How do you know? I did not find any measurements of it in aquick search.
Now, even when it would have more than +-1dB wideband ripple on-axis (after proper smoothing to reflect psychoacustics) this doesn't mean it's not balanced. Flat on-axis SPL isn't all that is relevant for monitors of this size, intended for listening in the far field where power response irregularities become at least as important as on-axis response.
It is just writted on the official ATC link you relinked yourself ! 
(not only deaf, blind too ?)! Read also the vertical off axis response ! And yes we know all that flat on axis response isn't all that relevant for...all the speakers ! I just found the neumann monitor too flat, so too bright for my tastes ! Voilà ! (It has often to see with the too flat on axis response... but yes, certainly not only !)
(not only deaf, blind too ?)! Read also the vertical off axis response ! And yes we know all that flat on axis response isn't all that relevant for...all the speakers ! I just found the neumann monitor too flat, so too bright for my tastes ! Voilà ! (It has often to see with the too flat on axis response... but yes, certainly not only !)
Last edited:
Mistaking monitor for meaning small is an audiophile corruption.
Presumably due to their unexplainable fondness of the tiny LS3/5s.
These would be nearfields in a studio while something like the ATC 300s would be mains but they are all monitors.
In live situations most monitors are wedge shaped PA speakers placed on the floor.
-6dB at 25Hz (20 if correctly soffit mounted) is pretty good in my view as is ATCs claim of +- 2dB from 50 to 12000Hz. I would call that flat.
In my experience ATCs published spec err very much on the side of caution.
Typical from this kind of driver layout.
And for the purpose they are designed this is usually more a pro than a con (you usually are not jumping around when working and it helps reduce early reflections from (the big reflective surface a) desk (is) if set up properly).
As is the fact that monitors are tools WITH flaws and quality which are sometimes quite usefull (Auratone and their horrible peak at 11khz and very limited bandwidth -80hz/12khz- which are quite usefull to simulate the poor mono radio receiver used in bathroom the morning, or a tv). Or the wide bandwith and extreme SPL capability of main to check for correct mic placement at realistic levels (not only to kill ears of clients for showoff).
In fact all this is because of misconception or failure to understand professionnal behavior/needs/reality and reading only spec sheets of industrials tools (music is an industry and loudspeakers are industrials tools).
To close the remarks about deaf sound engineer, it was true up to the 80's but since (not so) new generations usually take care of theyr ears wearing plugs and trying to respect exposure at reasonnable level each days they works. The one really deaf are usually retired or dead now...
High SPL exposition is now usually very short term, but this is true they are much more exposed than normal guy to this risks of deafning (more on Live act than in studio).
Last edited:
The -6dB at 25Hz and 20kHz specifies the frequencies between which the speaker offers a nominally flat response (specified in this case as +/-2dB). This IS a practically 'flat response' engineered to be as tonally neutral as possible - both in terms of its sound pressure and sound power outputs.
The maximum SPL figures reflect the ability to recreate peak outputs required of music reproduction that are more typically compressed. Such continuous levels of operation are rare as I tried to make clear previously - and, as you rightly hint, not healthy. Without reproducing such peak levels, however, music sounds subjectively dull which in turn can lead to both 'brightly balanced' recordings and domestic speakers. Again a subject for another thread...
The 380Hz crossover is not low at all - it is actually a compromise having it as high as this. Most likely this is an optimum compromise and hopefully the reasoning for this assumption has been covered previously in this and a previously cited thread.
"Fast" is not a relevant term. Having said that my own preference for a lower Q, sealed enclosure offers a subjective improvement often expressed by some as a 'faster' or 'tighter' bass - but this has nothing to do with the higher frequency output of the bass drivers.
Open discussion is and should be neither!
I'd love to see 4" variant of that dome driver, able to cross a bit lower with ease (let's say 200Hz to cover most of the vocal range) and to reach 2kHz while maintaining a pistonic behavior, and no major breakup till past 6kHz to avoid 3rd order distortion to trigger it.
Maybe the 4" dome in the Boxer loudspeakers was just that?
It looks like tweeters nowadays can typically be crossed over lower than what was possible when that ATC 3" dome was engineered. Small compression drivers mounted on small waveguides can also be used, like the 6" PT waveguide as found in the JBL AC16 for example, which achieves incredible directivity control in the 2.5kHz-20kHz range from my measurements (with a JBL 2407 driver, BMS 4540nd clone).
So if an evolution of that dome concept was to be put on the market my vote would be for it to target a lower usable range.
Maybe the 4" dome in the Boxer loudspeakers was just that?
It looks like tweeters nowadays can typically be crossed over lower than what was possible when that ATC 3" dome was engineered. Small compression drivers mounted on small waveguides can also be used, like the 6" PT waveguide as found in the JBL AC16 for example, which achieves incredible directivity control in the 2.5kHz-20kHz range from my measurements (with a JBL 2407 driver, BMS 4540nd clone).
So if an evolution of that dome concept was to be put on the market my vote would be for it to target a lower usable range.
Hello Pos,
Would you care to explain why you prefer a 4" dome over a suitably designed (with the emphasis on"suitably designed"!) 4" cone driver?
Apart from ruthless PRO and Studio use, I do not see much of an advantage in 3 or 4" voice-coils, to anticipate on that argument coming.
Kind regards,
Eelco
Would you care to explain why you prefer a 4" dome over a suitably designed (with the emphasis on"suitably designed"!) 4" cone driver?
Apart from ruthless PRO and Studio use, I do not see much of an advantage in 3 or 4" voice-coils, to anticipate on that argument coming.
Kind regards,
Eelco
I'm sure it is a 3" ATC and 15" TAD because i had long discussion about that with the studio owner (because both are not what i usually prefer), not so sure about the processing (filter type FIR or IIR).
Anyway i was ok with the claim they made of 'best monitoring in Paris place' at the time, i really liked them.
I was referring to the older discontinued Boxer loudspeakers (T5 I think it was?) that were sporting 4" domes.
I think Guillaume Tell studio still has these.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
To me VC surface is an important thing to avoid thermal distortion (short term thermal compression), but I'd admit I don't have data to backup my claim here...
Having a larger VC make the option of using an underhung VC more realistic.
Plus, the ATC double suspension system is very appealing, and the very low Rms (and associated high Qms) is a sign of a very well designed system.
Yes they still had them 3 years ago (one of my friend was assistant there
) but don't know about the ref of loudspeaker they made many reference.... This one are Nice speakers too (from my friend point of view i haven't heard them personnaly)! I've seen big Boxer columm with 8*10" and med/tweet per side at Funky Junk London 12/14 years ago... IMPRESSIVE and INTIMIDATING speakers! I know they dismantled a Kinoshita/Tad horn for something more like the one in the picture you linked iirc. Davout did too some years ago they had the Horn on 'leboncoin' at that time...
Last edited:
ATC did manufacture - at least prototyped - a 4" version of their dome. It was used as an exhibition piece as its usable bandwidth was 250Hz-2.5kHz. As mentioned previously, this compromises the upper end of the vocal range and whilst it goes low enough to accommodate normal male vocals, this represents a greater compromise than a 3" dome-based solution.
Even with the measures describes previously to increase the dome rigidity the fundamental break up mode remains a limitation and 6kHz is somewhat hopeful in my experience.
3rd order distortion is not the issue here - that was explained before to be down to eddy currents modulating the driving impedance in voltage driven cases and audibly limiting midrange transparency. Three solutions for this distortion have been discussed previously.
This has been answered previously too: One advantage of a dome driver is the maximisation of the voice coil diameter with respect to its diaphragm area (compared to that feasible with a cone driver). In turn this provides maximal coil surface area and therefore maximum power handling capacity. Without such capacity reliability is compromised.
That is because there is no such data (at least none I have read): Thermal compression is a longer-term, measurable effect. It is in fact inaudible when auditioning a single driver, BUT audible in a multi-band system where differing voice coil temperatures cause differing frequency responses.
Not really, but as also explained previously, it does permit tight voice coil geometries that are very difficult to manufacture reliably otherwise. This applies for either coil geometry.
I quite like having the 200-2000Hz decade on a single dirver.
This is for example the case with the JBL LSR32 / LSR6332 (4" cone, 220-2200Hz IIRC) and it work pretty well on vocals IMHO, albeit that driver, as good as it is (and it is) is nowhere near as good or capable as the ATC dome.
I tried (close to) current drive on that 4" cone from the LSR32, and indeed it did reduce the 3rd distortion breakup peak significantly: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/277997-break-up-frequency-distortion.html#post4410302
I really don't understand why current drive is not more popular among DIY enthusiasts, especially with nowadays active crossovers...
Well, that is another matter
(or is it? designing a driver with current drive in mind would surely simplify things when it comes to motor distortion, and open some new opportunities...)Using current drive on the ATC dome might prove difficult though, with its very high Qms and relatively high Fs (compared to its usable range).
Did you try it on that specific driver?
What I meant was an undherung VC implies a smaller VC depth, hence a smaller Power capacity that can be compensated with a larger diameter VC.
Last edited:
I do not understand what you are trying to show here, sorry. That 3rd harmonic distortion at -50 to -70dB audibly excites break-up modes? Whilst it may occur in the pass-band of the driver you have measured, in a 3" dome the first mode is out of band and further attenuated by the crossover - so maybe we are talking about non-comparable results?
Keep in mind is that the higher frequency cut-off of which I am a proponent also makes the specification of the next driver (nominally a tweeter) that much easier. Given that the tweeter will be the (power) limiting factor in the design (once a given low frequency roll-off is accepted), crossing over at 2kHz or so might add further to the compromise.
Me neither! Nor those manufacturing active loudspeakers. The audible improvements are not hard to discern.
It is eminently possible with the right electronics: A self-balancing bridge based on that first disclosed by David Birt is one such means. It also has further advantages pertinent to this thread too. IMHO Birt's invention has been over-looked for too long...
Also important here is the heat sinking capacity of the motor - which as discussed previously also has relevance to the means by which third harmonic distortion can be reduced
Last edited:
Soundbloke, i'm interested in current drive amplifier too and the related advantage. And i have some question related to this too including Low limit frequency this principle can be used and if benefits could be gained for compression drivers.
Off topic i know but as y ou seem to know about this i ask here!
Off topic i know but as y ou seem to know about this i ask here!
The distortion curves would have remain unchanged had I applied an active LP filter at say 2.5kHz. The fact that a crossover attenuates the breakup does not prevent a distortion produced from within the passband to excite it if the resulting harmonic falls into its range.
That is why I mentioned the option of using a compression driver and small waveguide
And then getting controlled directivity, almost no power compression and a more robust unit are added bonuses...
I'd love to read about it. Unfortunately my electronic skills are close to nil, and no off the self solution seem to exists beside using series resistors
Not from what I can gather from my measurements.
Having a very silent amplifier and/or a l-pad or autoformer in front of the driver is key though, otherwise the noise/distortion from the amplifier hides everything.