ATC speakers. any experiences?

ATC"S ARE AWESOME. Well, thats what I think. My buddy has the SCM35's which sound just like their bookshelf speaker (12's?) with lower bass. The price for the 12's are really low on Audiogon as well. ATCs are my fav speakers in a box, if I would ever be forced to buy a speaker in a box. They are seriously the best I have heard.

eyeteeth,

I've owned ATC SCM10 passive for almost 4 years.
(used to used it in two channel in the office now they are used for HT duty. )

They make all of their midbass/bass drivers in house and have probably one of the lowest distortion in buisness. Tweeters are either Vifa ( older models and some new ones ) or SEAS.

Don't be fooled by their paper specs on the low frequency extension. It is by far the most conservative.

They can handle high SPL with grace and authority, clear well articulated through frequencies ( their studio heritage showing ) yet have an ability to present the music in realistic natural manner with conviction. They can be very persuasive with good upstream components and quality power.

There's always a catch to anything good, however.
They are probably one of the most power hungry beasts to power 'em correctly. ( mine are 80db/8 ohm ) Newer SCM12 and up now have easier load than mine but, they shine with quality power you can afford to give.

ATC are un-hifi speakers. If you want all the audiophile tricks, there are zillions out there in many price range.
ATC speakers go straight to your heart ( and jugular ).

I see the similarity between Grado, AKG and ATC. So, if a listner opt for something other than Grado, they might be off putting.

These are NOT gentler, kinder sissy sounding today's speakers.


BTW, SCM7 is one down from 12. They don't have the bass extension of 12, but still good mini monitor in 1k range. ( I haven't heard none better )

Then of course I had to try 'em with tube powers, too. KT90 48 watts push pull in a small room works. It brings out already excellent ATC's vocal rendition and the earth is not so flat any longer.

eyeteeth,

This is a tough one to explain but I'll try. My observation in hi-end audio today puts too much emphasis on visual properties. Meaning soundstage, imaging or *tone* ( tonal balance ) and such. These attributes , whilest they can simulate the music in relatively in realistic manner from visul stand points, have nothing to do with timing and dynamic properties where, I think, they are crucial not only to get closer to the real thing, but to reproduce the music in a communicative manner.
Visual properties are easier to impress and point out while system dynamics and pace is hard to pin point.

In an ideal scenario, you need to have a mix of abilities... spacious soundstaging, clarity, precise imaging, a realistic tonal color and dynamic speed ( both macro and micro ).

Somewhere in a pursuit of better refinement and greater resolution, somehow, I think enoumous amount of emphasis in first three attributes and somehow the last one ( i.e. dynamics and speed ) got short shifted. I don't know who started a trend but a system or gear without that might have a true hi-end timbre and tonal accuracy, but lack in *drive* to keep the music going. Sytems that are excessively open toanlly can sound flacid in terms of drive and dynamics... it may sound beatuifully and sweet, but there's no sense of forward momentum. They can sound detailed and transprent but without rhythm and *funkiness*, the music has nowhere to go.

For speakers, many manufacturers might be compensating for many digital source which can sound bright and brittle. Many have this smoothing effect which I don't think it's a bad thing since they can sound very pleasing to your ears.
Those are the ones I call 'sissy' speakers.

Something that has a strong *voice* whether wrong or right have better chance capturing the essense of music. That's why ATC stands out from the rest. By no means they are perfect. ( nothing is ) but they put more emphasis on the last *bits* that are missing from the most available. i.e. laser sharp resolution allied to the tremendous dynamics and speed. They simply sound honest and fresh.

My system probably is unorthodox as far as system allocation goes. There are many thoughts on how much one should allocate on each components. I don't conform to any rules. I just try different things and see what sounds the best.
For speakers, my experience is that you get lot more out of 'em than from electronics with the same amount spent. Some 2k speakers benefit from an upgrade and can keep up with the best whilst some it's a sheer waste. No good rule there. I have heard ATC with little Linn amp or Exposure. Sounded good but not great. With ATC, a truely kick ass performance can be realised with much costlier ancillaries than their own price tag suggests.

I have heard good thing about Wyetech. Unfortunately, they don't have a local dealer here and I haven't heard 'em.
Adding a tubed preamp is a good way to go with ATC so long as they are neutral and don't let go too much of bottom end.

Sorry for my long winded reply and hope I answered your question.

Kuma,
I agree with you on new speakers, and I think they lose those attributes because they try to be efficient. (I am only speaking of those that I have issues with). ATCs are hard to drive because those huge magnets. My friend with the 35's uses a Linn 2250 and it is really sweet. I usually don't like Linn amps (well, other than the Klimax in my Linn Sizmik) but the 2250 is not the usual Linn sound. You should check it out if you have not heard it yet, it is a different breed. As for allocating money, I have $4500 tube monos to amplify my $500 maggies. My system is extremely unorthodox, but I love it, and I picked everything myself. I am waiting for my friend (the ATC/Linn dealer) to bring some ATC 12's over to listen with my tubes, then maybe I will own a pair.

did Linn give up on their house sound? I always thought they make better front ends than the rest.
I've considered the Twin but it was impossible for me to home demo.

Cool. i'm curious to hear your thoughts on ATC/tube.
Which amplifiers are you running?

BTW, I think SCM12 is a better deal than SCM35.

I guess it is still the Linn House sound, but it is way more dynamic, and brand new 2 channel technology for this amp. I just didn't like the LKxxx or the monos I heard (twin maybe?) but this amp has a lot of life and excitement to it. The Monos I use are Audio Valve Avalons. You can check my profile for the rest of my system. I thought the 12's were a steal. THey had pretty much everythoing the 35s did but the lower extension. I was listening through an ATC preamp, the CA-2 or something- and the 2250. If I had my chice, I would take the 12s. I liked the soundstage and image a bit better than the 35's. I think they were alot easier to set up too. What up with the need for ATCs to be near the back wall?

Cool Stuff. Is there a website for ACT? Thanks

Yes, but is not that informative. They are best known for there studio monitors. I heard somewhere that 80% of top recording studios use ATC.
http://www.atc.gb.net/

Kuma,
The SCM speakers are supposed to be heard with the grills on. I thought they were alot worse with them off, pretty much unbareable. How do your 7's sound with them off? Are the 7s designed to have them on while listening as well?

75 watts mono tube power ought to do it. I was quite surprised Art Audio Concerto II at 48 watts didn't lose marbles at high SPL. ( tons of electronica at high level albeit in a small room )

Standmounts always image better than floorstanders. My SCM 10 sounds better and more open in relatively in a free space rather than right up against the wall.

I think both 7s and 10s which do not use SL drivers sound clearer without them.
SCM12 definitely has better transparency than either of above and I have heard 'em with gills on.