My experience from the coating of cones is that weight impairs the ability of sensitivity. The cone will move slower but the sound will be more homogeneous.
I have applied coating to paper cones with good results. But they got slower and some details in the music disappeared. The coating consisted of thinner and araldite. 95% thinner. Thinner will evaporate and the coating weighed very little.
I also applied coating on trebles.
ScanSpeak soft textile dome. First I removed the soft coating that was on and then I applied the diluted araldite in a thin layer.
In fact, I haven't heard a better treble than this one.
I have applied coating to paper cones with good results. But they got slower and some details in the music disappeared. The coating consisted of thinner and araldite. 95% thinner. Thinner will evaporate and the coating weighed very little.
I also applied coating on trebles.
ScanSpeak soft textile dome. First I removed the soft coating that was on and then I applied the diluted araldite in a thin layer.
In fact, I haven't heard a better treble than this one.
Last edited:
But I can't experience the change, that's the point 😉 On a visual forum no one else can hear what you hear, and aren't you curious about what exactly you are changing?
No, not really. I just want the sound to be as good as possible for me.
That it can be helpful to others is fun.
But the weight of the cone increases and the sound becomes more homogeneous. Then you can strengthen the magnet by gluing on an extra magnet to increase the magnetic force. You have to glue it so that it wants to repel it. Increase by ~ 20%.
That it can be helpful to others is fun.
But the weight of the cone increases and the sound becomes more homogeneous. Then you can strengthen the magnet by gluing on an extra magnet to increase the magnetic force. You have to glue it so that it wants to repel it. Increase by ~ 20%.
That's fine, it's all about pleasing yourself after all. But if someone thinks it's helpful purely from your verbal description and tries it only to find it doesn't improve the sound for them but makes it worse, it's not much fun for them if they can't reverse the procedure, can they, just in case?
No, it's hard. You have to take it as a man. If it is done then you cannot regret it.
Thus, coating paper cones cannot be undone. But I like to try myself. If you have expensive items then recommend that you be careful. There is a difference it is clear. But if you don't hear the difference then it makes no sense.
Thus, coating paper cones cannot be undone. But I like to try myself. If you have expensive items then recommend that you be careful. There is a difference it is clear. But if you don't hear the difference then it makes no sense.
Indeed. Thing is, many people here state their own findings on a given matter; last I checked however, there is no obligation upon them to spend large amounts of extra time and money for the benefit of others if they don't wish to do so. Other people are free to try out what they say they have done if it interests them. That's their choice.
Last edited:
This is why it would be nice to have some measurements shown with pictures and a description of exactly what someone did and the results in a universally understood form. For example, what do you mean by the sound becoming more homogeneous?
It's also what I mean by it being a risky business, not from a money making point of view, but a money losing one.
It's also what I mean by it being a risky business, not from a money making point of view, but a money losing one.
The sound becomes more homogeneous. It gets more physical. It will be more enjoyable.
Hard to put your finger on it. Homogeneous, calmer I would say it sounds.
Hard to put your finger on it. Homogeneous, calmer I would say it sounds.
Last edited:
In this context it implies to me more uniform, consistent etc, and makes me think of the FR, in other words a flat FR will fewer resonant peaks etc. I, for one, would have been curious enough to take measurements to confirm that is what had happened, maybe next time, if there is one, you will be too 🙂
In the thread I linked earlier with regards to experiment on Visaton LTS50. It shows a drop in resonant areas in the waterfall plot.
Doesn't mean it will happen for every single driver... just a mention of how the difference is measured.
Oon
Doesn't mean it will happen for every single driver... just a mention of how the difference is measured.
Oon
You can try with tape. Then you can remove it again. That was my first action. Try knowing how to tape on one speaker. Compare with the other speakers.
It's fun to test.
It's fun to test.
That's an idea, there must be a number of more flexible, less permanent ways to experiment. The only thing I've done, not really similar, is to use blu tack on the surround of a woofer that had a unlocatable buzz, I think it might have been the voice coil rubbing.
Yes it may happen that the coil has changed its position. It can even become oval.
Fun that you solved the problem.
Fun that you solved the problem.
I think the coating can break down resonances that exist. It will be calmer and more comfortable sound.
This treatment is currently used by manufacturers of prestigious speakers, is known as "doping" and must be done with absolute assistance of measurements.
Also lately mass has been added only at the edge of the cone to cancel out undesirable resonances at certain frequencies.
Coincidentally there is a very recent article here.
And something to keep in mind, is that when changing the mass with different materials, the speaker's tone is altered.
W12CY003
Last edited:
Great! Now we have it on black on white. Several have started using coating as fine tuning of drivers. Thanks for the post.
to Scottjoplin
although my results would be considered purely subjective a group of 8 people unanimously chose a titanium horn diaphragm that was EnABLed!
each participant needed to chose between three 2441 JBL's , one untreated, one with "dots" at a 1/4, 1/2, 3/4 intervals and one with "dots" at the 1/3 and 2/3 intervals of the diaphragms circumference, not sure why but the clear winner was the one treated at 1/3's....
although my results would be considered purely subjective a group of 8 people unanimously chose a titanium horn diaphragm that was EnABLed!
each participant needed to chose between three 2441 JBL's , one untreated, one with "dots" at a 1/4, 1/2, 3/4 intervals and one with "dots" at the 1/3 and 2/3 intervals of the diaphragms circumference, not sure why but the clear winner was the one treated at 1/3's....
Last edited by a moderator: