Xref: utzoo sci.electronics:3570 rec.audio:7754
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wucs1!wucs2!jps
From: jps@wucs2.UUCP (James Sterbenz)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics,rec.audio
Subject: Re: reconing speakers
Keywords: loudspeaker
Message-ID: <916@wucs2.UUCP>
Date: 8 Aug 88 17:45:06 GMT
References: <904@wucs2.UUCP> <120@grace.atexrd.UUCP>
Reply-To: jps@wucs2.UUCP (James Sterbenz)
Organization: Washington U. in St. Louis
Lines: 31

In article <120@grace.atexrd.UUCP> rdp@grace.UUCP (Dick Pierce) writes:
>In article <904@wucs2.UUCP> jps@wucs2.UUCP (James Sterbenz) writes:
>>[question about deteriorating acoustic suspension cones]

>[procecdure to recone]

>Incidentally, the deterioration you discovered is quite common 
>amongst polyurthane foam surrounds from a variety of manufacturers.
>This is due to the fact that the kind of foam they use is conducive
>to mold and mildew growth, which simply eats the foam. Newer
>surrounds use an ether-based foam which is hostile to such growth,
>and is somewhat more UV resistant (making it somewhat longer living
>in cars). There is no visible or performance difference between the
>two (at least while both are intact :-)).

Thanks, but a couple of follow-up questions:

When did the ether-based foam come widely into use?  I also have a 
pair of Genesis 3+ speakers (8 years old).  These are not 
acoustic suspension, but have a foam-like support ring, although
it seems more rigid than the Electro-Voice foam was.  Is this 
likley to deteriorate in the next several years?  Do you know
of any way to protect the suspension ring (e.g. some sort of 
chemical to smear on the ring ... Armor-all is great stuff, but
who knows what it'll do to your speakers :-) ).

-- 
Teo             Computer and Communications Research Center
                Washington University in St. Louis 314-726-4203
INTERNET:       jps@wucs1.wustl.edu
UUCP:           wucs1!jps@uunet.uu.net