# Soft vs hard speakers/monitors



## trifidmaster (Nov 18, 2006)

Soft versus hard speakers/monitors?
What do you think?


----------



## immortalgropher (Feb 16, 2010)

I don't really understand the question...What do you mean by hard and soft?


----------



## trifidmaster (Nov 18, 2006)

I mean the material of the cone = paper, composite,...
I am sure this has an effect on the sound.


----------



## Stone (Dec 30, 2009)

I'm no speaker expert but I've never heard many good things about the quality of paper cones. I've always been led to believe that paper means poor quality (although I don't believe this one bit). Paper cones are old technology but they can still deliver high quality sound. I think aluminum is use in some and polypropylene is more common anymore. It's certainly a matter of preference. I don't really know that there is a way to compare quality between the two, but from my understanding paper cones typically deliver a bit of a softer tone and the poly cones are sharper. Guess it depends on what your preferences are and what it is you are trying to get out of your speakers/monitors.


----------



## 0bazooka_joe0 (Mar 22, 2010)

Seems to me you would get a better response out of a more rigid cone. There are a lot of carbon-fibre and fibre-glass cones out there these days. however, it still comes down to the whole speaker. you could have a solid 4" cone but it may be too good for the rest of the speaker and possibly give you an unwanted ns10 type sound (midrangy). Food for thought.


----------



## fractile (Mar 15, 2009)

From my limited experience the paper cones sound more 'natural' to me. Paper is more porous. This is useful in sealed boxes, I've read. In general, I think paper may have less overall acoustic efficiency, but may provide better compliance (if this is the right term); allowing greater freedom of motion than a more 'opaque' material. In my mind the hard cones are most appealing for those involved mainly with hard rock/heavy metal and other types of hardcore music. I did a listening test at the shop between paper and kevlar Adams; I liked the paper better.


----------



## maxserg (Dec 11, 2008)

Most of the time I prefer pulp(paper) cones. Talking about efficiency, most of the pro audio speakers are still made of pulp. One thing I don't like with carbon fiber, kevlar, aluminium(except for subwoofers like aurasound) or other "hard" cones is they tend to have breakup in the mids that is hard to tame even with sophisticated active or passive xovers.

For tweeters this can be a little different but even then, there are peoples that don't like the sound of titanium tweeters but there are exceptions I guess.


----------



## Recordman (Apr 23, 2010)

That makes sense... that is that a paper/pulp cone would sound good in a sealed box, or at least better than a composite cone. a composite cone in a sealed box will have no where for the air in the box to go upon rarefaction thus forcing the other cones/tweeter to move causing mud or deficient stereo field. the only thing with pulp/paper cones is they are more fragile and loose their rigidity, somewhat, over time. (at least that's what i see on some older speakers) In retrospect, the cone surround would probably wear out before the cone itself did.


----------



## fractile (Mar 15, 2009)

I saw a picture of the back of the Tannoy driver in my ML-10's: http://www.manleylabs.com/images/pro99/tannoysgmrecone.jpg You can see that there is some pulpy bulk to the cone, unlike many speaker cones are thinner and more prone to get flimsy, as you mention. Also, the surround is something like butyl rubber, which I think is practically indestructible compared with foam.


----------



## ejbragg (Dec 13, 2009)

I don't know enough about the difference between the two - nor have I compared the two purposely - to make a personal opinion on the matter. However, I know a couple of mastering engineers who both have spent some time listening to many different monitoring speakers. They both have a preferance of paper, with the reason being they believe paper sounds more "natural", or more "open".


----------

