Cone material

[tuck0411]

This might be more appropriate as a general question about speakers in general, however, I'm currently shopping for a sub, thus I'm posting it here.

From looking at the various manufacturer sites, I'm seeing various cone materials used, from paper to aluminum to something called para-amid, and others with the surrounds usually being either foam or rubber. I see the Rythmik FV12 in a lot of peoples' lists of top subs and that one uses a paper cone with a foam surround, which would seem to be among the least durable materials. I guess I'm biased against foam surrounds because I had the foam surrounds rot in my Epicure 11 woofers. I know this can be repaired, but I'd prefer the material be durable and last rather than deteriorate to the point of needing repair. Thus, I find myself leaning towards subs that use the more durable-sounding cone materials with rubber surrounds, such as the Emotiva and SVS subs. The question is, is my concern valid or are modern paper cones w/foam surrounds just as durable and long-lasting as are the aluminum/para-amid/whatever varieties?

 

[j_garcia]

It will last longer than the average person will keep it IMO Foam from the 70s was crap. Foam from today is different, but it still won't last forever. Paper cones also won't last forever and they are more fragile, but they will still last plenty long enough to get your use out of them.

Your title says cone material, but the question is about surround material?

 

[tuck0411]

Your title says cone material, but the question is about surround material?

Well, both, really. Paper cones seem to typically have foam surrounds, at least from the limited number of subs I've looked at online. Paper seems less durable than aluminum or para-amid and foam seems less durable than rubber.

Regarding length of ownership, I bought the Epicure 11's back in the mid-80s. Replaced the woofers when they blew and that was the early 90s. I tend to hang onto stuff probably longer than the average person, I suppose, so I like stuff that lasts and doesn't need a lot of maintenance to keep it going, thus cone/surround construction is one of the factors I'm considering. All other things being equal, I will probably go with a sub that uses stronger materials. Just sort of wondering if this is a typical consideration or if I'm just crazy, heh.

 

[j_garcia]

It is a valid question, but with current materials I would say it is less of a concern than it was previously. If it makes you feel more comfortable to have rubber surrounds and a para-aramid/poly/aluminum cone, then there's nothing wrong with that. For my cars, I do consider such things because I want rubber surrounds and cones that aren't suceptible to humidity, but not so much in the house. I have some gear that is up to 30 years old and it still works too (no, I am not the original owner )

 

[tuck0411]

Ok, thanks, J. Good to know the materials have improved. Suspect I will still go with the stronger stuff. I wonder why Rythmik uses aluminum in their F12 sub, but paper in the FV12. I'd probably go with the FV12 in a heartbeat if it had the same driver as the F12.

 

[j_garcia]

My GRs use treated paper cones with rubber surrounds

Paper is often chosen because it is pretty much still the lightest cone material and is also one of the most neutral sound wise, IMHO.

 

[tuck0411]

My GRs use treated paper cones with rubber surrounds

Paper is often chosen because it is pretty much still the lightest cone material and is also one of the most neutral sound wise, IMHO.

Yeah, that makes sense. One of the subs I am considering, the Emotiva X-Ref 12, uses something called "para-aramid blended fiber" in their drivers. I wonder how that compares to paper, weight-wise.

 

[j_garcia]

Para-aramid isn't new, but isn't common. It is pretty good sound wise, IMO, and is pretty light. I've only heard it in the Ascend Acoustics CBM-XX speakers and it does a good job, so no doubt it would do well in a sub too.

 

[tuck0411]

Well, I would dearly love to read an independent review of the Emotiva X-Ref sub before I pull the trigger on one, but Audioholics won't have their's out until next month, so I don't know if I can wait that long. All the user reviews I've seen so far have been positive, though.

What's the general reputation of aluminum as a driver material? SVS uses it in some of their subs and I'm also looking at the SB12-NSD.

 

[j_garcia]

I used to own a SVS PB-10 and I loved it, and have heard many subs with aluminum drivers. A lot of companies use aluminum drivers, so I don't think it will be an issue at all. I think the material is less critical to the sound in the lowest octave because it is less directional than with mids, but you still want a stiff, light cone. I've heard plenty of SVSs and their drivers are typically the least of your worries (not to indicate that they have weak points, they are excellent subs).

 

[tuck0411]

Yeah, I am tempted to just go with the SB12-NSD as the reviews have been good, but then the X-Ref 12 has the more powerful amp, and that's an attraction, so I haven't made my mind up yet. Decisions, decisions...

 

[Pyrrho]

Yeah, I am tempted to just go with the SB12-NSD as the reviews have been good, but then the X-Ref 12 has the more powerful amp, and that's an attraction, so I haven't made my mind up yet. Decisions, decisions...

The power of a built-in amplifier tells you nothing about the sound output of the subwoofer. The reason is that different woofers can have dramatically different sensitivities, and consequently one might require massively more power to be equally as loud as another.

These are general comments, and not about the specific subwoofers you mention. But what matters is sound output, not the rated power of the built-in amplifier.

My advice is to look to independent testing of the subwoofers by reviewers who take proper measurements, and decide according to that. Ignore the power rating of the built-in amplifier, as that is a completely useless bit of trivia.

As for cone materials, I would not worry about it at all for a subwoofer, unless I were using it in an abnormally wet environment. With the surrounds, however, I would prefer rubber over foam, even though people say that the new foam surrounds will not decay like the old ones. The thing is, no manufacturer seems to give a warranty long enough to cover it if they put in the foam that was often used in the 1970's into (at least) the early 1990's.

 

[GranteedEV]

I see the Rythmik FV12 in a lot of peoples' lists of top subs and that one uses a paper cone with a foam surround, which would seem to be among the least durable materials. I guess I'm biased against foam surrounds because I had the foam surrounds rot in my Epicure 11 woofers.

There are hundreds of kinds of "foam". Modern foam is going to last a lot longer than 1970s foam.

The question is, is my concern valid or are modern paper cones w/foam surrounds just as durable and long-lasting as are the aluminum/para-amid/whatever varieties?

It'll last plenty long. The amplifiers are probably going to be the first thing to go out of any of them, if anything "goes".

Yeah, I am tempted to just go with the SB12-NSD as the reviews have been good, but then the X-Ref 12 has the more powerful amp, and that's an attraction, so I haven't made my mind up yet. Decisions, decisions...

Amp power is not proportional to acoustic power.

Often, the reason more amp power is used is to make something smaller - IE to suffocate a driver as small a box as possible.

More surface area, more linear excursion, higher sensitivity more relative internal box volume, these things are more likely to get you more dynamic results than just throwing more amp power to be converted to heat by a driver shoved inside a shoebox.

 

[55katest55]

this is weird since i was also looking at the FV12 and thought it was weird that they used a paper cone. i am strongly considering that subwoofer, i hear it sounds great.

 

[tuck0411]

this is weird since i was also looking at the FV12 and thought it was weird that they used a paper cone. i am strongly considering that subwoofer, i hear it sounds great.

Yeah, it seems to have a really good rep for music, which is what I would mainly use it for. I wonder how it compares to the F12, which is a sealed box with an aluminum driver. I don't think I've seen any comparisons of the two.

And thanks to the previous two posters in this thread. All good advice there.

 

[55katest55]

well im quite interested in it for HT. i hear it is good for both, really. great output because its ported, and great accuracy because of the direct servo technology. i dont really buy the claim that accuracy isnt important for HT use. lemme know what you do! ill probably order within the next few days, if not tomorrow.

 

[tuck0411]

well im quite interested in it for HT. i hear it is good for both, really. great output because its ported, and great accuracy because of the direct servo technology. i dont really buy the claim that accuracy isnt important for HT use. lemme know what you do! ill probably order within the next few days, if not tomorrow.

You'll beat me to it, then, as I'm still busily reading reviews and perusing forums like this one and probably won't get around to actually ordering something for at least another week or so. I hear pros and cons, but mostly pros on the servo technology, and it seems like you can't go wrong with it. As for ported vs. sealed, I have a very small music room which measures 11' x 13', so I figure I don't really need the added oomph of a ported design. The right sealed sub in the right spot should be enough to pound me into oblivion,or so I hope.

 

[55katest55]

For me its basically down to the FV12 and the HSU VTF2 MK3. Im having a damn hard time choosing though. I have a tiny room too, so im sure youre right. kajflkajfsalkfjslkfj

 

[tuck0411]

Heh, well, I won't know I'm right until I get one picked out and plugged in. I just see folks recommending various subs based on room size and whatnot and a sub like the FV12 seems like it would be overkill for my room. Heck, the sealed units I'm looking at will probably be overkill, but we shall see.

 

[55katest55]

Heh, well, I won't know I'm right until I get one picked out and plugged in. I just see folks recommending various subs based on room size and whatnot and a sub like the FV12 seems like it would be overkill for my room. Heck, the sealed units I'm looking at will probably be overkill, but we shall see.

Maybe you should buy one, i should buy the other, and then we should switch.