Meridian Unplugged - Powered by MrTechGuy.co.uk Forums Discussion Meridian - Systems Sad to read that M choose to use Beryllium in new tweeters

Hi all

I feel sad to read that M choose to use the toxic substance of Beryllium in its new tweeters. "The commercial use of beryllium presents technical challenges due to the toxicity (especially by inhalation) of beryllium-containing dusts. Beryllium is corrosive to tissue, and can cause a chronic life-threatening allergic disease called berylliosis in some people. The element is not known to be necessary or useful for either plant or animal life." Source wikipedia

The toxicity source is a verified source. I really would hear what M has to say about choosing this material. I am fully aware of physical benefits of this material in this situation, but is our sound so important that we have to use very dangerous substances?

Best regards, Per Nilsson

Sorry, but it is common sense that Aluminum is poisonous already, from the way it is harvested from earth and further refined in jaw dropping filthy industrial processes. It is assumed to cater Alzheimer. The net is full of videos on Aluminium. A fraction is still only recycled ! It is used in all sort or medicine coats / pills and in all sort of sprays (almost all deodorants have Aluminium inside). All Apple products, most audio product are questionable with Aluminium. I find by comparison the point of toxicity of the little bits of Beryllium rather of minor impact and well a bit shallow ignoring most other stuff around us.

EDIT: message was typed on Macboor Air made of Aluminum !

Electricity can also be pretty bad for you if not correctly handled.

So can life...

Marvin, is that you...?

This stuff Dihydrogen Monoxide is pretty dangerous too...





Sometimes known as H2O.........

Are you kidding?

Hi all,

My point with this thread is about M choosing to use a very harmful substance. I did not start this thread to discuss the dangers of other substances or other health hazards. Many things are harmful.

Do audio companies have to choose dangerous substances or materials in the pursuit of audio nirvana?

Maybe M could have achived this improvement by choosing other technical solutions. Or they could have choosen not to incorporate this Beryllium tweeter due to its hazardous proporties of the material.

In other areas of manufacturing, companies have stopped using harmful substances and replaced them with less harmful substances. Asbestos is such a substance.

I will not shop this upgrade just because of the beryllium tweeter.

This my opinion and my way of viewing Meridians decision of using a very harmful substance.

Best regards, Per Nilsson

Dear Yetis

I assume that your question is concrete and not a retorical. And, yes i am not kidding. For me this a bad choise from M. And i dont feel happy about it and i choose to express my unhappiness about it on this forum in this way.

Best regards, Per Nilsson

This reminds me of the episode of "Yes Minister" I heard on radio 4 extra today.

The debate about Dioxyn and metadyoxin.

The political implications are hilarious.

Track it down, Chris

Per,
but please then be so kind to explain, why all the stuff in your footer was purchased by you and why you did not press those manufacturers to go a different route first ? Just out of curiosity....

Pers,
To take your concern seriously, I think the key issue is whether Beryllium poses any risks in the context that M will be using it (such as aerosolization of trace quantities as the speaker is used).

We all put our research and faith in products we use every day. I will put my faith (though, admittedly, without any specific knowledge) that Meridian has done its research in this regard, and has determined that no material risk is posed.

That said, it's always possible that in working with a driver manufacturer, Meridian may not have been aware of negative aspects of the material not related to it's audio characteristics. If that is the case, I would hope that they see this thread and do whatever research is required.