ATC SCM11

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the What HiFi community: the world's leading independent guide to buying and owning hi-fi and home entertainment products.

Frank Harvey

Well-known member
Jun 27, 2008
567
1
18,890
Richard Allen said:
The problem David is the drive unit parameters. Hardly any loudspeaker companies are making drivers with the right Q for a closed box unless you're like ATC and make your own. With the exception of the LS3/5A incarnations from the likes of Stirling and Harbeth it ain't gonna happen due to the size of the cabinet vs Er Indoors. This is why reflex boxes are so popular bar none.

I fully appreciate that a driver won't work in both situations, and they need to be different. And I understand that driver manufacturers aren't making the right drivers (maybe they would if people started buying sealed speakers over ported - they'll follow the money, after all), but there are quite a few speaker manufacturers out there that build their own drive units, so they don't have to rely on driver manufacturers.

Pas for the size of the cabinets, I'm sure more people would choose a larger box that can be used closer to a wall than a smaller box that needs a foot or more of space behind it...
 

chebby

Well-known member
Jun 2, 2008
1,257
34
19,220
plastic penguin said:
Personally, for low volumes, you are generally better off with ported speakers. They require less wattage/current to move the cone. Also the internal capacity of the cabinet with play a part, too.

Not my experience with my old Naim nSATs or my JPW Sonatas (both around 87dB).

Lower sensitivity speakers can make the amp work a bit harder at lower volume levels. This would have been a 'good thing' with my old Nait 5i where it was too loud for me beyond the 9 o'clock level (where the amp sounded best IMO) when using my first Rega R3s. (Part of the reason for getting the slightly harder to drive nSATs at the time.)

However my experiences and tastes for moderate volume levels are not so universally applicable and not all infinite baffle designs are low efficiency.
 
chebby said:
plastic penguin said:
Personally, for low volumes, you are generally better off with ported speakers. They require less wattage/current to move the cone. Also the internal capacity of the cabinet with play a part, too.

Not my experience with my old Naim nSATs or my JPW Sonatas (both around 87dB).

Lower sensitivity speakers can make the amp work a bit harder at lower volume levels. This would have been a 'good thing' with my old Nait 5i where it was too loud for me beyond the 9 o'clock level (where the amp sounded best IMO) when using my first Rega R3s. (Part of the reason for getting the slightly harder to drive nSATs at the time.)

However my experiences and tastes for moderate volume levels are not so universally applicable and not all infinite baffle designs are low efficiency.

I did say "generally", so not applicable to all infinite baffle speakers....
 

BenLaw

Well-known member
Nov 21, 2010
475
7
18,895
plastic penguin said:
chebby said:
plastic penguin said:
Personally, for low volumes, you are generally better off with ported speakers. They require less wattage/current to move the cone. Also the internal capacity of the cabinet with play a part, too.

Not my experience with my old Naim nSATs or my JPW Sonatas (both around 87dB).

Lower sensitivity speakers can make the amp work a bit harder at lower volume levels. This would have been a 'good thing' with my old Nait 5i where it was too loud for me beyond the 9 o'clock level (where the amp sounded best IMO) when using my first Rega R3s. (Part of the reason for getting the slightly harder to drive nSATs at the time.)

However my experiences and tastes for moderate volume levels are not so universally applicable and not all infinite baffle designs are low efficiency.

I did say "generally", so not applicable to all infinite baffle speakers....

Or to your very limited experience of ATC and I'm guessing non existent experience of EB.
 

unsleepable

New member
Dec 25, 2013
6
0
0
David@FrankHarvey said:
Pas for the size of the cabinets, I'm sure more people would choose a larger box that can be used closer to a wall than a smaller box that needs a foot or more of space behind it...

Why is that? I thought that the right distance to walls for best sound had more to do with whether the speakers were front- or rear-ported, and in some cases the resonance of the speakers, than with whether they are standmounters or floorstanders.
 

Frank Harvey

Well-known member
Jun 27, 2008
567
1
18,890
unsleepable said:
David@FrankHarvey said:
Pas for the size of the cabinets, I'm sure more people would choose a larger box that can be used closer to a wall than a smaller box that needs a foot or more of space behind it...

Why is that? I thought that the right distance to walls for best sound had more to do with whether the speakers were front- or rear-ported, and in some cases the resonance of the speakers, than with whether they are standmounters or floorstanders.

I wasn't referring to whether a speaker is a standmount or floorstander, as there are 'small' floorstanders on the market, as well as large standmounts. I was just making a point that it isn't necessarily the size of the box that some people object to - it can be the space they need in order to perform at their best.
 

hooflungdung

New member
Apr 15, 2013
5
0
0
i suppose it's reasonable to assume, that more poweful driver mechanics & stiffer cone materials needed to deal with higher internal air pressure of a sealed box must impact on sensitivity to the incoming signal.

whether it's an issue in real life listening situations, i suppose we all have to have a listen to find out.

i am interested to know if you, Pedro have set a budget cap on your purchase as you have gone a step up already to the ATC, as it seems to me that the standmount market is not so clear cut in terms of the pound per performance, eg £1000.00 speaker for £1500.00 amp & so on.

i suppose we are all a bit paranoid about getting a speaker which will not only suit the room & our tonal taste, but also provide the best outright quality to match the electronics supplying the music, without having our pants pulled firmly down in the process .

Good luck with P.M.Cs & let us know how you get on
 

MajorFubar

New member
Mar 3, 2010
690
8
0
I'm not sure there's any design advantages of ported speakers in terms of absolute sound quality. The only advantage I can think of is porting allows smaller designs to sound bigger and bassier. Though I'm no engineer, so maybe there are others. The potential disadvantages seem clear though: colourations caused by the cabinet, the room, and smearing caused by phase differences between the direct sound from the cone and the reflected sound from the port (front or rear). Perhaps the assumption is the wavelengths are are so long at low frequencies that the smearing caused by this interaction is irrelevant.
 

unsleepable

New member
Dec 25, 2013
6
0
0
David@FrankHarvey said:
I wasn't referring to whether a speaker is a standmount or floorstander, as there are 'small' floorstanders on the market, as well as large standmounts. I was just making a point that it isn't necessarily the size of the box that some people object to - it can be the space they need in order to perform at their best.

Oh, I get your point now. I hadn't understood it before. Thanks!
 

Pedro2

Well-known member
Nov 29, 2010
86
49
18,570
Hooflung,

I'm not really sure that we are taking a 'step up' budget wise as the Neat Motive 2SE cost more than the SCM 11 when they were originally purchased (4 years ago if my memory serves me correctly). We haven't really set a budget ceiling as such although I would think long and hard before moving above £2500. To be honest, having read numerous speaker reviews in the last 6 months, few, if any standmounts seem to come in around the £2k price range. Don't realy want to go active and don't want to go larger for reasons already stated. If anyone has any suggestions for better, if slightly more expensive then pease let me know. Just think that at present, the SCM 11 sounded very good and very good value for money.

p.s Richard, I profess to having no scientific knowledge of speaker build or design, unlike youself. I do thoroughly enjoy listening to music, however and believe that it is possible to listen to any make, model or design of speaker in order to draw my own conclusions.
 

hooflungdung

New member
Apr 15, 2013
5
0
0
hi Pedro

the step up i was referring to was from your previous demo.

i think you are definately barking up the correct tree with well designed quality 2 way standmounts for your room

& if you want to spend more how about dynaudio focus 160 or acoustic energy reference 1, & i don't think i would leave the Harbeth stone un turned, as they are supposedly great for nearish field/ lowish volume listening.

Happy hunting & don't spend too much
evil.png
 

Pedro2

Well-known member
Nov 29, 2010
86
49
18,570
Quick update on speaker quest:

Was going to hear the PMCs next weekend but a short holiday got in the way. Will try in a few weeks time. Meanwhile..... two more options have somewhat unexpectedly grabbed my attention.

First off is the Linn Majik 109. Never really given Linn speakers much thought until I posted on the Linn forum about the ATCs. The Linn's are also supposed to work quite close to a rear wall and are not bass heavy. There is also the possibility of moving to an aktiv configuration with the Majik DSM. CNO, any experience of these?

Which brings me to the second option; MAD 1920s. These are small monitors which are (very loosely) based on the LS3a of old. They are over £1000 more than the SCM11 but get excellent reviews. They are supposed to have a surprisingly big sound stage which belies their diminutive size as well as an ability to 'disappear' behind the sound. Not possible to hear these in a shop so will have shell out the readies on a 30 day sale or return basis. mmmm :?

Any thoughts or experience of the two options much appreciated :)
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
14
0
Pedro2 said:
First off is the Linn Majik 109. Never really given Linn speakers much thought until I posted on the Linn forum about the ATCs. The Linn's are also supposed to work quite close to a rear wall and are not bass heavy. There is also the possibility of moving to an aktiv configuration with the Majik DSM. CNO, any experience of these?

Hi Pedro

I have heard the Majik 109s on the end of a DSM (along with other speakers), which I wrote about here: http://www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/linn-kef-regaand-a-friend

Any time I have heard Linn Active stuff, it was further up the range.....imo. it was a good improvement over the passive version, but at the money it cost, I think you one can do better (for my taste anyway).

My advice is to try the speakers you have in mind at home (ATC & PMC), along with some R Series / LS50 (which I think have great synergy with Linn amplification).
 

Pedro2

Well-known member
Nov 29, 2010
86
49
18,570
Thanks cno.

Read your original post with interest. The PMCs are next on the list. The Linn's may be heard in another shop nearby if I can arrange it. Mind you, last time I visited the Linn dealer, I went in to audition a new amp (wanted to hear the Rega Brio or Naim 5) and ended up buying the Linn Majik DSM - a serious increase in spending! The owner cunningly showed my wife how the Majik could stream Itunes from her Iphone and the deal was done!

Very clever piece of kit which has multiple inputs and sounds great. We currently play lossless from a NAS, Itunes from Iphone, Mac and Ipad (via airplay) and Spotify from Mac using Songcast. In addition, a Sony BDP/Streamer uses the HDMI as well as an Apple TV. It really is amazingly versatile and would recommend without reservation (maybe a little with the power amp section perhaps?).

Anyway, I digress.... will keep you posted. Still need to mull over the MAD option too...... decisions, decisions.....
 

Pedro2

Well-known member
Nov 29, 2010
86
49
18,570
Well folks, after much deliberation we finally bit the bullet and bought the ATCs with new stands. Had them for about 6 weeks now and they sound brilliant.

Rick sold them to us on a 2 week home trial which was a number one priority owing to our room acoustics (see previous comments).

First impressions out of the box and sitting on an old pair of Z2 stands, were as follows; open, detailed, balanced and without any of the bass 'boom' that the Neat's were producing. Despite greater detail, the sound was far from clinical however. Reviews which comment on the lack of harshness with the new ATC tweeter are spot on. It is possible to listen for hours without any sense of fatigue.

A few days later, I phoned Rick to give him the good news and tell him that the ATCs would not be returning to the shop! Days later, we returned to Derby to purchase a pair of Q Acoustic speaker stands which Rick had recommended.

So now, the ATCs have been in use for over a month and sitting on the Q Acoustic stands.

First impressions have not changed and the sound remains as described. The ATCs did not appear to need any 'burn in' period. Addition of the new stands has made the sound stage became even more defined with clear placement of instruments and voices possible (something that was not evident with the Neat's probably due to bass interaction with room acoustics).

The ATCs cannot be described as 'warm sounding' but neither do they sound 'clinical' which leaves them somewhere in between. I'm tempted to say that they sound 'natural' but this is probably a term which doesn't fit easily into descriptions of music and sound reproduction.

Anyone wanting huge amounts of bass would probably need to look elsewhere. However, the bass is there and its detailed. You can easily pick out individual bass notes which many speakers appear to miss in the drive to make a big sound (often from a small box). This detailed, tuneful bass is also a revelation in our smallish, low ceiling living room. Some listeners might miss an extreme low end response but the addition of a sub would probably introduce the muddying effects that we have been trying to eradicate.

We never did get round to auditioning the PMCs or a selection of other lesser known options which I had on my list. The last few months have been too hectic for such activities. However, the end result is a good one. We've now got a speaker which sounds great in our living room *i-m_so_happy*

One final point to note. The ATCs are sometimes considered hard to drive but this is not the case for us. In our room (4m x 4m), the Roksan Caspian drives them easily and to loud listening levels. They appear to sound louder than the Neats at the same volume setting which is somewhat strange and not what I was expecting.

Thanks to Rick at Musicraft for excellent service and for anyone out there wondering if the reviews of these speakers are accurate, the answer is a resounding 'yes'. If you're wanting a speaker which just gets on with the job of presenting the music and gets out of the way, then give the ATCs a listen. You won't be disappointed!
 
Pedro2 said:
Well folks, after much deliberation we finally bit the bullet and bought the ATCs with new stands. Had them for about 6 weeks now and they sound brilliant.

Rick sold them to us on a 2 week home trial which was a number one priority owing to our room acoustics (see previous comments).

First impressions out of the box and sitting on an old pair of Z2 stands, were as follows; open, detailed, balanced and without any of the bass 'boom' that the Neat's were producing. Despite greater detail, the sound was far from clinical however. Reviews which comment on the lack of harshness with the new ATC tweeter are spot on. It is possible to listen for hours without any sense of fatigue.

A few days later, I phoned Rick to give him the good news and tell him that the ATCs would not be returning to the shop! Days later, we returned to Derby to purchase a pair of Q Acoustic speaker stands which Rick had recommended.

So now, the ATCs have been in use for over a month and sitting on the Q Acoustic stands.

First impressions have not changed and the sound remains as described. The ATCs did not appear to need any 'burn in' period. Addition of the new stands has made the sound stage became even more defined with clear placement of instruments and voices possible (something that was not evident with the Neat's probably due to bass interaction with room acoustics).

The ATCs cannot be described as 'warm sounding' but neither do they sound 'clinical' which leaves them somewhere in between. I'm tempted to say that they sound 'natural' but this is probably a term which doesn't fit easily into descriptions of music and sound reproduction.

Anyone wanting huge amounts of bass would probably need to look elsewhere. However, the bass is there and its detailed. You can easily pick out individual bass notes which many speakers appear to miss in the drive to make a big sound (often from a small box). This detailed, tuneful bass is also a revelation in our smallish, low ceiling living room. Some listeners might miss an extreme low end response but the addition of a sub would probably introduce the muddying effects that we have been trying to eradicate.

We never did get round to auditioning the PMCs or a selection of other lesser known options which I had on my list. The last few months have been too hectic for such activities. However, the end result is a good one. We've now got a speaker which sounds great in our living room *i-m_so_happy*

One final point to note. The ATCs are sometimes considered hard to drive but this is not the case for us. In our room (4m x 4m), the Roksan Caspian drives them easily and to loud listening levels. They appear to sound louder than the Neats at the same volume setting which is somewhat strange and not what I was expecting.

Thanks to Rick at Musicraft for excellent service and for anyone out there wondering if the reviews of these speakers are accurate, the answer is a resounding 'yes'. If you're wanting a speaker which just gets on with the job of presenting the music and gets out of the way, then give the ATCs a listen. You won't be disappointed!

That's great news. Please you're thrilled with them. They sound like corkers.

Just a quick point about them being hard to drive. I've been critical, not just ATC but any closed box design, especially when people try and put an entry-level amp, such as Cambridge or Marantz or Arcam. But with the quality of the Caspian, I wouldn't expect it to have issues in this area, but all speakers benefit from being driven well, especially if you like your music cranked.
 

Pedro2

Well-known member
Nov 29, 2010
86
49
18,570
Cheers Plastic,

The Roksan probably suits the ATCs well and although we rarely blast it out, it's good to know that your amp can handle volume without running out of steam!
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
14
0
I'm glad your journey had a happy ending.....which in no small part is due to finding an obliging dealer who accomodates home dems.