speaker match for 282/200

GraemeH posted:

I found the 20.23 had a very slight coarseness in the upper-mid...I suspect at the crossover point. It was evident on some vocals.

When I had the 23 I didn't notice it too much. It was when I changed to S400 that the more open nature of a 'speaker handling the upper-mid really became apparent.

G

Graeme, thanks.. the treble grain started to get on my nerves... i could hear it also in brass .. and it was in Sandy Denny's voice that was the final ticket.. I put my ATCs back in and wow, the expansive clarity and resolution in those sweet highs and upper mids was back.. I had missed it.. the tight but slightly lean  bass was back too. Now if only I could find a speaker that I could demo that sounded like the ATC but was more bass extended that could work in my room...

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Graeme, thanks.. the treble grain started to get on my nerves... i could hear it also in brass .. and it was in Sandy Denny's voice that was the final ticket.. I put my ATCs back in and wow, the expansive clarity and resolution in those sweet highs and upper mids was back.. I had missed it.. the tight but slightly lean  bass was back too. Now if only I could find a speaker that I could demo that sounded like the ATC but was more bass extended that could work in my room...

Methinks once an ATC man, always an ATC man? Perhaps the larger (active) ATCs might be the ticket in providing the extended bass that you are looking for.

It is interesting that you find the treble of the PMC 25.21 to sound slightly harsh as my previous experience with the older PMC models revealed them to be smooth sounding speakers. Either the speakers are not run-in yet, or the treble is not as smooth as the ATC SCM 19s that you currently own. Another possibility I can think of is after living with the ATCs for a considerable period, you may have got accustomed to the house sound of the ATCs and regard the (new) sound presentation from other loudspeakers to be "off".

Although I am happy with my Harbeth Super HL5 Plus, I may try the SCM11 or SCM19 sometime. Not to replace but to complement the Harbeths. The comment on the lean and less extended bass of the ATC SCM19 does worry me a bit though.

You could be right hence seeking feedback from PMC users. I have just found one PMC Twenty series review that commented on slightly grainy treble. I have listened to the Neat Iota Alpha, Russel K, Kudos and Focal speakers and they all very smooth and revealing trebles like the newer ATCs. The RK 100 although very good were perhaps  to mid dominant for my tastes.. I will try the Neats at home... when I heard them at the dealer they were booming a bit though as set up there.

My ideal speaker perhaps would be the PMC balance, extension and size, ATC mid detail with a quality ribbon tweeter such as used on the Neats... does it exist and demoable.

The RK 150 sounded close, although not ribbon tweeter... but quite big blocks of speaker

Wilko,I use the Taksim reference 3a's with the N272/250dr combo,and it is simply stunning,the instruments sound like they are actually in the room with me on good recordings,they are very revealing...and poor recordings send me running from the room,lol.I realize these are not the reflectors,but same company,same drivers,with a smaller,glass sided cabinet for the reflectors.I think the reflectors look super cool too,on those adjustable stands.I would say they definitely work well with Naim,I can't wait to add the xps dr to the 272.

Hi NQ .... buy a second hand 555ps ..... for about the same price....I use this with my 272 and it was jaw droppingly good!!! Expect to pay around 2-2.5k for a good one....  Then in years to come you can upgrade this to DR!!!

Re PMC's I use 20.21 and they are not harsh - treble is really good. Note when I changed power supply on 272 to 555ps this improved treble and detail dramatically .... (infact it improves everything!)

Yes I didn't say or mean harsh, it's response is smooth, but there is a noticeable bit of low level grit or grain in there... you don't hear in much music, but get trumpet, saxophone or clarinet solo you hear it... some less processed recorded female voices show it up too in the upper registers... it does remind me of the old ATC tweeters, however once you notice it, it's impossible to ignore. I guess its possible it might only show/be more noticeable on higher end equipment and I am expecting too much from the PMCs? I am using a 252DR /250 plus Hugo. Perhaps a 272 or SuperNait of some kind might be a better match.. this synergy thing can be a pain..... thanks for your feedback

Maybe the grit is in the Hugo, and it simply being revealed by the excellent speakers? 

Nigel - quite possible 

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

 

Graeme, thanks.. the treble grain started to get on my nerves... i could hear it also in brass .. and it was in Sandy Denny's voice that was the final ticket.. I put my ATCs back in and wow, the expansive clarity and resolution in those sweet highs and upper mids was back.. I had missed it.. the tight but slightly lean  bass was back too. Now if only I could find a speaker that I could demo that sounded like the ATC but was more bass extended that could work in my room...

An interesting speaker thread here, but I am intrigued by the Sandy Denny test. Judging by your comments in other threads we probably wouldn't see eye to eye politically, but can probably agree on Sandy's brilliance. I wondered whether you had a particular performance/recording in mind - this is on CD presumably (of which there are several masterings, I think!). My Harbeths are about to go to a new home this weekend and have been replaced by SBLs (primarily to suit a change of house). My sense is that the Harbeths are more transparent and sweeter than the SBLs on vocals and I will be making a final comparison before they disappear.

Clive

Clive - yes lets stick to music  - Northstar Grassman and the Ravens - sung live I believe at the Paris Theatre, London - the first track on the BBC Sessions 1971-73 CD (the rare one - but may appear on other CDs) - absolutely sublime haunting voice - nearly always gets me emotional...

My memory of the Harbeths C7s was  that treble was very sweet and smooth - i just felt the loose bass and dynamics let it down..

Thanks, Simon - I have the complete BBC sessions and I'm sure the Paris theatre set is on there, so will give it a listen in the next few days. My Harbeths are 30.1s.

Clive

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

GraemeH posted:

I found the 20.23 had a very slight coarseness in the upper-mid...I suspect at the crossover point. It was evident on some vocals.

When I had the 23 I didn't notice it too much. It was when I changed to S400 that the more open nature of a 'speaker handling the upper-mid really became apparent.

G

Graeme, thanks.. the treble grain started to get on my nerves... i could hear it also in brass .. and it was in Sandy Denny's voice that was the final ticket.. I put my ATCs back in and wow, the expansive clarity and resolution in those sweet highs and upper mids was back.. I had missed it.. the tight but slightly lean  bass was back too. Now if only I could find a speaker that I could demo that sounded like the ATC but was more bass extended that could work in my room...

Answer is active scm19a or scm40a with Hugo TT. The passive scm40 will give you a better top and middle with more low end. I know you have tried previously but try again and see if u come to the same conclusion. For me the scm40 is a masterpiece only improved by the actives. If they have one weakness they are a bit flatter at lower volumes. There is a compromise in everything.

Bob I would save up for the scm19, or second hand scm40. I had PMC 20.23 and the scm40 is better from top to bottom.

Halloween Man posted:

Answer is active scm19a or scm40a with Hugo TT. The passive scm40 will give you a better top and middle with more low end. I know you have tried previously but try again and see if u come to the same conclusion. For me the scm40 is a masterpiece only improved by the actives. If they have one weakness they are a bit flatter at lower volumes. There is a compromise in everything.

Thanks, for my listening room the 40s are just a little too much loud speaker right now.. and working at low volumes as well as medium is important... noticeable disparity here could in my experience point to issues with subtleties and nuance.

I am sure 19a is very good, howeverI do enjoy my NAP 250 sound and more importantly there is no easy way to locally demo the actives.... The SCM 19 mk2 I have currently work quite well at low volume, although the bass extension semis to contract a little. Have you heard the Russel K 150 and compared to the ATCs.. The RK floor standers are authoritative and go deep and are subtle and nuanced... but possibly more room sensitive...

Hi Simon no I've not heard russel k speakers but they do seem universally praised by all who try them.

The scm40a are probably a tad too big for my room but I just don't want to live without them. I'm hoping some upcoming acoustic room treatment might make it a match made in heaven.

nap250 and scm19 will be a tough act to follow.

Yes, I suspect it is, I might think of using a sub to get the bass extension...but it's an area I have zero experience in terms of hifi..and I have heard some shockingly awful subs

Simon

ATC c1 sub? I know huge has some experience of 2.1 setup

Halloween Man posted:

Bob I would save up for the scm19, or second hand scm40. I had PMC 20.23 and the scm40 is better from top to bottom.

Similar advice from me too Bob. I'm sure you'd love PMC 20/23s as I have and they have plenty of the bass that you are looking for . However I've been trying some ATC 19s for a couple of weeks as I mentioned earlier and they are really quite something , crystal clear and wonderful dynamics . I understand the lean comments but to my ears they have lovely tuneful bass albeit not quite as low as the PMCs , this is something I was longing for due to my home environment . They are really starting to open up now after the usual ride of running in and positioning but can only agree with the favourable words  from Simon and Halloween Man on ATCs  , they will be staying right here ! 

Halloween Man posted:

ATC c1 sub? I know huge has some experience of 2.1 setup

Yep, What do you want to know?  If I can give a reasonable answer from my experience, I will.

Last time any one with Hi-Fi experience listened to my system they didn't even realise there was a sub in the system, and couldn't hear the 'join' even when it was pointed out!  I do have a fair amount of bass trap gubbins in my room to help though.  On the other hand without the bass traps the room is truly awful (+23dB at 42Hz!), so I must have got something right with the sub (I integrated it using a miniDSP 2x4 as an active crossover)

Thanks Huge. Aimed at Simon really as he's contemplating a similar setup so I thought might he benefit from your experiences.

Folks, how does the SCM11 match up to the SCM19? Does the SCM11 retain all the attributes of the SCM19? I presume the SCM11 is a smaller version of the SCM19, and the main difference between the speakers is the SCM19 can play louder than the SCM11. Other than that, everything remains fairly similar.

Is my understanding correct, or flawed?

Never listened to scm11. The crossover is slightly different meaning tweeter is working harder and mid bass driver not as good as scm19 sl spec from their pro range. Still a very highly regarded speaker in its price range.

From a theoretical perspective, the 11 is likely to be an easier load - this is due to the magnetic shorting turn used to linearise the motor force in the SL driver of the 19 and the lower bass/mid cone weight.

Huge posted:

this is due to the magnetic shorting turn used to linearise the motor force

Are you making this up? It's not the impact of non-linearity in the multi-phase flange sprocket then?