ATC SCM50 measured performance vs. high quality studio monitors

Hi,

The actual numbers are guesstimates, HOWEVER, as I spend quite some time in pro audio and have good grasp of the sales figures for studio monitors by JBL, EV, Westlake, Mackie, Meyer, Dynaudio, KRK et al for the last 10 - 20 Years vs. those of ATC these figures should be within reasonable tolerance.

BUT YOU DO NOT KNOW.

The lists of "references" for most of those companies mentioned are much longer than ATC's.

The same can be said about many other Speakers, as can be the fact that they are endoresed by al sorts of Musicians and/or Sound people. All of which merely prooves that ATC is ONE PLAYER and not a particular big one at that in a wide market, to which Sturgons law applies as fully as it does to other items.

You might gain from not ignoring it.

You have repeated claims by ATC that one would call "extraordinary", unless they are understood strictly as marketing hyperbole with little relation to reality.

As you take exception to have these claims dismissed as "spin" the burden of proof rests with you. And remember, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. And writing "David Gilmore use them" has zero value as proof for the accuracy of statements of:

1) General respect and/or level of "reverence" of the majority of sound professionals and musicians for ATC Speakers.

2) The actual quality of ATC Speakers in any particular respect.

3) The actual degree of accuracy in terms of sound reproduction fo ATC Speakers.

So, if you wish to continue to make extraordinary claims unchallenged by those who feel they have proof that the claims are inaccurate, you MUST provide proof, that is factual and reasonable incontrovertable.

Untill then the fact remains that the opinions you have expressed are subject to substantiative challenge, especially in the light of actual facts available in the public domain on the subject.

If you have FACTS (not spin, hyperbole, opinion or conjecture) that contradict my position, namely that many speakers exist that in the traditional sense of word provide a greater degree of accuracy than ATC speakers (by virtue of flatter frequency response and lower distortion) I will be happy to see them placed in the public domain.

As you have consitently failed to do you must forgive for dismissing your writings as ravings from the fringe which remain in direct and patently obvious opposition to reality.

Ciao T

 

I would refer you, once again, to the list of professional ATC users, on their website.

 

I am sure genelec could do the same. As could amstrad!

 

Warner Bros Burbank, CA; Sony Music studios, New York...

OK, so post up genelec & amstrad's user list.

 

The points about David Gilmour are:

1. He is an accomplished musician.
2. He is exceedingly rich, and could afford anything he likes.
3. He has been in a lot of recording studios.
4. He chooses ATC.

 

5. is likely to have damaged his hearing from loud PAs over the years.

 

And another thing: hardly anyone drives a Ferrari, certainly less than 1% of the driving population. So Ferraris are obviously crap compared with Vauxhalls.

k-k, you are on ignore, sorry dude.

 

it means little. all it actually is, is a list of people who have purchased them in the past. Some might still use them, but not all, all the time. Unless they are on an "exclusively uses" list, of course.

 

So whatever Gilmour does you will do to? So am I correct in saying that atc was the only speaker you listened to when you bought it at anywhere near that price level and that you did so based on reviews, mag articles and the marketing spiel? Hence linn, naim, mana, atc...

Amstrad have millions of users. However many own or use it or dont is irrelevent.

 

ATC users

Sony and Warner? Your data is out of date. They have since upgraded:

http://www.pmcloudspeaker.com/studios/sony.html

http://www.pmcloudspeaker.com/studios/wbtokyo.html

 

PMC have made huge inroads into ATCs market share - as evidenced by the fact that PMC are the fastest growing uk hifi company and the market size is very limited...

I suggest you audition an ib1 asap bub. Everything you have said then becomes irrelevent. :force:

 

I haven't been following this thread 'cos I been pretty busy lately but for those who are interested the price is a lot less than Thorsten originally said.

I quote a email from First Sense, the UK distributer.

PMC are brilliant, I have a pair of AML1's myself. Next time I am in London I may audition the RL901k's and if they are really as good as all that I will start saving my pennies! There specs are impressive at least.

 

Hi,

I am shocked. Here we are in rip-off britain and a distributor charges less here than in the country of origin!

(BTW, First Sense has also snagged Micro-Gefell as line, probably some of the best Mikes you can get)

Okay, maybe my calculations of exchange rate where off by a little, but 4K damp squid the 901K must count as bargain of the year.

But beware, this is a true monitor, it tells you what was recorded, no matter what was (which is MIHO what you need for a studio monitor), not a "beautified" version.

At these prices I'm sorely tempted to just get a pair of 901K's, but my wife would kill me....

Ciao T

 

They certainly seem very cheap. But unfortunately they also look it, from a cosmetic viewpoint. Also a small sealed box won't have much extension. Or if it does, it will be rather quiet at those extremes, ie rolled off. May be worth a gander as a second system experiment, in a back room where cosmetics don't matter.

 

Hi,

Yes, the looks are not suited to domestic use, but then, they are not MEANT for domestic use... ;-)

The MEG's are most related to dipoles, but by making the LF system a cardiode (through the use of an acoustic delay line) not a dipole makes them unique.

Well, over the weekend (if they are open) I'll drop over to KMR in Whetstone to have a listen. I only know first had the older RL900A, which is a rather larger vented box and it's predecessor the 900 became East Germany's standard large format monitor around the time I started to work as Sound Engineer.



BTW, an assessment from a dealers demo of the sealed box version (901) was posted on TNT-Audio a few years back by Werner Ogiers (Quad fan himself).

http://www.tnt-audio.com/casse/rl901_e.html

Might be useful to compare....

Ciao T

 

No, you are incorrect. But I'm used to it.

 

Check ATC's website.

The Ferrari analogy still stands.

 

Its out of date.

Bub so which high end speakers did you audition along side the atc?

 

The ATC list is not *current* users only. I saw that list three years ago. Your data is now out dated. Things move on.

 

I didn't audition any alongside the ATCs. I've auditioned plenty of speakers before & since. None has equalled the ATCs.

As you've demonstrated in this thread, shop demos are a waste of time.

How do you know that the ATC users list is out of date? Please supply your evidence.