No, the requirements for accurate reproduction are the same - just peak SPLs are typically more compromised in a domestic environemnt. Where trends in the professional world have emerged such as for directional speakers or some heavily marketed speaker, unnaturally balanced recorded material is the typical result.
No they are not rare but they are costly to produce. Hence there is a cost penalty where performance and reliability are the issue.
I believe such a claim was the original and as yet unsubstantiated subject of this thread...
Last edited:
You did not understand what i meant: i already stated i do not want Atc or other wide directivity speaker at home but do like them for work.
The main reason is that in an untreated room i don't like the results of listening to non mastered diffuse field and this is almost always the case at home where critical frequency is at best in the 1m range (at least in eu, in usa room are usually bigger).
I do prefer narrow or mastered directivity speaker at home where except in nearfield you stay in diffuse field.
And i keep my previous statement about differences between a control room and home listening environnement.
Spl peak is not the only difference once you take room into acount in my view.
I do not agree about your view on unatural sounding production. From my experience this is more related with loudness war, the way artists jumped into that because louder is better and major labels and radio let them do. Most of the time this is not at tracking or mixing that an album sound is destroyed but at mastering stage. In many case i've seen they use "audiophile loudspeaker" (B&W often seen)not really monitors. In france but not only... I think i remember a discussion about mastering facility of Abbey Road: they had been endorsed by B&W or other brand like that... engineer just MISSED the previous Quested monitors.
The main reason is that in an untreated room i don't like the results of listening to non mastered diffuse field and this is almost always the case at home where critical frequency is at best in the 1m range (at least in eu, in usa room are usually bigger).
I do prefer narrow or mastered directivity speaker at home where except in nearfield you stay in diffuse field.
And i keep my previous statement about differences between a control room and home listening environnement.
Spl peak is not the only difference once you take room into acount in my view.
I do not agree about your view on unatural sounding production. From my experience this is more related with loudness war, the way artists jumped into that because louder is better and major labels and radio let them do. Most of the time this is not at tracking or mixing that an album sound is destroyed but at mastering stage. In many case i've seen they use "audiophile loudspeaker" (B&W often seen)not really monitors. In france but not only... I think i remember a discussion about mastering facility of Abbey Road: they had been endorsed by B&W or other brand like that... engineer just MISSED the previous Quested monitors.
Last edited:
Not cheap but they don't have to be as expensive as my Volts.
BMS will sell you one with a 77mm coil, 8" dia magnet and double spider for £145 incl VAT.
Mind you I still wouldn't bother even attempting such an experiment
That was where my comment was directed. The "loudness wars" and the increasing use of compression is a separate issue from overall balance, however - at least when using accurate speakers.
One enlightening test is to listen to the range of loudspeakers available from a single manufacturer and hear that the different balance presented by each. Clearly only one can be neutral at best. This is a test where ATC have always excelled - for example - any other please add...
It might also be worthwhile enquiring as to whether mastering studios and the like have purchased their speakers or whether they have been gifted them in return for publicity. Just a thought
Please also keep in mind that loudspeakers are not a fix for poor acoustics just as good acoustics are not a fix for poor loudspeakers.
This is a question mainly for soundbloke - as you seem to have extensive knowledge on these drivers.
I have the Volt 3" mid-domes - the VM752. I am aware this has a massive magnet - similar to the ATC S version and also the double spider and is used in very high end quested monitors - but I also note it has a very different design.
Do you have any opinions on the VM752? Is is to be considered in the same league as the ATC dome, (it is more expensive), or would you consider it to be inferior? I am interested because a quick glance would indicate they are both high end 3" very expensive domes, but they seem to have very different philosophies of construction.
Thanks very much in advance.
I have the Volt 3" mid-domes - the VM752. I am aware this has a massive magnet - similar to the ATC S version and also the double spider and is used in very high end quested monitors - but I also note it has a very different design.
Do you have any opinions on the VM752? Is is to be considered in the same league as the ATC dome, (it is more expensive), or would you consider it to be inferior? I am interested because a quick glance would indicate they are both high end 3" very expensive domes, but they seem to have very different philosophies of construction.
Thanks very much in advance.
What drivers do you have for woofer and tweeter? I suppose woofer is too low to cross directly with tweeter for hole filler?
I do have extensive knowledge of the ATC domes but only a brief time spent with the Volt driver. My reply here then invites others with better knowledge to either correct or support my view. My intention is not to berate the Volt driver.
My impression is that the Volt driver was conceived to try and improve upon the maximum displacement of the ATC version by adopting a long-coil structure. (The intention as a rival/replacement for the ATC unit is given away by the same strange rear baffle-mounting faceplate). It may also have been conceived to cut manufacturing costs and therefore deliver a cheaper product to ATC's drive unit customers.
In my experience a short coil geometry is superior in terms of its performance particularly here since the displacements are typically small given the crest factor of music signals - or at least those acoustically generated. The extent to which the Volt driver improves upon low frequency extension is unknown to me and is more complex than a simple displacement advantage since inductive effects will also likely become apparent.
I believe (?) Volt adopt a 'dry' coil winding procedure (although I assume this from a couple of pictures from their production facility I saw in a magazine article) that in extremes has proven less reliable than ATC's more costly 'wet' winding approach. There are also other differences such as the Volt steel motor parts not having the black zinc plated finish that aids power handling in the ATC unit. I do not have any idea of actual reliability of the Volt driver in the field, however.
Keep in mind also that the version ATC use in their own speakers is not available to the public and other manufacturers, so you have to be careful about comparisons...
That strange rear-baffle plate comes from the design of the original, from which the ATC seems to stem, the SEL/ITT 50 mm dome that also had the double suspension way back in 1973 or so:
Martin Colloms gives a crossectional diagram of the SEL/IT unit on page 120 of the 2th edition of High Performace Loudspeakers showing a certain resemblance between the two. The design is of the ITT unit is rather unique. The motor of the ATC , however, is very different.
Martin Colloms gives a crossectional diagram of the SEL/IT unit on page 120 of the 2th edition of High Performace Loudspeakers showing a certain resemblance between the two. The design is of the ITT unit is rather unique. The motor of the ATC , however, is very different.
Thank you - this echoed my thoughts - I just couldn't understand the choices in the VM752 - especially given that Volt are charging more money for it.
Regarding your thoughts on the lower extension - it actually has less usable range than the ATC dome - it's FS is 400hz, and it's output really starts to roll off below 500hz!
Also it states xmax is 1mm - which I think is less than the ATC dome - so all in all - it does seem to be an inferior design, unless someone thinks of something I have missed.
I may consider selling the Volt domes and replacing them with the ATC ones....
If I remember correctly Quested used the Volt dome for a few years before it became available individually from Volt.
Currently Volt is making a woofer for a company that sells copies of a larger BBC monitor which is also not available to the public yet (it may never be though).
Basically IMO the Volt and the PMC domes exist for no other reason that ATC stopped supplying them.
Currently Volt is making a woofer for a company that sells copies of a larger BBC monitor which is also not available to the public yet (it may never be though).
Basically IMO the Volt and the PMC domes exist for no other reason that ATC stopped supplying them.
Do PMC their own 3" ? I assumed it is a Volt also, since some PMC models use Volt woofers.
I once hat the chance to listen to their biggest system, including additional woofer module, run fully active with a "mass-grave" of Bryston amps. I must say thay I wouldn't mind to have them at home - apart from price and size of course.
I also had the opportunity to listen to the active ATC SCM100 and I wouldn't mind taking them home either.
Regards
Charles
I once hat the chance to listen to their biggest system, including additional woofer module, run fully active with a "mass-grave" of Bryston amps. I must say thay I wouldn't mind to have them at home - apart from price and size of course.
I also had the opportunity to listen to the active ATC SCM100 and I wouldn't mind taking them home either.
Regards
Charles