Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Researchers Make Paper Speakers For LCD TVs

Posted by samzenpus on from the that-smooth-origami-sound dept.

narramissic writes "Engineers at Taiwan's Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI) have developed stereo speakers in paper (video) that are are well suited for thin devices like LCD TVs and will be used in cars starting next year. According to an ITworld article, 'The special paper is made by sandwiching thin electrodes that receive audio signals and a prepolarized diaphragm into the paper structure. A special Flexpeaker adapter between the MP3 player and the speaker is used to play music through the paper.' ITRI says it hopes in the coming year to develop a chip that will do away with the adapter and allow people to plug a digital music player directly into the speaker. ITRI is also working on wireless technologies and will show off its first Bluetooth enabled paper speaker in July."

83 comments

  1. Paper? by oldspewey · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hasn't paper been the primary material in speaker design since, well, since speakers?

    --
    If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    1. Re:Paper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty much. I'm looking at a pair right now, bought in the late 80's.

    2. Re:Paper? by timbck2 · · Score: 1

      Yes, but paper speakers (until now) haven't been able to be made shallow/thin so as to fit in an LCD TV.

      --
      Absurdity: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion. -- Ambrose Bierce
    3. Re:Paper? by icebike · · Score: 1

      That's not entirely true. Most LCD TVs have speakers and most have paper cones. (Ok, most have metal or plastic support structures).

      Thin speakers are not particularly new.

      http://www.ubergizmo.com/15/archives/2009/04/paperthin_speakers_for_advertising.html (also covered by Slash dot here: http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/03/147246

      And see also:
      http://www.eurekalert.org/features/kids/2008-12/acs-tps121508.php

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    4. Re:Paper? by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      Hasn't paper been the primary material in speaker design since, well, since speakers?

      Maybe, but I would have thought the designers would be using computers more these days.

    5. Re:Paper? by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Funny

      I usually listen to mine, but each to his own.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    6. Re:Paper? by APL+bigot · · Score: 3, Informative

      Flat paper speakers. Yawn. This is old news decades ago. You can do this in your living room. I did decades ago. Interleave aluminum foil and the pages of a newspaper. Your making a capacitor. Connect the separate sheets of aluminum to the final audio amplifier in a tube amplifier. One connection to ground, the other to the anode of the final amplifier tube. And yes, there be high voltage here. You now have a talking newspaper. Slashdot is supposed to be a nerd site, why are the vast majority here unaware of this?

      --
      Heisenberg may have been here.
    7. Re:Paper? by SkyDude · · Score: 4, Funny

      You can do this in your living room. I did decades ago. Interleave aluminum foil and the pages of a newspaper.

      Newspaper? What's that?

      I'm guessing if one were to use the New York Times, only the left speaker would work. If using the Boston Globe, the speakers would only work when there's a discussion of gay marriage. And, if the speakers were made from the Chicago Trib - well, it wouldn't work at all.

      --
      == First cross river, then insult alligator.
    8. Re:Paper? by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      I usually listen to mine, but each to his own.

      Looking allows me to take advantage of my Monster Gold Plated Spectacles. Music has never looked so good!

    9. Re:Paper? by bami · · Score: 1

      Note to everyone, this does NOT work with the kindle, I repeat, does NOT WORK with the kindle. >:(.

    10. Re:Paper? by Phoghat · · Score: 1

      Meh

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    11. Re:Paper? by Phoghat · · Score: 1

      http://www.instructables.com/id/Homemade-speaker/

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    12. Re:Paper? by rnturn · · Score: 1

      ``And, if the speakers were made from the Chicago Trib - well, it wouldn't work at all.''

      Ah... another dissatisfied Chicago Tribune subscriber.

      (Wonder where Sam Zell's decided to hide the editorial page this week.)

      --
      CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
  2. But are they MONSTER Paper Speakers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    MONSTER Paper Speakers are made with the finest trees in the world. You won't hear better sound than from their fine pieces of papyrus.

    1. Re:But are they MONSTER Paper Speakers? by JO_DIE_THE_STAR_F*** · · Score: 1

      ...Let me write your number down... ahh here's some paper and... Crap! I just wrecked my $1500 MONSTER Paper speakers.

    2. Re:But are they MONSTER Paper Speakers? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      Strictly speaking, papyrus isn't made from trees at all. Though, if monster, the sort of company that would put gold-plated RF shielding on a toslink cable and charge extra for it, sold papyrus, it probably would be.

    3. Re:But are they MONSTER Paper Speakers? by fpophoto · · Score: 1

      Hmmm...gold-plated papyrus

    4. Re:But are they MONSTER Paper Speakers? by MadnessASAP · · Score: 3, Informative

      Monster does the most ridiculous things to try to get money from unsuspecting customers. My favorite was $150 for 6' of Fiber Optic used for Digital audio. I'm no expert but I bet I could get an undersea data cable for less per foot then that. The really insane part was that since it's a digital signal and it was over such short distances you could use a cheap piece of plastic and get the exact same result.

      --
      I may agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to face the consequences of saying it.
    5. Re:But are they MONSTER Paper Speakers? by Mister_Stoopid · · Score: 1

      Pfft, Monster may be fine for your amateur dog-and-pony-show setup, but I only use paper speakers made from old growth redwood pulp. It gives the sound an indescribable "warm feeling" that I just don't get from any other paper speakers.

    6. Re:But are they MONSTER Paper Speakers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm no expert but I bet I could get an undersea data cable for less per foot then that.

      Of course undersea cable is cheaper. The Monster Cable bulk rate doesn't kick in until you get into transoceanic lengths.

    7. Re:But are they MONSTER Paper Speakers? by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      Kevlar sounds cooler than "papyrus". And only kevlar has the strength to withstand the shear awesomeness that Monster Cable can provide.

    8. Re:But are they MONSTER Paper Speakers? by Idiomatick · · Score: 1

      They have cables up to 1800$ I think it was more than 6' though...

    9. Re:But are they MONSTER Paper Speakers? by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Redwood is crap, teak is the one true speaker-paper material!

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
  3. Durability issues? by DarkFencer · · Score: 1

    Maybe there's something I'm missing here but these do not sound very durable to me - especially not for being put in a relatively durable product like a car.

  4. So... by Jaysyn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They've been making paper speakers for a long time. This seems to be a driverless paper speaker, which apparently is a big deal. I guess technically the prepolarized diaphragm *is* the driver, but it isn't your standard cone / cylinder shape.

    --
    There is a war going on for your mind.
    1. Re:So... by JCSoRocks · · Score: 1

      They may use a unique approach but I can't imagine they're going to sound very good. Additionally, most of the uses already mentioned in the discussion range from novelty usage to just downright obnoxious (movie posters).

      Can we stop making music and movies sound worse and worse (compressed audio, paper speakers, etc) and start working toward more affordable audiophile quality sound?

      --
      You are using English. Please learn the difference between loose and lose; they're, there, and their; your and you're.
    2. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Can the vast majority of stay-at-home moms (not that that isn't an honorable profession - its one of the most honorable) tell the difference? No? Okay then, good luck with that.

      The market for the vast majority of sound equipment is for people who don't know a thing about sound and can't tell the difference between poor sound and quality sound. Until the market gets smarter you will continue to see the cheapest shit mass-produced for the cheap masses. And markets rarely get smarter on their own.

    3. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      From TFA:

      One limitation with Flexpeaker is that while it's very good with sounds at frequencies between 500Hz to 20KHz, it doesn't handle low frequency sounds well.

      They're not pretending to be able to deliver Hi Fi quality sound; this technology is for a completely different purpose to your home cinema setup. Audiophile equipment being expensive is no reason for people not to develop speakers for other applications.

    4. Re:So... by Burning1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In my experience, the issue isn't that most people can't recognize the difference between good sound and bad sound; the issue is that most people have never even heard good sound to begin with.

      Sure... We go to the theater and hear *loud* sound, and then get it into our heads that a base line capable of collapsing a lung means the equipment is of good quality.

      Frankly, these days even if you have good equipment, the source material is so bad that you can't actually tell.

    5. Re:So... by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      here's a 440 Hz test tone

      A sound system incapable of reproducing that sound isn't even close to Hi-Fi.

    6. Re:So... by waveformwafflehouse · · Score: 1

      At least they say it's designed for MP3 players.
      If they're trying to push "HD" video as a standard than why not "HD" audio? Oh wait, they'll call it something like digital paper extreme HD 3D surround that makes you forget why you asked if it sounds good.

    7. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's a somewhat longer, higher-bitrate version of the same test tone:

      video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7129170319259902290

    8. Re:So... by Burning1 · · Score: 1

      Great point. A 500Hz frequency cutoff would make this technology ineffective for reproducing a lot of common instruments, including the human voice.

    9. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That reinforces my suspicion that these are some sort of flexible electrostatic speakers. They really don't do anything remotely resembling bass. This fascinates me because all of the electrostatic speakers I've seen and built require hundreds of volts to drive properly. As a result, they can give you a nasty shock if you touch them and they tend to collect dust like you wouldn't believe. If this group has managed to solve those problems, I will be quite impressed.

    10. Re:So... by sjames · · Score: 1

      That's more or less it, the driver is built in and it isn't cone shaped, meaning it can fit in a much tighter space. Unlike other more or less flat speakers (earphone elements and similar), this is to be flexible (though that can't be good for the sound imaging).

      Either they will need some really good signal processing or the target audience is going to be restricted to the same people who are satisfied with the cheap built-in TV speakers (actually a fairly large group).

      Hardly Earth shattering, but likely useful.

  5. Greeting cards... by dirkbaztard · · Score: 4, Insightful

    would benefit greatly from this. Full stereo cacophony instead of the over-driven mono racket would be a blessing.

    1. Re:Greeting cards... by DanWS6 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Even better: banning greeting cards and the holidays that were created for them.

    2. Re:Greeting cards... by Carnth · · Score: 1

      Sending me the $5 instead of wasting it on a greeting card would be a blessing.

    3. Re:Greeting cards... by MrMista_B · · Score: 1

      Or be twice as godawful.

    4. Re:Greeting cards... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      upper

    5. Re:Greeting cards... by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Still better: evolving into a vertebrate, which is to say, growing a fucking spine. Don't want to participate in the holidays? Don't. It's pretty easy to opt-out of most of it. You can work on the holiday and get paid for it if you like, most employers are pretty happy to permit that one. I don't find it particularly holy to buy shit either.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  6. How is this different ... by colinnwn · · Score: 1

    than what Bose has been doing for years?

    I'll ask again after one of their speakers in a car sits in the sun for a couple years and quits working.

  7. Asians by lessthanpi · · Score: 0, Troll

    Just because you can make walls from paper doesn't mean you can make speakers

    --
    One man with a gun can control 100 without one
  8. This is what they are selling by Krneki · · Score: 4, Informative

    I think this is what the story refers to:

    http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/03/researchers-cre

    --
    Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
    1. Re:This is what they are selling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Same principle but different product, judging by the pictures.

  9. Dear lord, this is horrible... by Chyeld · · Score: 5, Funny

    The goal for the researchers is to be able to mass produce standard poster-size speakers (A2, or 60centimeters by 44cm) costing just US$20 each. Movie makers could then put out posters with soundtrack music or movie highlights emanating from them as people walk by.

    Kill me now, please. Just kill me now.

    You thought those talking birthday cards were annoying? Just try walking in the mall as all 100,000 posters located in random locations start talking all at once, producing the noise which finally wakens those who must not be named and end reality as we believed it to be.

    1. Re:Dear lord, this is horrible... by Plekto · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or imagine shopping and they have these hooked up to IR sensors.

      "Check out this deal on Bug Light! (starts playing radio commercial)"

      Yes, it is horrible. Moreso than most people can imagine.

    2. Re:Dear lord, this is horrible... by ACMENEWSLLC · · Score: 1

      Time to place that buy order for Bose, as they have their active noise canceling head sets.

    3. Re:Dear lord, this is horrible... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "My name is..." "My name is..." "My name is Judge."

    4. Re:Dear lord, this is horrible... by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      and what's wrong with a passive solution?

    5. Re:Dear lord, this is horrible... by cinderblock · · Score: 1

      Just try walking in the mall as all 100,000 posters located in random locations start talking all at once

      There are laws to keep this from happening. It is already very easy to add a small speaker to posters to do this kind of thing. (Remember the Big Mouth Billy Bass) People would throw a fit and get such things taken down if they ever got to be so annoying... quit over-reacting people.

    6. Re:Dear lord, this is horrible... by russotto · · Score: 1

      You thought those talking birthday cards were annoying? Just try walking in the mall as all 100,000 posters located in random locations start talking all at once, producing the noise which finally wakens those who must not be named and end reality as we believed it to be.

      Won't last long, thanks to vandals and security guards who fail to see them. Unless they use deaf mall cops, anyway.

    7. Re:Dear lord, this is horrible... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry. At this rate, the swine flu will get you before the paper speaker.

    8. Re:Dear lord, this is horrible... by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Bigger effectiveness.

      Although Bose always was, is, and always will be expensive crap posing as hi-fi. Not worth the money. Goes well with Monster cables.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    9. Re:Dear lord, this is horrible... by corsec67 · · Score: 1

      Japanese supermarkets are pretty close to that already, especially the DOMY near my school. They put CD players with CDs on loop all throughout the store, so sometimes you have 5 or 6 different things playing near you.

      Yes, it is indeed annoying.

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
    10. Re:Dear lord, this is horrible... by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Try removing the CD & flinging it across the store. Works wonders.

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
  10. Paper speakers are nothing new! by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

    But flat paper speakers are.

  11. It could be by treeves · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, it's a great idea ON PAPER, but...

    --
    ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
  12. Piezo-electric by CrAlt · · Score: 5, Interesting

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piezoelectric

    So they rediscovered the reverse piezoelectric effect and then glued it to some paper.

    Wow, I guess the 50 year old earphones on my crystal radio are cutting edge...

    --
    I have to return some videotapes...
    1. Re:Piezo-electric by philicorda · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure that it is piezoelectric.

      In the video, it appears the paper is covered in tiny electrostatic speakers. They mention a pre polarised diaphragm. It is electret, rather than externally polarised, as that lets them use much lower voltages.

      I don't think anyone has made an electret speaker before. High voltage electrostatic speakers are easy to find though.

      It is probably fairly efficient, but requires a lot of transducers, and their small size means no bass.

  13. Soggy by Kadagan+AU · · Score: 1

    Better hope they don't get wet.. I bet soggy paper speakers don't work quite so well..

    --
    This space for rent, inquire within.
  14. People don't care about sound any more. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It makes me sad that as television sets get larger and better screens, the audio side seems to be getting worse.

    Even a top of the range TV will have worse sound than a 1950s hifi.
    I understand that people want smaller speakers (preferably completely flat), but there are certain physical laws that make it difficult to get full range sound without a cabinet.

    I would love to start an advertising campaign about how televisions can be miniaturized, so that annoying big plasma screen can now be only a few inches in size. :) People would probably think me crazy, but that's how I feel about trying to get real sound from a tiny box.

    And don't even mention the 'one note bass' bose stuff please.

    1. Re:People don't care about sound any more. by Chyeld · · Score: 1

      I think it's less that people don't care as much as it's one of the rare times where we are actually divesting functions from a device instead of integrating more.

      It's hard to do 7.1 or even 5.1 audio from a set of stereo speakers. So why put much effort in it? Simply acknowledge this is something better left to an actual audio setup, and seperate the two functions into two seperate devices, both designed to do what they actually do, well.

    2. Re:People don't care about sound any more. by afidel · · Score: 1

      Some people still care about sound quality, like me =) My front's are 45lb 4' tall floor standers, however my rears are 6.5" 3 way's that are only 4.5" deep and produce fairly good surround sound.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    3. Re:People don't care about sound any more. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who makes the TV? Now who made the surround sound system I wonder?

      Damn marketing ploys to exploit both people who care about quality, and people who haven't a clue or just don't care.

      It's disgusting, I recognize this kind of crap more and more as i get older, and i wonder if the market world was always like this, or whether I'm just noticing things more clearly.

      Paper Speakers are cool, and probably don't sound tinny (lolpun) but still, if they don't sound good, then they are useless to me.

  15. I wonder what the bass response will be like... by dacks_ninja · · Score: 1

    I'll bet it sounds paper thin.

  16. Electrostatic by soundguy · · Score: 1

    This appears to be a low-voltage and flexible version of the electrostatic transducer, which was first prototyped around 90 years ago. Not NEW, just IMPROVED.

    A friend had a set of Magnaplanars the size of doors back in the 70's. They sounded great with an additional low-frequency driver. (didn't call them subwoofers back then because the bottom octave didn't really exist yet in recordings - vinyl records were rolled off at 50hz to keep the phonograph needle from being kicked out of the record groove by subsonics)

    --
    Nothing worthwhile ever happens before noon
    1. Re:Electrostatic by philicorda · · Score: 1

      I think the innovation here is that they are using pre-polarised diaphragms to avoid the high voltages used in previous electrostatic speakers. They are a little like electret mics driven in reverse.

      By the way, Magnaplanar speakers are not actually electrostatic. They use a coil and a magnet, just like a conventional speaker.

    2. Re:Electrostatic by earlymon · · Score: 3, Informative

      Magnaplanars were a diaphragm with an embedded serpentine wire conducting the AC audio signal. The diaphragm was sandwiched between permanent magnets that ran vertically, floor to ceiling. Looking at the diaphragm was not unlike looking at a long continuous paper clip. The permanent magnets were long and thin (about a 1/2" cross-section).

      Many people mistook them for electrostatics.

      With an electrostatic (the first speaker designed by AT&T, ever, using a pig's diaphragm and gold plating), the diaphragm is coated with a conductive material, then stretched between two metal plates. In the set I have, a 75 kV bias is applied to the diaphragm and the AC audio signal is routed to the front/rear metal plates.

      Then, there's the ESS Heil HF driver. That used metalized paper, with the metalization stripped away in a serpentine pattern, then given an accordion fold, then immersed in a high magnetic field (big permanent magnets!) and the AC audio went through the fold, and sound was produced in accordion fashion.

      Then, there was the Ohm-F HF driver - a metal-foil cone attached to a normal moving coil transducer.

      Because of their exotic designs and shapes, many people confused these others with electrostatics - but electrostatic refers to one and only one technology.

      The tech in the article seems to be something altogether new, and I'm looking forward to its advance.

      That being said, remember - you cannot cheat the laws of physics. When the diaphragm moves forward, creating an over-pressure, the rear side is creating a canceling under-pressure. (Every action having an equal and opposite reaction sort of thing.) With conventional speakers, the "opposite" wave is trapped or mitigated inside an enclosure and does not enter the room to cause cancellation.

      With a large diaphragm, you almost need an enclosure in back the size of the room. Impractical in the extreme, these are simply made and marketed as flat panel diaphragms and the rest of the speaker-room response is left to the owner.

      But every Magnaplanar and electrostatic speaker owner will tell you - the worst sounding rig you can get are bi-directional planar speakers crammed up against a wall. Why? Action- reaction: that rear wave's cancellation is a function of distance to rear reflective surface and rear reflective surface acoustic properties.

      So, no, until they re-write some physical laws, a paper poster on a wall producing hi-fi is not in the near future.

      That said - I guarantee if it's viable in a marketing study, some idiot will make them and people will buy them to put along-side their wall-mounted TVs.

      --
      Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
    3. Re:Electrostatic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the set I have, a 75 kV bias is applied to the diaphragm

      I hope it's not humid where you live, do you get zapped if you walk too close to them?

    4. Re:Electrostatic by tygerstripes · · Score: 1

      You clearly know a hell of a lot more about speakers than I, so I have to ask: is there anything like this that works by expansion/contraction of a planar surface rather than vibration? That would surely get around the problem you described, wouldn't it? When I first heard of planar speakers in wall-art etc, that was actually how I envisaged it working.

      --
      Meta will eat itself
    5. Re:Electrostatic by earlymon · · Score: 1

      Actually, that sort of discharge isn't a problem - long before you electrically attach to the diaphragm, the diaphragm electrically attaches to the front or rear plates - arcing. That tends to put pinholes (or worse) in the diaphragm - a known failure mode if you let it go too far. I live where it's very dry, so it's easy for dust to accumulate on the diaphragms, shortening the air gap and - as you can imagine - allowing for more arcing (capacitive discharge).

      If your local IMAX theatre's sound is crackley, then suggest to management that if they have electrostatic panels (quite common to IMAXes, from what little I know) then they might strongly consider cleaning them with a vacuum cleaner - just takes the usual soft-bristle couch-like attachment. A few IMAX operators were very grateful for this tip, as in both cases, they had already spent a lot of money to solve the problem to no avail. Vacuuming really is part of the normal care of open-air electrostatics. So - pass it along.

      (Some very exotic electrostatics, like the old Dayton-Wright's, had the entire electrostatic assembly in a sealed container with inert gases, and front and rear passive diaphragms mechanically attaching to the air in the listening space. Rare, but very cool - no arcing from dust or changes in humidity.)

      --
      Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
    6. Re:Electrostatic by earlymon · · Score: 1

      You ask a very good question - actually, questions within questions.

      With your permission, allow me to digress a bit, and ask you to envision a cork or bobber on water. The waves roll by, but the cork just bobs up and down, and only a little to front/back.

      Sound waves are mechanically a chain of an over-pressure followed by an under-pressure, and so forth. Typical speaker - your basic woofer that you've probably seen operate with the speaker grills off - are pistons, suspended by a visible front surround and a concealed (in the cabinet, but it's at the back of the cone) suspension.

      Those types of drivers produce sound by what audio engineers refer to as pressure displacement - you want it louder, or a lower frequency, the piston is going to do more back and forth travel to create that over/under-pressure chain. Think of putting your hand in a sink full of water and pushing back and forth along a surface with your hand - you'll make waves - pressure displacement, aka, amplitude displacement.

      Now, take the same sink, and just put in a finger at the surface of the water and push up and down - now your finger is like that bobbing cork - only now, instead of the waves making the cork rise and fall, the rising and falling cork creates the waves.

      With sound waves, that's analogous to molecular displacement. Here's why it's important. Given the speed of sound is roughly 1100 feet/second, and frequency is measured in Hz (cycles/second, or just as accurately, 1/second) then what is the wavelength of an 1100 Hz signal? One foot. A 110 Hz signal? Ten feet. 32 Hz? (That's the low C on a pipe organ, BTW.) - 34.375 foot wavelength.

      All in all, as it turns out, a 120dB (yeah, I know, it's a relative measure....) 32 Hz signal is going to be a long, powerful wave, isn't it? Going to require a hell of a lot of anything piston-like to belt that out. And it can be done and has been done - the Rolling Stones once held the record for response and sound pressure levels (range and volume) in concert. Very little short of the Rolling Stone's stagecraft can get you there.

      On the other hand, the air molecules themselves are only moving about a half millimeter, back and forth - molecular displacement.

      Magneplanars, electrostatics and plasma-driver speakers (originally the "Corona Wind" models by B&W, later Hill Plasmatronics) ALL work by molecular displacement to create sound. That's how they're able to produce sound without the diaphragm being piston-like - the diaphragm speakers are very, very taught - as is the plasma field in the others I'd mentioned. The slightest molecular movement (the up and down cork model) can result in very impressive waves. Larger diaphragms are used - like having a larger cork.

      So - that's the background.

      Now you see what's so intriguing about your expansion/contraction surface idea. If I imagine the surface as coarse - uniformly crater-like, in the ideal - the expansion/contraction could cause molecular displacement - but that movement would be orthogonal to the direction outward, where you want to transmit sound. On the other hand, we could look at the surface as corpuscular - a matrix of little accordions - and that would, logically and theoretically, produce some displacement in the correct direction - perpendicular to the surface itself.

      I'm not sure of the engineering, but what you propose seems like it **could** at first glance, solve the back wave problem.

      I'm going to need to mull that over for a while. I hope that others mulling it over are assisted by my little pedantic rant, above.

      --
      Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
  17. Revolutionary... by wowbagger · · Score: 1

    This could be totally revolutionary! Just think, this could totally change the meaning of "Money talks"!

    --
    www.eFax.com are spammers
  18. Electrostatic speakers, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds pretty similar to me....

    This is an adaptation, but come on.... revolutionary? I think not.

  19. stereo? is it really stereo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This appears to be just the application of Piezoelectric effect to paper.. The clip only mentions the use of this in posters..not as a replacement for existing speaker technology in car and home sound systems. But would be cool to have a poster talk to you as you walk past.. include this in the paper displays.. disposable video displays with sound..

      I do dispute the use of the term 'Stereo' .. this system just gives you multi speaker or audio point sources.. but stereo? stereo is not just having two (or more)speakers. Stereo is about basic positional interpretation from the listener.. but then many cheap mp3 players are twin channel Mono anyway..

    1. Re:stereo? is it really stereo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What would be cool is....

      There are thousands of tiny diaphragms on that paper.

      If they can address them individually then they have a wavefront capable speaker.

      You can do things with wavefront reproducing speaker systems that make 7.1 seem like a child's toy.

      It's a little like the difference between holography and normal photography.

  20. A whole new meaning to 'audio book'... by Bill+Zinclemyer+III · · Score: 1, Funny

    Watch Amazon release a gadget called the Crackle to play audio books.

  21. print me a pair of Bose please... by Sfing_ter · · Score: 1

    You Buford, print me up a pair o' them Boze Speakers what I kin heer gud frum.

    --
    A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
  22. Paper? So. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can only imagine what fine sounds will come from these paper speakers when I wipe my arse with one.

    Toot toot!