advertisement


ATC40 Actives on home dem

manicatel said:
Having played around with Dirac in other systems, I do find that it sometimes cures one issue, but creates another. Mainly it can take some life out of the music unless you are very judicious with it.
Sometimes “correct sounding ” & “enjoyable sounding” aren't always the same.
Only my opinion.
Click to expand...

I'd agree insofar as a system corrected with e.g. Dirac can seem lacking in bass or 'dry'. In part this is a question of familiarity (we get used to incorrect bass) and in part it can be addressed with a suitable house curve.
 
Andrew C! said:
Wonder if anyone who has had these speakers has had their room measured, or uses room correction with them?

Interested in views where users accept the compromises, or if the room speaker interaction is fine for the user etc? …
Click to expand...
I use SCM50As. I am lucky enough to have a free hand on positioning. I used REW playing pink noise and REW's real-time analyzer to move each 'speaker around individually to get a reasonably flat response plus/minus some dBs, with a slight downward slope. That worked well for me. And I have got used to the visual oddity that one 'speaker is about 10 cm in front of the other in my asymmetrical room.

The result is by no means as flat as I could achieve with room correction. However I am happy so far and I have not perceived any obvious problem. If you read Floyd Toole and other authors, humans adapt. From "Sound Reproduction: …" edition 2:
"In some ways, our problems with rooms, especially small rooms, began when we started to make measurements. Our eyes were offended by things seen in the measurements, but our ears and brain heard nothing wrong with the audible reality. As we will see, some of the resolution of the dilemma is in the ability of humans to adapt to, and make considerable sense of, a wide variety of acoustical circumstances. Separating sound sources from the spaces they are in is something humans do routinely."​

I am sure there are limits to human hearing adaptability and If we exceed those limits we hear problems such as room modes.

I would certainly use room correction if I felt the need. I am sure I will try it out at some time. However I suspect that minimum intervention to remove perceptible audio imperfections might be better than letting the software loose to get the flattest response as perceived by the eye.
 
I'd say get at least 1m of space between the listening position (LP) and the wall behind you at almost any cost. This for reasons of bass, mid, top, everything. I have a narrow room, and here I found it better to fire down the room and put the speakers near to the side walls and treat the side wall first reflection points. (I recommend diffraction - note this is not diffusion and it's not absorption - like this sort of thing http://www.jocaviacousticpanels.com/uk/products/dif.dynamicflow/index.htm. I actually have DIY versions made from white guttering ... how I arrived at this is a topic for another thread! But if your room is big enough to stay away from side walls, ATC recommend 1m, all power to you.)

Starting the LP at 1m from the wall behind your head, if you find the bass boomy (room mode) then move the listening position forward until you find you a spot where the room mode isn't too bothersome.

If by the time you find the above point, you find the overall sound is too bright, you can move the speakers nearer and nearer against the wall behind them to add warmth.

I found a tension between the two goals (LP into the room enough to tame the room mode vs overall sound warm enough). If you can't find an acceptable compromise, this is where I found tuned bass treatments at the room mode frequency mitigated my room mode, allowing me to move the LP back a bit more before the mode got bothersome (but, I urge never less than 1m from the wall). Tuning frequency of the traps must be done accurately with measurements (I use XTZ Analyzer).

An equilateral triangle between speakers and LP is a decent aim, "ish".

Bit of a dark art because every room is different, there are some strangely-shaped rooms for example.
 
Last edited:
Good post. Echoes my experiences & room style very closely.
I use GIK Acoustic panels, a mix of absorption & diffusion at the 1st & 2nd reflection points. It really helped with the metallic comb filtering reverb I had in my room.
I seem to remember reading that in narrow rooms, absorption is preferable to diffusion at the reflection points, but I take these things as guidance, rather than definitive compulsory rules.
 
Andrew C! said:
Wonder if anyone who has had these speakers has had their room measured, or uses room correction with them?

Interested in views where users accept the compromises, or if the room speaker interaction is fine for the user etc?
Click to expand...

My previous listening room was (L x W x H) ~23 x 17 x 9ft with brick and plaster walls all round and hard floor. That room was an acoustic abomination prior to treatment and there was no way to get coherent sound in that space, at any volume. There was a LF null between 45-60Hz so bass was sorely lacking too.

I first installed absorption panels on wall behind speakers and on side walls to catch first reflection points and added diffusers to back wall, which improved coherence but did little to improve bass response. Adding floor to ceiling chunk traps in all four corners finally tamed the bass response which went from absent to detailed and controlled, further improved overall coherence and really made the midrange shine. REW was used extensively during experimenting with room treatment options. I never got round to eliminating the LF null in its entirety (not even sure it was within the realms of possibility without going to great lengths and cost) but the chunk traps did manage to move the null to around 35Hz and I think for the most part I was getting most of what my 100's have to offer. The soundstage and imaging I had in that room made for an awesome, immersive listening experience that's spoiled me forever. From memory my 100's were 2.5m into the room and 1m away from side walls with listening position around 2m from back wall. Toe-in passed by either edge of my listening chair.

I hope to unpack them into a larger listening room next year.
 
Last edited:
johnhunt said:
I only have Dirac working under 80hz , might be wrong about the exact number but it’s in that region
Click to expand...

Likewise, all be it with different speakers. The MiniDSP SHD can store 4 sets of eq. I have one with Dirac measurements, and another without it. I prefer it with.
 
Andrew C! said:
Likewise, all be it with different speakers. The MiniDSP SHD can store 4 sets of eq. I have one with Dirac measurements, and another without it. I prefer it with.
Click to expand...
Pity you never tried SCM40As. If you’re prepared to compare four sets of eq it would make at least as much sense to compare two speakers!
 
AndyU said:
If you’re prepared to compare four sets of eq it would make at least as much sense to compare two speakers!
Click to expand...

These ATC's were considered, but did not pass WAF. No point in me demoing something that won't make is across the doorstep. Fact of life...

I would ad the MiniDSP SHD is a bit good, too, for its price.
 
I’ve owned Naim (300/252) and vitus (ri100/sia025), I no longer own either having gone active 12 months ago and I haven’t looked back. I’m not using atc but they were on my radar.

actives just makes so much sense... less system match issues, less cables, less boxes, less desire to continually upgrade (major problem with Naim).

Naim make great stuff that’s reliable, well built and holds its second hand values well but... their is other stuff out their for similar/less money that can offer so much more.
 
The SCM40 width must be including the wider feet down below. It's a 164mm LF driver compared to 234mm for SCM50 for reference.

atc-scm40-blackash-475x1024.png
 
The 50’s have a 10” bass unit so they must be wider? I have 40’s & am used to them visually, the metal grills are a bit on your face.

The classic 50s are twice as much money & don’t have a metal grill. Probably less intrusive.
 
For a bit of fun and because they are on offer at the moment I bought a pair of the AE1 actives, which have made me an active convert. I can’t believe for the money how good these little speakers are.
 
Thanks Krenzler, didnt think anyone had seen the post, i realise strait after posting it that the width measureurement for the 40s at 370mm was for the base! Was comparing them to the 50s classics at 304mm even though ive seen both speakers in the flesh i could get my head around the measurements knowing the size of the bass drivers etc.

Might chop in my PMC's if some ATC'40\50s come up.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top