[Audio fledgling]

Hi, I'm learning about the hobby, and was trying to figure out a quick reference ranking for the different dynamic driver materials.

I know that tuning and overall quality control make a huge difference, so driver material isn't everything, but since a lot of manufacturers seem to put that driver material front and center, it would be nice to be able to use that info quickly.

From least impressive to most impressive here's what I've been able to figure out so far, based on my understanding of the science.

1. The manufacturer doesn't tell you, or it's a fancy word for plastic.

2. Beryllium driver

3. CNT (carbon nanotube)

4. DLC (diamond like carbon)

I can't figure out where LCP (liquid crystal polymer) should be. Based on the fact that the arias are LCP and the Kato is DLC I can infer the diamond like carbon should be a better driver, but I can't figure out where liquid crystal polymer should be relative to the CNT driver?

Anyone have a thought as to where the liquid crystal driver belongs?

With the other ones, it's kind of sort of a Matter of looking at bonds, and comparing Young's modulus, because the principle of how they make good sound is the same, but liquid crystal seems like it might be using slightly different science, hence the difficulty.

 

[baskingshark]

Hi, I'm learning about the hobby, and was trying to figure out a quick reference ranking for the different dynamic driver materials.

I know that tuning and overall quality control make a huge difference, so driver material isn't everything, but since a lot of manufacturers seem to put that driver material front and center, it would be nice to be able to use that info quickly.

From least impressive to most impressive here's what I've been able to figure out so far, based on my understanding of the science.

1. The manufacturer doesn't tell you, or it's a fancy word for plastic.

2. Beryllium driver

3. CNT (carbon nanotube)

4. DLC (diamond like carbon)

I can't figure out where LCP (liquid crystal polymer) should be. Based on the fact that the arias are LCP and the Kato is DLC I can infer the diamond like carbon should be a better driver, but I can't figure out where liquid crystal polymer should be relative to the CNT driver?

Anyone have a thought as to where the liquid crystal driver belongs?

With the other ones, it's kind of sort of a Matter of looking at bonds, and comparing Young's modulus, because the principle of how they make good sound is the same, but liquid crystal seems like it might be using slightly different science, hence the difficulty.

The different materials in theory do bring some benefits to the table. Last year or so was the beryllium hype, this year seems to be the LCP hype (eg Moondrop Aria 2021, Dunu Titan S, Tin T3 Plus). These 3 LCP sets seem to give quite good sound, and I do think these 3 are some of the best single DD sets at sub $100 as of 2022.

However, these special driver materials, be it beryllium, graphene, LCP or diamond or whatever, needs to be coated and implemented properly to truly make a difference. In fact if you coat it wrongly it may make the driver sound worse by affecting its physical properties.

The official DUNU folks here on Headfi made some interesting comments about the lining/material of drivers: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/the-discovery-thread.586909/page-2968#post-15288735
"The PVD layer has to be thick enough and the microscopic grain pattern has to be regular enough to confer that pistonic motion beryllium is so famous for. That's why our sub-$100 products (DM-380 and DM-480) are still titanium drivers. Even the TITAN 6, at $139, is only coated on one side."

I suspect that at the budget CHIFI level, some of these novel material applications on drivers may be a marketing gimmick to stand out from the fierce competition at that price range. For all we know they are just sprinkling a few flakes of certain coatings on their drivers instead of uniformly applying it in the prescribed quantities to truly be effective.

Worse still, some companies were caught with their pants down falsely advertising that their IEMs contained beryllium drivers, when they didn't: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/bgv...d-new-ba-series.894331/page-327#post-15987274

DUNU says they have difficulty implementing this Beryllium coating in their sub $100 USD gear. And we already see unit variation in macroscopic areas in these budget CHIFI in terms of sound and build, so I'm not sure that some fly-by-night companies can ensure good QC for all their units when it comes to microscopic application of these novel materials in the proper layering. Beryllium is also toxic to process, so I wonder how do these companies sell beryllium touted IEMs at $30 USD factoring labour and costs?

FWIW, I have heard some purported beryllium or LCP driver sets that sounded no different (or even worse) than a conventional driver. So at the end of the day, the driver material/type is just one facet to consider in an IEM (and I would take it with a big pinch of marketing salt). Tuning and implementation are the much bigger factors at play, and having gourmet premium ingredients doesn't mean squat if the cook can't successfully cook it into a tasty feast.

 

[Audio fledgling]

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. Binocular manufacturers do something similar, a lot of them use different measurements to express how "bright" they are, but there literally all different mathematical transformations of the large lens diameter divided by the magnification.

Reading your reply made me realize something, I hope nobody would do this, but I think technically do to how, graphene is defined, it would technically be possible to color in drivers with a mechanical pencil, and then advertise them as graphene coated. That said, CNT and DLC also seem to be forms of graphene, and my CNT Heart Mirrors sound great. But graphene is a term allows for an uncomfortable amount of marketing wiggle room.

 

[chesebert]

All marketing crap. Wilson Audio makes their drivers out of paper and they sound fantastic.

Use your ears.