Anyone see these?

[Andre_Db66]

8 minutes ago, genek said:

I would think that the origin and response curve of the "renewed" vc would be important to a knowledgeable buyer wanting an original LST.

Unfortunately, there's probably no way of knowing what the final outcome of a Craigslist sale turns out to be.

I can contact this seller. Most likely receiving more background info

I would actually not be surprised if it was done professionally... i have mentioned before this is practice here. I can not say if that info would be handed down though when inquiring from the professional. It is his best kept secret, providing his daily bread...

[Andre_Db66]

I have just been replied by the seller. The refurbishing of the tweeters with most likely discussed chinese vc cost 500€. That is 500$ give or take. This was done by professional mentioned earlier...

A lot of money considering i paid 850€ for my refurbished set. All original drivers and recapped XO. Original cloth replaced with same spec cloth.

[genek]

I don't suppose there are FR measurements available...?

[Andre_Db66]

This one i made for a 2ax which i changed to external wires.

I could give this guy a call and ask him. Perhaps he will not reveal anything as it concerns his income. I am curious what technique he applies.

I asked a picture and got it.

This is an upgrade tweeter in my ar3a, according to Roy possibly a late version or tonegem. Fabric dome instead of paper. Magnet is gold colored like the mid driver. They were upgraded through official dutch distributor by the first owner.

Note different suspensions...

[ReliaBill Engineer]

21 hours ago, Aadams said:

No intent to discredit.  Your mechanical work is quite skillful, but not everyone who visits this site knows or recalls that you are repairing tweeters and modifying speakers to meet personal goals.  "Operates to my satisfaction" is not the same as "Operates within factory specs" without verifiable evidence of some kind.    I recall your work on the Super tweeter, not the 3/4 inch, but from your writings in this thread and mentions in other threads regarding AR speakers, I  mistakenly assumed you must have squeezed in some 3/4 inch experience somewhere that I had missed.  Many of the latter posts in this thread reference moribund and dead 3/4 inch  tweeters.  No posts regarding orange domes after the first page.

This thread should have been split into 2 other non-AR threads long ago. 

None of that is the intent of this thread. This is about using the Chinese replacement silk domes.

I still don’t get why you’re bringing up my work on the AR-2ax 1-3/8” phenolic dome tweeters, *here*. It’s off-topic. 

And you demand FR graphs to validate my work *here* to compare to “original” AR tweeters. (In a topic about Chinese silk domes.) First, such a thing doesn’t exist. No factory fresh examples exist after 60 years; time/age has altered them, even if NOS NIB. I didn’t change anything in my work; Same VC, same cap value, same pot, same magnet-faceplate, same dome, same wiring, same FG padding under the dome, same butyl rubber surround membrane. The only thing I changed was the 4 yellow foam dollops. I changed those to a butyl rubber compound. The end result was a tweeter dome with increased power response, yet still well damped. So at full 100% pot position, the output is much greater than “factory”. The user can *choose* to keep the tweets at AR levels, or choose a higher output level. So the factory output is in no way corrupted. But a small turn of the level pot toward 100% (from 60%) produces a more modern output level, if *desired*.  Or zero output, if desired. But that original AR super tweeter sound is still all there. 
 

 

[Andre_Db66]

I mentioned that also. Unless i am old enough to have witnessed AR demonstrations or have had childhood/pubescent experiences with authentic new AR sound in my past, how can i possibly have auditing reference points as to how an AR speaker should sound.

Factory fresh is most certainly not what one finds on craigslist. I refer to the sound as old tired dried out surround/suspension tweeters with less output than intended. Same goes for a refoam, it will never have factory compliance again...

Therefore, any refurbish attempt will likely differ to original. It makes everything subjective what we are discussing here. Yet not pointless. Time and effort, knowledge and tools is what it takes to transform these chinese vc into a working compliant substitute.

Anyone?

[ReliaBill Engineer]

It’s a tough topic. One foot on both sides of the AR fence. One foot on the make “functional” side. One foot on the “make look original” side. Tough to know if “make look original” sounds like factory fresh, since no factory fresh examples exist. Even testing with advanced measuring equipment is subjective, since old test graphs aren’t all-encompassing nor all-conclusive on how they sounded 50-60 years ago.

My father listened to my 2ax refurb speakers; said they sound the way he remembers them sounding. As others in here have done in remembering the original sound. Yet still other folks say you can’t rely on 50-60 memories of a “sound”, while some swear by those memories and judge others’ work by those same memories.

All one can do is attempt a best effort at keeping the AR original performance. It’s not an absolute science. 

I still enjoy the sound of the 2” hard dome mid-tweets I installed in my 2ax, more than the AR paper cone mids. Sounds a great deal like the early 3a that my friend had. Much easier, clear, unstrained sound. But not original.

 

Old, tired sound. I’m glad I made sound recordings for posterity:

Changed caps, cleaned the pots. All original drivers. Still old, tired sounding:

 

[Andre_Db66]

2 x 3a

1 x 3a impr

3 x different tweeter all originals afaik.

2 woofers rubber surround

1 woofer foam

Cant distinguish an individual speaker. It plays as one massive skyscraper speaker. I have had bigger speakers in those spots but nothing compares to this. I am in the studio, i am in front of the stage, i am in the auditorium. I have an 18 inch sub in the middle for completion only for below 40 hz and when turned off it is almost not audible. It depends if the notes are there, like with church organs or synth sounds.it is my most memorable setup to date and outperforms the LST. Those are now hooked up to 100 watt triode tube amps and placed against the wall and sound much better there.

I have to confess that the single kef or goodmans are very tough competition to the stacks and despite their comparable age the kef and goodmans both sound very refreshing. Micro detail is more present without the pick axe to the head effect of jbl or klipsch. I guess the tired sound of the super tweeters,or treble is simply an AR sonic trait. I am happy i can compare and swap out as recording quality dictates the sonic result in the first place...

 

[frankmarsi]

55 minutes ago, Andre_Db66 said:

2 x 3a

1 x 3a impr

3 x different tweeter all originals afaik.

2 woofers rubber surround

1 woofer foam

Cant distinguish an individual speaker. It plays as one massive skyscraper speaker. I have had bigger speakers in those spots but nothing compares to this. I am in the studio, i am in front of the stage, i am in the auditorium. I have an 18 inch sub in the middle for completion only for below 40 hz and when turned off it is almost not audible. It depends if the notes are there, like with church organs or synth sounds.it is my most memorable setup to date and outperforms the LST. Those are now hooked up to 100 watt triode tube amps and placed against the wall and sound much better there.

I have to confess that the single kef or goodmans are very tough competition to the stacks and despite their comparable age the kef and goodmans both sound very refreshing. Micro detail is more present without the pick axe to the head effect of jbl or klipsch. I guess the tired sound of the super tweeters,or treble is simply an AR sonic trait. I am happy i can compare and swap out as recording quality dictates the sonic result in the first place...

 

 

Amazing.

[ReliaBill Engineer]

I may try a Chinese dome tweeter on my AR-4X speaker project. I have the original tweeter, my modified Phenolic Ring Tweeter (PRT), and now the 2” paper cone tweeter is playing, which is a dead ringer for the sound of the original AR tweeter in this 1968 speaker.

2” paper cone tweeter on top of the cabinet. Modified, mounted PRT is disabled. 
 

(This configuration allows easy auditioning of mods or replacements. Fed directly from the XO. Impedance matching resistor is used. Foam mounting reduces diffraction effects.)

 

[Andre_Db66]

It will have to perform more in the midrange on that xo. It is referred to as a supertweeter. I wonder how it will hold out...

[ReliaBill Engineer]

6 hours ago, Andre_Db66 said:

It will have to perform   it will have to perform more in the midrange on that xo. It is referred to as a supertweeter. I wonder how it will hold out...

On the 4X? Or are you referring to a different AR speaker?

The 4X has no supertweeter; it’s a 2-way speaker. 

If you’re referring to the silk dome having to perform below 1kHz, I have a 1.5” silk dome with a low 500 Hz resonance. It has a smooth output 1kHz-20kHz. Bought these back in 2018. Just sitting in their boxes.
 

[Andre_Db66]

I meant that the chinese vc in the 3a magnet is an intended replacement for a supertweeter. Implementing it in a 4ax xo means it will crossover much lower. I dont know the data but it is indeed 2 way meaning the crossover point probably is around 3.5k or thereabouts. The tweeter might not perform that well taking on more midrange. I have not tried it except for in a 3 way xo.

Monday i will attempt the rebuild of the AR5 tweeters with resonance damping behind the dome. I will also prepare some coils with 0.01mH as proposed by Roy, gradually reducing the inductance.

[RoyC]

1 hour ago, Andre_Db66 said:

I meant that the chinese vc in the 3a magnet is an intended replacement for a supertweeter. Implementing it in a 4ax xo means it will crossover much lower. I dont know the data but it is indeed 2 way meaning the crossover point probably is around 3.5k or thereabouts. The tweeter might not perform that well taking on more midrange. I have not tried it except for in a 3 way xo.

Monday i will attempt the rebuild of the AR5 tweeters with resonance damping behind the dome. I will also prepare some coils with 0.01mH as proposed by Roy, gradually reducing the inductance.

Andre,

-You're correct regarding the small dome tweeter not being suitable as a drop-in replacement for the 4x.

-The coil value would be .1mh (same as the AR-11), not .01mh.

Roy

[Andre_Db66]

You are right Roy, 2 x .05=.1... my bad

I spoke to the professional who fixed the tweeters on the lst in craigslisting ad.

He has not done FR measurements. The statement is that if it sounds good it is admissable. The old FR graphs are not necessarily reliable...

There is no resonance material added because the dome is made of linnen and by far not as hard as the original paper dome.

He agrees the output is more than original but he claims the rolloff of the original is too much and the only acceptable original performance is that of an AR11 tweeter which i have in my 3a  improved and i concurr. It is made of linnen nonetheless and has resonance material behind the dome. I pushed it in and can feel it. The only difference between the AR11 dome and the chinese dome is their suspension.

More and more i am growing accustomed to the idea that even AR was searching for a different and better performance in the 3a tweeter and the reluctance to accept that the chinese vc might the closest thing to the latest tweeter version seems a matter of collective stubborness. To lift an AR 3 way speaker into the 21st century i am afraid it is not good enough to revive the old paper domes as they were not really good performers to begin with...

Chinese are very good at copying. 😁

EDIT

i have to corrrect above. It is not the ar3a impr tweeter which has the linnen dome in my set, it is the tweeter in the 3a, which has been discussed in another thread. It was assumes that the mids and tweeters had been replaced by Tonegem editions. Considered to be high quality....  🤔

kind of a paradox really.

[Andre_Db66]

3 hours ago, ReliaBill Engineer said:

On the 4X? Or are you referring to a different AR speaker?

The 4X has no supertweeter; it’s a 2-way speaker. 

If you’re referring to the silk dome having to perform below 1kHz, I have a 1.5” silk dome with a low 500 Hz resonance. It has a smooth output 1kHz-20kHz. Bought these back in 2018. Just sitting in their boxes.
 

No, what i mean is your setup. Applying a chinese vc tweeter to the 4x crossover will make the tweeter work at lower frequency than its goal purpose. Nice way to test it though i suppose.

[ReliaBill Engineer]

5 hours ago, ReliaBill Engineer said:

If you’re referring to the silk dome having to perform below 1kHz, I have a 1.5” silk dome with a low 500 Hz resonance. It has a smooth output 1kHz-20kHz. Bought these back in 2018. Just sitting in their boxes.

And:

 

2 hours ago, Andre_Db66 said:

No, what i mean is your setup. Applying a chinese vc tweeter to the 4x crossover will make the tweeter work at lower frequency than its goal purpose. Nice way to test it though i suppose.

As you can see in the first quote, I already addressed your concern. So I’m not really sure where you’re going with your last post….

I always make allowances for the differences in impedance when testing tweeters using the original AR XO values.

And it is a very valid way of testing both mid-tweets and tweeters, as long as they are sealed units. If there are problems, you’ll hear it. 

[ReliaBill Engineer]

5 hours ago, Andre_Db66 said:

I meant that the chinese vc in the 3a magnet is an intended replacement for a supertweeter. Implementing it in a 4ax xo means it will crossover much lower. I dont know the data but it is indeed 2 way meaning the crossover point probably is around 3.5k or thereabouts. The tweeter might not perform that well taking on more midrange. I have not tried it except for in a 3 way xo.

Monday i will attempt the rebuild of the AR5 tweeters with resonance damping behind the dome. I will also prepare some coils with 0.01mH as proposed by Roy, gradually reducing the inductance.

Again, for the 4X I think you’re quite confused. The 4X has a 20uF cap for a nominal 5 ohm impedance tweeter (4.7 ohms DCR). That tweeter needs to work smoothly below 1 kHz. 
 

That’s why I showed, and mentioned, a 1.5” dome tweeter, (The Chinese seller says 2.5”).

[ReliaBill Engineer]

4 hours ago, RoyC said:

Andre,

-You're correct regarding the small dome tweeter not being suitable as a drop-in replacement for the 4x.

-The coil value would be .1mh (same as the AR-11), not .01mh.

Roy

Who mentioned that for a drop-in replacement for the 4X? It wasn’t me.

[genek]

3 hours ago, Andre_Db66 said:

More and more i am growing accustomed to the idea that even AR was searching for a different and better performance in the 3a tweeter and the reluctance to accept that the chinese vc might the closest thing to the latest tweeter version seems a matter of collective stubborness. To lift an AR 3 way speaker into the 21st century i am afraid it is not good enough to revive the old paper domes as they were not really good performers to begin with...

There is no question that beginning with the 1977 ADD series AR started changing the balance of their speakers to be brighter than the original classic era models. Edgar Villchur had sold the company and left the building nine years beore, Roy Allison had left to start Allison Acoustics five years before and the corporate suits at Teledyne were undoubtedly aware that consumer preferences had moved away from the classic AR "symphony hall" balance.

So this discussion is now at an inflection point. Is it about the potential of these vc parts to restore original performance in classic ARs, in which case it stays here, or is it about using them to "update" classic ARs to a later, more "modern" sound, in which case it gets moved to Mods and Tweaks?

[Andre_Db66]

30 minutes ago, ReliaBill Engineer said:

Who mentioned that for a drop-in replacement for the 4X? It wasn’t me.

I am apparantly confused. I thought with chinese dome tweeter you meant the chinese voice coil attached to a 3a magnet

[Andre_Db66]

30 minutes ago, genek said:

There is no question that beginning with the 1977 ADD series AR started changing the balance of their speakers to be brighter than the original classic era models. Edgar Villchur had sold the company and left the building nine years beore, Roy Allison had left to start Allison Acoustics five years before and the corporate suits at Teledyne were undoubtedly aware that consumer preferences had moved away from the classic AR "symphony hall" balance.

So this discussion is now at an inflection point. Is it about the potential of these vc parts to restore original performance in classic ARs, in which case it stays here, or is it about using them to "update" classic ARs to a later, more "modern" sound, in which case it gets moved to Mods and Tweaks?

My point and preference is to have a replacement vc in the original magnet which first of all doesnt alter physical appearance.

Secondly by tweaking the setup internal and external ie xo and wadding, to obtain a workable solution generally suited as acceptable replacement unit in old school AR. Much like the Tonegem version. User tweakable by adjusting the potmeter on the back so that it can have more output than original if preferred but basically the same intonation. I find the mentioning of old tired originals appropriate (they lack output) and would like the same sound but with more output available...

Whether this topic moves to mentioned group is not important to me. It is by all means a mod and tweak anyway.... by definition

If it is accepted by the forum as a workable solution would be more important i would say. There is no way of proving what symphony hall sound is other than a subjective discussion. Perhaps people should bring their gear in to repeat history and do blind comparisons as in the hay days... that will prove that peoples ears have evolved too.

There are no factory fresh AR speakers from that era around anywhere, it is more than 50 years later. The professional i mentioned has a happy customer who does not complain with his refreshed LST tweeters. This is what people want and need i am afraid.

[RoyC]

2 hours ago, ReliaBill Engineer said:

Who mentioned that for a drop-in replacement for the 4X? It wasn’t me.

I was just responding to Andre, who apparently misinterpreted your initial statement ("I may try a Chinese dome tweeter on my AR-4X speaker project...") before you clarified your intent.

[RoyC]

1 hour ago, Andre_Db66 said:

My point and preference is to have a replacement vc in the original magnet which first of all doesnt alter physical appearance.

Secondly by tweaking the setup internal and external ie xo and wadding, to obtain a workable solution generally suited as acceptable replacement unit in old school AR. Much like the Tonegem version. User tweakable by adjusting the potmeter on the back so that it can have more output than original if preferred but basically the same intonation. I find the mentioning of old tired originals appropriate (they lack output) and would like the same sound but with more output available...

Whether this topic moves to mentioned group is not important to me. It is by all means a mod and tweak anyway.... by definition

Andre,

It should be noted that AR made crossover adjustments to modify the response of the later AR-11 style of 3/4" tweeter for use as a replacement for the early 3/4" tweeter. Specifically, a smaller cap was used for it in the original 3a and, later, a parallel coil was used in the 10pi and 11. Over a decade ago, Ken Kantor provided us with a number of response measurements for the NOS original 3a tweeter as well as later AR-11 and 12 tweeters. At the time he suggested a similar solution for restoration. Additionally, a perfect modern copy of the AR-11 tweeter already exists: https://www.midwestspeakerrepair.com/product/mw-audio-mt-4121-75-inch-dome-tweeter/

Look at the AR-11 and AR-3a Limited crossovers to see how it was done from scratch with the later tweeter.

If you just want to change things to your ear you should head to the mods and tweaks section.

Roy

[Andre_Db66]

Thanks for clarifying that Roy, i will look into that. Copying the improved xo to suit the fabricated tweeter seems the way to go for me because i dont tend to use the pots and find the opened up setting of the impr best suited. I try to emulate that with my 3a but the pots are a weak link...

I thought the intended use of the vc  was to facilitate a drop in tweeter for any of the older models. LST, 3A/IMPR, 11, 10Pi and ultimately 5 with 8R coil. I do know there are differences between each XO.

I fail to see what should be done in the case of LST implementation though. As far as i know only a resistor has been applied in the craiglist offering.

The Midwest, i and my friend, who owns AR11 do no find them a viable option because of the cost. Purchase/shipping and tax make these very expensive...