Uhm…what? lol you wanna clarify that statement?
First three that come to mind are the AR3, the classic 90's Vega 12 sub and some house brand 10" 2 ways my dad got with his old Sherwood receiver. Those 2 ways were probably garbage by today's standards but I always liked the deep, warm sound of the speakers I grew up with
The material absolutely makes a difference in sound. Otherwise every speaker would be made of the same material. Compare a pressed paper midrange to a poly cone mid or a silk dome tweeter to an aluminum dome. And magnets make a huge difference in how well it controls the cone movement.
I didn't say it doesn't make a difference. I was simply trying to explain that making knee-jerk comparisons between speakers based on their cone material and/or magnet size was useless.
I didn’t make any knee jerk comparisons either. This was observation. Nowhere did I compare them beyond type of material they were constructed of.
Also, didn't say you did. Are you always this charming?
I’m responding to you insinuations…which is exactly what they are. Are you always this combative?
if you didn't whip it with a wire-wisk in a chilled bowl, you don't have whipped cream worthy of the name.
The task of controlling the movement of the cone is mostly up to the suspension of the driver, i.e. the spider and the surround. The motor moves the diaphragm out of the center position and the spider/surround moves it back into the center position and so on.
I think one look at the various BMW upgrade kits will tell them its not feasible. For most people the premium systems sound fine and upgrades to all 4 ohm speakers are easy to do.
JBL is not the same company it once was, but they at least managed to maintain reasonable quality sound with most of their offerings throughout the company changes.
