|
|
 Re: Rubber vs Foam...
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 3
newbie
|
newbie
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 3 |
I bought my AR9's back in 1981 and the foam surrounds failed on all four bass drivers and the two larger midranges just last year. I replaced them all and the distributor said that the newer foam is immune to deterioration. If he's wrong I really don't care if they only last another 23 years. If you're unfamiliar with the AR9's they were a fantastic speaker and very highly reviewed (still sought after, in fact). The only problem with them is the size at five feet tall and weighing 120 pounds. Price had nothing to do with AR's use of foam since these giants are beautifully built and cost $1,800 the pair (back in '81.
By the way, without the foam surrounds the cones rattle against the frames during excursion since the foam is there to align the cones properly. Hearing the rattling in the background was the only way I knew the surrounds were bad. Broke my heart to pull the grills off and see that rotten foam.
|
|
|
Re: Rubber vs Foam...
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 5,236
axiomite
|
|
axiomite
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 5,236 |
In reply to:
By the way, without the foam surrounds the cones rattle against the frames during excursion since the foam is there to align the cones properly. Hearing the rattling in the background was the only way I knew the surrounds were bad. Broke my heart to pull the grills off and see that rotten foam.
Likewise with my Snell Acoustics Type K/II's. My heart hit the floor when I removed the grills and saw that deteriorated mess. 
But they're all fixed up and good as new again now though. 
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics24,945
Posts442,473
Members15,617
| |
Most Online2,082
Jan 22nd, 2020
|
|
|
0 members (),
369
guests, and
4
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
|
|
