Im just trying to wonder that what shape of wizzer cone is preferred with a 8 inch paper midrange cone with fabric surround to mate with. Technically i need a wizzer cone which goes relatively slightly lower in treble frequency to match to the 8 inch midrange cone.
I agree the fact that different whizzer cones will have different frequency extensions.
But can anyone tell me that shallower or steeper whizzer cone required in the above case?
I agree the fact that different whizzer cones will have different frequency extensions.
But can anyone tell me that shallower or steeper whizzer cone required in the above case?
There "should" be some Math describing it, not sure anybody invested time studying that, but wouldn´t bbe surprised to find in Olson´s book.
Or maybe one of the brilliant 50´s British designers.
Guess afterwards development in that direction got bypassed by Tweeter design.
That said, maybe if I am extremely bored in a future Covid lockdown (hey,they are restartting that in China, NOW 🙁 ) could spend some time building and measuring speakers with different whizzer cones and see what happens
Or maybe one of the brilliant 50´s British designers.
Guess afterwards development in that direction got bypassed by Tweeter design.
That said, maybe if I am extremely bored in a future Covid lockdown (hey,they are restartting that in China, NOW 🙁 ) could spend some time building and measuring speakers with different whizzer cones and see what happens
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
My speaker uses a 15” driver but you can see from the image that the whizzer is relatively shallow and large enough to produce at lower-than-tweeter frequencies. It sounds excellent (v. Wide dispersion, no harshness) so this approach has some metit.
