Atc scm20 [passive] Floorstander ?

[admin_exported]

Is the scm20 still available ?

If so, what is its price tag ?

Also how does it compare too the rest of the atc scm models ?

Unable to find any reviews .

 

[Anonymous]

The SCM20's are still available prices range from £2800-£3200 & the SCM20's are better than the SCM19's with a much better built cabinet & bracing plus a better tweeter, I still would probably suggest the 40's over the 20's as the mid dome really is very accomplished...also you need to budget for hefty stands, a used pair of 20's SL spec can be had for around the £1000 Mark...which is a very good deal.
all the best
Benny.

 

[BenLaw]

The only SCM20 tower listed on the ATC website is the active version. This is available online for around £6k. I'm not sure why anyone would buy a passive 20 tower over the SCM40? As well as additional cabinet size the SCM40 features the studio soft dome mid range driver

Edit: Benny beat me to it and has better info re the passive version

 

[MUSICRAFT]

Is the scm20 still available ?

If so, what is its price tag ?

Also how does it compare too the rest of the atc scm models ?

Unable to find any reviews .

Hi FATS 2828

What areas of improvement are you looking for over your SCM11 monitors and for the system as a whole to achieve/reproduce?

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

 

[Evlampi]

Ben, I would always choose Passive 20 towers over the Scm 40!

Listened to them several times side by side and i think the 20s have much more spacious, well integrated, and more informative sound.

Pay attention that there are some people out there(Me included, i think David from Frank Harvey too...) that even prefer the 19 to the 40!

 

[edplaysdrums42]

Ben, I would always choose Passive 20 towers over the Scm 40!

Listened to them several times side by side and i think the 20s have much more spacious, well integrated, and more informative sound.

Pay attention that there are some people out there(Me included, i think David from Frank Harvey too...) that even prefer the 19 to the 40!

He doesnt need to pay attention! He's just offering his opinion, the same as you are which i'm sure are both gratefully received.

I would like to compare the 40's against the 19's but havent had the chance but if i did i'd be surprised if i prefered the 19's

Cheers Ed

 

[BenLaw]

Thanks Ed

Evlampi, I'm very well aware David prefers the 19s, he says it on pretty much every thread about 40s!

In fairness, I've not heard the 20s, and I'm very willing to accept that some people would prefer them to the 40s, that's the nature of personal taste in hifi. It probably just goes to show that Rick's post is the sensible reply, rather than me leaping to give my opinion!

 

[Anonymous]

Hello Rick, As stated too you before more scale and weight. Unable to fit sub in room properly. But as of the last few days my 11,s seemed to have opened up and gained some extra grunt. It been quite a grind [ 9 months] but there is a definate improvement. The 19,s might be just a a step to far as size goes for a standmounter in my other half eyes. Also since the inprovement in sound recently i think the atc bug has finaly bitten.. Have been so close to getting rid ! Still would like some chest vibrating moments . regards

 

[MUSICRAFT]

Hello Rick, As stated too you before more scale and weight. Unable to fit sub in room properly. But as of the last few days my 11,s seemed to have opened up and gained some extra grunt. It been quite a grind [ 9 months] but there is a definate improvement. The 19,s might be just a a step to far as size goes for a standmounter in my other half eyes. Also since the inprovement in sound recently i think the atc bug has finaly bitten.. Have been so close to getting rid ! Still would like some chest vibrating moments . regards

Hi FATS 2828

Thanks for your reply and fair enough.

In which case then don't rock the boat and carry on enjoying the qualities of your SCM11 monitors for a while yet In due course have a listen to SCM20 Passive Towers. The SCM20's will offer even lower distortion, less coloration, sweeter and more natural treble and with greater coherence, scale, depth, dynamics and detail.

SCM-20 SL Passive Towers retail at £2803 (black ash), £2952 (cherry/walnut), £3163 (rosewood).

Btw, as an alternative to speakers ATC's SIA2-150 MK2 amplifier is also worth bearing in mind.

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

 

[Frank Harvey]

I know people jump straight to the 40's when talking about the ATC's, but a three way speaker doesn't always better a two way. For me, the SCM40 just doesn't hold my interest like the SCM19's and SCM20's do. I can only assume that this is because of the SL driver used by the 19's and 20's, which is superior to that of the 40's. The 19's and 20's seem far easier to match up with different amplifiers, whereas I find the 40's quite picky.

I would have had active 20's in my AV system, but because the left and right speaker would be sitting directly beneath the edges of the screen, I couldn't risk ruining the screen with the rising heat they'd give off!

 

[BenLaw]

I know people jump straight to the 40's when talking about the ATC's, but a three way speaker doesn't always better a two way. For me, the SCM40 just doesn't hold my interest like the SCM19's and SCM20's do. I can only assume that this is because of the SL driver used by the 19's and 20's, which is superior to that of the 40's. The 19's and 20's seem far easier to match up with different amplifiers, whereas I find the 40's quite picky.

I don't think anyone on this thread has 'jumped straight to the 40s' or suggested that a 3 way speaker always betters a 2 way. However, you're wrong to suggest that the drivers in the 19s and 20s are superior. Fwiw, the 20s have a different and superior tweeter from the entry series 19s and 40s. And the SL driver is highly impressive and, IMO, better than the competition. But the 40s drivers, in particular the studio soft dome, are a step up from the 19s. Hence my opinion.

I've said it before, quite why you bother stocking speakers that you constantly denigrate is beyond me, although I suppose it is possible to speculate...

I suppose it is a good sign that you now only consider the 40s 'quite picky' regarding amplification, rather than it being 'a quest of argonaut proportions': http://www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/whats-more-important-speakers-or-amp?page=4

 

[Frank Harvey]

Here we go again.... My wording imply that anyone did 'jump straight to the 40's', it was a generalisation. The 20's have a better bass driver and HF unit over the 40's, and the 19's have a better bass driver than the 40's, so I'm correct in what I have stated. No speculation needed Ben. Some might feel that the best speaker, and the only speaker that should be bought by anybody and everybody is the most accurate one, but there are many more people out there who are after a particular sound, or want a speaker for specific genres of music than those after accuracy. We like to cater for everyone rather than a minority. People are free to pop into our store and try the SCM40's against a whole host of other similarly priced, and more expensive, speakers to find out what type of sound they want, or need. On a personal level, it is well known that they're not my favourite speaker, which is my valid opinion. I will give advice impartially, as well as giving my personal opinion where I feel it's necessary. You trying to undermine anything I say isn't going to stop me saying it. It doesn't matter how you describe the 40's reluctance to shine on different amplification - I still find they sound best on ATC's own electronics.

 

[BenLaw]

The 20's have a better bass driver and HF unit over the 40's, and the 19's have a better bass driver than the 40's, so I'm correct in what I have stated.

I don't think this is right. The SL driver on the 19s and 20s is not a dedicated bass driver, so is different from the SL drivers used in the 50s and upwards - these are superior to the 40s bass driver for sure but I would say the 40's bass driver is superior to the 19s. Even if you want to debate that, the 40s have the studio soft dome mid driver, which ATC describe as being 'the only mid-range device capable of giving ultimate performance': http://atcloudspeakers.co.uk/downloads/entry_series.pdf

FWIW (and accepting you have heard many more speakers than me), having heard the SCM40s as well as floorstanders twice and four times the price, I agree with the sentiment that SCM40s are the finest VFM around

No speculation needed Ben. Some might feel that the best speaker, and the only speaker that should be bought by anybody and everybody is the most accurate one, but there are many more people out there who are after a particular sound, or want a speaker for specific genres of music than those after accuracy. We like to cater for everyone rather than a minority. People are free to pop into our store and try the SCM40's against a whole host of other similarly priced, and more expensive, speakers to find out what type of sound they want, or need.

For sure. Not really relevant to the 20s v 40s debate tho. Passive 20 towers are effectively a standmount with an extended cabinet. They also cost significantly more than 40s. From my point of view, the only reason to go for them over the 40s would be aesthetics. If I wanted a standmount I'd go for the 19s. Other opinions always allowed

Bet you don't sell a lot of 40s

 

[BenLaw]

I think what I was trying to say about the mid driver was something like this:

the midrange performance of the 40's will be better than the 19's due to it's extremely high quality mid dome. With the addition of this mid driver, the amount of work the bass driver has to do is cut back allowing it to concentrate on the frequencies it should be taking care of, producing a cleaner bass with less distortion.

From here: http://www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/atc-scm19s-vs-scm40s

It doesn't matter how you describe the 40's reluctance to shine on different amplification - I still find they sound best on ATC's own electronics.

Although just a few months ago you said this:

With the SCM40's, I'd stick to ATC amplification. Bryston does sound better with them, but I don't feel it's justifiable given the price difference.

From here: http://www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/front-end-for-atc-scm40s

 

[Anonymous]

Hello Rick , Thanks for the information. The scm20,s do seem out of sync price wise with the rest of the atc range, i was hoping they would fall in between the 19,s and 40,s. I,ll leave it at that before w.w 3 breaks out.

 

[Anonymous]

Hello Rick , Thanks for the information. The scm20,s do seem out of sync price wise with the rest of the atc range, i was hoping they would fall in between the 19,s and 40,s. I,ll leave it at that before w.w 3 breaks out.

just get some popcorn and enjoy the fun , there's nothing like two knowledgable people having a good hifi debate arty:

 

[MUSICRAFT]

Hello Rick , Thanks for the information. The scm20,s do seem out of sync price wise with the rest of the atc range, i was hoping they would fall in between the 19,s and 40,s. I,ll leave it at that before w.w 3 breaks out.

Hi FATS 2828

Your welcome.

Fair enough although i hope you'll keep us informed of changes to your system

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

 

[Frank Harvey]

The scm20,s do seem out of sync price wise with the rest of the atc range, i was hoping they would fall in between the 19,s and 40,s. I,ll leave it at that before w.w 3 breaks out.

The reason why some may see the SCM20 as 'out of sync' is because the SCM20 isn't part of their entry level series. Can a manufacturer offer 'more for less' even when comparing their own products? As an example, a Monitor Audio GS60 is far more speaker for your money than a pair of GX200's, but it doesn't necessarily translate into getting better quality for your money. If the SCM20 wasn't as good as a 40 - or even better - it simply wouldn't exist in the range

 

[Frank Harvey]

I think what I was trying to say about the mid driver was something like this:

the midrange performance of the 40's will be better than the 19's due to it's extremely high quality mid dome. With the addition of this mid driver, the amount of work the bass driver has to do is cut back allowing it to concentrate on the frequencies it should be taking care of, producing a cleaner bass with less distortion.

From here: http://www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/atc-scm19s-vs-scm40s

It doesn't matter how you describe the 40's reluctance to shine on different amplification - I still find they sound best on ATC's own electronics.

Although just a few months ago you said this:

With the SCM40's, I'd stick to ATC amplification. Bryston does sound better with them, but I don't feel it's justifiable given the price difference.

From here: http://www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/front-end-for-atc-scm40s

I really don't see the relevance of this post, as there's nothing in there that's any revelation, nor contradictory. Yes, I did find the Bryston combo sounding better with the 40's, but because of the 40's stubbornness in wanting to really 'work' with other amplification like the rest of the entry level range, I don't feel the Bryston combo is justified as far as price is concerned. Based on price /performance (or VFM as your lot tend to like your abbreviations), I'd recommend the CA2/P1 combo.

I find your continuing, and failing, efforts to trip me up rather tiring, and would welcome the puppet master to do his own dirty work rather than his minions.

 

[Frank Harvey]

The 20's have a better bass driver and HF unit over the 40's, and the 19's have a better bass driver than the 40's, so I'm correct in what I have stated.

I don't think this is right. The SL driver on the 19s and 20s is not a dedicated bass driver, so is different from the SL drivers used in the 50s and upwards - these are superior to the 40s bass driver for sure but I would say the 40's bass driver is superior to the 19s. Even if you want to debate that, the 40s have the studio soft dome mid driver, which ATC describe as being 'the only mid-range device capable of giving ultimate performance': http://atcloudspeakers.co.uk/downloads/entry_series.pdf

FWIW (and accepting you have heard many more speakers than me), having heard the SCM40s as well as floorstanders twice and four times the price, I agree with the sentiment that SCM40s are the finest VFM around

Regardless of which drivers are better or worse, it doesn't change the fact that more than one person in this thread prefers the sound of the SCM20's over the SCM40's. 'Thems the facts'.

No speculation needed Ben. Some might feel that the best speaker, and the only speaker that should be bought by anybody and everybody is the most accurate one, but there are many more people out there who are after a particular sound, or want a speaker for specific genres of music than those after accuracy. We like to cater for everyone rather than a minority. People are free to pop into our store and try the SCM40's against a whole host of other similarly priced, and more expensive, speakers to find out what type of sound they want, or need.

For sure. Not really relevant to the 20s v 40s debate tho. Passive 20 towers are effectively a standmount with an extended cabinet. They also cost significantly more than 40s. From my point of view, the only reason to go for them over the 40s would be aesthetics. If I wanted a standmount I'd go for the 19s. Other opinions always allowed

Bet you don't sell a lot of 40s

You're right, it's not relevant to the thread, but it was in answer to your 'speculation' comment on why we have the SCM40's on demo. As far as sales are concerned, those that have come to our store to compare the extensive range of £1,000+ speakers we have on demo and preferred SCM40's over other speakers have purchased - those that haven't, have bought an alternative. Some will regard the SCM40 far higher than I do, but then this is true of other speakers too (I have made it known about PMC DB1i's too, for example), so it's not exclusive to the 40's, nor to ATC. You seem to like making a mountain out of a mole hill in this respect.

 

[BenLaw]

I guess that, like the OP, we should leave it there for now.