Tweeter fun: Dayton plates

plastic_avatar

From Wuhan to Dayton

After cutting my teeth (and barreling into) @VSAT88 and @xschop's SL2000 dome replacement mod, it's time for another experiment.

xschop did some really sweet metalwork for adapter plates to mount the Dayton DC28FT-8 tweeter in a vintage Polk cabinet (his work is always amazing):

https://forum.polkaudio.com/discussion/168239/a-real-sl-2000-hack-replace-stock-burnt-voice-coils-with-silk-diaphragm-dome/p17

So, since I'm a little better at 3D printing and modeling now, after lots of Wuhan modding... new challenge!

The target


xschop uses this instead of the RD0-194.

It's a beautiful dome. It appears taller than the 198, and has some great features (listed on the product page).

I used my Wuhan plates as a starting point, and imitated the milled plates in plastic:




Those^ are a Wuhan, stock Dayton, and Dayton adapter plate.

I'm printing Dayton Plate v3 while I sleep tonight.

v1: The screw holes were off just a hair.

v2: The cuff on the underside of the plate, that sits around the magnet, was too wide.

v3: We'll see how it did come morning.

v2 = I couldn't wait

Even though the plate didn't fit my 1C, after I filed the opening in the tweeter cutout to fit the Dayton's leads, I mounted it (poorly). I had to hear it.


I'll mount the 2 I have in the lower locations, once I get a finalized plate done.

Does it really work?

Anecdotally, I believe it's more... lifelike than the SL2000 or Wuhan in that position. I really like the Wuhans. If my hearing wasn't great, I might not think the Daytons are worth upgrading to. The Wuhans are smooth and pleasant. The Daytons are more lively and... maybe... faster... like they create sound quicker and stop sooner...

This is a terrible example (noises, the plate isn't seated), but it blends nicely with the mids:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Jh0MIqsrJ7fu3TdXr__yVKnZ71zbQBSe/view?usp=drivesdk

Result

I've decided to buy 2 more next payday. I want to hear a full set of then in the 1C.

I'll be able give a better listen the next 2 weeks, but preliminary opinion is positive.

Anyhow.

I'll update more as I know more.

xschop

I woke up to a crafty goodness notification.
Looking good. I bet you have a wider off-axis response with that throat profile too.
Dayton dropped the ball with their thin plate/bezel. You've picked it back up with that beefy design.

plastic_avatar

I fixed the link... but it was the wrong snippet!

Ugh. Late nights and the limitations of this editor =\

I was trying to share the right-channel-specific live Hotel California guitar intro:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XnJkcEJU28E_9X0FkuGmB6Ye39-3BMVF/view?usp=drivesdk

I dislodged a Hurricane nut. Not sure I can retrieve without taking the passive and 2 mids out =(

plastic_avatar

Plate #3, after further filing the bottom lead opening a little wider, fits great!

Printing the second one I need now.

Question is, how best to connect the wires, since the spades are larger than Polk's? Solder, I guess?

Gardenstater

Autozone and Advance Auto Parts carry the gold plated brass female audio connectors. What size? They have 0.250", 0.187", and 0.110". They are crimp on and you can also backflow a little solder into them.

xschop

You can use standard 1/4" female connectors.
When I re-wired the modded 5Bs with Supra Rondo wire, I used these as they fit the Dayton and the factory MW perfectly....

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B07XNG8XH7?psc=1&ref=ppx_pop_mob_b_asin_title

Toolfan66

xschop

Is that Hunter, pre-crack days?

F1nut

Another train wreck.

The bottom tweeter is frequency restricted, so your hearing isn't as good as you think.

xschop

The frequencies that do get through are more accurate than a -0194. You can take that to the bank.

plastic_avatar

Don't like:

- The plate design?

- The technique I used to make the face shiny and glass smooth?

- The Dayton tweeter as an SL2000 alternative, for reasons?

- The sound recorded via the iPhone mic?

- Those sweet lookin' milled tips down below?

It's a neat experiment fir $125 (cost of 4 tweeters and filament). I'll probably put them in my 5B, if the listening sessions hold up.

I get that it's not an SL2000 nor a 194. Those measure differently from each other, and the Dayton measures differently than them.

I've often wondered what combo of attributes allows the 194 to drop in for the SL2000.

The Wuhan dome mod from VSAT88/xschop works great, so is it out of bounds to try the Dayton as an alternative based on xschop's work?

I'd love us to discuss (and even further experiment) to answer our questions.

(I know it's the transition tweeter between the mids and the upper tweeter. You might've missed that allusion.

I started there because I think the Wuhan does a really good job blending between the 2 sections (compared to the SL2000). I decided to keep it there because of the effect it appears to have on those transitions.

Maybe... later... when I'm testing the top tweeters... I can comment on extension, sparkle, airiness, and all those other words to describe the high-end portion of the experiment? Ya'know, when my great hearing will come in even more handy!)

Gardenstater

xschop wrote: »

The frequencies that do get through are more accurate than a -0194. You can take that to the bank.

I just read this article again by a positive constructive audiophile (thank god there are some!). Very interesting and educational. How many of us have Peerless tweeters in an oversized routed cutout? Not as bad as a circular one but there should be diffraction effects.

Article is very interesting also regarding the effect of varying the type and amount of damping material in the rear chamber.

https://www.speakerdesign.net/dayton_dc28f/dayton_dc28f_tweeter.html

xschop

https://forum.polkaudio.com/home/leaving?allowTrusted=1&target=https://www.speakerdesign.net/dayton_dc28f/dayton_dc28f_tweeter.html

Can't be a legit write-up. Where's the lol button for F1?

plastic_avatar

- v3 fits flush with the baffle, snug in the hole, and looks great. I might redesign the depth of the screws… not sure yet.
-


- Retrieved the nut by the power of stronger magnetic forces.

nooshinjohn

Now if you could do something about your loose screws….

Gardenstater

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Now if you could do something about your loose screws….

How long did you own your 1.2tl's again, without ever getting around to Dynamatting the baskets? 😉

nooshinjohn

Gardenstater wrote: »

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Now if you could do something about your loose screws….

How long did you own your 1.2tl's again, without ever getting around to Dynamatting the baskets? 😉

Choosing not to do something or “do no harm” is far different than deciding to butcher.

Gardenstater

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Gardenstater wrote: »

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Now if you could do something about your loose screws….

How long did you own your 1.2tl's again, without ever getting around to Dynamatting the baskets? 😉

Choosing not to do something or “do no harm” is far different than deciding to butcher.

Ahhh.....SO, "choosing" what to do with your own speakers, or not to do, in furtherence of enjoyment of this hobby is the right of everyone, is the point you are making? You are truly a wise man!

Gardenstater

F1nut

xschop wrote: »

https://forum.polkaudio.com/home/leaving?allowTrusted=1&target=https://www.speakerdesign.net/dayton_dc28f/dayton_dc28f_tweeter.html

Can't be a legit write-up. Where's the lol button for F1?

Never said it wasn't a legit write up, so stop twisting things to fit your agenda. The write up doesn't mean the tweeter is an appropriate one for vintage Polk speakers. Far from it.

FYI, it was you and garden that started using the LOL button on my posts. You reap what you sow.

nooshinjohn

Both are on my list…

xschop

I figured it was new vanilla function, auto-lol.

Gardenstater

F1nut wrote: »

xschop wrote: »

https://forum.polkaudio.com/home/leaving?allowTrusted=1&target=https://www.speakerdesign.net/dayton_dc28f/dayton_dc28f_tweeter.html

Can't be a legit write-up. Where's the lol button for F1?

Never said it wasn't a legit write up, so stop twisting things to fit your agenda. The write up doesn't mean the tweeter is an appropriate one for vintage Polk speakers. Far from it.

FYI, it was you and garden that started using the LOL button on my posts. You reap what you sow.

So you weren't LOLing the article? The only thing left is what I found interesting in it, and my appreciation of the author.

plastic_avatar

Question for The Hive

Given the differences in the 2000 and 194, what combo of qualities makes them interchangeable?

Is there something on paper that makes the Dayton appear as a bad choice?

Dayton



Polk

Gardenstater

I'll take a stab at it. I think the three most important parameters for voicing compatibility in the crossover (without mods to tweak) would be: 1) avg. impedance, 2) min. impedance, and 3) Sensitivity.

Min. impedance can be read from the graphs that Darqueknight gave us and the one on the Parts-Express site.

I get: SL2000 = 7.8 Ohms @ 4200Hz, RD0194 = 6.8 @ 4200, DC28FT-8 = 6.0 @ 2800.
Ave. is hard to graphically eyeball. Best to use the raw data and calculate.

Darqueknight didn't measure sensitivities afaik. DC28FT is spec'd at 89db with no freq. given.

If a tweeter is lower impedance but also lower sensitivity, I *think* it is possible for things to balance out.

heiney9

plastic_avatar wrote: »

Question for The Hive

Given the differences in the 2000 and 194, what combo of qualities makes them interchangeable?

Is there something on paper that makes the Dayton appear as a bad choice?

Dayton



Polk

According to those specs they aren't even on the same planet. Polk R & Ded the RD0 tweeters as drop in "upgrades" for at the time a 12-15 year old design (sl2000, 2500 & 3000).

The RD0's are not and were not and "off the shelf", "close enough to work" product. They were designed by Polk with their own speaker lines in mind.

Your speakers to do what you want, but Holy F just throwing things against the wall to see if they stick is such a waste. You yourself said you're on a very tight budget. That money could have been used elsewhere in your rig to actually make a difference.

smh

H9

xschop

The RD-0194's are a waste of cash/time IMO. If you get a pair that don't resonate, you're lucky. I believe Polk may have developed the -198 to ameliorate the -194's lack luster performance.

nooshinjohn

Don’t you just love it when new people show up and think they know better than 25 years worth of research that has been done by members of this forum regarding the SDA speakers. Work that has been done by Matt Polk himself, and others all of a sudden means nothing to these people. I’m tired of contributing to posts made by people who have no understanding of speaker design, SDA, or anything else. More than happy to help anyone that wants to learn but if you want to redesign you’re on your own, and don't think for a second that what you have is still a Polk speaker... all you have is a cabinet that was built by Polk.

F1nut

Is there something on paper that makes the Dayton appear as a bad choice?

Everything.

xschop

Tell Matt he wasted his time on the -194's.

Gardenstater

What is the significance of Zmax resonant peak and ratio of Zmax/Zmin? RD0194 has the highest (worst?) at 4.1. SL2000 (3.1), SL2500 (2.1), SL3000 (2.5), RD0198 (1.8) and Dayton (1.4).

Dayton has by far the lowest Fs due to the back chambered design which is an advantage for liberal choices of XO point in 2 way designs. Back chamber absorption of back wave is said to provide greater detail by higher end manufacturers such as Jean Maurer.

Too bad we don't know the sensitivities for the Polk tweeters, even though DATS apparently will measure that for you with the right set up.