In Reply to: Metal Cone loudspeakers -- Anyone like them? posted by jedrider on June 13, 2015 at 09:48:32:
Designers have been trying to balance these variables for many years -- hence both the proliferation of exotic materials/geometries and the continued existence of old standbys like paper (of which there are MANY varieties) and polypropylene.
The latter two have perhaps the best internal damping, which translates into a smooth rolloff above passband, can be reasonably light, but lack ultimate stiffness, which impairs their ability to behave purely pistonically and may obscure or "soften" transient detail.
Stiff, light cones, especially machined aluminum or magnesium, behave pistonically through the intended passband, but ring like a poorly tuned bell a couple octaves above crossover. Lousy internal damping.
Synthetic materials like carbon fiber, Kevlar, fiberglass, etc. all fall somewhere in between. They're real stiff, don't break up as bad as metal, but still have resonant spikes, and may not be as light as some other materials, depending on how thin they are pressed and how much resin binds the fibers.
Then there are the endless composites and sandwiches of synthetic and organic materials, each with its own characteristics. Focal is now trying woven flax, presumably with some sort of resin binding, Vandersteen is working with machined balsa wood, some metal cones feature an anodized or "ceramic" finish, and so on. The quest for unattainable perfection in all parameters continues.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Cone issues: low mass vs. high stiffness vs. good internal damping -- pick any two! - Brian H P 13:03:38 06/15/15 (1)
- RE: Cone issues: low mass vs. high stiffness vs. good internal damping -- pick any two! - DrChaos 11:52:40 06/16/15 (0)