# Waterproofing a paper cone?



## less (Nov 30, 2006)

Hi all,

I just added a set of Scanspeak 12ms to my kick panels and good grief they sound awesome! While building my kicks thoug - I got some fiberglass dust all over including on the cone of the scans. I used a lightly damped cloth to remove the dust and it actually marred the finish of the paper cone very slightly. But - it was enought to tell me I need to treat these buggers!!! 

I know the Alpine version is treated with something - but god knows what! I picked up some silicone based spray that is used for clothing and shoes... and it says it won't change colors or damage anything in normal situations... but I doubt a paper cone is considered a normal sitatuation! Living in MI now - where it does get wet in the winter and spring... hell - in the summer too - I don't want to mess these up if I can avoid it.

My experience with silicone makes me pretty sure it will work fine... although I may want to cover the rubber and exposed other parts before spraying, but with so many great minds here... it seemed like a smart thing to ask you all if you had any other or better ideas???

Thanks
Less/Jim


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

I had a buddy of mine that used to give his door speakers a good coating of sealer to "treat" his paper cone woofers. The only downside is you need to treat the back side too and that is a royal PITA to do.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

06BLMUSTANGGT said:


> I had a buddy of mine that used to give his door speakers a good coating of sealer to "treat" his paper cone woofers. The only downside is you need to treat the back side too and that is a royal PITA to do.


I wouldn't say that's the only downside. You're looking at pretty much a completely different speaker depending on the properties of the sealer used.


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

t3sn4f2 said:


> I wouldn't say that's the only downside. You're looking at pretty much a completely different speaker depending on the properties of the sealer used.


Yeah, because you add mass to the cone, completely seal it up, and you better hope the sealer doesn't eat the surround on the speaker you are trying to protect... The easiest solution would be to get those foam baffles and cut the backs out. That is what I am planning on doing when I replace my door speakers.... AGAIN...


----------



## 86mr2 (Apr 29, 2005)

The whole point of buying these pricey speakers is the way they sound. Coating them must change it. Coatings are part of the speaker technology. 

For instance, the silver paint on the TB W3-871 was supposedly the item which transformed a fair performer into a special driver. In the home loudspeaker diy community, Mod Podge, is popular to "improve" the performance of cheap drivers. Remember I said cheap, generally sub $8.00 drivers. 

If you put a coating on your 12m it will not be a 12m anymore. 

Build a rain shield.


----------



## chijioke penny (Mar 22, 2007)

OR you could sell ME the Scan's at discounted price (since, their damaged in all ) and buy yourself a new set  I'm your friend and just trying to help out!!!!! LOL


----------



## benny (Apr 7, 2008)

cloth grill with scotchguard? If they're in your kicks, the back of the cone is pretty safe, right? I would shy away from coating an expensive speaker.


----------



## BEAVER (May 26, 2007)

I would think Scotchguard should suffice and as mentioned, if the kicks are sealed I see no reson to spray the backsides.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

BEAVER said:


> I would think Scotchguard should suffice and as mentioned, if the kicks are sealed I see no reson to spray the backsides.


x2, you can throw a piece of carpet over a midrange specific driver without changing its sound, so I would think a layer of heavy duty grill cloth with Scotchgard is not going to affect things negatively either.


----------



## doitor (Aug 16, 2007)

There shouldn't be water in the kicks, unless you made a hole to vent them to the outside.
And in that case, people usually install membranes or variovents.

Jorge.


----------



## Megalomaniac (Feb 12, 2007)

less said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I just added a set of Scanspeak 12ms to my kick panels and good grief they sound awesome! While building my kicks thoug - I got some fiberglass dust all over including on the cone of the scans. I used a lightly damped cloth to remove the dust and it actually marred the finish of the paper cone very slightly. But - it was enought to tell me I need to treat these buggers!!!
> 
> ...


the alpines are coated, and it changed the sound for the worse according to users that have used both the scans and alpines. Gensis has a version thats coated with something but I do not know what. It sounded better than the scans from what i was told. Costs an arm and a leg for that driver though.


----------



## less (Nov 30, 2006)

Treated grill cloth it is....

That seems like a very logical way to go. Thanks for the input.. especially those who caught the mounting details. Part of me still thinks that the coating would be ok if I didn't try soaking the cone but jsut lightly hit it - but for safety sake, and for unadulterated sonic bliss, the treated cloth is the best option.

The stuff I picked up is pretty much the equivalent to scotchgaurd - so I will just spray that on some cloth and install it inside the metal grills that I plan on using to protect the drivers from peoples feet =)

Thanks again... I wrote to scanspeak too so it will be interesting to see thier response.

Less


----------



## Dillyyo (Feb 15, 2008)

t3sn4f2 said:


> x2, you can throw a piece of carpet over a midrange specific driver without changing its sound, so I would think a layer of heavy duty grill cloth with Scotchgard is not going to affect things negatively either.


This makes no sense to me as a barrier, such as a piece of carpet, does not add mass to the transducer. The barrier might alter the soundwave by partial inhibition of the energy transfer, but added mass seems to possibly alter the basic structure of the wave it self. I could be wrong, but just doesn't seem equivelant to me.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

Dillyyo said:


> This makes no sense to me as a barrier, such as a piece of carpet, does not add mass to the transducer. The barrier might alter the soundwave by partial inhibition of the energy transfer, but added mass seems to possibly alter the basic structure of the wave it self. I could be wrong, but just doesn't seem equivelant to me.


I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. I was saying that if a moderately thick piece of unbacked carpet does not inhibit the sound of a _midrange_ then a thin grill cloth with a spray on it probably will even less.


----------



## Dillyyo (Feb 15, 2008)

t3sn4f2 said:


> I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. I was saying that if a moderately thick piece of unbacked carpet does not inhibit the sound of a _midrange_ then a thin grill cloth with a spray on it probably will even less.


oooppps:blush: I thought you were saying that a spraying on the cone was equivelent to a piece of carpet! LOL I thought that was rather odd coming from you, but you never know!


----------



## Megalomaniac (Feb 12, 2007)

Less, do you have any photos of your new install?


----------

