"Fast CSD is generally based on overall driver design skills rather than just the diaphragm."
Hello Soongsc
The idea was to look for any obvious break-up differences between the Aluminum vs Be diaphrams in the waterfalls or impulse responses. These two drivers are identical except for the diaphram material. So all other variables are accounted for. I thought you were looking for data to see differences between other commonly used materials and Be.
" So it would not seem to make sense to compare different driver categories."
I don't see the logic in that. If it's a "better material" it should be better in either application.
Rob
Hello Soongsc
The idea was to look for any obvious break-up differences between the Aluminum vs Be diaphrams in the waterfalls or impulse responses. These two drivers are identical except for the diaphram material. So all other variables are accounted for. I thought you were looking for data to see differences between other commonly used materials and Be.
" So it would not seem to make sense to compare different driver categories."
I don't see the logic in that. If it's a "better material" it should be better in either application.
Rob
A related question might be: "If I can replace the aluminum or titanium 'frams in my Altec/JBL/EV/18Sound/whatever drivers with real beryliium 'frams - will they be better?" Same driver, different metal.
This ignores, of course, that the driver design might be optimized for a certain metal.
I would certainly "Be" interested in the measurements and listening tests.
This ignores, of course, that the driver design might be optimized for a certain metal.
I would certainly "Be" interested in the measurements and listening tests.
jlsem said:
Hi John
Thats not really relavent is it? The engineers can be doing a great job while the marketing people are lieing through their teeth.
If you paid for Be diaphragms and then found out that they were not, wouldn't you be upset? Or you paid for diamond diaphragms and they turned out to be glass?
Hi Earl,
Quite a wrong statement. And so important for playback.
The angle where you place the sound in the sound image changes. There for the hight and with and depth might change with the dispersion.
Example:
When I got no dispersion, with a head phone on my head I place the sound stage in my brain.
The shape of ear and learning curve of your brain store the information direction and distance. So when you are listening you can reproduce the image, with this stored data.
Regards, Helmuth
Brett said:
They were just being kind; in fact, it didn't look all that good on you....
Robh3606 said:
Hello Zilch
Do you have a any PTH1010 waveguides and a 2431 less aqua?? I will post a CSD for an uncoated Be diaphram and see what the difference is. You game?? Or do you have an uncoated 2435 and 2431 to measure and compare??
Rob
Yeah, all that, bunches of each. Clearly, however, the issue can only be resolved by the skeptics doing the measurements and listening for themselves. Next thing, we'll be asked to dissect the phase plugs. What about the ferrofluid? Have we ever sent the diaphragms out for quantitative assay? It's titanium Button showed; nothing's going to be sufficiently definitive but an equivalent titanium diaphragm, which is not available.
Naw, I don't give enough of a whit to dive down this hole. Point is, as another has inquired, allegedly pure Be-diaphragm drivers are available for DIYers to explore, as well as their aluminum counterparts, JBL 2435HPL and 2431H, respectively. I forget what the difference is in 2430H, but the data sheets are all available in the Lansing Heritage Forum technical reference pages.
OR, we can just keep blathering about it....
SY said:
-an aerogel is simply a gel suspension where the liquid component is then removed and replaced with gas, at least to some extent.
-that particular aerogel was an acrylic gel with at least part of the liquid component removed and replaced with air (..actually most of the liquid). It *also* contained small fibers of Kevlar suspended in this gel.
So yes it is in fact an aerogel, just not a good one when compared to the typically beneficial properties of good silica aerogel.
On the other hand it isn't hydroscopic either. (..though others like Cabot have gotten around this issue for silica aerogel.)
SY said:
Are you sure there wasn't super-critical drying? What's both a major processing ingredient AND solvent of acrylic?
Comparatively high densities, yes.
In fact on the "front" of the diaphragms it's apparent that the drying process was never fully completed (probably because it was resting in a form during the drying process). It's sticky, eww.
Yeah, some of the drivers were excellent, others not so much. It's too bad the company closed and no longer produce either the smaller eff. mid-range nor the pro mid-range with this material, both were excellent.
Goldsound may not have been gold, but the gold piezoelectric domes from Audax were gold, though only vapor deposited.
(..the same is true for Audax's tiny gold dome super tweeter and the new tweeter from Supravox.)- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.