upgrading my avi amp to atc amp??

[admin_exported]

Hello everyone I am a new member and I would like some advice from anyone that can help me.

I recently purchased the Atc scm 40 speakers and I am very happy with them.I had the spendor s9e previously and the atc's in my opinion is a much better quality speaker. I am thinking of updating my amp which is the avi laboratory series integrated with 175w per side to the atc integrated amp. I have been very happy with the avi until now that I purchased these speakers. When I increase the volume just under half way the sound becomes very bright and a bit harsh. I am not quite sure if it is my amp or maybe the qed genesis bi wire speaker cable.

So I am thinking of purchasing the atc amp and hopefully getting rid of the top end brightness and getting better results. I am also thinking maybe going for a pre/power combo with a lot of power and quality as I like listening to my music loud at times.

Will I improve things by doing this? Will the upgrade be worthy? All information and experiance would be much appreciated.

 

[Frank Harvey]

What you're finding with your AVI amp is that it's working outside of it's capabilities. An amp working within it's capabilities will sound the same at higher volume as it does at lower volume. Bryston is a perfect example of this.

Finding an amp to match up with the SCM40's is quite a task. We've tried everything we have, and the best thing is to stick to ATC's own. The CA2/P1 combo is only a little more than the SAI2-150, and can be improved later on by adding one or two more P1 power amplifiers. The ATC electronics do help tame that 'top end brightness' you speak of - something other amps didn't do.

Although for the cost involved in that, it would be better to sell the SCM40's and have active SCM50's, which would far outperform the multiple power amp route at a similar cost.

I would definitely look at changing the Genesis speaker cable. QED cables are generally bright, and something from Chord's range will also help tame any brightness.

 

[MUSICRAFT]

soundquality:
Hello everyone I am a new member and I would like some advice from anyone that can help me.

I recently purchased the Atc scm 40 speakers and I am very happy with them.I had the spendor s9e previously and the atc's in my opinion is a much better quality speaker. I am thinking of updating my amp which is the avi laboratory series integrated with 175w per side to the atc integrated amp. I have been very happy with the avi until now that I purchased these speakers. When I increase the volume just under half way the sound becomes very bright and a bit harsh. I am not quite sure if it is my amp or maybe the qed genesis bi wire speaker cable.

So I am thinking of purchasing the atc amp and hopefully getting rid of the top end brightness and getting better results. I am also thinking maybe going for a pre/power combo with a lot of power and quality as I like listening to my music loud at times.

Will I improve things by doing this? Will the upgrade be worthy? All information and experiance would be much appreciated.

Hi soundquality

Nice one. The SCM40 are excellent speakers and imo are probably the finest vfm floorstanding speakers curently available.

The AVI is a very good amplifier. At these levels your amp is probably starting to peak hence why its sounding bright/harsh. ATC's SIA2-150MK2 with its low distortion, class A bias (up to 2/3 output), high current and damping factor will offer an immdeiate improvement in most areas with a detailed, controlled, natural, dynamic and powerful presentation. You should be able to push ATC's amplifiers even further before they start to peak.

The differences between SIA2-150MK2 and CA2/P1 are very minimal. The SIA2-150MK2 is fuller whereas the CA2/P1 combination is a more direct in its presentation.

I will also sugggest that you consider using standard mains cable supplied with the components and use a generic speaker cable. This is how i have achieved ideal results with ATC products over the years.

Btw, the SCM40's with ATC's superb drive units are good enough to accomodate many component changes.

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

 

[Anonymous]

Thank you for the advice.

I definatly can't afford the active scm50's at this stage. So at the end of the day what should I go for the integrated or the ca2/p1 combo from your experiance? I can't listen to either as we do not have a dealer in our state.

Also one other question please, with the scm40's being tri wired what are the best results, to use a speaker cable that is tri wired and if so what type? Or which one in the chord range(speaker cable) will match the atc combo?

Thanks.

 

[Anonymous]

Thank you Musicraft. I do prefer a fuller sound so I am swaying towards the SIA2-150mk2 from the helpfull advice I am receiving here.

What type of speaker cable do you recommend? (Brand, model,bi-wire,tri-wire)

Thanks.

 

[Anonymous]

The ATC amplifiers have no more power than the AVI amplifier.

It sounds though you will need much more power, so consider the 600w per channel AVI monobloc.

The underlying issue, however, is inefficient passive crossovers.

 

[Anonymous]

Taylor74:
The underlying issue, however, is inefficient passive crossovers.

So he should sell everything and go active? Well, so should we all, according to some.

There actually could be a lot more underlying issues. Don't forget there's voicing of the speakers, balance, size of cabinet, quality of drivers, quality of amplifier etc.

You surely can't believe that its just the crossovers????

 

[chebby]

Tarquinh:So he should sell everything and go active? Well, so should we all, according to some.

Resistance is futile.

 

[Frank Harvey]

Taylor74:The ATC amplifiers have no more power than the AVI amplifier.

Unfortunately, comparing watts is like comparing chalk and cheese.

 

[Frank Harvey]

soundquality: I definatly can't afford the active scm50's at this stage. So at the end of the day what should I go for the integrated or the ca2/p1 combo from your experiance? I can't listen to either as we do not have a dealer in our state.

It's rare that moving a power amp stage out of an integrated amp and placing it in a separate box makes no difference. The SIA2-150 is a stunning amplifier, but the pre/power will get more out of the SCM40's (or indeed any speakers), and if you decide later on to add another power amp, the CA2 makes a better pre-amp. It's a couple of hundred quid difference - I'd go for the pre/power every time, unless space was an issue.

Also one other question please, with the scm40's being tri wired what are the best results, to use a speaker cable that is tri wired and if so what type? Or which one in the chord range(speaker cable) will match the atc combo?

Rather than running three cables to the speakers, just run one better one. We use Chord Odyssey in our demo room for speakers of this calibre (and on special ocassions we crack open the Epic

). Chord will make up jumper cables from any of their cables to use in place of the shorting links, which are only really meant to be a temporary measure.

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks guys for the feedback.

I defenatly would like to go for an atc amp like David and Rick suggested. Not quite sure on the integrated or the pre/power yet.

If I whent with the integrated for now and later on added the P1 and bi ampd would that be ok? And what cables would be necessary to do this.

Also would be the best speaker cable for this combo (atc amp, atc speakers, Bi-wire,tri-wire?)

Any feedback apreciated.

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks David for getting back to me.

Have you compared both amps with the scm 40's and if so I would like your opinion how they differ in sound. Also would tha CA2 mark2 pre amp work with the SPA2-150 Power amp? Sorry for all these combos but I would like to way up my options.

 

[drummerman]

Tarquinh:Taylor74:

The underlying issue, however, is inefficient passive crossovers.

So he should sell everything and go active? Well, so should we all, according to some.

There actually could be a lot more underlying issues. Don't forget there's voicing of the speakers, balance, size of cabinet, quality of drivers, quality of amplifier etc.

You surely can't believe that its just the crossovers????

Well, I can see where you want this one to go although 'some' have a point. True active, if done right, is certainly a good and efficient way to power speakers, not least because the amps can be totally optimized to match driver characteristics. They also don't need to be able to drive varying loads such as an amplifier which is used which different speakers, so can be engineered simpler nor do they need the expensive casing. A passive xover is there to mask/reduce driver (and driver integration) issues. From that point of view its a damage limitation exercise, not much else. It will contribute nothing positive in itself. You're right too, there are other issues which are important for the end user, such as cost and upgrade path. The former is often overrated, as there are examples such as from 'some' and others such as Dynaudio which prove that it can be cost efficient to go active. The latter, the 'upgrade path' is imo a double edged sword. Reading through this forum there are many examples of people never really finding something they truly like. Often this is as a result of having this upgrade path in the first place and the confusion arising from a lot of choice and temptation. At other times it's because its truly difficult to match an amplifier, cables and speaker to the best of their respective abilities. A good active design takes this out of the equation, in theory. Neither way is right or wrong.

As always, my opinion only.

 

[Anonymous]

DM I don't disagree with your points at all. My point is that the crossover is only on part of the speaker design. Active is better from the crossover perspective without question, particularly at the bass end of the spectrum, but on the other hand it doesn't necessarily mean much in terms of the all-important sound quality.

Voicing, design, cabinet and driver quality remain paramount, and the reason why so many passive speakers outperform active speakers. My concern is that there is a creeping, insidious belief that actives are better than passives simply because they are active, and that just isn't true.

Also, and it is unfortunate, though there are many active designs on the market they tend to be geared towards the desktop computer speaker or the nearfield monitors which do not lend themselves to use in the home. Apart from individual offerings from Dynaudio, Quad, ATC, AVI and a couple of others, the only manufacturer who has a large range of active speakers is B&O, and, while they are superb, they are a touch expensive. Otherwise the choice of active speakers is tiny compared to passive.

Recently went out hunting for actives myself and came back with the conviction that the only actives which came close to my setup were B&O (couldn't listen to Dynaudio as could't find them here) , so I kept my speakers and upgraded the amp. Therein lies another problem: actives tend to have to compromise on amps - it's difficult to put a class A into an active speaker box without the mammoth fans necessary to cool it ruining the sound - and, of course, swapping amps is not an option so, despite their being active, the amp could be holding the speaker back.

Anyway, as you say it's not black and white.

 

[MUSICRAFT]

soundquality:
Thank you Musicraft. I do prefer a fuller sound so I am swaying towards the SIA2-150mk2 from the helpfull advice I am receiving here.

What type of speaker cable do you recommend? (Brand, model,bi-wire,tri-wire)

Thanks.

Hi soundquality

I am busy at the moment however i'll get back to you later on today.

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

 

[plastic penguin]

drummerman:Tarquinh:Taylor74:

The underlying issue, however, is inefficient passive crossovers.

So he should sell everything and go active? Well, so should we all, according to some.

There actually could be a lot more underlying issues. Don't forget there's voicing of the speakers, balance, size of cabinet, quality of drivers, quality of amplifier etc.

You surely can't believe that its just the crossovers????

Well, I can see where you want this one to go although 'some' have a point. True active, if done right, is certainly a good and efficient way to power speakers, not least because the amps can be totally optimized to match driver characteristics. They also don't need to be able to drive varying loads such as an amplifier which is used which different speakers, so can be engineered simpler nor do they need the expensive casing. A passive xover is there to mask/reduce driver (and driver integration) issues. From that point of view its a damage limitation exercise, not much else. It will contribute nothing positive in itself. You're right too, there are other issues which are important for the end user, such as cost and upgrade path. The former is often overrated, as there are examples such as from 'some' and others such as Dynaudio which prove that it can be cost efficient to go active. The latter, the 'upgrade path' is imo a double edged sword. Reading through this forum there are many examples of people never really finding something they truly like. Often this is as a result of having this upgrade path in the first place and the confusion arising from a lot of choice and temptation. At other times it's because its truly difficult to match an amplifier, cables and speaker to the best of their respective abilities. A good active design takes this out of the equation, in theory. Neither way is right or wrong.

As always, my opinion only.

Bang on!

Also regarding the comment about "...never really finding something they truly like," is because many people either buy something for the wrong application or their expectations go way beyond the reality of the component.

 

[Frank Harvey]

soundquality: Thanks David for getting back to me.

Have you compared both amps with the scm 40's and if so I would like your opinion how they differ in sound. Also would tha CA2 mark2 pre amp work with the SPA2-150 Power amp? Sorry for all these combos but I would like to way up my options.

No problem.

We have the integrated amp and pre/power in store which I have compared through the SCM40's. It is a small difference - don't expect a night and day difference here - but removing the low level pre-amp signals from the power amp section does give better resolution and accuracy.

If I went with the integrated for now and later on added the P1 and bi ampd would that be ok? And what cables would be necessary to do this.

You can add a power amp later and bi-amp, which will have it's benefits, but it doesn't matter how many amps you have, they will perform better with a dedicated pre-amp. Integrated amplifiers acting as pre-amps don't sound as good as dedicated pre-amps.

Also would be the best speaker cable for this combo (atc amp, atc speakers, Bi-wire,tri-wire?)

As I mentioned earlier, just single wire would be fine. If it was me I'd stick to what I know, which would be the Chord Odyssey, or the Epic if I was feeling adventurous. You could look at Nordost, but the Chord will retain a bit of warmth in comparison.

 

[MUSICRAFT]

MUSICRAFT:soundquality:
Thank you Musicraft. I do prefer a fuller sound so I am swaying towards the SIA2-150mk2 from the helpfull advice I am receiving here.

What type of speaker cable do you recommend? (Brand, model,bi-wire,tri-wire)

Thanks.

Hi soundquality

I am busy at the moment however i'll get back to you later on today.

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

Hi soundquality

I would say the SIA2-150 MK2 with its fuller presentation will be an even better match with your Gamut cd player. Another benefit you might find with the fuller presentation is finding it easier to match future compoments changes/upgrades. The upgrade path is available with the SIA2-150 MK2 by adding the one P1 to bi-amp the SCM40's and later on another P1 to tri-amp the speakers.

The pre amp section of the SIA2-150 MK2 (just as that of the original SIA2-150 MK1) is good enough as it is based on ATC's reference SCA2 pre amplifier. I've compared the pre amp sections of the SIA2-150 MK2 versus the CA2 and both against the SCA2 all through ATC's SCM100ASL Professional Monitors which are installed in the shop. The difference between the SIA2-150 MK2 pre amp and CA2 is very minimal. The pre section of the SIA2-150 MK2 and the CA2 are both superb in their own right and both can also hold their own against the stunning SAC2 (which has been my overall reference pre amp for over a decade btw). I would say the pre amp section of the SIA2-150 MK2 offers 70% and the CA2 75% of the performance of the SAC2.

I would recommend that you single wire the SCM40's as the crossovers are more than good enough. I would also highly recommend using standard generic speaker cables as these i believe will give ideal results with ATC passive monitors compared to many other speaker cables from budget to high end. The generic speaker cables are affordabe, simple and effective. Job done. I will also suggest you use standard mains cables as these will allow your components to breathe.

Btw, the CA2 pre amp can be used with the SPA2-150 power amp although the SPA2-150's ideal partner is the SCA2.

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

 

[Messiah]

Active vs Passive is not really the point of the original post but from my experience so far, Actives are much better.

A couple of years ago at the Bristol Show I heard some Meridian DSP8000s. Nothing else that day or at the Bristol Show last year came close to bettering that sound. I always wondered why. I came up with an answer. They were Active. This lead me into my own research and I inevitably came accross the AVI ADM 9.1s. These I duly bought and everyday they impress me and are certainly better than my more expensive Cyrus set up. WHF compared their worth to a system of nearly double the price. Mr E has also just reviewed these for Gramophone so it would be interesting to see at what price point he thinks they compare??

I have also read on another forum where on of the top bods from Naim was posting and he also advocated Active over Passive.

For me as well the clincher is the recording studio. How many use Active speakers compared to Passive? In my limited research I would say that most use Active. Why would that be other than because they perform better??

I also agree that not all actives are brilliant but for those that are done right, I don't think they could be bettered for the same outlay with a passive system.

As DM says. My opinion only.

 

[MUSICRAFT]

Hi Messiah

Yes, when designed correctly active speakers are a better alternatively to passive speakers. Hence why the vast majority of professional studios use them. In this respect (imo) i have yet to hear any better than ATC ASL Professional Monitors. Simply amazing and why i use them. There is no going back after these beauties.

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

 

[chebby]

Messiah:Mr E has also just reviewed these for Gramophone...

Interesting. I like Gramophone's hifi reviews.

Thanks. I'll pop out and get one tomorrow. (Is it the issue that's in the shops now?)

 

[Messiah]

chebby:
Messiah:Mr E has also just reviewed these for Gramophone...

Interesting. I like Gramophone's hifi reviews.

Thanks. I'll pop out and get one tomorrow. (Is it the issue that's in the shops now?)

Yeah. Mr E has done a good job with that review.

 

[MUSICRAFT]

MUSICRAFT:MUSICRAFT:soundquality:
Thank you Musicraft. I do prefer a fuller sound so I am swaying towards the SIA2-150mk2 from the helpfull advice I am receiving here.

What type of speaker cable do you recommend? (Brand, model,bi-wire,tri-wire)

Thanks.

Hi soundquality

I am busy at the moment however i'll get back to you later on today.

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

Hi soundquality

I would say the SIA2-150 MK2 with its fuller presentation will be an even better match with your Gamut cd player. Another benefit you might find with the fuller presentation is finding it easier to match future compoments changes/upgrades. The upgrade path is available with the SIA2-150 MK2 by adding the one P1 to bi-amp the SCM40's and later on another P1 to tri-amp the speakers.

The pre amp section of the SIA2-150 MK2 (just as that of the original SIA2-150 MK1) is good enough as it is based on ATC's reference SCA2 pre amplifier. I've compared the pre amp sections of the SIA2-150 MK2 versus the CA2 and both against the SCA2 all through ATC's SCM100ASL Professional Monitors which are installed in the shop. The difference between the SIA2-150 MK2 pre amp and CA2 is very minimal. The pre section of the SIA2-150 MK2 and the CA2 are both superb in their own right and both can also hold their own against the stunning SAC2 (which has been my overall reference pre amp for over a decade btw). I would say the pre amp section of the SIA2-150 MK2 offers 70% and the CA2 75% of the performance of the SAC2.

I would recommend that you single wire the SCM40's as the crossovers are more than good enough. I would also highly recommend using standard generic speaker cables as these i believe will give ideal results with ATC passive monitors compared to many other speaker cables from budget to high end. The generic speaker cables are affordabe, simple and effective. Job done. I will also suggest you use standard mains cables as these will allow your components to breathe.

Btw, the CA2 pre amp can be used with the SPA2-150 power amp although the SPA2-150's ideal partner is the SCA2.

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

 

[MUSICRAFT]

MUSICRAFT:MUSICRAFT:soundquality:
Thank you Musicraft. I do prefer a fuller sound so I am swaying towards the SIA2-150mk2 from the helpfull advice I am receiving here.

What type of speaker cable do you recommend? (Brand, model,bi-wire,tri-wire)

Thanks.

Hi soundquality

I am busy at the moment however i'll get back to you later on today.

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

Hi soundquality

I would say the SIA2-150 MK2 with its fuller presentation will be an even better match with your Gamut cd player. Another benefit you might find with the fuller presentation is finding it easier to match future compoments changes/upgrades. The upgrade path is available with the SIA2-150 MK2 by adding the one P1 to bi-amp the SCM40's and later on another P1 to tri-amp the speakers.

The pre amp section of the SIA2-150 MK2 (just as that of the original SIA2-150 MK1) is good enough as it is based on ATC's reference SCA2 pre amplifier. I've compared the pre amp sections of the SIA2-150 MK2 versus the CA2 and both against the reference SCA2 all through ATC's SCM100ASL Professional Monitors which are installed in the shop. The difference between the SIA2-150 MK2 pre amp and CA2 is very minimal. The pre section of the SIA2-150 MK2 and the CA2 are both superb in their own right and both can also hold their own against the stunning SAC2 (which has been my overall reference pre amp for over a decade btw). I would say the pre amp section of the SIA2-150 MK2 offers 70% and the CA2 75% of the performance of the SAC2.

I would recommend that you single wire the SCM40's as the crossovers are more than good enough. I would also highly recommend using standard generic speaker cables as these i believe will give ideal results with ATC passive monitors compared to many other speaker cables from budget to high end. The generic speaker cables are affordabe, simple and effective. Job done. I will also suggest you use standard mains cables as these will allow your components to breathe.

Btw, the CA2 pre amp can be used with the SPA2-150 power amp although the SPA2-150's ideal partner is the SCA2.

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

 

[Anonymous]

Messiah:
Active vs Passive is not really the point of the original post but from my experience so far, Actives are much better.

A couple of years ago at the Bristol Show I heard some Meridian DSP8000s. Nothing else that day or at the Bristol Show last year came close to bettering that sound. I always wondered why. I came up with an answer. They were Active. This lead me into my own research and I inevitably came accross the AVI ADM 9.1s. These I duly bought and everyday they impress me and are certainly better than my more expensive Cyrus set up. WHF compared their worth to a system of nearly double the price. Mr E has also just reviewed these for Gramophone so it would be interesting to see at what price point he thinks they compare??

I have also read on another forum where on of the top bods from Naim was posting and he also advocated Active over Passive.

For me as well the clincher is the recording studio. How many use Active speakers compared to Passive? In my limited research I would say that most use Active. Why would that be other than because they perform better??

I also agree that not all actives are brilliant but for those that are done right, I don't think they could be bettered for the same outlay with a passive system.

As DM says. My opinion only.

You seem to miss the point about speaker voicing. All speakers do not sound the same, whether active or passive. Compare B&O with Genelec or your own ADMs and you'll find they sound very different, yet they're all active designs.

Also recording studios have different requirements for their speakers so that doesn't really apply.