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

[goat76]

The KH150 and 120 have some of the top bass performance for their size for compact ported 2-way monitors (like most in this class) and their ports are even optimised to reduce flow noises but in the end the physics can be stretched but not switched off. Also there are no active ATC monitors in those price classes and I also doubt their 2-way sized monitors perform better if both equalised to the same exact bass response.

The point I tried to make earlier was that ATC would never even attempt to make a small speaker reaching as low as those Neumann speakers. ATC has a different philosophy where they always want to keep the distortion as low as possible, and they rather use subwoofers whenever more low bass extension is needed.

 

[Purité Audio]

Are there any distortion measurements for ATC loudspeakers?
If you could point me to them it would be appreciated.
Keith

 

[thewas]

The point I tried to make earlier was that ATC would never even attempt to make a small speaker reaching as low as those Neumann speakers. ATC has a different philosophy where they always want to keep the distortion as low as possible, and they rather use subwoofers whenever more low bass extension is needed.

I understood that, don't worry, as I wrote though it is not difficult to filter a Neumann to get also such response, offering thus this additional option if filtering is available (and in my opinion it should be in studio usage).

 

[574stereo]

It is the sad reality as I know quite few of such, especially in 2024 it is a shame that not few professionals still lack the education of unsafe hearing levels and the corresponding injuries.

I agree, but exposure time also plays a significant role.

Mixing at 84dB all day is ridiculous and will result in accelerated hearing loss. I do however also need my speakers to go loud for those 10-20 minutes a day figuring out certain parts of the mix. If my speaker system can't sustain 90dB with peaks around 14 dB higher than that then it's not doing its job. KH310s are unable to do this until you add in a sub and the Neumann subs are unfortunately prone to blowing drivers when you use them this loud.


Also, the artists aren't listening to the same things you are. Audiophiles wouldn't know where to begin when it comes to making the kind of sonic decisions needed in the music making process. I've noticed a large discrepancy here between what people on this forum think is needed in the music making process vs what's actually needed from a listening point of view. The days of a speaker being a tool used purely by classical or maybe jazz recording engineers are far in the past but I think even the great Floyd Toole still sees things this way (and hence, the entirety of this forum). The truth could not be further from this.

Before someone chimes in with a comment about poor sounding modern music, these are commercial forces and usually driven by label A&Rs and artist management. In my experience I haven't come across resistance from artists or producers when it comes to allowing music to be more dynamic and breathe more. These decisions instead are being forced upon the industry by the very people we need to keep happy to pay the mortgage.

 

[574stereo]

Are there any distortion measurements for ATC loudspeakers?
If you could point me to them it would be appreciated.
Keith

I've seen a multitude of distortion measurements posted in many places on this forum but I can't remember where. You'll have to go and do some digging...

I haven't seen any proper multitone distortion measurements of any of the speakers in discussion but it's extremely audible in field use on KH310s.

 

[Purité Audio]

I agree, but exposure time also plays a significant role.

Mixing at 84dB all day is ridiculous and will result in accelerated hearing loss. I do however also need my speakers to go loud for those 10-20 minutes a day figuring out certain parts of the mix. If my speaker system can't sustain 90dB with peaks around 14 dB higher than that then it's not doing its job. KH310s are unable to do this until you add in a sub and the Neumann subs are unfortunately prone to blowing drivers when you use them this loud.


Also, the artists aren't listening to the same things you are. Audiophiles wouldn't know where to begin when it comes to making the kind of sonic decisions needed in the music making process. I've noticed a large discrepancy here between what people on this forum think is needed in the music making process vs what's actually needed from a listening point of view. The days of a speaker being a tool used purely by classical or maybe jazz recording engineers are far in the past but I think even the great Floyd Toole still sees things this way (and hence, the entirety of this forum). The truth could not be further from this.

Before someone chimes in with a comment about poor sounding modern music, these are commercial forces and usually driven by label A&Rs and artist management. In my experience I haven't come across resistance from artists or producers when it comes to allowing music to be more dynamic and breathe more. These decisions instead are being forced upon the industry by the very people we need to keep happy to pay the mortgage.

83/84 dB is the maximum level advised for prolonged ( eight hour ) listening.
Keith

 

[574stereo]

Eight hours of 83/84 dB is completely unsustainable for mixing. Better decisions are made if you spend most of your time around 76-78 dB. My Grace 905 generally shows average levels of 90-95 dB when I'm really cranking the level to get a certain perspective, but I'll need to take an ear break afterwards.

When I'm in the room while music is being written/produced/tracked, you can expect higher levels than that for longer however. A friend of mine just came back from a few weeks of producing for a major artist who first broke ground in the 1980s (name starts with an M) and they were generally monitoring around 105-110 dB. Hearing protection can be used but you have to be discrete about it or else you're going to cause issues politically.

 

[ahofer]

Eight hours of 83/84 dB is completely unsustainable for mixing. Better decisions are made if you spend most of your time around 76-78 dB. My Grace 905 generally shows average levels of 90-95 dB when I'm really cranking the level to get a certain perspective, but I'll need to take an ear break afterwards.

When I'm in the room while music is being written/produced/tracked, you can expect higher levels than that for longer however. A friend of mine just came back from a few weeks of producing for a major artist who first broke ground in the 1980s (name starts with an M) and they were generally monitoring around 105-110 dB. Hearing protection can be used but you have to be discrete about it or else you're going to cause issues politically.

Given that, I’m astonished at movie sound levels these days. I once asked a theater manager to turn them down (the previews are often particularly painful) and he said he could not, contractually.

I bring attenuators to the movie theater now. It still seems loud. I saw Wicked yesterday and it was uncomfortably loud despite them, particularly the finale.

Update: previews before the Dylan movie:

 

[574stereo]

Given that, I’m astonished at movie sound levels these days. I once asked a theater manager to turn them down (the previews are often particularly painful) and he said he could not, contractually.

I bring attenuators to the movie theater now.

Yes cinema levels are very strictly regulated. However the decisions being made by the director aren't and I find it deeply frustrating, I cannot get over how incredibly loud a lot of modern films can be when I go see them on the big screen. I think I'd rather watch at home to be honest...

I can see a future in the music industry where things like dynamic range are more regulated which will allow us get things punching/hitting properly again, but for the time being it's all a total mess unfortunately.

 

[dfuller]

I don't know at which SPL some people listen to music but when I had the KH310 for a few weeks for nearfield listening at home (it is sold from Neumann as a nearfield monitor) it was super clean at levels of 85+ dB at my LP, I have the impression we like to exaggerate.
Also the HD measurements of Amir showed quite an impressive performance considering their size and being not ported.

Even at pretty moderate average levels (80dBA) you can hit the mid 90s on bass region instruments, which ends up being a fair bit of excursion on a small sealed box.

And, this is one of these things where once you hear it you can't unhear it.

As I've said - it's much less of an issue on the 25As, solely because the woofer is handling one fewer octave, and that octave just so happens to be the upper fundamental/lower first harmonic region for vocals. I am not going to say the 25As don't have issues - that port based hump is pretty bad - but if you fix that with EQ, I am of the opinion that the Mk2 is a pretty nice speaker. I'd love to see one on the NFS.

I understood that, don't worry, as I wrote though it is not difficult to filter a Neumann to get also such response, offering thus this additional option if filtering is available (and in my opinion it should be in studio usage).

Neumann currently optimises their designs (outside of the 420) for maximal LFX and don't really aim for more SPL handling. Which is fine. It's a valid approach especially considering very few people need the sheer SPL of the 420. But the difference in IMD at the same level between the 310 and the 420 is absolutely insane - the 310 will reach 10% at 85dB(A) at 2m (about 3% at 1m), the 420 sits around 2% or lower. It's readily audible - the 310 starts to sound boxy at any meaningful level. That speaker needs a Purifi-tier woofer for its design and it doesn't have it.

 

[Purité Audio]

 

[thewas]

Also, the artists aren't listening to the same things you are.

Never claimed something contrary, musicians hear very differently to must of us here (also compared to recording engineers) and often don't care about tonality and generally neutral reproduction, they rather spend their money on instruments and don't listen much to recorded music.

 

[thewas]

As I've said - it's much less of an issue on the 25As, solely because the woofer is handling one fewer octave, and that octave just so happens to be the upper fundamental/lower first harmonic region for vocals. I am not going to say the 25As don't have issues - that port based hump is pretty bad - but if you fix that with EQ, I am of the opinion that the Mk2 is a pretty nice speaker.

And as I have said as soon as you EQ a KH310 to a similar response the difference in distortion will become much less. I agree the Mk2 is quite a nice speaker but in mainland Europe it costs as much as your beloved KH420 which makes the choice quite obvious.

Neumann currently optimises their designs (outside of the 420) for maximal LFX and don't really aim for more SPL handling. Which is fine. It's a valid approach especially considering very few people need the sheer SPL of the 420. But the difference in IMD at the same level between the 310 and the 420 is absolutely insane - the 310 will reach 10% at 85dB(A) at 2m, the 420 sits around 2% or lower. It's readily audible - the 310 starts to sound boxy at any meaningful level.

I know both well as well as their difference in distortion/SPL, what is often forgotten is that the KH310 is marketed by Neumann as a nearfield monitor and only the KH420 as a midfield one, so its a bit of apple and pears comparison.

 

[dfuller]

View attachment 416566

The only part of this semi-relevant to the conversation at hand is the distortion vs level graph. And, I'll note, it's about the same as the 310 but with a 1.5" smaller driver.

 

[changer]

One of my parent's neighbors sold his Neumann KH420 to buy the ATC SCM 110. He's happy with the upgrade.

Would it be an upgrade if they didn't sound better in the ears of its new owner?

 

[dfuller]

And as I have said as soon as you EQ a KH310 to a similar response the difference in distortion will become much less. I agree the Mk2 is quite a nice speaker but in mainland Europe it costs as much as your beloved KH420 which makes the choice quite obvious.

Eh, yes and no. KH420s are huge, much larger than the 25As or 310s - the size comparison is more the SCM50s, which are quite a bit larger. I can understand wanting something a bit more if you're space limited.

As for the first bit, their LFX is actually quite similar - Per S&R, F6 is 32hz on the 25A vs 30 on the 310. Neither of them will get loud doing that, that's asking too much of small drivers in small boxes. With the ATCs, if you bring that 5dB hump centered around 60hz down, suddenly you've got a bit more headroom all while having a flatter LF response (and yes, they are a bit chesty and thumpy around there).

 

[574stereo]

5dB hump? I’m guessing you’re looking at the measurement posted by Purite Audio above? The port ‘hump’ on the SCM25 is actually more like 1-1.5 dB in reality.

 

[Purité Audio]

Ahhh if only we had some contemporary comprehensive measurements then we could have a proper discussion,
Keith

 

[Theta]

Ahhh if only we had some contemporary comprehensive measurements then we could have a proper discussion,
Keith

Sorry Keith, "a proper discussion on ATC", what would be the point? I think that very few the people on this forum own ATC speakers and the rest don't intend on buying ATC speakers.
Most of the comments are negative, (old, out of date, no credible measurements.)
To me it is being unfair to the makers.
It is their prerogative to publish what they like. No disrespect of course, Theta

 

[Purité Audio]

I am firmly of the opinion that every component ( speakers and electronics) would ideally come with a comprehensive set of measurements.
It is an ideal of course , as to owners and intended owners, I would definitely be more likely to consider ATC if they could provide a comprehensive and contemporary set of measurements.
Keith