@mofojo Quite right on the Kanta front. I haven't heard them. But having listened to F cones and W cones in the same room I can understand how the Kanta would be better. So far as I can tell the 1000 series bests the 900 series primarily because the cabs are much more robust and the better tweeter crosses over 1200 Hz lower. Not sure the 1000 wins out in warmth though. Nearly identical W cones in the 836W don't out-perform 936's. The comparison between those two is largely up to taste. The ONLY point I was trying to make is that the F cone shouldn't just be dismissed as inferior and that there are factors beyond the cone material at work here.
Here's the Focal white paper:
https://www.focal.com/sites/www.focal.fr/files/shared/catalog/document/focal-flax_sandwich-whitepape...The F cone is clearly superior in some ways, inferior in others, and equal in one characteristic. Initm, you stated Focal said the W cone was just better. There's the white paper. I'm not seeing clearly better there. I'm seeing competitive to say the least, but more accurately, just different. It's very reasonable to conclude an F cone with a better motor and better surround will sound and perform better than a W cone with a lesser motor and lesser surround, which is pretty much what we're talking about here. I honestly didn't intend to make this such a bitter discussion, but presuming the W cone to just be better while ignoring all other considerations is just plain wrong. I'm pretty sure Focal demonstrated flax could be the equal of the W cone in the 836W and 936.
