There are suppressor manufacturers that have used cones in many of their suppressor lines. I don't dispute that. I also don't dispute a good can is a good can regardless of whether it started out as a solvent trap kit, or you paid a premium for it and bought it from the manufacturer.
Typically high power rifle stuff use cones. 308. 223
And many have experimented with clipping the baffles, others have not. I get the basic principle of it, I just don't know that it is worth the effort in the end product. I have friends who work (and own) their own manufacturing facilities and much of their data on their meters have concluded the same where they have tested before and after porting and clipping. And I have known people who use solvent traps and listen to the can before and after clipping. Most show only a neglible change in sound, if any. If you have a poor sounding can, clipping baffles isn't going to fix it.
I have seen others use different length spacers and simply by arranging them differently, has shown more of an improvement than clipping.
With that said, not all calibers work well with cones which are mainly what's been out there for some time now. Some calibers work better with other designs. High pressures and low pressures just need different things. Otherwise, all silencers would have cones and sound great with no reason to use any other style. But that's not really the case.
This is where much of my bias comes from. And bias probably isn't the right word anyway. My distrust and dislike is for solvent trap companies taking advantage of people who don't really know any better and don't care if their unknown grade aluminum cones melts after a mag dump of 308. After all, making any changes from how they ship the solvent traps, changes what they were marketing, so they're not responsible when someone gets hurt.
How many solvent trap companies have came and went in the last 3 or 4 years?
