ATC SCM 19 (Curved) & Super Lumina Speaker Cable upgrade

Nice. Did you upgrade from the NAC A5 to the Super Lumina speaker cable? A 5m pair of Super Lumina is costlier than the ATC SCM19 if I am not mistaken.

What stands are you using with the 19's?

Interesting. I have Twenty.23's and recently listened to ATC SCM50A SL towers and I was a little disappointed after hearing big things about the ATC's on the forum. I was keen to have a listen as I would consider ATC's as a future upgrade and I like the idea of active speakers (something like the 19A or the 40A). Anyway, fronted by a 272/XPS, I found the ATC's midrange to be crystal clear with absolutely minimal distortion, but overall I felt the presentation leant more towards being top heavy. They were impressive, and unfatiguing but ultimately I found them uninvolving. I also found the bass a bit dry and lacking extension compared to PMC's with some tracks feeling like the bass had been completely sucked out of them. Perhaps this was a more honest presentation, but it just wasn't for me. It would be foolish of me to completely rule ATC's out in future but I was disappointed these didn't win me over on the day. 

I got the ATC's from a well know auction site. They are only 4 months old and in Satin Black - which is what I wanted. I also got the stands with them (Custom Design FS106) as the guy was upgrading to SCM40's so didn't need the stands anymore. The fact they were local was a real bonus too.

Ryder - I was using Tellurium Q Black speaker cable which I preferred to NAC A5 with my PMC's but I didn't compare the Tellurium and NAC A5 on the ATC's only the Tellurium against the Super Lumina. I bought the 5m Super Lumina after a home demo on a used set which I have kept. (Thanks James @Tom Tom)

Mayor West - I'm surprised with your impression as I find the presentation to be exciting and certainly not top heavy. The bass is certainly not missing in my system! The fact that I keep getting goose bumps, tapping my feet and I can listen to it for many hours without any sign of fatigue is great. The music really draws you in and I tend to listen to it at a slightly higher volume than before with no distortion. I can't stop smiling! 

Hi RussT. I do wonder whether the lack of Naim poweramp has something to do with what I heard. Furthermore, most people seem to sing ATC's praises including people who have swapped from PMC's so I would definitely not rule them off the audition list in future :-)

Mayor West posted:

Interesting. I have Twenty.23's and recently listened to ATC SCM50A SL towers and I was a little disappointed after hearing big things about the ATC's on the forum. I was keen to have a listen as I would consider ATC's as a future upgrade and I like the idea of active speakers (something like the 19A or the 40A). Anyway, fronted by a 272/XPS, I found the ATC's midrange to be crystal clear with absolutely minimal distortion, but overall I felt the presentation leant more towards being top heavy. They were impressive, and unfatiguing but ultimately I found them uninvolving. I also found the bass a bit dry and lacking extension compared to PMC's with some tracks feeling like the bass had been completely sucked out of them. Perhaps this was a more honest presentation, but it just wasn't for me. It would be foolish of me to completely rule ATC's out in future but I was disappointed these didn't win me over on the day. 

The same here — compared ATC 19 and PMC 21.25 in a dealer’s demo room. Preferred the PMC and later bought the 25.23... Listening to them right now as I write (Korngold’s Tote Stadt) — awesome speakers... 

Yes, it may be due to the power amp. I use a Naim NAP 250 DR with no issues. I would love to try the active version one day, but I'm limited for space. I know the footprint is the same as my 19's, but my stands are slightly narrower than the speakers and with the extra legs on the active version I couldn't physically fit them in without redesigning the lounge!

I haven't heard either the SCM19 or 50, but I do know the SM75-150 midrange unit in the 50 (same unit in model 40 upwards), and it really is sublime - over the years (and it has been around since the 1970s, albeit with a few tweaks along the way) many have suggested it is the best sounding midrange driver ever produced. Other manufacturers, including Dynaudio and PMC, have used the ATC unit in some of their larger designs, until they developed their own near-clones (this does not apply to the 20- or 25- series PMCs, only the larger models.) The bass-mid unit of the smaller speakers have retained significant aspects of the SM75-150's design, and so presumably much of the character, so their reportedly excellent midrange is unsurprising. 

In addition to influence of amplifier as already noted, perception of how good the bass end is depends very much on personal preference, and can vary between rooms, though the transmission line designs used by PMC do achieve greater bottom end extension than either the bass reflex approach used in ATC's larger models or the sealed box smaller models. 

Very similar journey to Russ for me . I love the ATC 19s powered by a 250DR , they do sound different to PMCs in the bass department which takes some getting used to but I certainly wouldn't call them bass light , more very tuneful bass  . Incidentally I heard some Active ATC50 ASLs last week fed by a Benchmark DAC3 , this was a seriously fine sounding and neat looking system . I'm considering going active ATC50 once I move back home in the new year , its funny how seeing your house as a building site changes your perspective , I'm thinking aesthetics as much as sound quality at the moment , losing a few boxes would certainly help . 

I love my 40 actives, there are not enough superlatives in the English language to describe them.

Halloween Man - I can only imagine how good 40 actives must be over passive 19’s. Did you try passive Atc’s or go straight to active 40’s?

Russt posted:

I've recently made 2 major upgrades to my system and I'm astounded by the results!

Firstly I had the opportunity to purchase some ATC SCM 19's with stands to replace my PMC 20.23's. These ATC's are brilliant. I've never heard a midrange like it. I tried the PMC's again afterwards and it was as if the midrange was subdued. The Bass is far better, just as deep but with real texture and power, it makes the PMC's sound flabby by comparison. The Treble on the ATC's is also much better defined.

Then I tried some Naim Super Lumina speaker cables and this has improved the sound even further! The realism is startling, the music is coming from the room and not just the speakers. I find I'm listening to much more music for many hours and it isn't fatiguing at all! I'm in audio heaven right now and loving it!

I urge anyone to try ATC speakers if you get the chance and the Super Lumina range if funds allow.

Now back to the music.....

 

 

 

You should consider adapting them for single wire. Simple modification which I did on my SCM 11s

Hi there, I’ve heard both passive and active 40 and active 19. They are all superb, you can’t go wrong. The 40s are more suited to my taste having a little more bottom end and fuller tonality, to be honest too much for my modest room. The active 40 over the passive 40 did seem to have a tiny bit more clarity, a very thin veil lifted, more perceived bass that was also tight and perfectly controlled, and an overall more realistic sound. They are a masterpiece. It’s difficult to imagine how any speaker could sound better.

Alan - yes I will consider it, thanks. Can you confirm whether it involves any soldering or can you just put both lugs onto the same post?

Also, would it affect the warranty in any way?

I am a little nervous of stripping down a 4 month old speaker if it will affect the 6 year warranty in any way.

If you want to preserve the warranty just unscrew the bolts and attach the metal 'hoops' to one of the binding posts. They can then be put back if necessary without any visible change. I took the opportunity to remove the lugs and solder direct to the metal hoop.

Alan, it will be a much neater solution than using jumper leads and if the sound improves further then it is well worth considering. Many thanks.

Russt, congrats, I am a long time ATC fan, and I really enjoy my latest ATC 19s...  I drive with a Nap250.2 and Naca5 ... I have found the mk2 19s more room and stand sensitive then the earlier 19s, but if you can get right you are rewarded with a lovely seamless presentation.. and as you say the mids are to die for.. and really do the part on engagement. I also use wooden stands as I have found they give the best overall performance  with optimum energy transfer... I just didn’t like metal stands (high and low mass) with the new 19s as I felt they made the presentation drier than it should.. the wooden stands seem to bring a natural ‘ organicness’     to the sound... and everso slightly slow the bottom octaves..

I also tried PMC, and fun as they were, especially the twenty5 series, in my opinion, they just can’t compete in resolution and transparency.... two of the attributes that really bring a synergy  with higher end Naim amplification. BTW I do have misgivings on the twenty5 series tweeter or tweeter implementation... I find it relatively coarse and lacking resolution compared to the ATC in house tweeter implementation (and I repeated my findings on my dealer’s Statement based system to rule out electronics).. perhaps it says more about ATC rather than PMC however...

Many thanks for your comments Simon, they are rather good aren't they. Could you confirm which stands you are using and have you tried removing the jumper leads and connecting the internal wiring of the speaker as mentioned by Alan above?

i did find that both midrange and tweeter of my PMCs (EB1i) could be improved, as reported in thread PMC + ATC mod and tri-amping. But whether would depend on the PMC model: as mentioned above, the higher level PMCs (now the SE series) actually used to use the ATC midrange driver until they developed their own near-clone, but it doesn't feature in their lower level models, presumably because of cost/size. 

It's a nice coincidence that this thread popped up just after Acoustica in Chester held a two-day ATC event.  Having heard so many good things about ATC from certain members of this forum I decided to put a few files on a memory stick and take a trip to Chester on Friday.  I was simply motivated by curiosity with no intention of changing my system(??!!).  Whilst there, I listened to the SCM 19 driven actively and passively via a 250DR as well as a passive SCM 40.  Front end was a 272 (bare).  The music on the memory stick was a mixture of classical, jazz and acoustic folk tracks.  No pop, rock, electronica (I think, not actually sure what that is) so please bear that in mind in evaluating any comments.  Some PMC speakers have been criticised in this forum, e.g. by SiS, for treble harshness and making choirs uncomfortable to listen to.  I have many choral recordings and don't find this with my PMC Fact 3s (but I'm not sure if they have the same tweeters as the 20 and 25 series) so I included a recording of an a capella choir on the stick.

First up were the active 19s followed by the passive 19s.  What surprised me most was how very different these two systems sounded.  I much preferred the active setup.  The bottom end was so much tighter with the active speakers and, to abuse the old cliché, a veil was lifted from over the treble.  A drum solo was quite simply astonishingly tactile and vocals were presented so that all the careful phrasing and nuance in the singer's performance were conveyed directly to the listener.  A very small criticism was that the immediacy with which the performers were presented meant that acoustic space in which the recording was made did not come across quite as obviously as in my own system.  Next up were the passive 19s and coming directly after the active speakers were a comparative disappointment.  The treble sounded more closed in and the bass was a lot looser.  Perhaps if I had listened to the passive speakers first, my reaction would have been different.  I am not sure how much of the difference was down to the active operation and how much down to the different sonic signatures of Naim and ATC power amps, but the difference was certainly striking.  However, there's a twist in the tail to this story.  There was a another customer in the shop who listened along with me and his reaction was a strong preference for the passive speakers.  When I quizzed him about this, he said that he thought the active setup was so revealing, it would make a lot of recordings uncomfortable and one could end up listening to just a fraction of one's collection.

After that I also tried the SCM 40s on the end of a 250DR.  The family similarity with the 19s was clear, but I did find the bass a bit overwhelming.  This is probably a reflection of my (poor?) taste as I prefer the bass to be taut and not too prominent, and I can see how other ears may have a different reaction.  I was offered an opportunity to hear the active 40s and the ATC rep who was present stated that the active 40s were his favourite speakers.  But having already spent over two hours on concentrated comparative listening I decided to save that pleasure for another occasion.

When I got home I played the same tracks on my own system and much preferred my (to many listeners, lean-sounding) PMCs to the passive 19s, though this is probably an unfair comparison as I have an XPS on my 272.  At any rate I came to some interesting conclusions:

1)  If comparing speakers, the order in which one hears them may matter.  I am sure psychologists would have something to say on this.

2)  Tastes really do differ -- a lot!  So anyone asking for hifi advice on a forum needs to take this into account when reading replies.  I feel sorry for those in locations where even shop demos are not possible.

3)  I am sufficiently intrigued by the active ATCs that I intend to go back and listen to the active 40s and compare them with the active 19s.  I would definitely need to try them at home before making any changes to my system.

4)  Notwithstanding the naysayers on this forum, the 272, even bare, is bloody good.

Roger

I enjoyed reading your Roger, it pretty much reflects my experiences with ATC.

It's so important when comparing speakers to do so in the same room and positions to get a true comparison. The 40 actives are a very special speaker that to my ears are more forgiving with my music than the active 19. If you are not used to the bottom octaves of bass then some might consider the bass too much. The 40 actives in no way exaggerate bass they simply tell it as it is. Their bass response is flat and accurate. What can make bass exaggerated is room acoustics, a room mode could increase bass and make it overwhelming and out of balance. My own room does this to a certain extent but it's tolerable and only exists on certain bass heavy tracks, for example 'far from me' by Nick Cave,  or 'soul rebel' by Bob Marley. I've learned that no hifi system is perfect, it's about accepting compromise for your own taste and ears that, as you say, will differ from one person to the next.

Russt posted:

Many thanks for your comments Simon, they are rather good aren't they. Could you confirm which stands you are using and have you tried removing the jumper leads and connecting the internal wiring of the speaker as mentioned by Alan above?

Hi Russt, I use Russ Andrews Torlyte stands, and use Naca5 wiring configured as F connectors into the ATC binding posts.

BTW, Roger, nice narrative....

Simon - thanks for the info on your stands etc much appreciated.

Roger - I really enjoyed reading about your experience with ATC so far and would love to hear your opinions on the comparison between the active 19's & active 40's if and when you get a chance to audition ideally in your home environment.

Interesting to read the positive reports re ATC speakers

I recently auditioned the SCM 19 and SCM 40 models in passive operation at my local dealer using a Musical Fidelity integrated amplifier, I really liked the presentation of them both and after discussing my system the dealer recommended I try the SCM 50 model. After hearing these there was no real comparison, as others say the dome midrange unit is sublime. Unfortunately this was not my usual Naim dealer so I could not hear them on a known system, however I was convinced my Nap300/252 amplification was at least as good as the MF in the shop. Also the active versions were not available to audition.

Needless to say after about several weeks of thinking about this I tried them at home on my Naim system and they did sound stunning, if a bit overpowering in the bass end. I had them on loan for about 5 weeks and spent a lot of time rearranging room position and bass is now fine. Fine tuning was important but no need to worry about stands with these as they come with their own small steel stands.

Speaker cables are an Audio Note copper cable which was provided by the dealer, Audio Note Lounge in Brighton, and did sound similar to my NAC A5, but the old cables weren't long enough for the new set-up

They were not a cheap purchase but I would highly recommend them if the rest of the system is up to it as they are ruthlessly revealing till set up correctly!! 

Innocent Bystander posted:

the SM75-150 midrange unit in the 50 (same unit in model 40 upwards), 

Hi I B

SCM50's use the Super SM75-150S whereas SCM40's use the original SM75-150.

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft