I would not call ATC's warm, very revealing of source and can be a bit relentless over time, or at least that's how I felt about the ATC 19's I had.
That's why I compared Focals with ATC.
I would not call ATC's warm, very revealing of source and can be a bit relentless over time, or at least that's how I felt about the ATC 19's I had.
That's why I compared Focals with ATC.
If the green and red curves are response cirve at an angle, that would explain why in some circumstances, Focal speakers are perceived as bight even though the on-axis measurements show them flat. I'd expect the power response to show that the tweeter is pretty exposed above the midrange.
I had a pair of 1007s for a year or so and foolishly sold them as I didn't have the space for a proper hifi at the time. I still miss them and hope to get another pair when funds and space permit.
The styling is a bit Marmite but I love the house sound, fast and open to my ears. I think the reputation for brightness may come from their older models more so than the newer ranges.
Hifi follows fashions like everything else. They may be the new cool brand (like ATC today) in a a couple of years who knows
The styling is a bit Marmite but I love the house sound, fast and open to my ears. I think the reputation for brightness may come from their older models more so than the newer ranges.
Hifi follows fashions like everything else. They may be the new cool brand (like ATC today) in a a couple of years who knows
Evil Emperor
Taller Than Stalin
Another way of looking at this is the Sugden was way too warm and not revealing enough for the clean PMCs.
I've always found PMC to be a reasonably neutral loudspeaker, which is presumably why it's popular with studios. The Sugden is nice, but rose-tinted IMO.
I don't like ATCs at all. Every time I've heard them, all I hear is nasty break-up properties at the top of that midrange dome's range that swamp the tweeter. People equate that hardness with detail. It's just hardness.
Purité Audio
Trade: Purite Audio
I suspect the Sugden wouldn't have had enough output to properly drive the PMC's.
Keith.
Keith.
Whilst I understand your view, having demoed at these shows (not with Focal I must add) I am more surprised with how good some systems do sound.
20+ manufacturers queuing for the same entrance then queuing for a lift and/or fighting down a corridor. Often its very late at night and people are tired and stressed. Couple this with the display needs and presentation etc it is a bit of a nightmare. We had bags of point of sale leaflets, stands etc.
By 3am when kit is still being lugged around, sound perspective is often skewed. Not saying it is right but this is often how it was. Larger companies suffer the worst as they are often deming/displaying much more kit.
How often does a smaller manufacturer sound better, to my ears it was most of the time. They normally have a few boxes, can carry them in from the front of the venue, put them together in about an hour and spend the next couple of hours dicking around with the sound.
This coupled with the reality that very few people buy as an influence of a show. It is more of a showcase/shop window. It is just as much an industry and press get together as it is a consumer show. Many of the staff will have whopping hangovers for most of the show and couldn't discern good sound even if they wanted too
darrenyeats
pfm Member
To answer the OP, I liked the Focals at Scalford.
I've probably ferreted most measurements on ATCs on tinternet and they aren't the ultimate in every aspect of measurement, then again no speaker is. However, they have always measured exceedingly well for mid distortion (including lower, mid and upper mids). So I will defend your right not to like them etc, but I dispute that explanation.
Darren
Interesting point.
I think this is an internet myth. There is that graph of the raw ATC mid-dome response on tinternet, yes, and there is a resonance above the crossover, yes. But there are resonances in the middle of the mid-band too, no-one mentions those even though they are at a similar level if you take into account the 4th order crossover.
I've probably ferreted most measurements on ATCs on tinternet and they aren't the ultimate in every aspect of measurement, then again no speaker is. However, they have always measured exceedingly well for mid distortion (including lower, mid and upper mids). So I will defend your right not to like them etc, but I dispute that explanation.
Darren
darrenyeats
pfm Member
Back to the OP, everybody talks about treble when they talk about Focals.
Here are my subjective impressions from Scalford. They had great deep bass. The only weakness of their bass, to my taste, is a high order roll-off (but for some material it really works I confess).
The treble, I find excellent. Really detailed and natural. When played too loud, I thought I could hear the dreaded "metal tweeter" but I am talking really too loud overall so perhaps not a problem.
Impressive sound overall, I spent a lot of time in the Focal room.
Darren
Here are my subjective impressions from Scalford. They had great deep bass. The only weakness of their bass, to my taste, is a high order roll-off (but for some material it really works I confess).
The treble, I find excellent. Really detailed and natural. When played too loud, I thought I could hear the dreaded "metal tweeter" but I am talking really too loud overall so perhaps not a problem.
Impressive sound overall, I spent a lot of time in the Focal room.
Darren
ex brickie
pfm Member
I'm a huge Focal fan - I own modded Micro Utopia Bes. Yes the treble is on the bright side of neutral (I wouldn't say harsh) and the bass is fantastic for its size. Best of all is the detail - I've not heard another speaker come close - even for double the money.
I've owned and lived with passive ATCs from 12s to 40s. All were good. I've also heard shop demos of Active 50s and 100s. I did this out of curiosity a few months ago after so many on here were saying these active speakers were the best thing since sliced bread. I'm glad I didn't buy on a whim. The ATCs (and I'm a huge fan of the company: I use their amp to drive my Focals) were frankly dull. Detailed - but uninspiring. I heard them with McIntosh and Croft preamps. So for my taste (and they may not be for everyone) I'll stick with Focals every time
I've owned and lived with passive ATCs from 12s to 40s. All were good. I've also heard shop demos of Active 50s and 100s. I did this out of curiosity a few months ago after so many on here were saying these active speakers were the best thing since sliced bread. I'm glad I didn't buy on a whim. The ATCs (and I'm a huge fan of the company: I use their amp to drive my Focals) were frankly dull. Detailed - but uninspiring. I heard them with McIntosh and Croft preamps. So for my taste (and they may not be for everyone) I'll stick with Focals every time
Although the OP was a very loaded question, it may get to the heart of "why we like what we do?". Focals have always left me cold, and I don't know why? Last year, at the Oatlands Park show, when I heard them play my "Carolina Chocolate Drop" CD on an expensive DCS stack, I thought they had lost the meaning of music. I could here all the elements although I thought the timing was wrong. I thought the system (with VTL amplification) could be used for analysing the details but not for me enjoying it.
Evil Emperor
Taller Than Stalin
No. This is nonsense, for several reasons.
1. The judgment of internet critics might well be the judgement of the guy who puts his head around the corner of the room for a nanosecond, then scuttles off with a brochure in hand
2. The judgement of internet critics who know they don't like a brand because they've constantly reinforced their belief that the never liked the brand to make sure they don't like the brand. That's blind brand prejudice
3. The company setting up the system has its allegiances that may go far above the pay grade of the grunts setting up. We can pick the right product to go with the best product, they have to choose what they are given from a limited portfolio of products.
4. I've been in hotel rooms where the walls are so thin, you can tell what brand of toothbrush the guy in the next room is using from the sound of his brushing. They are not designed or shaped to be in any way like a living room
5. Our systems generally benefit from not being moved around every day. When I had Quad ESLs, I knew that if I moved them too much, I'd have a week of crappy sound while they settled back down. I've once been 'lucky' enough to spend two days at a show (a long and expensive story involving the intermediate shaft bearing and the noise made by an early Porsche Boxster engine disintegrating) and the sound of rooms on the Sunday were infinitely better than the sound of rooms on Saturday, despite my heightened sense of anger on the second day
I was joking about the midrange, and SQ is right, I regard them as pretty much perfect, as do the industry professionals.
sq225917
Bit of this, bit of that
I was merely pulling your leg I similarly consider them superlative.
merlin
Avatar changed - Town names deemed offensive.
I changed from ATC SCM50asl Anniversary to Focal Diablos and consider them a considerable upgrade in areas that are important to me.
Speakers are totally down to personal preference. Take a listen in a well set up, domestic environment preferably your own.
Vimtokid
pfm Member
I've owned a pair of Focal 1027 Be for a couple of years now and think they're excellent. Like Manicatel I never really bother to respond to these threads as they generally go along a similar line with expressed distaste over 'edgy/brittle/harsh' presentation. I genuinely struggle to reconcile some of these comments with the sound I experience at home. Maybe it is model specific, maybe its environment and maybe it partnering electronics.
They are very revealing speakers and I do prefer a more detailed presentation, but I'd never describe them as harsh. I've walked out of rooms with full-on Naim systems that have been too much for me in terms of sounding edgy and forward. (Please don't think I'm Naim bashing BTW, I've also enjoyed other Naim set-ups.) I also was very disappointed with a show demo of some Focal Diablos a couple of years ago as they sounded (in that room, in that set up) too forward for me. My rather long winded point is that these are qualities/features/presentations that I would recognise and be unhappy with if I experienced the same at home, which I don't.
They are very revealing speakers and I do prefer a more detailed presentation, but I'd never describe them as harsh. I've walked out of rooms with full-on Naim systems that have been too much for me in terms of sounding edgy and forward. (Please don't think I'm Naim bashing BTW, I've also enjoyed other Naim set-ups.) I also was very disappointed with a show demo of some Focal Diablos a couple of years ago as they sounded (in that room, in that set up) too forward for me. My rather long winded point is that these are qualities/features/presentations that I would recognise and be unhappy with if I experienced the same at home, which I don't.
Philifa
pfm Member
I had a pair of Electra 906s for about 4 years. Bought new and on stands recommended by the dealer...can't remember the make. They were great, very revealing, dynamic and sounded excellent driven by Naim kit.
SWMBO was never keen on the size as they are quite large for stand mounts. Anyway I borrowed a pair of NSats to try as they were more acceptable to the missus. Have to say the NSats absolutely blew the 906s away. Boogie factor, prat, call it what you like but it was certainly there with the NSats. I never knew what I had been missing. Needless to say the NSats stayed and the 906s were sold the following week.
PS The 906s were about twice the price of the NSats and full of modern technology, phase aligned etc etc, just goes to show its a load of bollocks really. The only way to choose is to listen, forget everything else.
SWMBO was never keen on the size as they are quite large for stand mounts. Anyway I borrowed a pair of NSats to try as they were more acceptable to the missus. Have to say the NSats absolutely blew the 906s away. Boogie factor, prat, call it what you like but it was certainly there with the NSats. I never knew what I had been missing. Needless to say the NSats stayed and the 906s were sold the following week.
PS The 906s were about twice the price of the NSats and full of modern technology, phase aligned etc etc, just goes to show its a load of bollocks really. The only way to choose is to listen, forget everything else.
Too much of a compromise for me.