Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="sundownz" data-source="post: 7141125" data-attributes="member: 549523">Rubber is also a comparably poor choice in cold climates -- my Russian clients tell me the E8 v.2 surround is like concrete in Moscow this time of year. It&#039;s the only rubber surround driver we make now and I may end up changing it for that reason.A dB or two is a HUGE difference in SPL... you are talking about losing 33-66% of the power put into the driver in the surround at that point. Typically it won&#039;t be that dramatic of a loss, though, but enough that it&#039;s not going to be desirable unless you simply need extra mass for the design and don&#039;t want to put it in the coil.As far as tearing... if the design limits the driver with the spider or motor first before the surround then there is no problem with mechanical tearing of the surround. It is a balancing act of design.Most modern foam surrounds will last a LONG time as well since they are treated much better than old ones were. For example... I am not aware of any SI Mag drivers with a rotten surround and some of those are ~8 years old dating back to the v.1 Claw model and are still in usage today... Nick has an original GZ Nuke as well with an intact foam surround -- that thing is OLD.As for cost... it&#039;s not like a rubber surround cost 100 dollars... the price difference is quite small. If a design calls for rubber - I will use it. If it calls for foam - then I will use it. Cost doesn&#039;t come into play for me on this matter as it&#039;s such a small difference, IMO.Rubber has it&#039;s place, especially when designing a driver with a purposely low Fs, but simply saying &quot;I hate foam - rubber rocks&quot; is a bit short sighted.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="sundownz, post: 7141125, member: 549523"] Rubber is also a comparably poor choice in cold climates -- my Russian clients tell me the E8 v.2 surround is like concrete in Moscow this time of year. It's the only rubber surround driver we make now and I may end up changing it for that reason. A dB or two is a HUGE difference in SPL... you are talking about losing 33-66% of the power put into the driver in the surround at that point. Typically it won't be that dramatic of a loss, though, but enough that it's not going to be desirable unless you simply need extra mass for the design and don't want to put it in the coil. As far as tearing... if the design limits the driver with the spider or motor first before the surround then there is no problem with mechanical tearing of the surround. It is a balancing act of design. Most modern foam surrounds will last a LONG time as well since they are treated much better than old ones were. For example... I am not aware of any SI Mag drivers with a rotten surround and some of those are ~8 years old dating back to the v.1 Claw model and are still in usage today... Nick has an original GZ Nuke as well with an intact foam surround -- that thing is OLD. As for cost... it's not like a rubber surround cost 100 dollars... the price difference is quite small. If a design calls for rubber - I will use it. If it calls for foam - then I will use it. Cost doesn't come into play for me on this matter as it's such a small difference, IMO. Rubber has it's place, especially when designing a driver with a purposely low Fs, but simply saying "I hate foam - rubber rocks" is a bit short sighted. [/QUOTE]

Verification