

 

[Pearljam5000]

They are within +/-2dB! The maximum amplitude there is 4dB = +/-2dB.

Between 91 and 95dB SPL 50Hz-17kHz. How is that not clear?

Most brands don't even reach the +/-3dB mark without heavy DSP.

Also those aren't anechoic chamber measurements, they are factory QC measurements before packing and shipping. To double check the drivers are well matched and all is OK / functioning. They are nearfield measurement likely with a short adaptative time window to avoid too much environment influencing the results, they are definitely not anechoic lab grade or high precision measurements. They are QC and are put up against similar type and model reference speaker measurements in the exact same space/setup/configuration to check for abnormal deviations.

What they are looking for is a deviation. The drivers are tested separately during production before assembly and matched by pair, as well as the amps. ATC does not process each speaker in an anechoic chamber. Not a single manufacturer does outside R&D work. It would be insanely time consuming and expensive to do so.

See it this way : when we calibrate systems/speakers, we don't care if the measurement microphone we use has +/-0,25 or +/-1dB response because the Microphone / Chain / SPL / Setup used is the exact same for both speakers. So these aren't variables, they are constants. What we are doing at that stage is fine matching drivers levels - the difference we see will be what difference there is between the drivers and amp setting (the only variables) we call the delta between the amplitudes.

It's the same there. They are looking for unusual deviations before shipping, not for pure speaker performance such as those measured in an anechoic chamber.

Context is everything.

What this graph shows is that within the QC check on the factory floor before packing, the speaker does not show any particular deviation from the standard target response for that model within that setup.

And even outside an anechoic chamber measurement, it's still within the +/-2dB range stated.

You can see how they do it in this video

 

[JJB70]

I would say that ATC succeed because their products are good (although not world leading technically these days), they know their business and the products are well supported. I hope they continue in this way and don't get bought out by some international conglomerate like so many others.

With the increased noise these days about "right to repair", they will have to change literally nothing in their business model to adopt it, because it's what they already do, in contrast to most of the rest of the industry.

It may not be as exciting as measurements but there is a lot to be said for long term support and serviceability. ATC may not have class leading measurement but all the ones I have listened to sounded very good.

 

[aac]

Yet, it's for ATC - who are providing loudspeakers to the absolute highest quality mixing and mastering facilities in the world and a very large number of A list engineers that specifically requested those speakers be used - to prove their speakers don't have a massive hole in the midrange?

"appeal to authority" is a bad practice.
And according to sound and recording measurements I would not consider ATC a "honest manufacturer". At all.
Maybe sound and recording measurements are wrong. But there are no other data, so it's the only option I have to use.

 

[Frgirard]

Atc 100

It may not be as exciting as measurements but there is a lot to be said for long term support and serviceability. ATC may not have class leading measurement but all the ones I have listened to sounded very good.

The atc sound is not the question. The question is: atc make the better speaker on Earth. The measurements shown before or the atc 25 measurements published by resolution magazine said a another story.

 

[Frgirard]

"appeal to authority" is a bad practice.
And according to sound and recording measurements I would not consider ATC a "honest manufacturer". At all.
Maybe sound and recording measurements are wrong. But there are no other data, so it's the only option I have to use.

Keep Cool, it's the game.

 

[TimVG]

Atc 100

The atc sound is not the question. The question is: atc make the better speaker on Earth. The measurements shown before or the atc 25 measurements published by resolution magazine said a another story.

They were from Soundandrecording. Before someone questions the validity of these measurements, they were taken by Prof Dr.-Ing. Anselm Goertz of the Institute for Acoustics and Audio Technique (IFAA)

 

[dfuller]

Atc 100

The atc sound is not the question. The question is: atc make the better speaker on Earth. The measurements shown before or the atc 25 measurements published by resolution magazine said a another story.

IMO, they don't make the best speakers on earth - they make generally competent speakers. They're not the best. But, I think for professional situations, "generally competent" is fine, because support and reliability (both of which ATC does marvelously well) matter just as much. You could have the greatest speakers in the world but if the plate amps fail a lot and the company's support is bad then it doesn't matter how good they sound.

 

[Frgirard]

We know an Atc in 2045 will be repair.
A neumann kh420 or a Focal trio 11 in 2035 will be not repair.
We are on a forum where the measurements are a major focus.

 

[Frgirard]

They were from Soundandrecording. Before someone questions the validity of these measurements, they were taken by Prof Dr.-Ing. Anselm Goertz of the Institute for Acoustics and Audio Technique (IFAA)

Soundandrecording, where I wrote? I wrote resolution magazine.