Hi! In my experience, which has been Altec, Jensen, and dumpster diving audio foolishness, (1) Professional refoam of speakers like Wharfedale Super 12s, (2) Paper surround of nice speakers like nicer Jensens (Maybe Altec RCA, and also German 8" Radio speakers), (3) Treated Fabric types (you know the type), but never heard leather surrounds but, broken in, who knows? Just curious with so many experienced posters, but in any event, thanks for reading! Robert
..... Laserbeams? No, wait! Plasma-ions!
Eastern Voltage Research - Plasma Speaker Kit
And... Tesla coils?
YouTube
In stereo?
YouTube
Eastern Voltage Research - Plasma Speaker Kit
And... Tesla coils?
YouTube
In stereo?
YouTube
Last edited:
surround material is just there to damp the cone and hold it centered, it acts in combination, you already know this.
To get 'dynamics' look for high enclosure QT like smaller closed boxes, however this is not always true, impulse can be too very good in OB or ported if done well with the right drivers......
Hight QMS = driver with high dynamics.
Sorry for the confusion. I realize loads of parameters dictate speed of a speaker driver. I do have a fondness for larger sealed boxes, but own boxes with 'holes' too. I agree surrounds affect sealed boxes more so, but surely surrounds make some difference in general. Why rolled or pleated paper, etc, when Buytel rubber is cheap and simple to implement (with slave labor instead of skilled craftsmen)? How come the hoohaw about speakers with 8" diameters but only 6" cones. Maybe surrounds are only important if sagging pleats or rotted foam? OK, I'm being a bit snarky, but I'm willing to learn from experienced people. There's a limit to how much info can be obtained in lurking. ;>)
The inherent material properties of the different types of surround material depend not only on chemical composition or density, but also thickness, whether has a "foam" based internal structure and also tiny variations in material "mix" can lead to drastic changes in the properties of the end product.
Then there is also big variations in regards to actual type of design of the surround, as in the actual shape, structure, one or several waves, bends, edges etc. Like half roll, inverted half roll, wave, accordion etc. etc.
So it is very hard to answer your question properly, because, while material "type" might have something to say about the mechanical properties of a specific speaker surround, so does a large number of other things.
To keep it short: In general, a surround with less mechanical resistance is faster than a surround with high mechanical resistance.
But an "ideal super driver" with hardly any mechanical resistance might not be useable in any practical scenario, you also have to take into account that the membrane or cone of the driver needs to be slowed down the right way, the voice coil has to remain in the magnet gap etc. It is a great balancing act.
Again, very difficult to answer your "question", since it seems to stem from a view that only one particular part of a speaker driver has any impact on perceived performance.
Hope I'm not being overly difficult myself here, very hard to give you a proper answer.
Then there is also big variations in regards to actual type of design of the surround, as in the actual shape, structure, one or several waves, bends, edges etc. Like half roll, inverted half roll, wave, accordion etc. etc.
So it is very hard to answer your question properly, because, while material "type" might have something to say about the mechanical properties of a specific speaker surround, so does a large number of other things.
To keep it short: In general, a surround with less mechanical resistance is faster than a surround with high mechanical resistance.
But an "ideal super driver" with hardly any mechanical resistance might not be useable in any practical scenario, you also have to take into account that the membrane or cone of the driver needs to be slowed down the right way, the voice coil has to remain in the magnet gap etc. It is a great balancing act.
Again, very difficult to answer your "question", since it seems to stem from a view that only one particular part of a speaker driver has any impact on perceived performance.
Hope I'm not being overly difficult myself here, very hard to give you a proper answer.
I just want it noted that my first reply to this thread was actually serious, albeit with a joking tone.
The fastest surround would be the non-existent one, sound out of thin air, no membrane, dustcap, voice coil, spider, surround or any other mass to move back and forth with delicate precision.
The fastest surround would be the non-existent one, sound out of thin air, no membrane, dustcap, voice coil, spider, surround or any other mass to move back and forth with delicate precision.
Fast Surround?
I suppose you refer to the 'compliance' of the surround material. I find this to be much less important than the 'durability' of the material. My expensive JBL's had foam, and after a few years it fell apart. This just seams cheap to me - regardless of compliance. I had a repair shop install rubber surrounds on the woofers. I can tell no difference in sound, and they will last much longer than foam.
Because of 'cheap' I won't ever buy another foam surround speaker, and I actually lean toward pro sound drivers with treated cloth surrounds.
JT
I suppose you refer to the 'compliance' of the surround material. I find this to be much less important than the 'durability' of the material. My expensive JBL's had foam, and after a few years it fell apart. This just seams cheap to me - regardless of compliance. I had a repair shop install rubber surrounds on the woofers. I can tell no difference in sound, and they will last much longer than foam.
Because of 'cheap' I won't ever buy another foam surround speaker, and I actually lean toward pro sound drivers with treated cloth surrounds.
JT
The OP’s original question is an important one, as a fast surround results in transparency. The fastest surrounds (for cone drivers) in my experience have been:
1. Goodmans Axiom 80 with no surround, but rather a free edge design employing three equidistant suspension arms attached to the cone, instead of a traditional surround.
2. Lowther/Fostex fullrange drivers with very light foam or treated cloth surrounds.
3. Cabasse 21NDC bass driver with ultra light cellular foam cone and surrounds.
4. Yamaha NS1000 beryllium drivers with pleated cloth camera shutter type cloth surrounds.
5. Accuton drivers with soft compliant rubber surrounds.
All of the above drivers have a characteristically transparent ’fast’ hyper detailed sound.
1. Goodmans Axiom 80 with no surround, but rather a free edge design employing three equidistant suspension arms attached to the cone, instead of a traditional surround.
2. Lowther/Fostex fullrange drivers with very light foam or treated cloth surrounds.
3. Cabasse 21NDC bass driver with ultra light cellular foam cone and surrounds.
4. Yamaha NS1000 beryllium drivers with pleated cloth camera shutter type cloth surrounds.
5. Accuton drivers with soft compliant rubber surrounds.
All of the above drivers have a characteristically transparent ’fast’ hyper detailed sound.
Last edited:
While I completely agree on prioritizing durability over compliance, it is also important to note that: Not all foam is created equal. Some foam surrounds have pretty good durability.
That said, I also have a weak spot for the Pro drivers with treated cloth surrounds.
Another thing is that quite a lot of a drivers mechanical resistance comes from the Spider, in some FR drivers the surround has a role more towards centering and sealing than actual dampening.
A liquid silicone application on the foam will prolong the life of the suspension for many years.
There is no alteration of the original compliance meaningful for the sound, in any case much smaller than replacing by rubber
What would be the weak point ? tell us please
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.