Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="audioholic" data-source="post: 7366643" data-attributes="member: 549629">That video does not show a cone warping. Most of what you are seeing is tricks from the camera. The surround dimpling is however real. If the cone warped even half as much as you think that video suggests, the coil would become misaligned.No, distortion is not distortion. Even if that cone in the video was &#039;distorting&#039; as you think it is, that is a far cry from audible distortion. In terms of talking about stereos, distortion refers to deviation from the original recording. The cone distortion you are referring to is deviation from the original shape. Two completely different topics. Its like suggesting that if a speaker cone is &#039;warping&#039; its shape, its also &#039;warping&#039; time and space.Paper cones still tend to be lightest, followed by poly, and metal cones coming in last (yes, even titanium). So again, using the PG or Ti are bad examples of light weight cone designs.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="audioholic, post: 7366643, member: 549629"] That video does not show a cone warping. Most of what you are seeing is tricks from the camera. The surround dimpling is however real. If the cone warped even half as much as you think that video suggests, the coil would become misaligned. No, distortion is not distortion. Even if that cone in the video was 'distorting' as you think it is, that is a far cry from audible distortion. In terms of talking about stereos, distortion refers to deviation from the original recording. The cone distortion you are referring to is deviation from the original shape. Two completely different topics. Its like suggesting that if a speaker cone is 'warping' its shape, its also 'warping' time and space. Paper cones still tend to be lightest, followed by poly, and metal cones coming in last (yes, even titanium). So again, using the PG or Ti are bad examples of light weight cone designs. [/QUOTE]

Verification