I'm wondering if there are sound scientific principles behind various company's speaker technology/materials and whether a speaker that doesn't have this patented technology (i.e. Kevlar for the cone material in B&W speakers) will sound inferior to one that does, all other things being equal. For example B&W have their patented Nautilus technology, the use of Kevlar materials for their drivers and the golf ball dimples to reduce excess sound energy. Paradigm uses a mixture of paper and metallic particles for their driver cone materials, i.e. ICP (injection-molded co-polymer polypropylene), have a "high-pressure die-cast aluminum or glass-reinforced injection-molded polymer (GRIP) chassis [to] eliminate vibration, ringing and flexing..." [from their brochure] and some of their speakers have a PTD (pure titanium dome). Some speakers, like Def Tech, have "ferrofluid damped moving coil aluminum tweeters" It has been said that speakers with pure metallic domes are superior to paper. Sonically I can see why. But what about Paradigm's paper-metal hybrid? Or Def Tech's ferrofluid damped aluminum tweeters? Has anyone done tests on the sonic differences between titanium vs. aluminum vs. ferrofluid damped aluminum vs. Kevlar? How much is sound science and how much is overeager marketing? Is this a hopeless request? Is this another case of apples and oranges? This goes to the heart of the paradoxical question about performance differences between different speakers. Is the proof in the pudding?