planet10 said:
Scar is the high end company and SB Acoustics is the lower end. Just like Scan Speak and Vifa.
It was formed back in '07 by Lars Groller (head design guy at Scan Speak, vifa) and David Stephens, VP of sales from Scan Speak/Vifa.
Lars also owns GamuT audio: http://www.gamutaudio.com
Regards,
Dennis
Sorry guys, I wasn't criticize paper per se, expecially in this case where presumibily the price will be comfortable!
I am just annojed to not see one big manufacturers who try to offer something more performant material, composite or whole.....
( accuton maybe, but results do not seem to me so interesting :-( .)
I am speaking of real midwoofer, to say 6", 7", 8" , not only tweeters where effectively we have seen enough imo ( diamond, beryllium,etc):
We will see........
Cheers,
Paolo
I am just annojed to not see one big manufacturers who try to offer something more performant material, composite or whole.....
( accuton maybe, but results do not seem to me so interesting :-( .)
I am speaking of real midwoofer, to say 6", 7", 8" , not only tweeters where effectively we have seen enough imo ( diamond, beryllium,etc):
We will see........
Cheers,
Paolo
Personally, I'm not bothered by it's use of paper as paper can sound excellent too ( Although my favorite cone materials are hard composites and metal), I'm more bothered by it's use of dust cap instead of phase plug.
From my experience since I was 15 yrs old, On my cheap DIY speakers, I always find the midwoofers sound better when I remove the dust cap, Much to my father's worry that debris could get stuck in the magnet gap, But I said, What the heck , They are cheap anyway, And power overload would destroy them first than debris entering. Fast forward many years, I found this site in 2001, Then I learned that cavity resonance is responsible for the negative impact of dustcaps. Otoh some speakers have small dustcap that was directly attached to the voice coil have less audible cavity resonance. But still, Phase plug sounds better than dustcap ( however small) to my ears.
From my experience since I was 15 yrs old, On my cheap DIY speakers, I always find the midwoofers sound better when I remove the dust cap, Much to my father's worry that debris could get stuck in the magnet gap, But I said, What the heck , They are cheap anyway, And power overload would destroy them first than debris entering. Fast forward many years, I found this site in 2001, Then I learned that cavity resonance is responsible for the negative impact of dustcaps. Otoh some speakers have small dustcap that was directly attached to the voice coil have less audible cavity resonance. But still, Phase plug sounds better than dustcap ( however small) to my ears.
inertial said:Sorry guys, I wasn't criticize paper per se, expecially in this case where presumibily the price will be comfortable!
I am just annojed to not see one big manufacturers who try to offer something more performant material, composite or whole.....
( accuton maybe, but results do not seem to me so interesting :-( .)
I am speaking of real midwoofer, to say 6", 7", 8" , not only tweeters where effectively we have seen enough imo ( diamond, beryllium,etc):
We will see........
Cheers,
Paolo
Given the considerable experience of the best manufacturers and the fact that they would take advantage of anything that would give them an edge, there must be some reason why exotic materials are seldom used.
Of course there is the Seas Excel line of drivers. Those are neither paper nor plain aluminum.
I happen to prefer cones such as those of Scan Speak. IMO they are superior to the rest, especially for the midrange.
Dave
dlr said:
Given the considerable experience of the best manufacturers and the fact that they would take advantage of anything that would give them an edge, there must be some reason why exotic materials are seldom used.
True Dave, but this is accetable for "budget components" not for, to say, "illumination" line!
Paper is cheap and well knowed in his carachteristics.
His damping is good but the ratio stiffness/weight is mediocre ....
Floppy cones, as amusing called in another forum....
Cheers,
Paolo
inertial said:
True Dave, but this is accetable for "budget components" not for, to say, "illumination" line!
Paper is cheap and well knowed in his carachteristics.
His damping is good but the ratio stiffness/weight is mediocre ....
Floppy cones, as amusing called in another forum....
Cheers,
Paolo
Paper is an old, generic term that does not describe the acoustic characteristics. They are not "floppy", this is just a prejudice. I have not heard a hard cone in the midrange superior to the Scan-Speak line. When I do, I'll start using them. Until then, "paper" is superior.
Dave
dlr said:
I am not versus paper (little ) cones Dave, I like 11FGX and MD 10.39.08 ; they was superb!
I'm talking in technical sense where the limits of the materials are evident.
I have not heard a hard cone in the midrange superior to the Scan-Speak line. When I do, I'll start using them. Until then, "paper" is superior.
Dave [/B]
Oh, I know your website Dave : very very good IMO
A friend of mine was using the scan, interesting driver. Very musical and very robust also.
To be honest up to today I prefer subjectivaly my audax HM100ZO
Motor is not so good as the scan but the cone guys, wow!
One more : I'm experimenting with the TB1337/SA. This is cool,
you can listen at it even fullrange!
Cheers,
Paolo
Originally posted by inertial I am not versus paper (little ) cones Dave, I like 11FGX and MD 10.39.08 ; they was superb!
I'm talking in technical sense where the limits of the materials are evident.
They do have their limits. One of the problems is unit-to-unit consistency. Those drivers that use a damping compound application seldom have the consistency. Hard cones are possibly the best in this regard. That's also a likely reason for the higher cost of good "paper" units.
To be honest up to today I prefer subjectivaly my audax HM100ZO
Motor is not so good as the scan but the cone guys, wow!
One more : I'm experimenting with the TB1337/SA. This is cool,
you can listen at it even fullrange!
Cheers,
Paolo
One issue I have with what I've seen from Tang-Band is the consistency. That and they do seem to make changes in a driver unannounced. They do seem to be improving their offerings, however.
Dave
planet10 said:
Precisely. It's more flexible in that sense. There are other advantages to being less stiff than hard cones. The latter never have the off-axis performance. That's too often overlooked. I think that I could agree that hard cones woofers may be optimal, but not for midranges, not yet anyway.
Dave
Hi,
I dont believe that hard cone is superior to paper cone and vice versa, I do believe though, based on my listening experience that hard cone tends to have more inner details than soft cones. same with metal tweeter and soft tweeter. It all comes down to taste and to each his own.
Regarding the cone profile of these new vifas, SOme one have mentioned that the cone is deep and that shallow cone have better mid . Well , I dont think this is universally true,It all comes down to taste, In my experience deeper cones tend to have warm mids and shallower cones tend to be more analitycal sounding. The B&W CDM1se that I used to own have deep cone profile, The mid had a very good tonality and tends towards warmth, But very musical, Probably one of the best mids I've heard. The B&W n805 that I own have shallower profile , the mid is very analytical. Of coarse I'm aware that many other factors come into play in the final sound of the speaker system, But this observation of mine extend not only on these 2 speakers I've mentioned.
I dont believe that hard cone is superior to paper cone and vice versa, I do believe though, based on my listening experience that hard cone tends to have more inner details than soft cones. same with metal tweeter and soft tweeter. It all comes down to taste and to each his own.
Regarding the cone profile of these new vifas, SOme one have mentioned that the cone is deep and that shallow cone have better mid . Well , I dont think this is universally true,It all comes down to taste, In my experience deeper cones tend to have warm mids and shallower cones tend to be more analitycal sounding. The B&W CDM1se that I used to own have deep cone profile, The mid had a very good tonality and tends towards warmth, But very musical, Probably one of the best mids I've heard. The B&W n805 that I own have shallower profile , the mid is very analytical. Of coarse I'm aware that many other factors come into play in the final sound of the speaker system, But this observation of mine extend not only on these 2 speakers I've mentioned.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.