What I'd like to replace it with....the "preferred embodiment", as is said, is to beg/borrow/rent a pair of decent mics. Record a selection Properly. Merge it to a slideshow of the pics I have showing the process of How they're made, rather than the static shot of them playing (boring). That way a viewer could see that, yes, there's the process of making them but that it's not as difficult as making an electrostatic panel, a full range ribbon, a Heil-type AMT ribbon, or certainly our compadre's Mag's quest for a MBL clone.
On the other hand, maybe I shouldn't....
Just a slide show of pretty close-ups...."Don't try this at home, kids..." *L*
On the other hand, maybe I shouldn't....
Just a slide show of pretty close-ups...."Don't try this at home, kids..." *L*
Something else to contemplate...
https://app.audiogon.com/listings/f...ndspiel-2015-11-05-speakers-95008-campbell-ca
Interesting to view the pics @ this listing. The cone has a Very Obvious application of Mystery Material Damping applied to the bottom exterior. Certainly not as attractive as the pics @ the GP site of the same product, fer chure. The close-ups of the cones that show the wrinkles referred to in the description cause pause. The result of 'cone fondling'? High spl 'excursions' (pun intended)? Is the latter the price one might pay for thin gauge cone materials driven hard enough to 'step over the line', so to speak?
Perhaps the modern trade-off of the original Ohms' "sounds great @ 200w., blows @ 201..."? Wrinkles don't strike me as something I'd want to tolerate in $12K speakers. Not even my cheap-az cones, IMHO.
Thoughts, taunts?
https://app.audiogon.com/listings/f...ndspiel-2015-11-05-speakers-95008-campbell-ca
Interesting to view the pics @ this listing. The cone has a Very Obvious application of Mystery Material Damping applied to the bottom exterior. Certainly not as attractive as the pics @ the GP site of the same product, fer chure. The close-ups of the cones that show the wrinkles referred to in the description cause pause. The result of 'cone fondling'? High spl 'excursions' (pun intended)? Is the latter the price one might pay for thin gauge cone materials driven hard enough to 'step over the line', so to speak?
Perhaps the modern trade-off of the original Ohms' "sounds great @ 200w., blows @ 201..."? Wrinkles don't strike me as something I'd want to tolerate in $12K speakers. Not even my cheap-az cones, IMHO.
Thoughts, taunts?
Pic 5 sure looks like an aluminum cone to me. And the seam is delaminating; been there, dealt with that.
2009 = 6 yr. old units w/ 80 hr. OK...fell out of love with them that fast? Freaked out by the cone condition? Warranty conditions didn't cover shipping to/from Germany? Huh?
I'm Way Over 80 hr. on mine, warts 'n all. Hmm...
2009 = 6 yr. old units w/ 80 hr. OK...fell out of love with them that fast? Freaked out by the cone condition? Warranty conditions didn't cover shipping to/from Germany? Huh?
I'm Way Over 80 hr. on mine, warts 'n all. Hmm...
The seller also sez..." Cosmetic crinkles in deflection cones (see pics), does not affect sound quality."
Well, that's simply not true. And, the de-lamination...? What a joke!
Those look like Ti cones.
Upon reflection and a little research, you're right...TI. I thought it had a 'bronzy' color, but no...
"Blackbird" and the like hold a certain fascination for me. Bennett was Scottish, an 'world class" piper and violinist, who got into taking trad. music and lyrics and putting a new 'spin' onto them. The vocalist, Lizzie Higgins (died in '77) recorded "What a Voice, What a Voice" (the track you hear), a trad. song. If you have the lyrics in hand, you can understand what she's singing @ the age of 48. Bennett died in '05 of lymph cancer, and we lost another prodigy....
I first heard "Blackbird" here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQ_IQS3VKjA
Incredible beauty, masterful skill, glorious music that dovetails both. What's not to like? *VBS*
I used to ride bikes, pedal and moto, both on streets. If I'd tried any of that, I'd break Everything and all that connects them. *L* I have some restraint, and a little sense left , then and now...
"Blackbird" and the like hold a certain fascination for me. Bennett was Scottish, an 'world class" piper and violinist, who got into taking trad. music and lyrics and putting a new 'spin' onto them. The vocalist, Lizzie Higgins (died in '77) recorded "What a Voice, What a Voice" (the track you hear), a trad. song. If you have the lyrics in hand, you can understand what she's singing @ the age of 48. Bennett died in '05 of lymph cancer, and we lost another prodigy....
I first heard "Blackbird" here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQ_IQS3VKjA
Incredible beauty, masterful skill, glorious music that dovetails both. What's not to like? *VBS*
I used to ride bikes, pedal and moto, both on streets. If I'd tried any of that, I'd break Everything and all that connects them. *L* I have some restraint, and a little sense left , then and now...
Spent some hours researching surround materials. One that seems promising is Santoprene, although it could be a little tricky to cut rings out of what seems to be a sheet of 'rubber band' stock....
Maybe I should look at how they make rubber bands, keeping in mind that they're obviously not flat...*L*
Maybe I should look at how they make rubber bands, keeping in mind that they're obviously not flat...*L*
There are no music links or commentary included in this post.
"Off the shelf" foam or rubber surrounds would require sizing the cone to fit the i.d. of the existing ring. An option that has it's appeal, $ spent vs. time spent sizing and cutting.
Always seems to go like that...that 'time/money' ratio is a real pest.
Oh, yeah...close-up of the current state of the V.3 'front' pair, with the 'flipped' tweeter. Sounds so much better having the highs not aimed at my ankles.
"Off the shelf" foam or rubber surrounds would require sizing the cone to fit the i.d. of the existing ring. An option that has it's appeal, $ spent vs. time spent sizing and cutting.
Always seems to go like that...that 'time/money' ratio is a real pest.
Oh, yeah...close-up of the current state of the V.3 'front' pair, with the 'flipped' tweeter. Sounds so much better having the highs not aimed at my ankles.
Attachments
Well, cutting the EVA I've used is fairly easy, due to it's being fairly stiff in both planes and not 'stretchy'. To cut something that is, I think I'd opt for spraying one side with 'artist's adhesive', a low-tack version that's meant to be repositionable, much like a Post-It in 'sticky'. Cleaning it off would vary with what it's been sprayed on, however. Anything used should be tested against a scrap to make sure it won't melt or damage the material.
One thing I learned about foam surrounds is that the foam they're made from comes 3/8" thick and is then heat-pressed into it's shape, ending up about .05" thick. That's what gives a foam surround it's shape and density. And then one can fool around with the formulation of the foam which will vary it's characteristics. And off one goes into the deep end of the pool...
Until I get some Santoprene to mess about with, I think I'll stick with the EVA. It seems to be working well, isn't detaching from the cones or the base assemblies, and is stiff enough to keep the cone supported so the vc doesn't drop out of the 'sweet spot' in the magnet. That ought to keep any strain off the spider having to support the whole shebang.
Currently I've got 1/2" twixt cone edge and base opening edge, which is about right for their size. By varying the height of the post assemblies that hold the motor basket above the base assemblies, I can 'load' or 'unload' the 'tension' between the spider and the EVA, which allows controlling excursion of the cone. 'Tighter' limits the bass, 'looser' allows for more. Kinda like a 'mechanical eq', in it's way. There's a 'sweet spot' where the two balance out...
Looking into the subject, I still like the EVA. It's not effected by moisture, is reasonably stable, has decent density for the purpose, and is widely used for shock absorption which I equate to damping. In some ways I'm leaning towards treating the interior of the cone in some fashion to experiment with any 'tuning' for resonances and the like.
I need to generate a few duplicate units to play with all of the above before I can come to some more concrete observations. Along with finding an adhesive that can be used and dissolved fairly easily so swapping cones could be accomplished relatively painlessly.
One thing I learned about foam surrounds is that the foam they're made from comes 3/8" thick and is then heat-pressed into it's shape, ending up about .05" thick. That's what gives a foam surround it's shape and density. And then one can fool around with the formulation of the foam which will vary it's characteristics. And off one goes into the deep end of the pool...
Until I get some Santoprene to mess about with, I think I'll stick with the EVA. It seems to be working well, isn't detaching from the cones or the base assemblies, and is stiff enough to keep the cone supported so the vc doesn't drop out of the 'sweet spot' in the magnet. That ought to keep any strain off the spider having to support the whole shebang.
Currently I've got 1/2" twixt cone edge and base opening edge, which is about right for their size. By varying the height of the post assemblies that hold the motor basket above the base assemblies, I can 'load' or 'unload' the 'tension' between the spider and the EVA, which allows controlling excursion of the cone. 'Tighter' limits the bass, 'looser' allows for more. Kinda like a 'mechanical eq', in it's way. There's a 'sweet spot' where the two balance out...
Looking into the subject, I still like the EVA. It's not effected by moisture, is reasonably stable, has decent density for the purpose, and is widely used for shock absorption which I equate to damping. In some ways I'm leaning towards treating the interior of the cone in some fashion to experiment with any 'tuning' for resonances and the like.
I need to generate a few duplicate units to play with all of the above before I can come to some more concrete observations. Along with finding an adhesive that can be used and dissolved fairly easily so swapping cones could be accomplished relatively painlessly.
Being 'unmutual' isn't necessarily bad...
I know Paul thinks I'm wrongheaded for using the 5 mil aluminum, but I've got a butt-load of it. If I opt for a stronger driver that can handle the heat, I've got watts to spare to push it around. Sure, the characteristics of the response will vary from the 'ideal', but I'm looking at it as a 'destruction derby entrant' vs. a Ferrari. I can work on 'nuance' later...
What I think I'll mess with for awhile is a workable cone slip roller. That'll take the hassle out of shaping a cone regardless of thickness and allow for a better seam, regardless of adhesive used. I like using a film transfer tape because there's no 'squeeze out' of glue...looks unsightly. I can tolerate the glue line at the cone/surround seam, but I think the cone seem should look 'clean'.
We all have our priorities...*L*
I know Paul thinks I'm wrongheaded for using the 5 mil aluminum, but I've got a butt-load of it. If I opt for a stronger driver that can handle the heat, I've got watts to spare to push it around. Sure, the characteristics of the response will vary from the 'ideal', but I'm looking at it as a 'destruction derby entrant' vs. a Ferrari. I can work on 'nuance' later...
What I think I'll mess with for awhile is a workable cone slip roller. That'll take the hassle out of shaping a cone regardless of thickness and allow for a better seam, regardless of adhesive used. I like using a film transfer tape because there's no 'squeeze out' of glue...looks unsightly. I can tolerate the glue line at the cone/surround seam, but I think the cone seem should look 'clean'.
We all have our priorities...*L*
It seems the stiff EVA would be a good mechanical match with the mass/stiffness of the 5 mil Al.
I've wanting to look into Bud P's method of cone treatment...maybe now is the time.
That's my take on it, 'by guess and by gosh' as it may be...a thinner material for a thinner walled cone might be appropo to head off potentially wrinkling the cone from bass pistonic motion. But that's just another thought...
It is one reason/rational for trying a windowed cone, but that's just a 'side trip' in the journey.
And yeah, Bud's routine intrigues me too. I've wondered if one should just send him a completed cone, a cone accompanied by one still unformed, or all that plus a completed unit (a 'playable' one) so he could hear what it does/is doing...since it is a 'different sort of animal'. Guess it'd be best to ask, esp. if he'd be still interested.
Oh, happy Friday the 13th, BTB. Don't forget to break some mirrors, walk under a ladder, all that.... Tempt fate, just for the thrill of it. *G*
It is one reason/rational for trying a windowed cone, but that's just a 'side trip' in the journey.
And yeah, Bud's routine intrigues me too. I've wondered if one should just send him a completed cone, a cone accompanied by one still unformed, or all that plus a completed unit (a 'playable' one) so he could hear what it does/is doing...since it is a 'different sort of animal'. Guess it'd be best to ask, esp. if he'd be still interested.
Oh, happy Friday the 13th, BTB. Don't forget to break some mirrors, walk under a ladder, all that....
Tempt fate, just for the thrill of it. *G*
Learned something useful tonight. Closed the 'ports' at the bottoms of the front pair, and the bass tightened up nicely. I'd noticed that with the smaller, previous units that when played on a desktop the output was 'sharper' in response.
Does seem to indicate that 'tuning' the PVC support columns in some fashion is in order. Addition of an interior baffle or baffling to break up any standing waves would be a plus as well.
Does seem to indicate that 'tuning' the PVC support columns in some fashion is in order. Addition of an interior baffle or baffling to break up any standing waves would be a plus as well.
Welcome to the Tonight Show monologue
Another hair-brained concept...revising the EVA surround to damp the cone as well as support it.
Since it's slightly 'stretchy', slip it like a sock down the cone and adhere it to the lower portion of it. Kill two stones with one bird? Worth a try...
On the left of the image is what I've done previously, with a bead of cement at the junction of the cone and the EVA. It's difficult to make a nice even bead, dodging the supports, and there's the issue of maintaining the cone on center on the surround.
On the right is the proposed; cone centering becomes a snap. As long as the surround it centered on the base (the dark rectangle), which is pretty simple to do, alignment of the cone base is nearly automatic. And the adhesive can be applied at the bottom, out of sight...
I'll let you know if it's as easy as it 'reads'...
Another hair-brained concept...revising the EVA surround to damp the cone as well as support it.
Since it's slightly 'stretchy', slip it like a sock down the cone and adhere it to the lower portion of it. Kill two stones with one bird? Worth a try...
On the left of the image is what I've done previously, with a bead of cement at the junction of the cone and the EVA. It's difficult to make a nice even bead, dodging the supports, and there's the issue of maintaining the cone on center on the surround.
On the right is the proposed; cone centering becomes a snap. As long as the surround it centered on the base (the dark rectangle), which is pretty simple to do, alignment of the cone base is nearly automatic. And the adhesive can be applied at the bottom, out of sight...
I'll let you know if it's as easy as it 'reads'...
Attachments
I'll let you know if it's as easy as it 'reads'...
Interesting idea.
What drawing program are you using?
CorelDraw X7...the 'Home & Student' version, because we're cheap and I don't need ALL the fancier graphics options of the 'full boat' version (which costs 3X more).
As for the 'idea', yeah...I think it's worth cooking up a prototype pair, esp. since I've now got 5 speakers from the truck stereo swap-out. 2 - 5 1/4", 3 - 6x9".
For a moment, I considered elliptical cones for the 6x9's, but that's insane...
I think I'll try one, just to see if I can do it. *L*
As for the 'idea', yeah...I think it's worth cooking up a prototype pair, esp. since I've now got 5 speakers from the truck stereo swap-out. 2 - 5 1/4", 3 - 6x9".
For a moment, I considered elliptical cones for the 6x9's, but that's insane...
I think I'll try one, just to see if I can do it. *L*