What's up with the Kenrick "KRS Artificial Leather" surrounds?

[BMWCCA]

The large thread over on AK about an owner's latest "dream system" (second this year) involves Kenji having twisted him into the alternate reality where the 4333A is the best JBL, ever, and the only one with forever crossovers that need no upgrading due to their use of polyester-film caps. No other can compare. Now another member pops up with the Kenji "upgrade" to what he refers to as "KRS Artificial Leather" surrounds. I assume KRS is shorthand for KenRickSound, but . . . why do it?

Anyone know anything about these? How they affect the driver's performance parameters? Durability? Anything? My assumption is it's an attempt to improve on the lifespan of foam surrounds for Kenji's well-heeled clients. But what does it do to the sound? Seems to me it would be as heretical as an off-brand re-cone.

[grumpy]

Without measurements and listening, who knows...

That said, there were quite a few early drivers that had actual leather surrounds (and often phenolic, spiders... which makes the name make a little more sense looking at them... whether it had anything to do with it or not).

I've always assumed lansalloy was an attempt at an artificial leather surround with good self damping properties and without the upkeep (oops).

No real comment about the properties of a new pleather(?) surround.

[hjames]

because there is an almost mystical kinship with ... Leathah!

The large thread over on AK about an owner's latest "dream system" (second this year) involves Kenji having twisted him into the alternate reality where the 4333A is the best JBL, ever, and the only one with forever crossovers that need no upgrading due to their use of polyester-film caps. No other can compare. Now another member pops up with the Kenji "upgrade" to what he refers to as "KRS Artificial Leather" surrounds. I assume KRS is shorthand for KenRickSound, but . . . why do it?

Anyone know anything about these? How they affect the driver's performance parameters? Durability? Anything? My assumption is it's an attempt to improve on the lifespan of foam surrounds for Kenji's well-heeled clients. But what does it do to the sound? Seems to me it would be as heretical as an off-brand re-cone.

[BMWCCA]

Here's the sales pitch the owner was given, supposedly by Kenji:

Kenji found them to give much better bass than stock.

Apparently, they've been working on this improvement for a long while before offering it as an upgrade.

I wonder how Kenji would define "better"?

[grumpy]

Not arguing for or against, but mo' better bass sounds a little like "coldest beer in town".

If they can sell them (perhaps via demo or word of mouth) without further info,
I'm not going to get all butthurt about it. Would be interesting (for me) to know more
so I don't drop it in the polished/plated 075 category.

(ok... sort of interested. Hasn't motivated me to drive over to AK for a look-see :P)

[JeffW]

Hell, I read the guy's thread and still couldn't rustle up enough outrage to inquire.

[Ian Mackenzie]

If you dismiss the description "leather" an alternative surround is not a new idea.

If you were to regard this as a cloth surround for all intensive purposes it may well do some things better.

Jbl have after all used cloth surrounds in recent times.

It may well (leather) be less prone to pumping on large excursions where a foam surround would literally balloon rather than see air pressure in the port. The losses Q? in the surround may have a dynamic impact under those conditions Foam is better for controlling boundary reflections as sound waves move out to the edge of the cone.

I have heard some some full range drivers with leather surround recently so leather is out there.

That is my educated guess. Make the driver a better air pump.

But it might be a case of plecibo (aka visual) on the part of the user that dominates what the ears hear

[gdmoore28]

Ian, I'm not a word Nazi, but I had quite a stumble over the "intensive purposes" in your post. Is that intentional, or did you mean "intents and purposes?"

GeeDeeEmm

[Ian Mackenzie]

I meant the latter but read this

"for all intensive purposes"

"Both for all intents and purposes and for all intensive purposes are widely used to mean “for all practical purposes” or “virtually".

For all intensive purposes is a fairly common eggcorn derived from the original phrase. It’s often heard in speech, but it’s rare in published writing because it generally doesn’t pass through the editorial process."

Just throwing it out there

I admire Kenji for differentiating himself in the market and if this bring joy to some of his customers then that is a good thing ( in an otherwise compromised set of circumstances)

(Auto word correct on the iPhone and my dog licking me can result in a loss of exact meaning)

[hjames]

Its not actually leather, but a synthetic leather of some kind ...
No pro or conning it, I'm just sayin'

[Lee in Montreal]

I have (almost) 40 years old Butyl surrounds on several of my KEF woofers and they are still like new. I was always amazed that JBL produced foam surrounds that start deteriorating the day they are made. Even being kept in storage in a box. If synthetic leather works better and last longer, then why not?

[hsosdrum]

While I was working at Harman, I had many discussions with Greg Timbers and Jerry Morro about speaker (transducer) design, and both told me that the construction and materials in a speaker's surround have a very large impact on its performance. (I specifically remember Jerry telling me that the treated accordion surround of the 2213Nd-2 woofer in the 4312E was "more than 30% responsible" for the transducer's overall performance.) Changing the surround material (i.e. from foam to leather), its construction (from 180-degree roll to 135-degree roll, or to accordion, or from untreated accordion to treated accordion) or its physical properties (i.e. its compliance) will significantly alter the transducer's performance. And the full extent of these changes is almost always unpredictable, since the transducer's physical elements all interact and affect each other's physical performance.

As Grumpy said, measurements should reveal how the new surround actually affect's the woofer's performance. Without measurements, any simple pronouncement that the sound is "better" is always a matter of opinion. (When was the last time any of us blindly accepted another audiophile's opinion that something sounded "better" without first listening to confirm it for ourselves?)

But just as important, even if the mod does measure and sound "better", is it repeatable? Can subsequent leather surrounds be manufactured with tolerances tight enough to ensure that the resulting woofer performance will duplicate that of the measured prototype? Absent such repeatability, any such modification, no matter how much "better" it sounds, should be considered a "one-shot deal". Considering that "leathah" is a natural material that is subject to natural variations in density and rigidity, and that the surrounds are hand-made and subject to the small variations attendant to all hand-made products, I have my doubts that it's possible to create multiple leather surrounds with physical properties similar enough to ensure consistent woofer-to-woofer performance.

Edit: This was written before Heather's post about the surrounds being synthetic leather. Nonetheless, my feelings about it are the same.

[BMWCCA]

Edit: This was written before Heather's post about the surrounds being synthetic leather. Nonetheless, my feelings about it are the same.

The term used by the owner of the system, and Kenji, and in the title of this thread was and is "artificial leather".

I have to wonder if the Russians have figured out this "new" technology yet?

[lordoflight]

Is there a way to "soften" the surrounds in order to get more bass?

[hjames]

Is there a way to "soften" the surrounds in order to get more bass?

Most people add a subwoofer to get more bass ...
rather than try to tweak the speaker (driver) design ...