Have you tried "doping" your speaker cones?


I recently "doped" my cones. I had read several discussions on it, on the Single Driver Website. It seems Damar varnish is the "dope" of choice. I couldn't find that brand so I used another. I thought it made a fantastic difference. The cones are much stiffer and there is better definition and smoother high end. Bass tightened up too. Had to make a slight adjustment in the "stuffing" in my transmission line tube to cut the bass back a little. They recommend two coats, so that's what I did. Anyone else tried it?
twl
Just to add a little to this topic, I rearranged my room and moved my speakers out further to get closer to the "typical" placement formula, and wow! I don't know if the doping gave more coherent phase info or what, or maybe it was just the placement diff, but the soundstage now is incredible! I played Madonna(Immaculate Collection) and the soundstage now ranges from about 6ft behind the rear wall to about 4ft in front of the speakers in depth, and about 4ft outside each speaker in width! This is about 13ft depth and about 20ft width. And the imaging is rock solid, well to the outside of the speakers. With this kind of depth, who needs surround sound? I know I'm raving, but I am flabbergasted. Really, guys, this is the first time I have ever gotten soundstage and imaging like that from a speaker. Oh, sure, you get imaging, but alot of times it is centered and smallish. And, you get big soundstage, but the image focus is lacking, but the combination of both is a real mind bender. And, having the speakers disappear while providing solid imaging thet's well outside the left and right boudaries that is "palpable", is alot different than having the speakers disapper and provide nice imaging within the left/right boudaries.I suppose this is why people spend $30k-50k on a set of speakers.Pardon my lunatic rantings, but I am really enjoying this. I feel like after all the speakers I built, I finally hit the bullseye.
I doubt that Herman.

Looked like a practical suggestion to me. I doubt that any member at Audiogon can say that they have never posted a fragment of incorrect data.

Unless of course they have never posted :~)
Herman, no need to apologize. You put forth what you thought was helpful information. Luckily, someone else caught it and was able to correct it. When we are too big to make mistakes or be corrected, THEN we need to start thinking about apologizing : )

Twl, sounds like you've just had an "audio revelation". It's great, isn't it ??? : )

You're finally hearing what a point source can do. Now if you could only get rid of the boxes and start doing some 360* radiation, you'd really see what width and depth was like. When things really start to cook, you'll take notice of image height too : ) Sean
>

PS... Sometimes I have to silently laugh when people ( primarily salespeople ) talk about the "depth" of the soundstage on a system. I think that you may start doing the same.
Sean, this is great fun. I am noticing large heighth improvements also. Sometimes, I think it might be too high. The drums are low, where they should be, and the instruments and voices are at middle height and about natural proportion and location, but sometimes tinkling bells and such seem to come from the ceiling. It's eerie, as my ceiling is vaulted to 16ft. Kind of a neat effect though.