Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site hp-pcd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!decvax!harpo!seismo!hao!hplabs!hp-pcd!orstcs!hakanson
From: hakanson@orstcs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: More Speaker Questions - (nf)
Message-ID: <2993@hp-pcd.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 20-Dec-83 03:30:20 EST
Article-I.D.: hp-pcd.2993
Posted: Tue Dec 20 03:30:20 1983
Date-Received: Thu, 22-Dec-83 00:34:00 EST
Sender: notes_gateway@hp-pcd.UUCP
Organization: Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR
Lines: 25

#N:orstcs:2900006:000:1303
orstcs!hakanson    Dec 19 09:20:00 1983

I am intrigued by the "Honeycomb Disc" speaker drivers that some manufacturers
are bragging about (apologies for not citing the name, it escapes me).  Are
they right in saying speakers should not be cone-shaped, and that a flat driver
is more accurate and/or realistic than a cone?

Apparently the claim is that cones used to be the only way of getting a stiff
enough driver, but that improved technology has given the method of reproducing
sound the way it was "meant to be."  So what's the verdict from you experts
and engineers out there?  Are cones that way for a reason, or can they be
flat?  Should they be flat?  Does this arguement apply to woofers, midrange
drivers, tweeters, passive radiators, all of the above, or none of the above?

To show you where I'm coming from, my current speakers are the Infinity RSa
model, which are two-way's with a ten-inch plastic woofer (cone) and the
"famous" EMIT tweeter.  I am not in the market for any new components (I'm
saving up my money for a CD player, and at this rate I should be able to afford
one by the time they get the bugs worked out), but am always on the lookout for
improvements.  I'd like to hear technical opinions on the Infinity RSa's, too.

Marion Hakanson			CSnet:  hakanson@oregon-state
				UUCP :  {hp-pcd,teklabs}!orstcs!hakanson