Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Will That Be Paper or Plastic?
As I look around this dysfunctional madhouse that you dare call a discussion group, I can't help but notice that just about every single thread is an attack thread of some sort, on someone or other. After only a few days of posting here, there's even an attack thread in my honour now (thanks to "Westface" for that one). True discussions about audio are actually quite rare here, from what I've seen. I don't mean the usual tired old senseless, pointless, worthless, quasi-debates about "Blind Tests" vs. "Sighted Tests", or the same 25 year old arguments about which is better LP or CD (its always the same conclusion: those with discerning tastes who understand what music sounds like, know that LP is more accurate within its limitations of amplitude,those who believe whatever they've been brainwashed to believe by the mid-fi industry and know nothing about music reproduction, always blindly claim its CD - and ne'er the twain shall meet). So anway, I'd like to see if I can "class things up a bit" by opening up an actual attempt at an audio-related discussion. Perhaps it can be considered a slight diversion from the usual flame wars. I was reading an article recently where the author talked about the advances in speaker technology (cone materials, etc), and seemed to establish a preference for paper-coned drivers. This made me question my Kevlar-woven drivers, as I wondered if he had a valid point to make. He said despite "trends" in speaker technology, such as the driver materials or cabinets, that the Japanese had a preference for paper drivers, for this specific reason: Basically, his argument was that paper is a natural material, as are the materials of many musical instruments, which are made of wood or even brass, etc. He talked about rapping the side of a cup made of plastic, and one made of wood, and determining what kind of sound it made. He argues the plastic cup will make an unnatural type of sound, unlike the wood material. His reasoning was that plastic materials are used in driver design because they -measure- well, particularly figures of distortion. But that the paper cones (I assume if properly designed), while they may produce more distortion than plastic or measure more poorly, also produce sound that more resembles real music. Which is something you can't measure. As I become more and more aware of the affect of materials in our environment from my other audio experiments, I find no affection for plastic, and I admit a bias towards natural materials. So I think there may be some merit in his argument, but I'm not a speaker designer, and don't have enough expertise to say what the "sound" of a cone may be, without the motor. If anyone has any reasonable and thoughtful opinions on the issue, I'd be interested to hear. If you just want to line up to attack me, please note that I now have a thread specifically for that purpose: "An open invitation to critique Soundhaspriority's audio expertise". Again, thanks to Westface for helping this newsgroup to better focus their attacks on the "real" enemies of RAO. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Great Money Making Opportunity | Vacuum Tubes | |||
Doppler Distortion - Fact or Fiction | Pro Audio | |||
Paper for printing CD inserts? | Pro Audio | |||
Home studio setup - Protools or Layla? Mac or PC? Paper or plastic? | Pro Audio |