said above: >> I always thought paper cones were for low end Radio Shack speakers.
Nope.
Sincerely
I remain,
Nope.
Sincerely
I remain,
Paper is the most natural sounding to my ears. But it lacks dynamics and high volume capability. To add to TWL's post, I think paper is good for absorbing unwanted resonances in the driver. Better than metal and polypropylene (that's a low end material Epos being an exception - there's always an exception) |
You know I don't photograph much audio gear. So when Motts approached me to photograph their new idea for headphones I was a bit sceptical when I first saw them. Boy was I wrong. They may not be comfortable but the audio experience is like nothing I've ever tried. Brings back memories of the good old days when I was a kid. Every time I use them though my wife complains I smell like tomato paste! So I was thinkin', why, for Pete's sake, don't the speaker manufacturers catch on and use these materials for their drivers?! I'm guessing that once they catch wind of these babbies Dixie Cups will be giving them a run for their money....paper is lighter and can move much faster after all. Motts SchaMater Reference Marco |
Not true at all. "Paper" tends to denote taking the cheap way out but is in fact a complicated mess of fibers, polymers, resins etc., engineered for light weight (has to react quickly), high rigidity (prevents deformation) and longevity. Paper's been a proven performer for decades - only recently have things like Kevlar and metal cones been introduced, and while they have advantages and disadvantages over paper, they alone do not make a speaker high end by virtue of their properties. |