Yes, I think that a frequency plot could show some difference. I would be inclined to measuere just one unit before and after coating, rather than make comparisons between two units that could have measurable differences to start with.
Unfortunately, I was staying in Germany when we made this comparison and we didn't have measuring equipment to hand. If I have the opportunity to repeat the experiment with measuring, I'll certainly report back.
I would be interested to know whether the differences we heard could be measured in this way, although I would be surprised if seeing the results would alter my subjective impression.
Out of interest, has anyone out there made a measurement of a speaker cone before and after C37?
Steve
Unfortunately, I was staying in Germany when we made this comparison and we didn't have measuring equipment to hand. If I have the opportunity to repeat the experiment with measuring, I'll certainly report back.
I would be interested to know whether the differences we heard could be measured in this way, although I would be surprised if seeing the results would alter my subjective impression.
Out of interest, has anyone out there made a measurement of a speaker cone before and after C37?
Steve
Painting cones
I would expect a huge difference on painting a paper cone with any material, and the effect will show up on a simple plot of frequency response, but even more clearly on a waterfall response. Much of the art of loudspeaker driver design is to do with doping cones to tame them.
However, painting one cone with one material and gaining an improvement does not make that material a universal panacea. When attempting to make lightbulbs, Edison discovered hundreds of ways of making unsuccessful ones before finding a successful recipe...
I would expect a huge difference on painting a paper cone with any material, and the effect will show up on a simple plot of frequency response, but even more clearly on a waterfall response. Much of the art of loudspeaker driver design is to do with doping cones to tame them.
However, painting one cone with one material and gaining an improvement does not make that material a universal panacea. When attempting to make lightbulbs, Edison discovered hundreds of ways of making unsuccessful ones before finding a successful recipe...
SY said:
I have already replied to this but for some reason it has not appeared (I HATE computers)
Yes thanks for your time, but number lock is always on.
And as you 0231can c0231ee it doesn't work.
I shall have to live a life free from 0231cedillas.
As for "tu " and "vous" I am old-fashioned. I would have had to have been introduced to Frank and know him well before I used "tu".
7N7
Re: Painting cones
I have studied this most profound comment for a looooong time.
Guess what, I cannot understand what on earth has to do with "universal panacea" for the life of me. Can someone please put me out of my misery and *enlighten* me?
Regards,
****EC8010 said:I would expect a huge difference on painting a paper cone with any material, and the effect will show up on a simple plot of frequency response, but even more clearly on a waterfall response.**** Much of the art of loudspeaker driver design is to do with doping cones to tame them.****
Ah!, of course. What do we use on aluminium, magnesium and and titanium etc? Surely not the good old PVA, oops I'm sorry!, I meant 'Plastiflex'.
However, painting one cone with one material and gaining an improvement does not make that material a universal panacea. ****When attempting to make lightbulbs, Edison discovered hundreds of ways of making unsuccessful ones before finding a successful recipe...
I have studied this most profound comment for a looooong time.
Guess what, I cannot understand what on earth has to do with "universal panacea" for the life of me. Can someone please put me out of my misery and *enlighten* me?
Regards,
Have a look at a PV (pressure/volume) indicator graph and notice the difference between ordinary combustion and detonation. With the latter the pressure has an extremely sharp rate of rise and very high peak pressures too. The comparatively docile "chuff" of proper pressure rise under normal conditions is switched midstream into an *almighty* "CRACK" sound which is plainly audible outside the engine and sounds like hammers hitting the tops of the pistons because of the huge pressures invloved and the rate of increase of those pressures. Strictly speaking, that is pinging, not detonation but neither are kind to pistons. What's more, neither are "controlled" as such. It can be all over in a few seconds..Bobken said:Keld, Having rebuilt many rally car engines for a living and seen all of the damage which pistons are subjected to, there are two reasons for pistons to become 'holed' (during operation)
I repeat that the operation *is* the result of "a series of *controlled* explosions" as any knowledgeable engineer will be able to confirm, when a homogeneous mixture of petrol and air in the approximate ratio of 14:1 by weight, is ignited.
Regards,
Bobken,
all I'm saying is that just because a coating of C37 on 7V's paper cones improved matters, it won't necessarily work on another cone. Positive recommendations can easily be taken out of context and start urban myths. I would only attempt treating a cone if I knew I could afford to lose that loudspeaker, because the chances of obtaining an improvement are so low - hence the Edison comment.
Aluminium cones are usually treated by deep anodising, but I have seen doped aluminium cones too (and not PVA!). To my knowledge, I haven't seen any titanium cones - do tell.
all I'm saying is that just because a coating of C37 on 7V's paper cones improved matters, it won't necessarily work on another cone. Positive recommendations can easily be taken out of context and start urban myths. I would only attempt treating a cone if I knew I could afford to lose that loudspeaker, because the chances of obtaining an improvement are so low - hence the Edison comment.
Aluminium cones are usually treated by deep anodising, but I have seen doped aluminium cones too (and not PVA!). To my knowledge, I haven't seen any titanium cones - do tell.
How about this simple example of finding "new religion".
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=129532#post129532
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=129532#post129532
Hard engineering, not bottle of Magic Slop.
I have not tried this bottle of coating stuff and I have no plans to, but what it made me think of was an opamp application note. The setup was for amplifying low level dc signals from a transducer and the suggestion was given to shield the opamp from air currents. Covering the opamp with a shield to stop air moving past it reduced the tiny moment-to-moment varations in temperature and produced about a tenfold reduction in very low frequency noise. Perhaps the way with audio might be to put a big blob of blu-tac or putty or plasticine or silicone sealer or some sort of non-conducting goo (the right colour of course ) completely covering the IC, especially the pins, too keep air drafts off it. I have never seen this done with audio, but it would be cheap and easy to do. Based on definite fact too.
I have not tried this bottle of coating stuff and I have no plans to, but what it made me think of was an opamp application note. The setup was for amplifying low level dc signals from a transducer and the suggestion was given to shield the opamp from air currents. Covering the opamp with a shield to stop air moving past it reduced the tiny moment-to-moment varations in temperature and produced about a tenfold reduction in very low frequency noise. Perhaps the way with audio might be to put a big blob of blu-tac or putty or plasticine or silicone sealer or some sort of non-conducting goo (the right colour of course
) completely covering the IC, especially the pins, too keep air drafts off it. I have never seen this done with audio, but it would be cheap and easy to do. Based on definite fact too.
EC8010 said:
I agree with you EC8010, although I think that the chances of obtaining an improvement are higher than you do.
The speakers that I design use anodized, aluminium cones and I will be experimenting with various coatings to determine whether they improve these speakers or not.
Shall I report back later?
Steve
Re: Painting cones
painting fluids, varnishes for
many months for same price as some tiny drops of C37.
Go to your local Paint-shop or just down at the place
where you put gas, pertrol into your car.
You will have plenty of sprays, oils and stuff
to experiment with.
For 60 dollars you will get gallons of most stuff!
Or Better - buy yourself a pair of new Midrange Drivers
of good quality.
That will give you a detectable difference of the sound.
Hopefully for the better.
/halo - trust Focal and Audax and Scan-Speak to do his coating
- as halo doesn't think he has better knowledge than the workers
at those Companies.
halo is no professional, will not pretend to be anything but a DIY-man
Yes, and you can try out all sorts of differentEC8010 said:
painting fluids, varnishes for
many months for same price as some tiny drops of C37.
Go to your local Paint-shop or just down at the place
where you put gas, pertrol into your car.
You will have plenty of sprays, oils and stuff
to experiment with.
For 60 dollars you will get gallons of most stuff!
Or Better - buy yourself a pair of new Midrange Drivers
of good quality.
That will give you a detectable difference of the sound.
Hopefully for the better.
/halo - trust Focal and Audax and Scan-Speak to do his coating
- as halo doesn't think he has better knowledge than the workers
at those Companies.
halo is no professional, will not pretend to be anything but a DIY-man
I think you're missing the point here.
Yes, you could experiment with all sorts of sprays, lacquers and varnishes, each must cheaper than C37. Hey, I think you could probably get stuff that is 100 times cheaper.
There's just one problem ... what stuff is that?
Of course, each time you use the wrong stuff you throw away the drive units.
But, why bother?
Dieter Ennemosa, who makes the C37, has done all this already. He is a violin maker - a field where they pay many hundreds of times more for their snake oil. Like many others, he was searching for the elusive quality that gave certain violins their million dollar sound. Along the way he started to experiment with using lacquer on hi-fi speakers. He found that, to his ears, it improved the sound.
Read about Dieter Ennemosa and C37
I have no idea how much C37 costs them to make but it's not relevant. You pay for the discovery and the experimentation. You save on the time and the drive units not thrown away. You gain something in the sound (and, of course something in the appearance but that's not relevant to this discussion).
Now, if you believe that Mr. Ennemosa is more of a con artist than an enthusiast on a genuine quest or, if you believe that the stuff can't possibly do any good or, if you think that you can do just as well with some stuff you can pick up from your wife's cosmetics cabinet and you don't mind sacrificing some drive units to prove it ...
Don't buy it.
Otherwise try to listen to what the stuff does. If there's no stockist in your area maybe you can find someone who uses C37 living locally. Or go to a hi-fi show where the chances are extremely high that you can find some high-end manufacturers that already use the stuff.
I took the time and trouble to listen and I'm glad that I did.
Steve
PS: I'm not in any way associated with this company or product.
PPS: I've only listened to a C37 treated speaker and heard an improvement in one system so far. Therefore, I couldn't recommend it unconditionally at this time. I can only say that I think it's worth a try.
PPS: I have been prompted to post this message by some of the rather silly comments that I've read in this thread.
halojoy said:
Yes, you could experiment with all sorts of sprays, lacquers and varnishes, each must cheaper than C37. Hey, I think you could probably get stuff that is 100 times cheaper.
There's just one problem ... what stuff is that?
Of course, each time you use the wrong stuff you throw away the drive units.
But, why bother?
Dieter Ennemosa, who makes the C37, has done all this already. He is a violin maker - a field where they pay many hundreds of times more for their snake oil. Like many others, he was searching for the elusive quality that gave certain violins their million dollar sound. Along the way he started to experiment with using lacquer on hi-fi speakers. He found that, to his ears, it improved the sound.
Read about Dieter Ennemosa and C37
I have no idea how much C37 costs them to make but it's not relevant. You pay for the discovery and the experimentation. You save on the time and the drive units not thrown away. You gain something in the sound (and, of course something in the appearance but that's not relevant to this discussion).
Now, if you believe that Mr. Ennemosa is more of a con artist than an enthusiast on a genuine quest or, if you believe that the stuff can't possibly do any good or, if you think that you can do just as well with some stuff you can pick up from your wife's cosmetics cabinet and you don't mind sacrificing some drive units to prove it ...
Don't buy it.
Otherwise try to listen to what the stuff does. If there's no stockist in your area maybe you can find someone who uses C37 living locally. Or go to a hi-fi show where the chances are extremely high that you can find some high-end manufacturers that already use the stuff.
I took the time and trouble to listen and I'm glad that I did.
Steve
PS: I'm not in any way associated with this company or product.
PPS: I've only listened to a C37 treated speaker and heard an improvement in one system so far. Therefore, I couldn't recommend it unconditionally at this time. I can only say that I think it's worth a try.
PPS: I have been prompted to post this message by some of the rather silly comments that I've read in this thread.
Circlotron said:
Have a look at a PV (pressure/volume) indicator graph and notice the difference between ordinary combustion and detonation. With the latter the pressure has an extremely sharp rate of rise and very high peak pressures too. The comparatively docile "chuff" of proper pressure rise under normal conditions is switched midstream into an *almighty* "CRACK" sound which is plainly audible outside the engine and sounds like hammers hitting the tops of the pistons because of the huge pressures invloved and the rate of increase of those pressures. Strictly speaking, that is pinging, not detonation but neither are kind to pistons. What's more, neither are "controlled" as such. It can be all over in a few seconds..
Hi,
I'm sorry but I haven't quite figured out whether this is in agreement (or disagreement) with what I said as you also refer to the same two comments I used of "pinging" (or pinking), and "detonation", both being possible causes of damaged pistons, exactly as I had said.
As I also said, these phenomena are (generally) caused by too weak fuel mixtures and/or ignition timing being overly advanced, and they do take a little time to destroy pistons, although at only 6000 RPM, a large number (500!) of complete engine revolutions occur in just five seconds, of course!
In other words it is never the result of an (one!)unusual 'explosion'.
The point that I made to Keld was that this type of damage results in initially softened and 'melting' of piston crowns, which do not "look like someone has whacked the piston with a hammer", as he had suggested. Out of many thousands of abused engines, I have never seen any piston crown which has cracked or broken as if by some hard object, except by collisions with valves, or whatever.
Of course, sophisticated engines (my own twin turbo is an example) have (several) 'sensors' located around the cylinder block, which will immediately signal the engine management system to adjust either the fuel or ignition timing or both (or reduce boost pressure, if appropriate) so that the problem is (or should be!) alleviated before any such permanent damage occurs.
Regards,
Hi Bob. What I was meaning was that detonation and pinging / pinking are when combustion goes out of control on that particular cycle, the causes and details of which I'm sure we both well know. It is still combustion of course but not in the desired orderly manner. I remember the first time I was standing right next to an engine that was pinging and the noise was quite surprising to say the least! Harmonic distortion of the combustion variety.
Best regards. GP.
Best regards. GP.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.