Tad comp vs ATC dome + tweet opinions. - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Multi-Way

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 27th December 2005, 04:53 PM   #1
RyanC is offline RyanC  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Denver CO
Default Tad comp vs ATC dome + tweet opinions.

Hello-

I am going to start on my 3rd gen of studio monitors and I have narrowed 500-800hz and up duties down to two options the tad 400x series or an ATC 75-150s soft dome mid with say a hequiphon or other suitable tweeter.

I have heard the ATC's before in the 50sl studio monitors, and while I like the speaker they were a tiny bit over pronounced in the 2500hz range, and it sounded like there were some XO probs an octive above that (nulling in various points of the room). But they were very transparent, and I love the smooth even dispersion- They seem to lack a bit of dynamic accuracy, but only so much as "hi fi" systems tend to. . .

I have not heard the tads- but without a 2nd driver they probably wont have the 5k nulling. . .I don't have a huge controll room though (about 10' x 20') but I like the idea that with different lenses it would be possible find the better dispersion pattern for my specific room/console/work configuration. Any thoughts here? what lenses do people like for 400x. My thought would be to have a seperate woofer cab so that lenses could be changed out until an ideal one was found. or do you just sprint for the th 4001 tad lens? Thanks for any and all input-
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th December 2005, 05:49 PM   #2
diyAudio Moderator
 
pinkmouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Chatham, England
I really don't know the TADs, so I can't comment on that, but what I have experienced before is reflections from the desk causing exactly the problems you describe with the ATCs
__________________
Rick: Oh Cliff / Sometimes it must be difficult not to feel as if / You really are a cliff / when fascists keep trying to push you over it! / Are they the lemmings / Or are you, Cliff? / Or are you Cliff?
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th December 2005, 06:08 PM   #3
diyAudio Member
 
ShinOBIWAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally posted by pinkmouse
I really don't know the TADs, so I can't comment on that, but what I have experienced before is reflections from the desk causing exactly the problems you describe with the ATCs
Whilst I don't have *any* experience of listening to monitors in a studio environment I can also agree with you that something other than speaker design of the SCM50ASL maybe causing the problems Ryan is describing.

I'm pretty sure Ryan knows I use the SM75-150 super's in my own monitor design and I can safely say that I can neither hear nor measure no such beaming or peak at or around 2.5Khz nor any dispertion discontinuaties or cancellation within the 3.5-5Khz range.
It perhaps isn't right of me to point this out since my design is completely different to SCM50's. The only common denominator they share is the SM75-150S midrange and SB75-150SC bass driver. The XO implementation and method is a world apart, my cabinet design and baffle design, again, is radically different and the tweeter is a Scanspeak ring radiator model rather than the Seas Excel used by ATC.

So Ryan observation could be completely true and I cannot argue that fact since I've never heard the SCM50. But what I can state is that the SM75-150S does not have these characteristics as an inherent trait but rather the design of the SCM50 introduced these or are part of a room function.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th December 2005, 06:16 PM   #4
diyAudio Member
 
ShinOBIWAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Also...

The TAD's are pretty legendary, and whilst I've never heard a single one, I'd certainly be prepared to confidentally hand over money for them.

If it were me I'd go with the ATC's again but that's only because I had an immediate fondness of the sound straight away and which has grown even more in time. I've said it a few times in the past; I've never hear such midrange before. Perhaps I haven't heard enough systems but for now its more than I could ever have wanted.

Good luck whichever way you turn.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2005, 03:32 AM   #5
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Portal 2012
I've had the 4001 and 4002's - They sound decent in Edgar Horn 550 Hz maple block round Tractrix horns crossed at 600 Hz (60 degree spherical) but are even better in Sierra Brooks 180 Hz round tractrix (wooden) crossed at 300 Hz. For best results use a straight bass horn below them to 50 Hz and horn loaded subs below the bass horns. Direct radiators when used with large format compression drivers are too dynamically compressed and will choke the system down. Fully horn loaded is the way to go. The 4002 is the more extended of the two if you eliminate the 2" throat adaptor and use the 1.5" throat direct to the horn. In the end both sound a bit mechanical and 'hi end' etched to me and are unacceptable for long term listening pleasure.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2005, 11:01 AM   #6
diyAudio Member
 
ralphs99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Hi Ryan,

Large format compression drivers as near/mid-field monitors? Crikey!

I've used the heavy duty JBL hardware (rather than TAD) and they really need some air between the horn and listener. And that's really at issue with your question: What kind of horn could you use in such a situation? Well, it's gonna be big to cross down around 500Hz. In a small room have you got a metre of depth available for a horn?

For a room your size a smaller format driver (1" or 1.5") is more approrite, but then won't get you down to 500Hz.

Overall I think you'll be better off with direct radiators as near/mid-field monitors. Easier on the ears and wallet, much easier to integrate, smaller.

The ATC mid is a great driver, and I think the passive ATC monitors do leave something to be desired in the crossover department. Have a listen to an active pair and see what you think. It is be a much better option for building an accurate monitor.

BTW, what were versions 1 & 2?

Cheers,
Ralph.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2005, 11:08 AM   #7
diyAudio Member
 
ShinOBIWAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally posted by ralphs99

Overall I think you'll be better off with direct radiators as near/mid-field monitors. Easier on the ears and wallet, much easier to integrate, smaller.

The ATC mid is a great driver, and I think the passive ATC monitors do leave something to be desired in the crossover department. Have a listen to an active pair and see what you think. It is be a much better option for building an accurate monitor.

BTW, what were versions 1 & 2?

Cheers,
Ralph.
I had no idea Ryan was talking about the passive version of the SCM50's. That may explain something but I still can't offer a firm opinion since I haven't heard them either.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2005, 07:05 PM   #8
RyanC is offline RyanC  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Denver CO
Cool good feedback all around-

That was my main concern was the size of my room- But I did see that the sierra pic of a promo in an 11x17 room soo I was thinking it might be do-able- I can lose some space, but I would rather not loose that muich. . .

Sorry it was a scm50 passive- My thought at the time was it could be improved an with active setup- I heard the K+H 0198 is that a 75-150s? They were much better to me. There was no console in either situation, and they were in an excelent room.

Anyway V1- audax 8"aerogel with fountek ribbons, with tc2+ subs. The Problems were the 8's were too beamy (duh) and the founteks didn't go down to 1k very nicely, where they were not beamy. . .

V2- was sort of a rebuild of v1 with 6.5 aeros and hequiphon tweets- which are much improved, but still does not disperse as smoothly as I would like in the upper mids- and the aeros tend to rattle in the 100hz-180hz region. But I feel the audax aero material does an excelent upper mid, very detailed and revealing in the area above 1k. . .

Thus, as I have 8 channel DA for my XO anyway (digidesign 192) I am thinking 4 way is the way to go- subs, maybe eton 8", atc mids and heq tweets. Any thoughts on that.

Also I was not bent on either solution going all the way down to 500hz per se. In a 4 way, there are many woofers that can cover 80-1000 very well.

How low does the atc 150s play happily? Anyway thanks guys
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2005, 10:11 PM   #9
diyAudio Member
 
ShinOBIWAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally posted by RyanC
Thus, as I have 8 channel DA for my XO anyway (digidesign 192) I am thinking 4 way is the way to go- subs, maybe eton 8", atc mids and heq tweets. Any thoughts on that.
Ryan I'm not sure if you read my escapades with the Percieve v1 & 2's but I had a nightmare mating woofers to the SM75-150S. First I tried a couple of Seas L22-RNX4-P's then a Seas Excel W22-EX01 and the penny finally dropped with ATC's own 9" SB75-150SC. The problem is that the ATC mid must almost certainly be crossed to a low Q, and therefore well damped, cone such as a paper one if you want to hear it at its best. Ralph also uses Volt drivers with his and has noted sucess so I'm not the only one.

I'd highly recommend the ATC SB75-150SC to pair with the super since they are designed specifically to go together - a perfect match or at least how ATC think it should be. I can confirm the combination is very strong too, much better than either of the Seas drivers I tried.

Quote:
How low does the atc 150s play happily? Anyway thanks guys
ATC recommends 380hz and I'd agree, I use 420 but the difference is virtually zero in new money. I tried 250hz and even 200hz but didn't seem to have the same tightness of integration I got at ~400hz.
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th December 2005, 12:59 PM   #10
diyAudio Member
 
ralphs99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Hi Ryan,

I'm not sure what H&M use. It looks a lot like the ATC, but judging by how close the mid is to the edge of the cabinet on the O198, there isn't enough room for the magnet of the STD ATC mid let alone the Super version.

If you're comfortable with a crossover point around 1kHz then there are plently of upper midrange horn options open to you; diffraction horns, CD horns etc. But I still feel that in a relatively small room you'll have an easier time basing a system around direct radiators.

One of the things I am trying to achieve with my setup is to avoid a crossover point between about 300Hz and 3kHz. There aren't many drivers that can support this requirement with wide dispersion and achieve a decent SPL. The ATC mid with its small diameter and large Xmax is probably the ideal driver in this case.

I'm running the ATC mids down to 350Hz with no problems. It needs some EQ to get down there, but I think ATC is spot-on suggesting it be used that low. It really shines when pushed a bit.

Integration with the ETON's is probably feasible, but you could go for a larger diameter driver and lose the sub as it doesn't have to go up very far to reach the crossover point with the ATC mid. Maybe something like a 12".

Shin is probably right that the ultimate match is an ATC bass driver, and his point about matching the ATC to a well damped paper cone bass driver is well taken, as I'm getting excellent results with Volt bass drivers.

Cheers,
Ralph.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
To tweet or not to tweet? pforeman Full Range 2 7th April 2009 08:30 PM
Tweet, tweet! weinstro Multi-Way 8 19th October 2007 10:29 AM
Please help me identify this tweet!!! safetyman Multi-Way 2 18th December 2005 07:33 AM
Anyone measured the PE 269-788 Tweet? SmarmyDog Multi-Way 0 1st October 2005 06:18 PM
SS R2904/7000 ring vs SS D2904/71000 dome opinions?? Adam D Multi-Way 0 1st September 2004 11:39 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:54 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2