Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="audioholic" data-source="post: 6286493" data-attributes="member: 549629">If we were trying to find the exact cone area of the radiating surface, I would agree with you. There are more accurate ways, if for some reason, you need to know EXACTLY. But the point of this thread is comparing cone area between subs, so Pi®^2 will work fine.Where Pi®^2 falls short is it includes 100% of the surround. Your numbers are likely derived from the 2/3 of surround is included method, but its &#039;averaged&#039; so who knows what size surround it was factoring. Thus your method is a guess to get close, just like Pi®^2 is. If we/he require exact numbers, look up the cone area for each speaker being compared, as most manufacturers list this spec. Otherwise, if we are just trying to get a rough idea, using Pi®^2 will be fine.And lets face it, when comparing cone area between systems, if the cone area difference comes out so slight that you need exact cone area figures for each driver being compared to conclude which has more, then other factors like excursion, power input, enclosure design, installation and environment will all play MUCH larger roles in over all output differences.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="audioholic, post: 6286493, member: 549629"] If we were trying to find the exact cone area of the radiating surface, I would agree with you. There are more accurate ways, if for some reason, you need to know EXACTLY. But the point of this thread is comparing cone area between subs, so Pi®^2 will work fine. Where Pi®^2 falls short is it includes 100% of the surround. Your numbers are likely derived from the 2/3 of surround is included method, but its 'averaged' so who knows what size surround it was factoring. Thus your method is a guess to get close, just like Pi®^2 is. If we/he require exact numbers, look up the cone area for each speaker being compared, as most manufacturers list this spec. Otherwise, if we are just trying to get a rough idea, using Pi®^2 will be fine. And lets face it, when comparing cone area between systems, if the cone area difference comes out so slight that you need exact cone area figures for each driver being compared to conclude which has more, then other factors like excursion, power input, enclosure design, installation and environment will all play MUCH larger roles in over all output differences. [/QUOTE]

Verification