ATC SM75-150S Dome Mid Measurement Data

So when bub posts measurements of the ATC speakers on PFM as evidence to back his position that ATC speakers are the best its perfectly OK, but when SM posts measurements of another midrange unit on here its dismissed as a wind up. hmmm.

Time for a picture of another crystal

 

[wind-up mode]Bub's real problem is he can interpret graphs only when they show fairly straight lines, not when they get all wiggly.[/wind-up mode]

 

And then only in the presence of sufficiently plush and soothing marketing material

 

I dunno about you but I can't read graphs that are that small.... Seriously is there a detailed scan I can look at?

 

I think it's a problem because, in reality, he simply doesn't understand them. His representative for the South of England has before acted as an interpreter, but left to his own devices he seems all at sea. Unfortunate, but then, I know nothing about medicine.

Sometimes I wish I owned a hifi shop near Bub. It would be like taking candy from a baby.

 

Lets leave bub alone

He loves his ATC's (and other things like BMW's, and SME turntables) and enjoys them all tremendously.

I think it's great to enjoy the things you own.

Nothings the ''best''.. the best being a subjective term subject to personal opinion. The ''best measuring'' may not be the ''best sounding'' according to the same test of subjective personal preference.

I'm reminded of people that think the 'Vitavox S2' is the best midrange driver in the world, and other s that think it's an ATC midrange dome.... and others that think it's a diamond mid-range, or a ceramic driver ...or...

 

Yes let's leave little BubsyWubbsy alone.

Maybe there is a correlation between lovers of BMW and ATC?

 

The best measuring will be the best sounding if you measure the right thing

 

define ''the best measuring''

not everyone likes to listen to a ruler flat response...

 

The correct metric that correlates with objective performance

Sure they dont - but that isnt hifi

 

if being truly faithful to the recording was paramount to all of us, we'd have acoustic materials on all of our walls, floors and ceilings.. in fact probably 'a room within a room with an air gap'..

We'd then have no problem using EQ and any other means to eek out the response we wanted.

Doesnt sound like a fun place to live though..

 

Chris,

I would have to agree that any speaker should start from the premise of using the lowest possible distortion drive units in the most efficient manner possible to minimise any compromises.

Certain metrics really do matter with loudspeakers IME. I also happen to think that frequency response is less important than distortion levels, quite possibly one of the reasons many EQ solutions actually end up worsening the sound.

 

well, yes I agree with the principle of design you describe.

What then however of many of the lowther type speakers which measure terribly, have obvious colouration - but in so many ways have a magical sound that you can listen to for hours?

 

I can't.

 

'ZeroGain - it's like you never left primary school!'

 

They produce pleasing distortion and simplification?

Ideally yes the room would be treated - if it wasnt for pesky WAGs

 

Stereo Mic,

Bub may be somewhat regid in his pronouncements, but one thing he has got right is VFM. The cost of the speakers you are puting forward as improvements on ATC cost an extraordinary and worrying amount don't you think?

 

I would agree with that.

I still don't know how ATC manage to make such wonderfully engineered drivers (even if you do or don't like the sound ) in the UK so competitvely.

 

Because they buy most of their parts from the local B&Q!

 

Really, Keith, this constant sniping at ATC is becoming not only tiresome, it also does your reputation as an industry member no good at all. Sniping at the competition is generally a sure sign of unhappiness with one's own performance.