There is no ATC SCM150ASL Pro review or frequency response curve.

[Ilkless]

I'm not really seeing a di mismatch in that data. I see diffraction but not a di mismatch.

This threads gonna turn into a repeat of the other one here, which has like 250+ pages of people going in circles. I wouldn't even bother caring about ATC, invest your time, energy, and possibly money into researching brands who are up to date in terms of transparency.

Look at the off-axis bunching rather than on-axis discontinuity

 

[EERecordist]

I chose SCM25a MKII over my 8351b which I used for a long time. Admittedly the imaging wasn't quite as pinpoint holographic (it's still excellent), but I could hear more detail / separation and overall I just find it a better sounding speaker. Not NIGHT AND DAY or other hyperbole garbage mind you, the Gens are great speakers too and I could easily work on them happily.

I posted this in the ATC thread here and had half the forum up my ass about how I must be wrong, post measurements, I'm just a fanboi cultist etc. etc. I think I'll trust my own ears mixing music at a high level for 20 years but sure, think what you want.

The ATC and the Gen are around the same price here btw (in Canada). People here really seem to have a hate hard-on for ATC. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Knock yourselves out, they're the best speakers I've ever heard and I've heard / worked on a lot.

In my town, they are popular in tracking and mixing studios. My friend uses their old ProAc, another British Monitor for nearfields, and the ATCs for listening to find problems. They updated from ATC25a nearfields to SCM45a soffit mount. I wonder if there is some kind of novel nonlinearity which make them popular in studios. Novelty can make us listen more closely.

 

[Sacha]

In my town, they are popular in tracking and mixing studios. My friend uses their old ProAc, another British Monitor for nearfields, and the ATCs for listening to find problems. They updated from ATC25a nearfields to SCM45a soffit mount. I wonder if there is some kind of novel nonlinearity which make them popular in studios. Novelty can make us listen more closely.

Nah, my room is flat within + / - 2db above 100hz, I've posted my measurements in another thread. There is no nonlinearity here. Just beautiful neutral sound.

 

[574stereo]

Same here, without DSP I was getting +/- 2dB between 400 and 30 Ish (from memory), a few squiggles in the midrange which change as you move your head (not an issue in mixing due to averaging between the left and right ears/listening from different positions) and then essentially within 1.5dB from 2k up to around 10-11k.

 

[Purité Audio]

From 25s without any eq?

 

[MAB]

From 25s without any eq?View attachment 409976

Perhaps in a room setup to offset the speaker’s actual response, but only if you keep your head in the right place.

All of this reinforces the question, why no measurements on a speaker that is so often a critical tool?

 

[dfuller]

From 25s without any eq?View attachment 409976

I really don't understand where that high boost is coming from because it sure as shit isn't audible. My guess is measurement error - ATC's measurement axis is 5 degrees below the center of the midrange, and people miss that part. It doesn't show up in other measurements of the 25 either.

 

[574stereo]

I was on 25s but moved to 50s. The difference was in the low-end (more due to the woofer position changing and different driver tunings), floor bounce interaction is much better with the SCM 50s but that's more to do with the room than inherent in the speakers. I kept the mid and HF in the same place and that band barely changed.

From 25s without any eq?View attachment 409976

 

[sq225917]

Absolute bs.

I didn't notice you in the rooms...

 

[574stereo]

I really don't understand where that high boost is coming from because it sure as shit isn't audible. My guess is measurement error - ATC's measurement axis is 5 degrees below the center of the midrange, and people miss that part.

That doesn't look like SCM25s at all to me. I had them next to KH310s and they were a little softer up high if anything.

My understanding in science is poor/incorrect data is worse than no data at all.

 

[MAB]

That doesn't look like SCM25s at all to me. I had them next to KH310s and they were a little softer up high if anything.

My understanding in science is poor/incorrect data is worse than no data at all.

Which is why it would be great to answer OP’s question.

 

[Purité Audio]

Quite, a trip to the measurers would sort all this out, as if that is ever going to happen.
Keith

 

[JustJones]

The floor stand ATC SCM40 passive quasi-anechoic frequency response
Hard to find any measurements on ATC.

ATC SCM40 | Review - AVMENTOR.net

ATC SCM40, Read Interesting Stories and Reviews about Audio, Hi-Fi, 2-channel, stereo, and multichannel technologies

www.avmentor.net

Summed near field

 

[Ktacos]

Look at the off-axis bunching rather than on-axis discontinuity

I'm not seeing it. You're gonna have to edit the graph to show what you're seeing because I'm really not seeing it, sure you're not confusing the edge diffraction with di mismatch?

 

[goat76]

The floor stand ATC SCM40 passive quasi-anechoic frequency response
Hard to find any measurements on ATC.

ATC SCM40 | Review - AVMENTOR.net

ATC SCM40, Read Interesting Stories and Reviews about Audio, Hi-Fi, 2-channel, stereo, and multichannel technologies

www.avmentor.net

View attachment 409984

Summed near field

View attachment 409985

That one is also most likely measured at the wrong height, probably at the height of the tweeter instead of the height of the mid-dome driver.

 

[Ilkless]

Nah, my room is flat within + / - 2db above 100hz, I've posted my measurements in another thread. There is no nonlinearity here. Just beautiful neutral sound.

A read of Sound Reproduction would disabuse you of the notion that this proves what you think it does.

This does nothing to establish the reflected to direct sound ratio or the congruence between reflected and direct sound that is made psychoacoustically problematic in bounded acoustical conditions (i.e. rooms) with poor directivity.

Your comment assumes that you can treat your way out of this incongruence just because the steady-state response is flat. Which is... to say the least, reflective of the dismal state of knowledge and extensive Dunning-Kruger Syndrome seen in recording "professionals" that know enough to aspire to technically competent speakers, but not enough to neither realise their anecdotal experience and veneer of objectivity does not (a) align with extensive research across psychology, physiology and acoustics and (b) when a brand is merely paying lip service to an aspiration of accuracy.

 

[Ilkless]

I'm not seeing it. You're gonna have to edit the graph to show what you're seeing because I'm really not seeing it, sure you're not confusing the edge diffraction with di mismatch?

4.5-5.5 kHz at least. Also, doubtful the 4kHz dip of that magnitude is edge diffraction.

If it is, just as much an indictment of the speaker and the brand when people have figured this out for the last 20+ years.

 

[a4eaudio]

 

[Sacha]

A read of Sound Reproduction would disabuse you of the notion that this proves what you think it does.

This does nothing to establish the reflected to direct sound ratio or the congruence between reflected and direct sound that is made psychoacoustically problematic in bounded acoustical conditions (i.e. rooms) with poor directivity.

Your comment assumes that you can treat your way out of this incongruence just because the steady-state response is flat. Which is... to say the least, reflective of the dismal state of knowledge and extensive Dunning-Kruger Syndrome seen in recording "professionals" that know enough to aspire to technically competent speakers, but not enough to neither realise their anecdotal experience and veneer of objectivity does not (a) align with extensive research across psychology, physiology and acoustics and (b) when a brand is merely paying lip service to an aspiration of accuracy.

Lovely. People like you make this forum such a welcoming, friendly and educational place.

 

[sq225917]

Seems like a perfectly educational response to me, unless you hold your own opinion in high regard.