Neil Gader/ATC/Plinius
Mike -- Thu, 01/18/2007 - 20:39
Neil, I've been enjoying you audio explorations for a few years now, with my attention initially caught by your use of relatively little known ATC speakers. I'm on my second set of ATCs. My question is related to your very interesting description in the current Plinius preview of your exploration of amplification for the ATC 20-2.
Have you tried an ATC amp?
I know they don't have much of a range with one 200wpc power amp, one 200wpc integrated amp and the 350w tri-mono amp pack for their active three ways. I haven't had the pleasure of hearing the big active three-way ATCs but my understanding is that they're phenomenal.
Just wondering. :)
Hey Mike,
I'm aware of the ATC amps and their active products but no I haven't auditioned one at home. the thing is, for the 20-2 Actives, ATC biamps them with 50/250 split tweeter/woofer. In a passive iteration like mine 200Wpc (no biamp) just doesn't quite cut it like 300W, including Plinius' own 9200 integrated. I know it sounds insane but the difference isn't subtle, as I tried to point out in the Plinius sneak peek. Of course the Plinius deserves a lot of the credit too.
I've heard some of ATCs bigger models in studio settings and they are mighty revealing and dynamic and loud. However they may be too revealing and thus I doubt whether many audiophiles would take to them at home. There still is that divide between consumer and pro expectations.
All the best, Neil
Neil Gader Associate Editor The Absolute Sound
neil.gader wrote: However they may be too revealing and thus I doubt whether many audiophiles would take to them at home.
Neil-
Another astute observation. The difference between just getting everything off the recording (and I consider that an admirable, if yet unattainable goal) and making it sound like I think it should (often not terribly difficult, but often surprisingly expensive) could be the root of all audiophile evil. Just maybe.
smiles,
Scott
Scott,
Here's a brief story that I think amplifies your point;
I recall talking to a mastering engineer who uses ATCs in his studio and he stated that while he can listen for hours at a stretch while mastering, when he goes home to listen to music he'd rather hear a more impressionistic treatment of the music, somthing more akin to falling into a nice pillowy couch. So in essence, he goes for truth at the professional level and throws that all away when he gets home to relax. It kind of raises all kinds of issues regarding the state of recorded sound and our desire (or lack of it) to hear what has accurately been recorded versus what we wish had been recorded if the process were as pure as our own hearing.
Neil
Neil Gader Associate Editor The Absolute Sound
neil.gader wrote:
versus what we wish had been recorded if the process were as pure as our own hearing.
Neil-
It would be fun to chew the fat a bit with this individual about what musical compromises, if any, they can live with when listening off the clock so to speak. One of the things that always perplexed me when talking to certain audio industry people on the manufacturing side was the a priori view that one starts from a personal take of what a hifi should sound like as opposed to one solely based on revealing the totality of the recording. The prospect of trading Julian Bream sounding like he's in the room for not being able to make out subleties of his technique seems a bargain many audiophiles are ready to make first negotiation out of the gate.
Your story reminds me of the near-sighted large-format photographer who always kept two pristine pairs of prescription glasses with him while working, but preferred to wear dime-store sunglasses at home to take the edge off reality. Okay, I made that up. :-) Funny how we use our different senses in interpreting the world around us.
kind regards,
Scott
Post new comment