[AJinFLA]

Cone materials certainly have the potential to affect the perceived sound, whether via the soundwaves in the soundfield (pardon the pun), or via the light waves impinging upon the eyes (and the associated data post processing vs the memory bank). It is very difficult to separate the two.
IMHO, the differences are often exaggerated and if there, implementation related.
Drivers have inside and outside passband related resonances. Cone stiffness and bending behavior affects off axis and summed response. Etc, etc, etc.
One listens to a "system" rather individual drivers (hopefully! ).
There can be (and are) excellent examples of all, as there are poor examples. It's the system response/behavior, in room, that matters the most.

cheers,

AJ

[Russell Dawkins]

There are some interesting, if biased, comments here from Alan Shaw - a man who has studied cone material more than most.
http://tinyurl.com/c2dh2td

Shaw points to the "Radial" material formulated by Harbeth (in a government financed development process) as being the reason their mid range sounds so good. He also respects paper, done right, as I do. He is very dismissive of polypropylene.

The designer of Audio Physic loudspeakers, Joachim Gerhard, used to select between batches of cone material by (amongst other tests, I'm sure!) dropping naked - no voice coil, former, spider or surround - trial cones on his kitchen table and simply listening to the precise nature of the sound produced by impact with the table. He also favored paper.

[Æ]

The designer of Audio Physic loudspeakers, Joachim Gerhard, used to select between batches of cone material by (amongst other tests, I'm sure!) dropping naked - no voice coil, former, spider or surround - trial cones on his kitchen table and simply listening to the precise nature of the sound produced by impact with the table.

Anybody could do that. Like you couldn't tell the difference if you dropped a paper plate or a plastic plate on the table. Or a pencil or pen, or a. . . .

[AJinFLA]

I dropped an ice cream cone on my kitchen table once. Made a mess.

cheers,

AJ

[FullRangeMan]

Anybody could do that. Like you couldn't tell the difference if you dropped a paper plate or a plastic plate on the table. Or a pencil or pen, or a. . . .

If a person works too long with pro-audio, especially on stage, he ends up with a very small auditory perception to details etc, ie the person gets the known hard ear.
The guy's brain becomes completely refractory and does not absorb the delicacies of a good tube amp driving a good paper cone FR ... bones of the office.

In the 70 years, I work two years on stage, and have to quit this job, as I fell it could damage my ear and brain perception.
Toscanini aware listen a live US concert on radio in Italy, a oboist had breathing problems, Iam not this good, but a poly cone had a sound signature very clear to my ears.

[AJinFLA]

Iam not this good, but a poly cone had a sound signature very clear to my ears.

What type of poly? Poly is short for Polypropylene, which like paper., is rarely used "pure" in loudspeaker diaphragms. Most often, there is doping or impregnation, coating, etc, etc. for stiffening and other altering of properties...and performance (the Harbeth article, while amusing, seemed to gloss over this fact).
It is far too generalized to say "poly" or "paper", etc.
Btw, when you listened to the "poly cone" signatures, how were all the other variables controlled and eliminated as contributors to perception?

cheers,

AJ

[FullRangeMan]

What type of poly? Poly is short for Polypropylene, which like paper., is rarely used "pure" in loudspeaker diaphragms. Most often, there is doping or impregnation, coating, etc, etc. for stiffening and other altering of properties...and performance (the Harbeth article, while amusing, seemed to gloss over this fact).
It is far too generalized to say "poly" or "paper", etc.
Btw, when you listened to the "poly cone" signatures, how were all the other variables controlled and eliminated as contributors to perception?

cheers,

AJ

Iam referring to polypropilene.
And mainly the type used onthe Beyma 5MP60/N, the is no xover here, I use only 1,5metre of QED Silver speaker cable.
When there is a crossover on the loudspeaker, the cone timbre tends to disappear, as well the harmonic integrity of the recording.
I favored paper cones, hard to beat the natural sound quality of paper cone.

[Æ]

I favored paper cones, hard to beat the natural sound quality of paper cone.

So, like there never was a really bad loudspeaker that used paper cones?

I guess that is why you like BOSE so much, because they use paper cones.

[FullRangeMan]

So, like there never was a really bad loudspeaker that used paper cones?

I guess that is why you like BOSE so much, because they use paper cones.

Sorry, maybe you mistake, who own BOSE 901 is HiFiSoundGUY member.
I never own Bose, I runing Beyma FR and Carver Amazing.
Certainly there is many bad sound paper cone speakers, I already own various in the past, only at this late time of life, I sure I prefer fullrange Alnico speakers and paper cones;

[Russell Dawkins]

Anybody could do that. Like you couldn't tell the difference if you dropped a paper plate or a plastic plate on the table. Or a pencil or pen, or a. . . .

Looks like you completely missed the point, AE

What type of poly? Poly is short for Polypropylene, which like paper., is rarely used "pure" in loudspeaker diaphragms. Most often, there is doping or impregnation, coating, etc, etc. for stiffening and other altering of properties...and performance (the Harbeth article, while amusing, seemed to gloss over this fact)

You have quite the ego to, from your position, dismiss Alan Shaw as "amusing". Do you think what you say about polypropylene is news??

[srb]

I never own Bose, I runing Beyma FR and Carver Amazing.

And mainly the type used onthe Beyma 5MP60/N, the is no xover here

According to Beyma, 5MP60/N is a low and mid frequency driver in line with its 12KHz frequency response.  For those people whose hearing extends to 12KHz or less, it would fufill the desire for a "full-range" driver.  But for those with hearing extending to 15KHz or higher, it should ideally be mated with a tweeter to capture the true harmonic integrity of the original recording!
 
Steve

[FullRangeMan]

 
According to Beyma, 5MP60/N is a low and mid frequency driver in line with its 12KHz frequency response.  For those people whose hearing extends to 12KHz or less, it would fufill the desire for a "full-range" driver.  But for those with hearing extending to 15KHz or higher, it should ideally be mated with a tweeter to capture the true harmonic integrity of the original recording!
 
Steve

Please, see the Freq chart and you will understand why I use it as FR.  As usual what the manufacturer said worth nothing.
There is many famous FR drivers with less bandwidh than this Beyma, as PHY-HP, the big Nirvanas etc

[Æ]

Looks like you completely missed the point, Æ

So what, big deal, either way I'm not impressed. Seriously.
Also, I've heard some really good polypropylene coned drivers, regardless of what those other guys thought they heard. I remain unbiased.
I'm not in the business of selling loudspeakers and I can use whatever I darn well please.

[AJinFLA]

You have quite the ego to, from your position, dismiss Alan Shaw as "amusing".

You should read a bit slower Russell. Or maybe it's late at night where you are.

the Harbeth article, while amusing...

Note there is no "dismissal" of Alan Shaw as "amusing", but rather the article...which starts like this:

This thread concerns the basic technical reason that a Harbeth sounds so much more open and fresher, with more micro-detail than other speakers....

I would sincerely hope that if I coined an article that started with the premise: why "Soundfield Audio sounds so much more 'open' and 'fresher', with more micro-detail than other speakers", that would illicit some laughs...at my expense...and rightfully so....my huge ego and all
Fresher???

Do you think what you say about polypropylene is news??

Was the lossy nature of "polypropylene" "news" to you?

cheers,

AJ

[AJinFLA]

Iam referring to polypropilene.

Yes, that's the primary ingredient .

And mainly the type used onthe Beyma 5MP60/N, the is no xover here, I use only 1,5metre of QED Silver speaker cable.

That may well be an example of pure poly! Hard to say. You must listen nearfield with cables that short .

When there is a crossover on the loudspeaker, the cone timbre tends to disappear, as well the harmonic integrity of the recording.

As it should, though don't understand the 2nd part. Never heard a good multi-driver point source? Something like a KEF 201/2?

I favored paper cones, hard to beat the natural sound quality of paper cone.

Never heard a cymbal, high hat or triangle that "sounded like paper" . But to each their own.

cheers,

AJ

[JLM]

Over 90% of the speakers I hear sound more like each other than unamplified live music (IMO the only legitimate standard).

"Better"/more expensive speakers sound like classic "hifi" sound (artificially produced) which is the great unspoken plot (industry standard) of audio.

[wushuliu]

Maybe there are diy folks lurking who could set up a comparison in the same box, same crossover of drivers with similar specs other than cone materials.

Maybe time to check over at diyaudio, but man some of those threads are looong.

This has been done I believe by JeffB over at Techtalk (but focus was on nonlinear distortion) and Augerpro at Htguide...

http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?t=26743

[FullRangeMan]

As it should, though don't understand the 2nd part. Never heard a good multi-driver point source? Something like a KEF 201/2?

cheers,

AJ

QUOTE: When there is a crossover on the loudspeaker, the cone timbre tends to disappear, as well the harmonic integrity of the recording.
As it should, though don't understand the 2nd part.
= =
If I understand right, seems to me you unaware of the ''harmonic integrity'' when there is no xover; I see it as below:
Every musical note had a sound, it is formed by the fundamental frequency & harmonics that made the sonic decay of this musical note, it is the sound signature of every musical instrument and of every Concert Hall or home music room.

In a solo musician recording, this musical ''signature'' in the recording are simpler and less complex than a full orchestra in a concert Hall.
So, 80 symphonic acoustic musicians in a big reverberant concert Hall, made alot of musical notes (fundamental & harmonics) per second, that in a live recording will define the acoustics, the size of the hall, the musical notes timbre, tones, soundstage etc...

So, when the music lover go listening this live recording of this orchestra, the 80 musicians´s acoustics musical fundamental and harmonics frequencies, are now a cascade of electric signals per second in a recording, to make matters worse, now the only sound source is the small voice coil of the speakers.

Unfortunately this delicate and fragile waterfall of electric musical notes(fundamental & harmonics) are broken when the loudspeaker had crossover or even a capacitor to linearize impedance.
This cascade of many electric signals in this recording are ordered in a sequence of time and intensity each other, this complex code are broke even by a sole capacitor/inductor, but tech audio guys call it linearize impedance, put in phase, expand the frequency.
Unfotunately again, compression on the mastering studio lower this time aligment(jitter) and up some frequencies to made the music more suited to radio play.

In practice of the real-life the sound signature of the concert Hall is recovery from the recording, only when the loudspeaker had no crossovers parts, tweeters etc...
Or something about it, as the physics of sound and electronic audio is much more complex than I have outlined briefly here.
I sure there is other explanations on Web.

[Letitroll98]

To shed a little light on the posts Russell D linked to, the Harbeth employee was noting the difference between two methods of forming speaker cones from polypropylene.  The Harbeth speakers referenced use polypropylene as a cone material, only injection molded as opposed to vacuum formed.  Paul Barton of PSB also changed from vacuum forming to injection molding, but not because of SQ directly, it was for QC.  The IM method made it easier (possible?) to match drivers in stereo pairs, which led to improved SQ.

Ref. AJ's comments about most polypropylene cones being treated with other materials or sandwiched with other materials, he's dead on correct.  The days of the old Infinity speakers with the clear (and pure) polypropylene cones that had an unnatural honk through the upper bass and midrange are almost long gone.  So when poly cones are referenced it encompasses a wide range of finished materials.

Ref. FRMan, I also have an affinity for the naturalness sometimes achieved using treated paper cones.  It's a generalization for sure, but I really like the magic I've heard from some Fostex FE and Lowther drivers.  But that wouldn't stop me from buying poly, aluminum, ceramic, carbon fiber, Nomex, whatever if I liked the sound.  Implementation is King.       

[srb]

The Holy Sh*t award for unbelievable (and expensive) cone manufacturing has to go to YG Acoustics and their BilletCore^TM manufacturing process.
 
http://www.ygacoustics.com/UploadFiles/file/PDF/YG%20Acoustics%20BilletCore%20Brochure.pdf
 
They start with a 2.5" thick 16 lb solid aluminum billet and precision machine it down to a 1oz .008" thick cone.
 
Steve