ATC SCM50 measured performance vs. high quality studio monitors

I'm quite looking forward to the data DominicT has promised to post.

 

Yes, what this thread needs is more data - and fast.

Repeating the notion that ATC actives display mid-band distortion does not make it so. I don't know how reliable the measurements are, but what I do know is that I've never been conscious of any distortion at all - and I've lived with them for three years. Either I have very selective deafness, or it is not a real issue. If I am selectively deaf, then it still isn't an issue (for me).

 

No the measurement of the distortion makes it so. See the plot in HFN.

 

I don't buy hi-fi magazines any more, and, in any case, the data may be unreliable.

 

Nope - as atc are sure to have checked it over before publication to make sure the assessment was accurate and would comment on any mistakes I am sure.

 

When data lead us to an incorrect conclusion - in this case that ATC actives have easily-audible mid-band distortion - then the data are suspect.

The ATC midband is famously clear, open, dynamic, free of coloration, and articulate. Therefore the data which you are presenting, or the conclusions which you have come to based on this data (more likely, perhaps) are wrong.

You'll be telling me Quad ESLs are "boring", next.

 

Brizon, from a brief look through some of your other posts (including the link posted earlier to the thread on AudioGon), you firmly believe that magazines aren't to be trusted because they are inherently corrupt. This doesn't sit too well with your championing of the HFN tests.

Dunc

 

The only means by which to assess the correctness or incorrectness of a conclusion is from the data. Conclusion follows data in other words. To say that data can lead to an incorrect conclusion because you "know" it is wrong is therefore entirely circular - which is the entire problem with your audio reasoning as you have decided what the conclusions are before you even look at the data. The data may be wrong that is correct however the conclusion based on that data is not. Which is why we are looking for evidence in other independent measurements that may support or deny these findings. The difference between us is that if we find other corroborative measurements then you will still deny that the conclusion is correct. Which is religion not science.

Yes I beleive they are however that corruption extends to hiding the negative facts. This negative fact has slipped through the net so presumeably it can be trusted

 

This thread has been very very silly indeed.

All we know from the HFN review about 'mid range distortion' is,

"Gated measurements, on the midrange axis at 0.5m gave more accurate mid range and treble figures (curves not shown). These indicated remarkably low distortion of under 1% through the mid and treble."

What remarkably low means is unstated, although that's about 10-30 times worse than a Quad ESL63. Anybody concerned about distorting loudspeakers and not using Quads is clearly confused. And given their impulse response and dispersion I'd have thought Thorsten would have been creaming himself. I guess hard engineering reality inevitably clashes with hifi marketing.

Still, a very silly thread predicated on speculation and misinterpretation.

Paul

 

My experience of ATCs is daily listening for three years. I had a quick leaf thru the review in the hi-fi mag, concentrating on the conclusion, as I didn't want to buy the mag. What I read there seemed like a very fair and favourable review, based on ATC speakers which I have heard, including fox's, Stu's and Alan's (in Alan's recording studio).

Why on earth fruit & nut here want to try to turn a triumph into a disaster is quite beyond me.

 

Bumble bees can fly, I know this because I have witnessed it, and discussed it at length among other bumble bee enthusiasts.

Yet, through faulty data & reasoning, aerodynamicists decide that they can't fly.

 

It means "easily audible", I guess.

 

Bub,

Bumblebees can fly - that IS the data. There is no faulty data - just a gap in understanding. Which was addressed some years ago. It is therefore not the same thing we are discussing - which is tantamount to saying bumblebees cant fly when one is hovering right before you and a theory of how bees use trailing wing tip vortices for extra lift is open before you.

Nick.

 

Yes, and ATCs don't distort, I have a pair downstairs. That's the point.

 

My ears say otherwise. Backed up by the data. Merlin has proposed a theory. Thats good enough for me. As the naim amps you own also seem to share this type of distortion and colouration IMHO I wonder if you actually like it and this has informed your hifi choices.

 

The NAC52 doesn't distort either. You have little or no experience with either ATC or Naim, and I have a lot. You are wrong & I am right.

But since you are happy being wrong, I'll leave you here.

 

I vote this thread of the year!


Keep up the good work chaps

 

Bub,

I have plenty of experience of naim. 15 years worth of friends systems. Plus listening to to the 52 and 552. The limitations are inherent in the design - just look at the original engineering notes in wireless world and the like and the later amendments that were made to amend this (and not taken up by naim). They are coloured by their distortion spectra. It adds an edge or brilliance to the sound just like the ATC IMHO.

Regards,

Nick.

 

I really can't be bothered to argue any more. Zerogain seems to have been taken over by Tabloid readers who will argue that black is white until they are blue in the face.

 

Nick's argument would be more convincing if he wasn't overlooking the fact that it applies to Naim's (olive) power amps. Bub doesn't use them and has indeed quite publically stated that he doesn't like them much.

The German magazine 'steroplay' has measured the 282/Hicap/250.2 combo. The pre measures quite well, although the noise was a little higher than expected. The power also measured quite well, and had lower noise. Interestingly, when pre and power were used in tandem, the distortion spectra aligned to produce a textbook downward trend with rising order of distortion. They liked it enough to award it a 'Highlight' or Best Buy, which doesn't happen that often.

And before anyone starts speculating, there was no money or other backhander involved.

Sorry for the distraction, back to the thread.