[HN Gopher] Classic components could be replaced by rubber in ne...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Classic components could be replaced by rubber in next-gen
       loudspeakers
        
       Author : crousto
       Score  : 73 points
       Date   : 2023-06-03 18:18 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.polytechnique-insights.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.polytechnique-insights.com)
        
       | _Microft wrote:
       | These speakers seem to work like this:
       | 
       | There is a rubber layer, coated with conducting material to serve
       | as electrodes. The signal is applied in form of a high voltage
       | which makes the electrodes attract each other and contract the
       | rubber in between perpendicular to the surface (i.e. the rubber
       | layer gets thinner). Since the rubber material is relatively
       | incompressible though (volume of the material doesn't change),
       | the surface area of the membrane has to increase in return. To
       | generate sound from that, the membrane is stretched over a cavity
       | that is under higher than ambient pressure which helps expand the
       | 'balloon' when its surface area increases. This displaces
       | surrounding air which means the contraption is emitting
       | soundwaves.
       | 
       | (I could only find a thumbnail of the first page of a paper from
       | that professor and extracted this from it)
       | 
       | https://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=21108
        
         | yummypaint wrote:
         | This sounds like an "electroactive polymer." there are some
         | squishy tapes made by 3m that incidentally have this property
         | out of the box. Make a spot of conductive carbon paint on each
         | side, apply a few kV, and watch the spots double in area as the
         | electrostatic forces squish the material.
        
       | sandreas wrote:
       | If you want an affordable, good sounding speaker that you can
       | build yourself, you might wanna take a look at Tech Ingredients:
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKIye4RZ-5k
        
       | Kapura wrote:
       | The article mentions the fragility, but seems extremely
       | optimistic on the ability to solve this, but I'm not sure way. It
       | just says "once this is overcome" but the things it seems to be
       | talking about are major barriers to a commercial product.
        
       | smnscu wrote:
       | [flagged]
        
         | KennyBlanken wrote:
         | > I had ChatGPT expand on the paragraphs
         | 
         | Yeah, don't do that. Nobody wants to read "AI" textspam here in
         | the comments.
         | 
         | > so take the audiophile considerations with a grain of salt
         | lol.
         | 
         | The understatement of the year. Repeat after me: chatgpt is not
         | deterministic.
        
           | kennywinker wrote:
           | Just to +1 this, in general nobody wants to read AI textspam
           | anywhere. I hope the trend is over now but like a month ago
           | any time somebody would ask a question on the slack I'm on,
           | someone else would copy-paste 500 words of chatgpt blathering
           | with a similar "disclaimer".
           | 
           | We all know about chatgpt now. If someone wants a chatgpt
           | answer to their questions, they can go get that themselves.
        
       | dsr_ wrote:
       | This appears to be describing an electrostatic speaker. They're
       | on the market, and have been for decades, using mylar or a
       | similar material.
        
         | vr46 wrote:
         | I was wondering much the same, except I note that my pal's
         | massive Quads and the older radiator-like versions at uni were
         | still crazy heavy due to the power supply (I assume) and they
         | were a bit short on warm bass, perhaps these "new" speakers run
         | on a trickle of power and produce bass like a Cerwin-Vega for
         | all I know?
        
           | ilyt wrote:
           | The power supply problem is not power but voltage,
           | electrostatic speakers just require high voltage
           | 
           | Also they are expensive audiophile thing so good chance they
           | were driven off some super inefficient and/or made on
           | discrete componentes, hence the size
        
         | hristov wrote:
         | It doesn't. This scheme uses a membrane like the electrostatic
         | speakers, but otherwise it is quite different. In the
         | electrostatic speakers, you load the membrane with extra
         | electrons and then use electro-magnets to apply a varying
         | electric field across the membrane in accordance with your
         | sound signal. Since the membrane has much more electrons than
         | protons, the electric field causes the membrane to move. This
         | method requires magnets.
         | 
         | The system in the article does not use magnets. What they do is
         | they make a membrane that moves when a voltage is applied
         | between its top and bottom surfaces. Thus, the membrane can
         | probably be referred to as being piezoelectric, although the
         | article does not use that term. In this case you can apply the
         | sound signal directly to the membrane and make it move, and
         | when it moves it creates sound. Thus, this system does not
         | require any magnets.
         | 
         | The lack of magnets will make it much lighter. Also, the fact
         | that you are applying the signal directly to the thing making
         | the sound may result in better sound quality.
        
         | buildbot wrote:
         | Yeah I am really nonplussed how this is the top post on HN
         | right now (I know that is against the rules to mention but
         | really)
        
           | ahahahahah wrote:
           | This is the response of someone who knows that electrostatic
           | speakers are a thing and has seen marketing or other images
           | of them, but has no idea how they work and lacks either the
           | curiosity or the capability to learn. The speakers described
           | in this article are nothing close to electrostatic speakers.
        
           | coldtea wrote:
           | Because it has nothing to do with EL speakers -- this is just
           | the casual HN dismissal
        
           | TulliusCicero wrote:
           | > Yeah I am really nonplussed
           | 
           | Well this tells me nothing.
           | 
           | (The two meanings of this word are essentially opposite)
        
             | CrampusDestrus wrote:
             | The wrong meaning is the opposite of the right meaning
        
             | samstave wrote:
             | > _Well this tells me nothing._
             | 
             | Well its certainaly not a non negative statement because
             | its talking about being plussed, which is a positive
             | statement, so a nonplussed person is truly chaotic-neutral.
        
             | falcolas wrote:
             | I can't tell if serious or sarcastic. Either way, here you
             | go.
             | 
             | nonplussed : adjective
             | 
             | - Bewildered; unsure how to respond or act.
             | 
             | - Unfazed, unaffected, or unimpressed.
             | 
             | - filled with bewilderment
        
               | flyingcircus3 wrote:
               | This meets the criteria of Poe's law. It is equally
               | reasonable to assume _you_ are being sarcastic or
               | serious. If they didn't just recently look up the
               | definition themselves, they wouldn't have commented about
               | the conflict in the two definitions.
        
             | flyingcircus3 wrote:
             | Summarizing dictionary.com:
             | 
             | 1. Surprised and confused 2. Unperturbed
             | 
             | "Yeah I am really unperturbed" doesn't make sense in
             | context of it's parent.
             | 
             | I'm not sure how you could be nonplussed about this.
        
               | coldtea wrote:
               | > _" Yeah I am really unperturbed" doesn't make sense in
               | context of it's parent_
               | 
               | It's not just unpertrubed, it's also "not impressed".
               | 
               | In the context of the comment it basically means "I see
               | this speaker announcement as nothing special, what's the
               | big deal?".
        
         | dist-epoch wrote:
         | I'm not so sure. Electrostatic speakers have big heavy metal
         | electrodes.
         | 
         | They talk about a thin conducting layer on the rubber, quite a
         | different thing.
        
           | aidos wrote:
           | They definitely look very different. I understand how ESLs
           | work, but I don't quite get how these move. Can anyone
           | explain?
        
             | falcolas wrote:
             | As I understand it, the rubber being is forced into the
             | shape of a dome via air pressure, which makes one side a
             | bit bigger than the other. The electrostatic charge on the
             | opposing faces when one is bigger than the other would
             | cause it to flex - acting as a speaker diaphragm.
             | 
             | It's a bit of a guess though; its definitely outside my
             | wheelhouse.
        
             | karmakaze wrote:
             | Like an electrostatic speaker the opposite charges'
             | attraction generate movement. The difference is in an ESL
             | one of the charges are stationary. In this new scheme, both
             | charges are on the membrane but on opposite sides where
             | attraction compresses/thins the rubber causing it to expand
             | along its planar directions causing the dome to get larger.
             | The inner air pressure is to assist the expansion movement.
        
           | chrisdhoover wrote:
           | Magnepan speakers have been around since the 1970s. They do
           | not have anything heavy. Martin Logan speakers do have a
           | heavy base presumably the driver.
        
             | jakedata wrote:
             | Don't confuse magneplanar speakers with electrostatic
             | speakers. Other than them both being flat they are quite
             | different beasts.
        
       | buildbot wrote:
       | This seems only mildly different than already existing
       | electrostatic drivers??? In terms of getting rid of heavy magnets
       | at least.
        
         | jeffbee wrote:
         | Yes, as we know from the history of electrostatic speakers, all
         | you need to replace those bulky magnets is a sheet of mylar the
         | size of a billboard, and also a regular magnetic voice coil for
         | the half of the power spectrum that they can't handle.
        
           | buildbot wrote:
           | These seen smaller than a billboard: https://www.crutchfield.
           | com/S-Me16Db11xTX/p_839EMESLD/Martin...
           | 
           | And with lower frequency sound, aren't heavy drivers actually
           | better? You literally need more mass/energy to push more air,
           | but at a lot lower frequency so the effect of moving the mass
           | back and forth at 20Hz does not really matter as much as
           | 40Khz?
        
             | bob1029 wrote:
             | The weight of the driver is not really a factor so much as
             | a side effect of the engineering. You want to look at it in
             | terms of total volume displaced and the sensitivity (if you
             | are thinking about efficiency). Drivers with more surface
             | area & excursion typically do have larger magnets and
             | support structures.
             | 
             | LFE reproduction is all about moving large volumes of air
             | by any means necessary. There are relatively featherweight
             | subwoofers that literally use fans to move volumes of air
             | and achieve performance that is impossible in traditional
             | drivers of any weight class.
             | 
             | Doesn't really matter how you do it as long as things stay
             | in phase.
        
             | ilyt wrote:
             | > These seen smaller than a billboard: https://www.crutchfi
             | eld.com/S-Me16Db11xTX/p_839EMESLD/Martin...
             | 
             | Right... because this one contains a normal magnetic woofer
        
       | Puts wrote:
       | Wouldn't rubber dry out over time? If you pay for a good set of
       | speakers you probably want them to last for decades.
        
         | coldtea wrote:
         | Couldn't you just replace it? We also pay for good cars, but we
         | still change their tires every so often...
        
       | sublinear wrote:
       | > Current loudspeakers use a magnet coupled with the movement of
       | a copper coil to vibrate a membrane. In the future these heavy,
       | bulky, and expensive components could be replaced by a dielectric
       | elastomer membrane.
       | 
       | They mention efficiency, but not power. I don't like how this is
       | framed as the general future of all speakers when it's really
       | just the future of midrange drivers.
        
       | tapper wrote:
       | My screen readers reads that site in a verry strange way. It says
       | that there is soft hyfens in a lot of the words so it reads the
       | words like reproduce as"repro duce"
        
       | gtvwill wrote:
       | Ehhhh interesting, might go well for tweeters. Can't see it being
       | great for bass. Can't be arranged in a paraflex horn config.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-06-03 23:00 UTC)