Cones vs. factory spikes?


Has anyone done any A-B testing for various speaker cones? Currently, my KEF REF 4s (120 lbs each, ported base) have the factory spikes. Before spending big bucks on Orchard Bay cones (used on Talon Khorus and recommended by my dealer) or Black Diamond Racing (why is their web site is abysmal?), I would like to know what others have used on the bottom of their speakers and if they make an "audible" differnce. Rest of system (for 2 channel) is: Aranov tubemonos, firstline pre, Sony SCD-1 (on order).
lornecherry
Try the BDR or Polycrystal speaker cones, thread them almost, but not completely, against the speaker bottom face. These two work the best for me on carpeting. If you're lucky enough to have hardwood floors, or VERY low pile carpet, try the Audios MIBs under the speakers. Wow. Like you, I despise the simple spikes even the most expensive speakers seem to provide as factory equipment. Awful sounding, and don't inspire structural confidence, at least to me. I always fear the damn things will shear right off with heavy speakers, you know?
Most factory spikes are just threaded rod ground to a point on one end with locking nut, almost an afterthought. I use "collossial" Polycrystal cones which are 2" tall brass coated with polycrystal material. Does clearly provide better sound all around over factory spikes and cost $160 for a set of eight threaded cones. I was told by dealer to tighten cones against speaker bottom to completely couple for best sound. You can loosen one cone as needed to level.

Also as Evans said don't be afraid to experiment with other speaker mounting methods such as Aurios MIB, RollerBlocks, Vibrapods etc. All produce different sound. Sistrum, mentioned by Macm, and others make speaker platforms with spikes built in, can get expensive though (as can Aurios MIB for speakers)
I think you guys are CRAZY! "Cones or spikes....hmmm what sounds better?" Nothing wrong with being nuts, eh?
OK. That does it. Now I'm totally confused. Here is what I knew up to now : On speakers, when the voice coil moves, it generates an equal (assuming no loss) force in the opposite direction (ie towards the back). If not dampened, this causes colorations and reduction of power towards the front. Therefore, it is necessary to anchor the speakers to the floor firmly to stop the backward motion of the cabinet. The best way to do this via spikes and cones. There are even suggestions that the cone and/or spike 'cups' reduces the 'firmness' of the anchoring and should be avoided. There was even a thread in A'gon which suggested marble to be bolted to the speaker ! Now, in this thread, I read about 'Aurios' and 'Roller Blocks' under the speakers. Again, to my understanding, these are designed to 'sway', -possibly- causing the speakers to move. What am I missing here ? Can someone please explain...
Ikarus; you're right, it is complicated. I recently called Dunlavy Labs and ended up talking to John Dunlavy himself. I asked him why he did not put spikes/cones on Dunlavy speakers and he said "because they don't measure as well as without" (he was referring to flat frequency response).

It's true, Dunlavy does not use any coupling devices between speakers and floor. J. Dunlavy also said the best thing to do is to just let the speakers "float on carpet". Dunlavy speakers are mostly pretty heavy, and he did not specify conditions under which measurements were made.

All that said, my Vandersteen 3Asigs have Tiptoes, which I like, and my 2Ces have good quality spikes threaded into the steel basees. While I am considering spikeless Dunlavy speakers, I do prefer spiked speakers, based on my experience with the Vandys. Craig