Thinking about a pair of ATC SCM40

[Woodface]

Perhaps more useful input from me to the OP…

I love what ATCs can do. I’ve had active 50s.

My only criticism is that IMO they need to be played quite loud to come alive. By no means awful at lower volumes, but the temptation was always there to crank them up a smidge (or more than a smidge!), which is not always ideal.

Perhaps in a bigger room that’s less of an issue.

So, audition at home, and try to audition at varying levels, not just “audition loud”!

Hope that helps.

That’s a slightly nuanced issue, they don’t need to be loud but they sound very clean at elevated volumes which is not really a criticism.

I do find myself cranking them up a bit subconsciously so a decibel app on the phone can be useful. They don’t sound loud when they are loud if that makes sense? Lack of usual distortion.

I suppose it’s a bit like driving a very fast car.

 

[herb]

Judging from listening to the active and passive speakers on this thread using Grado RS1s I would not choose ATC speakers for classical music. At low level I can reproduce the difference using different interconnects in my Naim CDX2.2/ATC/Harbeth system. I assume using an ATC integrated 150wpc for the comparison is too radical.

For classical music I prefer the ESL or BBC light cabinet approach. Heavy speakers in my experience thud too much. Lightweight speakers reproduce instruments more naturally. The Harbeth approach appeals.

However I see that Mr Shaw is going active. Did anyone hear his experiment at the Bristol show? Were the heavy electronics inside the cabinets?

 

[Unregistered]

I'm considering a change to wall mounted speakers & subs so if anyone here is interested in a pair of active 50's (yew finish, previous spec tweeter) pm me.

 

[TheFlash]

Judging from listening to the active and passive speakers on this thread using Grado RS1s I would not choose ATC speakers for classical music. At low level I can reproduce the difference using different interconnects in my Naim CDX2.2/ATC/Harbeth system. I assume using an ATC integrated 150wpc for the comparison is too radical.

For classical music I prefer the ESL or BBC light cabinet approach. Heavy speakers in my experience thud too much. Lightweight speakers reproduce instruments more naturally. The Harbeth approach appeals.

However I see that Mr Shaw is going active. Did anyone hear his experiment at the Bristol show? Were the heavy electronics inside the cabinets?

Seriously? I strongly recommend that you hear an actual pair of either, but particularly the SCM40A if you can, rather than basing your judgement on hearing them through another speaker (of sorts). I listen to a wide range of music including classical on mine and they do classical magnificently. No thud!

There is far more to differentiate active vs passive than whether the electronics are inside the cabinets. The fundamental attribute of active (rather than "powered") speakers is that the crossover is before the amplifiers rather than after it. This topology could be established outside the cabinet but there are obvious aesthetic attractions to incorporating the electronics into it. As well as the advantage of having the shortest possible cables from each amplifier to its associated driver.

 

[doctorf]

Perhaps more useful input from me to the OP…

I love what ATCs can do. I’ve had active 50s.

My only criticism is that IMO they need to be played quite loud to come alive. By no means awful at lower volumes, but the temptation was always there to crank them up a smidge (or more than a smidge!), which is not always ideal.

Perhaps in a bigger room that’s less of an issue.

So, audition at home, and try to audition at varying levels, not just “audition loud”!

Hope that helps.

As the owner of your old 50s, I agree!!

 

[Roog]

Re the OP, I purchased my SCM 40s based on listening to them through my SuperUniti and where this was not possible I used the HiFi shop's Nova, I tried them at home and once purchased I continued to use them through my SuperUniti. I thought they sounded fine using this integrated amplifier. I have since bought a very slightly more powerful amplifier but the sound signature remains much the same, with a nice clean bass presentation.

Like most speakers they sound more exciting when played a little bit louder. IMO the whole 'more power' thing is greatly exaggerated, the SCM 40s are not a difficult load for an amplifier, sure they are unlikely to sound great when used with an old Marantz 1030 at 15W rms but any competent modern solidstate amp is likely to be adequate. I mean, "how loud do you want to go?"

As for the actives I have not heard them but the sales man did say that they sounded very much like the passive version 'just more', not sure what that meant but as he didn't have any to try I can't comment. Despite now being interested in DSP active speakers myself I still harbor a worry about having amps in the speaker enclosures, not sure why, just set in my ways I guess.

One thing I would add is that they are quite big and industrial looking, I think if I was buying again I might think about this a bit. They do take over my living room which is similar to the OPs in size.

 

[John Phillips]

... I love what ATCs can do. I’ve had active 50s.

My only criticism is that IMO they need to be played quite loud to come alive. By no means awful at lower volumes, but the temptation was always there to crank them up a smidge (or more than a smidge!), which is not always ideal. ...

I changed from 20L Proac speakers with 6.5" woofers to 50L active ATCs with 9.2" woofers. I realized I was initially playing the ATCs much louder than the Proacs after gradually finding myself not needing the higher volume to enjoy the result and gradually turning down the volume control.

I can see how the "needs to be played loud to come to life" view can arise. But in my case I now blame having adapted to the volume constraint of the Proacs. I have now adapted to using more judiciously the volume freedom I have with the ATCs, and I now don't see the comparison that way round.

 

[Whaleblue]

I changed from 20L Proac speakers with 6.5" woofers to 50L active ATCs with 9.2" woofers. I realized I was initially playing the ATCs much louder than the Proacs after gradually finding myself not needing the higher volume to enjoy the result and gradually turning down the volume control.

I can see how the "needs to be played loud to come to life" view can arise. But in my case I now blame having adapted to the volume constraint of the Proacs. I have now adapted to using more judiciously the volume freedom I have with the ATCs, and I now don't see the comparison that way round.

I perhaps (likely) had them in too small a room, and right next to the lounge, so not an ideal environment for them.

They certainly have the ability to sound superb, and I’d never put anyone off them - just to check that they enjoy them played relatively quietly as well as louder.

 

[herb]

Seriously? I strongly recommend that you hear an actual pair of either, but particularly the SCM40A if you can, rather than basing your judgement on hearing them through another speaker (of sorts). I listen to a wide range of music including classical on mine and they do classical magnificently. No thud!

There is far more to differentiate active vs passive than whether the electronics are inside the cabinets. The fundamental attribute of active (rather than "powered") speakers is that the crossover is before the amplifiers rather than after it. This topology could be established outside the cabinet but there are obvious aesthetic attractions to incorporating the electronics into it. As well as the advantage of having the shortest possible cables from each amplifier to its associated driver.

Yes I suppose an audition at a local dealer is possible. It probably will not happen as hopefully my buying days are over. My experience at shows confirms my liking for ESLs or BBC type speakers with little obvious cabinet limitations.

In my second system I use some Adam active speakers which are fine. The interconnects are 4 metres long and very much affect the sound. In my main system I have a choice of 10 one meter interconnects, all sound very different even at those short lengths. I suspect five meters will be worse.

I am aware of the recent Exposure active system. Perhaps the dealers' explanation of why active systems do not sell well is because punters like the option to alter the sound to taste, which is difficult other than using limited trim pots on actives. Perhaps times are changing.

MY ATC amp does exactly what I wanted it to do and I am sure their active/passive speakers do an excellent job. Low level listening is important to me and the Harbeths do a great job.

 

[Allaboutmusic]

Listened to the 19s today on the end of my exposure 3010S2D and thought it sounded excellent, however don't think the speaker is big enough for my room so thinking about passive 40s. I could maybe get a exposure stereo power amp and biamp the speakers which I think should be plenty of power.

 

[AndyU]

Judging from listening to the active and passive speakers on this thread using Grado RS1s I would not choose ATC speakers for classical music.

Judging from owning Quad Electrostatics, albeit ELS57s, and owning a variety of ATC speakers, and having listened predominantly to live and recorded classical music for 50 years, I would choose ATCs over Quads for classical music any day. If you choose the right lute music say, or spoken voice, then sure Quads can be magic, uncannily real, but anything with weight, complexity, power - a string quartet, a choir, a piano, an orchestra - the ATCs are way more satisfying and credible. One thing you do learn from the Quads though is how good it is to get speakers away from room boundaries. A good bit of what you think is cabinet colouration is comb filtering, caused by having speakers close to the wall.

 

[herb]

Judging from owning Quad Electrostatics, albeit ELS57s, and owning a variety of ATC speakers, and having listened predominantly to live and recorded classical music for 50 years, I would choose ATCs over Quads for classical music any day. If you choose the right lute music say, or spoken voice, then sure Quads can be magic, uncannily real, but anything with weight, complexity, power - a string quartet, a choir, a piano, an orchestra - the ATCs are way more satisfying and credible. One thing you do learn from the Quads though is how good it is to get speakers away from room boundaries. A good bit of what you think is cabinet colouration is comb filtering, caused by having speakers close to the wall.

I had 57s from new for 14 years. In a large attic room with sloping side walls and open alcoves behind 57s the results were spooky. The best results came from BBC radio live broadcasts of large symphonies and perhaps choirs. You are sitting in the audience say half way back in the stalls or in the Grand Circle. I have been there in reality many, many times.

Harbeths provide some of that experience and perhaps sound more immediate, nearer to the performers = 5 rows back or so.

They say the ATC midrange driver rivals the ESLs for transparency. Impressive though I don't like bass.

Ten years ago I would be at the dealers for a demonstration. I have the money but as I said my buying audio days are over if I am lucky

 

[TheFlash]

Listened to the 19s today on the end of my exposure 3010S2D and thought it sounded excellent, however don't think the speaker is big enough for my room so thinking about passive 40s. I could maybe get a exposure stereo power amp and biamp the speakers which I think should be plenty of power.

Why passives?
Might I suggest two things:
1) Listen to the passives (they’re impressive) and the actives (same cabs, same drivers)
2) do your sums of passive+power amp vs actives

Of course once you’ve done (1) you’ll throw away your calculator. But (1) will encourage you to do (2).

 

[Joe]

Re the OP, I purchased my SCM 40s .....................

One thing I would add is that they are quite big and industrial looking, I think if I was buying again I might think about this a bit. .

Are yours the first gen flat sided ones or the later facelift curved sides ?

I wouldn't really class the second gen as industrial but I suppose it's all a matter of perception and personal taste. ( I was disappointed that ATC made them with curved sides...I preferred the original look )

 

[John Phillips]

I perhaps (likely) had them in too small a room, and right next to the lounge, so not an ideal environment for them. ...

In the opposite sense, my small-ish Proacs were driving a 6.7m x 3.6m room with the listener 2.8m away. They sounded great to me but it's quite possible they were too small for the room and didn't sound comfortable on the peak levels of dynamic music above a certain volume level. (It was not the amplifier, which had more than enough output.)

The SCM40s of this thread (and my SCM50s) have a much higher than typical maximum output level, so they will drive a bigger room very comfortably.

 

[Roog]

Are yours the first gen flat sided ones or the later facelift curved sides ?

I wouldn't really class the second gen as industrial but I suppose it's all a matter of perception and personal taste. ( I was disappointed that ATC made them with curved sides...I preferred the original look )

I have the curved one, but I find them quite imposing, drivers look quite functional and the grills which I use because impact from errant dog balls is quite common in our home do look a bit industrial, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder as they say.

I forgive them all of this because they have a big sound.

 

[Woodface]

I think the speakers look fine but the grills are rather industrial. Speakers are not usually things of beauty.

 

[Joe]

Yes...the grills really are nasty.....a better way must be possible.

 

[John Phillips]

Yes...the grills really are nasty.....a better way must be possible.

I get it that some find them ugly.

Nevertheless, I suspect they: (i) are effective at reducing the possibility of accidental driver damage; (ii) are acoustically transparent; and (iii) allow the drivers to be visible (which many seem to like) while being protected. Good, functional, engineering design it appears, even if not attractive. I did audition the SCM40A but my dealer did not fit the grills at the time so this view is only from seeing online images.

My enquiring mind wonders just how I would redesign the grills to achieve good function as above and also make them look attractive.

 

[popol_vuh]

I absolutely love the look and grilles of ATCs v2 home series speakers. Industrial look FTW. Nit to mention these grilles do what they're supposed to do and also have very little impact on sound. Just no-bullxxxx design. Love it. Hope ATC never change their philosophy.