2. speakers
  3. 151205-117859

Is the dynamic advantage of cones just distortion?

I came across the viewpoint that panel speakers are inherently superior to most if not all cone based dynamic speakers and the often cited advantage of dynamics in cone speakers is simply just due to distortion (that is not inherently in the music). And the reason people prefer cones is because of this distortion.

Any thoughts on this? Also any thoughts on why cone based speakers dominate the market vs panels like magnepan and soundlabs?
smodtactical
5 responses Add your response
mike_in_nc
1,147 posts
 
I think that distortion is one way that a component (speaker or electronics) might sound louder. And at least in the moderate price range, panel speakers to tend to have less distortion.

On the first point, Robert E Greene said this in TAS in his review of the Janszen zA2.1: "One of the mechanisms by which music gives the impression of getting louder is that the distortion produced by instruments themselves increases as they are played louder. An unthinking listener can confuse messenger and message and can start to believe that components with distortion that remains low as levels rise are “undynamic.” I am not making this up. A well-known reviewer claimed for example that the Sunfire Signature (which could put out 2500 watt pulses) was undynamic compared to tube amplifiers. You can form your own impression of what was going on there."

If you don't know Greene, he is a professional mathematician and semiprofessional violinist. He knows sound, he knows theory, and he actually measures the gear he reviews -- though TAS doesn't print measurements.

Typically, panel speakers don’t have as wide a sweet spot as cone speakers. That’s one big reason they are not as popular: they are more suited to serious listening than providing music for a party.

erik_squires
16,056 posts
 
Nope, not at all. 

The big advantage of panels is the planar dispersion giving them a higher ratio of direct to reflected sound.

Otherwise, in almost every measurement, a top tier dynamic system will outperform a panel.

Buy what you like. Buy what integrates best for you, but lower distortion is not the answer you are seeking.
mijostyn's avatar
mijostyn
8,570 posts
 
It is much simpler than that. Dynamic (cone) speakers are more popular because they are small, easy to live with and there are hundreds if not thousands of them available that are less expensive than just about any planar system, magnetic or ESL. Ribbon speakers have just as wide a sweet spot as any dynamic speaker as do ESLs that are not flat but curved in some fashion. Ribbons and ESLs have much better transient response than dynamic speakers because the moving part has much lower mass and every molecule of the diaphragm or ribbon is being driven and controlled down to the molecular level. Dipole speakers which includes planar magnetics and ESLs,  limit dispersion in very useful ways and when you make them line sources this effect is better yet. Not that you can't get a dynamic speaker to perform well but most do not perform as well as the better planar magnetics and they have not got a prayer against a line source ESL. Horns, because you have better control of dispersion and they are a better impedance match to air like ESLs should be the ultimate point source speakers, ESLs the ultimate line source speakers. Cones, domes and such belong in a museum with Edison:)
(Just intentional inflammatory rhetoric to bring out the gremlins.)  
bdp24's avatar
bdp24
9,788 posts
 

Robert E. Greene in The Absolute Sound, reviewing the Eminent Technology LFT-8b loudspeaker:

"Distortion in the ET sounds as though it is down at electrostatic levels---or lower. This seemed to me one of the lowest-distortion speakers in the midrange that there is, perhaps THE lowest. Measured midrange distortion is down at levels like 0.1% or less."


Noel Keywood on the LFT-8b in Hi-Fi World (UK):

"My first impression of the Eminents was that they are all but ’silent’ loudspeakers. There was such an absence of any colour, character, or mush that the LFT-8b’s sounded barely there; as a loudspeaker they are particularly ’silent’ against all else."

"The sheer absence of ’anything’ is a little disconcerting at first, hence my comment that the loudspeaker itself is silent. The absence of character, and sense of ease, gave me the impression that there was ZERO DISTORTION (my emphasis), meaning any distortion of any sort. Again, here is a ’silent’ loudspeaker, an almost uncanny experience."

"Singers and instruments are---if you can imagine this---starkly clean, with no colour or embellishment at all. There was a wealth of fine detail, and lightly struck cymbals rang with a simple, sweet delicacy that was entrancing. It was so easy to pick out fine details in a performance because of the lack of ’anything’ that all became clear in a simple manner through the Eminent."

"The LFT-8b’s are in a world of their own and quite unlike any other loudspeaker I have heard. They are not even like Martin Logans, being more stark and matter of fact, and more simply pure. The Eminents are probably the purest and least coloured loudspeakers I have ever heard. You are suddenly left with just the music, and it is an intriguing and fascinating experience."


In spite of all the above being true. audiophiles continue to ignore this $2499/pr marvel. As the kids say, oh well.

erik_squires
16,056 posts
 
If we are talking about measured distortion in an anechoic room, I've never seen any panel come down as low as the best dynamic drivers, nor have I seen them get as close in smoothness of frequency response or dynamic range as equivalent dynamic speakers.

However!

Panel speakers often integrate much better in a room and provide more detail at the listening location, with less acoustic treatment needed.

So I'm not sure which the OP was asking.
Log in to respond
More to discover
80x80
Zellaton Plural Evo
80x80
Raidho X1.6
80x80
TAD TAD Micro Evolution ME1