It is only important that both loudspeakers have an identical phase vs. frequency relationship in order to preserve spatial information. I am not aware of any serious research that proves a 4th order phase shift to be audible. Phase linearity does not at all seem to be important. JBL doesn't apply it in its flagship M2, just to mention an example.
Klippel scan is a real time surface scan of a vibrating surface from 20~20Khz. Can any measurement get more real?
If you really think that a sheet of paper can handle the air without deformations... i can live with it.
PS : reality is perception.
If you have no background in mechanics, you should study acoustics from the beginning IMHO.
Ernst Chladni - Wikipedia
Chladni's ones are great, 2mm thick metal plates deformed by a violin bow caress.
Chladni's law - Wikipedia
Yeah the only ones I can think of are those tangband 'ISO cone' woofers.
I wish there were more choice.. Other than car subs
For wavelengths larger than a quarter of the circumference of a drivers radiant surface, cone shape has virtually no impact on radiation pattern. (Kates)
That includes all bass drivers. Acoustically, it makes no difference if they are concave, convex or flat. Of course there are mechanical differences.
I have not compared the radiation pattern, but the higher frequency modes and patterns will be different. Since perception is related with a complex combination of frequencies, the different shape will cause different response and perception even if the radiation pattern is exactly the same at lower frequencies.
Simple and elementary remark :
The bigger the soundwaves are... the more they trigger an important volume of air particles and the more it requires power... and the more this larger volume of acutated particles loose its energy rapidly.
If you are looking for an accurate low notes rendering, the volume of displaced air particles is everything.
A curvilinear cone captures less air volume than straight walled... but it also depend of how much the cone is curved... and it can be anecdotic.
Last edited:
Yes, you can, about the rigidity of a curvilinear shape VS straight cone.
It is not so simple... at all.
In either case they are relatively cheap electrets. When web meetings sucked for any number of reasons, the prefect "meeting" mic was a big research subject.
I remember years ago having to justify a budget item to the CFO in Ireland, the image lag and compression totally distorted body language and the swooshing sound made me feel like I was being sent to hell.
Last edited:
My simple remarks:
A flat diaphragm is a very bad idea for a sound radiator because it flexes too much and making it a cone stiffens it greatly. The difference between a straight side and a curved side makes very little difference and none at all at long wavelengths.
From my experience there is little to be gained from worrying about cone breakup because the situation is so complex. Leave the cone design to the manufacturers and just evaluate their products from the data sheets.
There are usually two problems in a high grade LF driver to pay attention to; 1) resonance of the magnet on the basket; 2) the rim resonance. Neither can be completely avoided, but with neo magnets, the magnet resonance generally moves out of band. The rim resonance is usually the limiting factor for the HF capability of any woofer. How this is handled has more to do with the surround and its design than the cone itself. Once the rim has gone into resonance, most drivers become unusable due to the many many resonances that start to creep in.