Any users working with the atc 20asl pro mkII for 5.1 as well as mains? These are my main choice right now. I'll have a professionally built room with bass management, all that great stuff.

I've gone away from large speakers and enjoy mixing on smaller speakers that aren't so room reactive. I've used so many different speakers -- and I'm not looking for opinions on other brands as much as I'd like feedback on the new atc 20s.

Was also curious about break in time, stereo imaging (I've read the specs). How the bass roll off sounds. I really like that they are a sealed cabinet.

I'm still considering the 25's but they may have too much influence in the bass range, are ported and don't have the new SL spec tweeter.
Thanks slutz!

PS - I'm selling my barefoot mm27 gen2s in classifieds. See link below:

I've had my SCM20mkII's for about six months now, but I'm not using them in a 5.1 scenario.

What I can tell you is that they've been nothing short of a revelation for me. The previous monitors I had are favorites of many here and are a good monitor (I'd rather not mention names), but after getting the ATC's I felt like I was hearing reverb and the overall space in my mix for the first time. The depth, imaging, and clarity is incredible. Due to the sealed design, they also extend low enough for my use. With that being said, if you're a ton of post work with sub-octave stuff you'll want a sub.

All in all, I'm extremely happy with mine. My only complaint is the weight. Holy hell they're heavy! 58 lbs each!

-Josh

Thanks Josh-

yeah I'll definitely be using a sub (probably 2 summed to mono to avoid room modal issues).

Did you have a break in period? I too have used a many a speaker loved in these forums.

I think with age and maturity I've found myself going to a simpler more refined setup.

I can't contribute to how they broke in. I unboxed mine and immediately ran program material through them without listening too critically. I put 20-25 hours on them and started mixing an EP and everything translated well. After the initial break-in I can't say I have noticed any further progress, but that's a tough thing to pinpoint.

I've also simplified my rig a bit and it's a refreshing feeling. Quality monitoring, a tuned room, and a handful of quality outboard goes a long way!

Simplicity is the way. Agreed!

After talking to ATC and a few others the new SL tweeter makes the 20s very close to the 25s voicing and have a more gentle roll off because of the sealed cabinet. Perhaps a 5% difference in the midrange between the two models. The 25s also don't have the newer woofer. ATC can't fit the newer components in the 25 cabinet.... the 20s are calling my name....

Just correcting a few little points. The woofer in the 20 has been round awhile, its the "SL" (super linear) woofer developed along with the family of SL woofers (9, 12 and 15 inch in the 50/100/150/200/300). It was in the 20 Mark 1 for many years.

What makes it different from the larger SL's drivers is the mid dome grafted on to the woofer cone, acting like a sort of mechanical midrange, delivering the most amazing woofer HF response for a great midrange. It definitely sounds like an ATC midrange character. A very hard trick to pull off.

What's new in the 20 Mark 2 is the new ATC tweeter, the Pro only "S" version; new amplifier designs, new crossover, a new easier to use cabinets. SO the Mark 2 is a significant change from the previous 20 Mark 1, but carries the same sonic footprint with improved clarity and detail. Its available in active and passive forms.

The new ATC tweeter is not in the 25, as it will not fit the tiny baffle space available.
Brad

Did I mention Brad and the folks at ATC have some of the best service around?

And very nice folks indeed!
Brad

I'm actually in a similar situation as you. I've been changing up my setup for simplicity and quality rather than 101 pieces of ok outboard. One of my changes is new monitors. I've actually got a pair of SCM20PSL MKII's on order. More for a demo first because I havnt heard them yet. But talking with my buddy at Studio Economik he actually was telling me he prefers the 20's over the 25's due to the midrange clarity on them. I've spent some time on 25's and was floored by them so if he is right I think it should go well. Will keep you posted if i dont get distracted like usual.

The new 20's have more midrange clarity than the 25's? Very interesting...

I found it quite interesting as well. But it could also be just how they are reacting to the room they are in. I know when i spent some time on the 25's I couldnt imagine having MORE clarity. I have a feeling in the right room the 25's would still be a better overall monitor. But for me the 20's should be plenty.

I don't personally agree with this "more midrange clarity from 20s than 25s " idea. I've spent an awful lot of time listening and demoing these two. I think the 20 Mk2s have an improved top end, not midrange. The mid dome is ATC's best invention. Now maybe someone could view stuff above 3500 as midrange, then I could maybe understand the comment.

Brad

Has anyone compared the scm20asl pro mkII to Genelec 8351?

Although don't forget the X-over has moved down to 2.1 KHz with the SCM20s, so the new tweeter is covering a significant part of the midrange which was handed to the midwoofer beforehand.

I love both, I have active 20 mk2s and I think the 25 and 20 are both excellent, but in some areas (lower mids and lower & upper HF) the SCM20 is stronger, while in other areas (IM distortion, 'middle'-midrange clarity, maximum SPL output, bass output) the SCM25 is better.

Although I would say that the imaging I've heard from my SCM20s is absolutely

Thanks Alex. I've been looking at that same crossover tweeter spec and noticed that difference between the 25s. Good to hear your thoughts.

What do you think for my situation-- a 5.1 surround with the 20s, integrating a sub (possibly 2)? I like the sealed cabinet of the 20s. One concern I have with the 20s is being to track and crank it without them breaking up.

Thanks for the feedback everyone.

I would love some feedback re: ATC 20s Mk II vs genelec 8351.

On spec they are very different. To name a few...The genelec has dsp, is ported and is a three way. The 8351 also has a very different freq response 32-40 -6db.

So they seem to be very different animals. Any thoughts from users who have experience with both? How is the genelec glm?

Thanks for posting that Alex. Important point. I was referring to the top end of the 25 (above 3500) compared to the 20 (above 3500). The lower 20 crossover does make a difference compared to the previous 20.

I don't really see that many people comparing 20 mk2s to 25s, I wish I did. I guess this is partly due to price (5-6K vs 8-9K) and partly due to low end. People always seem to want "more bass" in the US and I guess that's why the 25 is so popular. In smaller room, the 20 Mk2 is an amazing speaker, and doesn't feel bass light to me-it feels super defined. Alex, you are right about imaging; the SL driver in the 20 is a helluva "bit of kit". There are many reasons a person might like a pair of 20A Mk2s over a pair of 25s or older ATC 2 ways or non ATC's. The only areas where I would not think of them as a "first try" would be a large room, in urban, hip hop or EDM. With some of those applications, I would want a subwoofer, especially for the client's playback. I have been working on that idea, trying to find a sub solution that is affordable and sounds good with the 20s. The frustration is the ATC 1-15 sub is clearly the best sounding, the most defined; cost is equal to 25s so that does not get me 20Mk2 + sub package for 7-8K ( less than a set of 25s). So I have some ideas in development and maybe we'll have something at NAMM that could be a 20Mk2 + sub solution for less than a pair of 25s. It won't be an ATC sub, but hopefully something that works with the 20s well enough to get work done and impress clients. Then you could have an excellent mix speaker and low end when you need it.

Brad

For what it's worth, I mainly mix indie/rock stuff and the 20's are plenty loud for my situation. I pushed them to see how loud they'd go and by the time the clip lights blinked it was far too loud for me to handle. My mix position is about a meter from each monitor.

20s are easy to integrate with a sub (unlike almost EVERY other small 2-way speaker out there). Super smooth roll-off and only 90º phase shift from the box alignment.

RE maximum SPL - mine go loud - I run out of balls before the limiter lights flash, and they go plenty loud enough to keep bass players happy if I'm tracking with the player in the live room.

It's only when you really want to impress clients/players with big-club-subs that they can't deliver, but I wouldn't expect any 6.5" speaker to be able to.



Yes I have been looking in to a sub to go with mine too for the bigger control rooms I sometimes work in, just to get that extra octave of oomph. It's not 'missing' on the SCM20s, but it's not exactly going to rattle any windows.

I would definitely agree RE the bottom-end. They are not bass light unless you compare them to a much bigger speaker, or a small ported speaker (which will have over-exaggerated bass across a small range).

If you guys do find a decently priced sub to go with the 20's id love to know! I'll be looking for one down the road most likely to handle that low end. Gotta see how they react to my room first. (demo periods are the best arent they)

So i just noticed - the ATC 20asl mkII are very well powered (250w)....when you consider they have more power than the ATC25 or ATC45 ( both 235w), that is probably a good sign of great dynamics/transients. Very curious to hear these....

Hmm. My info on 20 ASL Mk2 says 200W + 50w not 300W. Max SPL is always the number that draws my attention, as its amp + driver. On the 20 Mk2 it's max 108dB SPL, on the 25 its max 109dB SPL, on the 45s its max 112dB SPL. That being said, 108 is loud.

Brad

Sorry you are correct - I just pulled that off Sweetwater's website which says 300w total. But I also noticed they have the crossover point wrong on the ATC20's, so maybe their website is just out of date or something.

And either way - the ATC 20 only having 4db less max SPL than the ATC 45's is quite impressive considering the size difference and amount of woofers between the two!!

How close(or far) are the ATC 20asl mkII to the SCM25A Pro, sound quality wise?

Hmm, that would be a user bias issue to answer correctly.

If low end is a top priority for you, then the 25s are better.

If the midrange is the priority, (as it is for most ATC customers) then they are very close.

If its top end you care about, then you might like the 20 Mk2s better than the 25s.


The goal was to build a small 2 way that sounds as much like the 25 (and other ATC's such as 45s, 50s, etc ) as possible. So I think ATC is successful in reaching their goal. Very low distortion, can hear changes in cable immediately, reverb tails, plug ins vs hardware, very small differences are readily noticeable.

Brad

Brad-

Is it easier to integrate a sub with the 20s since they are sealed as compared to the 25s, roll off etc? And secondly easier to integrate a 5.1 setup with the 20s and a sub?

Well I think I will say yes to that, but I would not say always true. In practice, Shawn Murphy and MANY other of my movie 5.1 high level end users use 25s and swear by them. There are a LOT of 25s in the movie mixing/composing work. Many of those guys are using an LFE channel so that may be the reason why and is a slightly different condition than the one you asked about.

If you use the ATC recommended sub, their ATC SCM 1-15ASL, you get a variable low pass and this makes for mating to a variety of mains easier. ATC does not recommend you roll off the mains whether they be 20s, 25s, 50s or larger. You lower the low pass on the sub to blend in to the mains. But they have the luxury of their sub which is the best one I've heard with any ATC.

But if you are not doing movies and have no LFE, and you want this for music bass extension, then things get different. The extended low end of the 25 mated to a sub that responds too high, (it may not have a variable low pass), that gets messy. And if you use bass management and roll off all the wonderful low end of an ATC to send it to the high distortion (in comparison) sub, that does not work for most ATC music customers.

SO that is why I would not say the 20s are always easier (than other ATC's) to integrate to a sub as there are many different subs and many different uses.

Brad

PS I've been experimenting with a sub with the 20s that has a fixed 90 hz low pass, it sounds great both in both options: roll off the 20s at 90 to transition to the sub, don;t roll of the 20s (run them parallel to the sub) with a 90Hz low pass on the sub.

Thanks for the quick reply.

I'll be using my setup for many purposes: post 5.1, post stereo, composing, mixing and mastering.

So I need the most defined-detailed option that will react the least with the room. My new room will be professionally built by David Kotch. He has installed 25s before. And we will have bass management if needed. I would prefer to have the atcs without any roll off. +1 20s.

My main concern is: Will I miss that slightly extra detail in the midrange of the 25s? Or will the 25s give me too much bass for the room? Or do I trust my years of experience, ears and knowledge and go with a slightly smaller speaker that may be less reactive to the room (in the bass) and get psyched for the newer ATC tweeter, go with the 20s?

Perhaps the answer is to demo both when the room is built. I'd want to keep it consistent and have all the same model for LCR lt rt.

I spent a day listening to speakers but sadly missed this one--almost all Barefoot or ATC. I'm pretty close to a diehard ATC user with my favourite (in a large enough space) being the 150 -- the 110, 200, 300 do not do it for me but the 50-100-150 are perfect. That being said, I need some mobile/travel speakers. I realize that the low-end will be diminished in any smaller speaker so my focus is the lower-mid and up. The 25 does not do it for me. I know it has a modified midrange driver from the 50+ series and I find it "boxed" by comparison. Overall, I find it compressed in the mids and less focused by comparison to the other 50+ speakers (this is running the 25 plugged) -- keep in mind that the 50+ speakers set a high bar and this isn't "compressed" in relation to other manufacturers.

My big question is if the SCM20ASL mk2 has a signature closer to the SCM50ASL with bass lacking or does the SCM25A? The low end isn't the focus to me and I find that possibly emphasizing the freq range with the 25 and its 3-way design left the mid a little less lacking (at least for my taste.)

I also think the SL driver helps to dampen the harmonics in the low-end which is another thing the 25 lacks (and the SL spec drivers are something you grow accustomed to if you are used to in the large ATC speakers.) Brad, is it worth checking the 20mk2 if I was disappointed with the 25? Does it satisfy the signature of a 50 with less bass/higher roll off?

I know every listening experience is individual but...

I kind of agree with your points from my own experience. SCM25s are really really superb, but for me the SCM 20SL actives have many of the things which I loved about SCM50s when I first heard them.

I do think the SCM 25 is a better speaker overall, but the SCM20 is so incredibly good at many things...