AR-3a Possible Tweeter and Hello

[JohnHeubel]

Howdy all,

First post here, don't know why I didn't join earlier, anywho, just wanted to say hi. I've gotten the speaker restoration bug over the past couple years, whether just keeping nice cabinets and adding new drivers, or doing full restorations with original equipment. Mainly GoodWill or curbside finds, and there have been some goodies... EPI 100s (4), KLH 17s, AR TSW510s, 410s, BA A60 Series IIs (x4) and now these AR-3as. Almost no sound out of them, woofers badly need refoaming (Oct '72 driver manufacture dates) and I'm sure the pots are badly corroded. Thread started here over on AK: http://audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=371214

I repaired the broken leads to the tweeters today and afterward got good continuity checks, but ohms are a different story. #1 was reading 3.? ohms (I forget what exactly) and the other hovering around 1 ohm. So something's definitely amiss. Is there anything else I can do with this tweeter to see if I can get it up to spec? If not, though I've seen the recommendation for the HiVi and coil, what about this one:

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=279-051

It might be in keeping with the Frankenspeaker look of these old ARs (no offense intended).

John

[DON]

Howdy all,

First post here, don't know why I didn't join earlier, anywho, just wanted to say hi. I've gotten the speaker restoration bug over the past couple years, whether just keeping nice cabinets and adding new drivers, or doing full restorations with original equipment. Mainly GoodWill or curbside finds, and there have been some goodies... EPI 100s (4), KLH 17s, AR TSW510s, 410s, BA A60 Series IIs (x4) and now these AR-3as. Almost no sound out of them, woofers badly need refoaming (Oct '72 driver manufacture dates) and I'm sure the pots are badly corroded. Thread started here over on AK: http://audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=371214

I repaired the broken leads to the tweeters today and afterward got good continuity checks, but ohms are a different story. #1 was reading 3.? ohms (I forget what exactly) and the other hovering around 1 ohm. So something's definitely amiss. Is there anything else I can do with this tweeter to see if I can get it up to spec? If not, though I've seen the recommendation for the HiVi and coil, what about this one:

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=279-051

It might be in keeping with the Frankenspeaker look of these old ARs (no offense intended).

John

Welcome here! Those are some solid looking cabinets. I don't know where you're located but there are some fine looking AR2ax cabinets on e-bay for $50 but local pu only. They're the European style cabinets with a dark grille and small trim added on the face of the sides. I bought a pair just like these in 1972 and sold them for $75 in the early 2000s.

[JohnHeubel]

Welcome here! Those are some solid looking cabinets. I don't know where you're located but there are some fine looking AR2ax cabinets on e-bay for $50 but local pu only. They're the European style cabinets with a dark grille and small trim added on the face of the sides. I bought a pair just like these in 1972 and sold them for $75 in the early 2000s.

Thanks for the info Don. I've finished the refoaming and cleaning of the pots, just waiting for the new caps and tweeters. I did opt for trying the Peerless 4ohm tweeters instead of the HiVi s since the Re is closer to original specs. I'll report back on my impressions, but having not heard the originals, you'll need to take it with a grain of salt. Now to fabricate some faceplates or other mounting mechanism,since these replacements are smaller than originals.

John

[RoyC]

I did opt for trying the Peerless 4ohm tweeters instead of the HiVi s since the Re is closer to original specs.

John

John,

If your goal is to have a functioning pair of speakers, any number of tweeters, will "work". Be aware, however, there is no tweeter on the market (including the tweeters you have chosen) that will even come close to the original tweeter's response without crossover alterations. Much has been written about this in this forum. The rated impedance was probably the least important published specification upon which to have based your decision. Frequency response, sensitivity, and dispersion are collectively more important considerations...to name a few.

Roy

[JohnHeubel]

John,

If your goal is to have a functioning pair of speakers, any number of tweeters, will "work". Be aware, however, there is no tweeter on the market (including the tweeters you have chosen) that will even come close to the original tweeter's response without crossover alterations. Much has been written about this in this forum. The rated impedance was probably the least important published specification upon which to have based your decision. Frequency response, sensitivity, and dispersion are collectively more important considerations...to name a few.

Roy

Roy,

Thanks for the response. A quick question: what effect does the 0.07mH coil have on the crossover when used with the HiVi? Does it roll off the highs a bit or is there some other purpose? If the former, couldn't that also be accomplished with an equalizer?

I do realize that subbing-in a non-OEM driver is a less-than-ideal situation. But as has been stated here and elsewhere, even if I could find a working driver, chances are it will be even more muted than original and very high priced. I would assume (yes, that has it's connotation) that the more specifications you can get to match up with the original, the more suitable a replacement it will be. Since I haven't found a full set of specs for the original, nor can get full specs for the replacements, I looked at the suggested replacement, and then looked to see if there were other alternatives that might also be a closer match in impedence to the original. I don't have test equipment, and have never heard the originals, so my choices were basically: go with the "known" replacement and modification, or try something different. Here's the specs of the drivers side-by-side, though I have no access to dispersion plots etc:

HiVi Q1R 1-1/8" Textile Dome Tweeter

A precisely manufactured German diaphragm is mated to a large shielded motor structure. The result is a tweeter with excellent timbre and low distortion characteristics. Transient response is improved via the use of ferrofluid and a copper-clad aluminum voice coil. Some of our customers have used this tweeter as a drop in replacement for the popular classic AR3a speaker from the 70"s. Note that they have recommended adding a .07mh 18 gauge inductor in parallel with the tweeter to more mimic the original AR3a sound. Specifications: *Power handling: 15 watts RMS/30 watts max *Impedance: 6 ohms: *Frequency range: 2,500-20,000 Hz *Fs: 1,000 Hz *SPL: 89 dB 2.83V/1m *Dimensions: A: 4-9/16", B: 3-5/8", C: 1-5/8".

Peerless India T25FG-04-02 1" Silk Dome Tweeter No Faceplate

Modern version of the famous LK10/SK10 Series soft dome tweeters, now manufactured by Peerless India. Close-tolerance design provides smooth response, high efficiency, and low distortion. Fits snap-on and 3-hole screw-on faceplates, or custom installations. Buyout, limited quantities. Specifications: *Power handling: 40 watts RMS/80 watts max *VCdia: 1" *Impedance: 4 ohms *Re: 3.14 ohms *Frequency response: 2,000-20,000 Hz *Fs: 1,942 Hz *SPL: 89 dB 2.83V/1m *Dimensions: A: 3", 2-5/8" across flats, B: N/A, C: 1".

To my thinking (right or wrong) both are "equal" in frequency response and the Fs shouldn't really matter with the crossover frequency of 5000Hz. Both are equal at 89dB sensitivity. So, "on paper", it would appear that the Peerless "should" be a better match to the original than the HiVi since it's also closer in impedence. If it isn't, will I know? No. If it is, will I know? No. But...if it sounds good, it could give someone else another option for keeping the speakers playing. I'll let everyone know what the result is once I have them installed.

[RoyC]

So, "on paper", it would appear that the Peerless "should" be a better match to the original than the HiVi since it's also closer in impedence.

John,

In this case the difference in published specs between the HiVi and Peerless tweeters is irrelevant. The response of the original AR tweeter has been measured by a number of forum members, and the unique nature of its unmodified response is firmly established. A crossover modification is absolutely required for both replacement candidates to even come close to the original tweeter's response. In the case of the HiVi, as well as the AB Tech replacement tweeter, a relatively simple modification (the small parallel coil) bring them close...yet they both have their own character. (At least both have the advantage of "friendly" faceplates for mounting in the AR cabinet.) It has also been pretty well established that no modern dome tweeter can match the dispersion characteristics of the original.

I and others here have been experimenting with dozens of replacement tweeter candidates for a number years, some very similar to your choice. It is very possible your tweeter can be made to work acceptably after you fashion a faceplate, BUT I am very confident it will not happen without a crossover modification similar to the small parallel coil used for the HiVi and ABT tweeters. The coil serves to cut off the tweeters' response into the midrange, something the original tweeter does steeply and naturally, mechanically. The typical specs of modern tweeters (as it relates to this issue) are pretty much the same, and ALL require electronic modification to emulate the response of the original tweeter.

This is a very old discussion...a search of the forum will provide more insight.

Roy

[JohnHeubel]

John,

I and others here have been experimenting with dozens of replacement tweeter candidates for a number years, some very similar to your choice. It is very possible your tweeter can be made to work acceptably after you fashion a faceplate, BUT I am very confident it will not happen without a crossover modification similar to the small parallel coil used for the HiVi and ABT tweeters. The coil serves to cut off the tweeters' response into the midrange, something the original tweeter does steeply and naturally, mechanically. The typical specs of modern tweeters (as it relates to this issue) are pretty much the same, and ALL require electronic modification to emulate the response of the original tweeter.

This is a very old discussion...a search of the forum will provide more insight.

Roy

Roy,

Thanks again, and yes I did search and read some of the threads on the tweeters. To make sure I understand what you're saying here does this sound right? ...original AR tweeters had great dispersion (which can't really be matched by modern domes) but didn't have as extended a frequency response as the typical modern dome, and also rolled off more quickly. The original xover accounts for the original response curve of the tweeter, but the .07mH value of the coil added to modern replacements works for all "suitable" modern domes, so that they drop off faster below 5kHz (i.e. the coil size wasn't matched to just the HiVi and ABT was it)? All else being equal (though I doubt it was during the testing) were the HiVi and ABTech tweeters chosen as replacements because they also fit the original's dimensions w/o modification? It would be great to be able to do better testing and customize my purchased tweeters into the existing crossover, but that's not going to happen any time soon for me.

I know this may be simplifying a complex discussion, and I'm certainly not trying to take anything away from those of you who've done all the research you have...my hat's off to you and all who put the restoration guide together. I'm just trying to get good sound out of classic speakers, not necessarily the most "authentic" sound, because I wouldn't know what "authentic" is anyway. That's not to sound flippant, just a realistic assessment of my situation.

John

[RoyC]

If not, though I've seen the recommendation for the HiVi and coil, what about this one:

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=279-051

John

John,

I was just responding to the question you posted above...There is NO way to know what will have to be done to the Peerless tweeter to integrate it with the 3a until it is tested and evaluated. Much work was done to come up with ways to implement the HiVi and ABT tweeters with minimum fuss. In fact, recent feedback through Ebay's "Vintage AR' (Larry Lagace...who has been selling MANY HiVi replacements), suggests nothing larger than a .05mh coil should be used with the HiVi tweeter.

Given your stated intention and limited resources, I would have recommended taking advantage of the work that has already been done. I simply do not agree with your reason for dismissing the HiVi tweeter. You have no frame of reference from which to proceed, nor any way to measure your results. Add to that, the need to fabricate a faceplate. On the other hand, I don't want to discourage you from experimenting with your speakers. If the Peerless tweeter turns out to work for you, that is really all that matters. Since your Peerless tweeter is a Parts Express "factory closeout" it is likely your specimens will be one-of-a-kind when completed. That counts for something. :-)

Roy

[JohnHeubel]

John,

I was just responding to the question you posted above...There is NO way to know what will have to be done to the Peerless tweeter to integrate it with the 3a until it is tested and evaluated. Much work was done to come up with ways to implement the HiVi and ABT tweeters with minimum fuss. In fact, recent feedback through Ebay's "Vintage AR' (Larry Lagace...who has been selling MANY HiVi replacements), suggests nothing larger than a .05mh coil should be used with the HiVi tweeter.

Given your stated intention and limited resources, I would have recommended taking advantage of the work that has already been done. I simply do not agree with your reason for dismissing the HiVi tweeter. You have no frame of reference from which to proceed, nor any way to measure your results. Add to that, the need to fabricate a faceplate. On the other hand, I don't want to discourage you from experimenting with your speakers. If the Peerless tweeter turns out to work for you, that is really all that matters. Since your Peerless tweeter is a Parts Express "factory closeout" it is likely your specimens will be one-of-a-kind when completed. That counts for something. :-)

Roy

No problems...and if I don't like the way they sound, I can always go with the HiVis next time I need to order. I guess I'm the kind who likes to try different approaches to things. Having to make the faceplates seemed like just another extension of the "let's see if I can fix this" mindset. The AR-3a's I have came with the blank metal backing pieces for the AR badges, but not the badges themselves. I know I could purchase new ones from Larry, but instead I'm trying my hand at engraving. Just part of the hobby I guess. Drew up a template on graph paper, transferred the image via carbon paper, darkened with a Sharpie and then engraved with my Dremel tool. Then I'll spray them goldish, hand-paint the lettering, and give them a lacquer coat. Will it be perfect? Not by a longshot. Is it a lot of work vs spending the $29? Yep. Has it been fun doing? Absolutely! Here's the progress so far:

[soundminded]

No problems...and if I don't like the way they sound, I can always go with the HiVis next time I need to order. I guess I'm the kind who likes to try different approaches to things. Having to make the faceplates seemed like just another extension of the "let's see if I can fix this" mindset. The AR-3a's I have came with the blank metal backing pieces for the AR badges, but not the badges themselves. I know I could purchase new ones from Larry, but instead I'm trying my hand at engraving. Just part of the hobby I guess. Drew up a template on graph paper, transferred the image via carbon paper, darkened with a Sharpie and then engraved with my Dremel tool. Then I'll spray them goldish, hand-paint the lettering, and give them a lacquer coat. Will it be perfect? Not by a longshot. Is it a lot of work vs spending the $29? Yep. Has it been fun doing? Absolutely! Here's the progress so far:

IMO what made the 3/4" AR tweeter unique is its dispersion, by far the best of any I know of except for Roy Alison's design for his own branded speakers. Even here, with Alison's contribution to LST and his own later multi tweeter designs he was clear (and correct IMO) that as good as those two tweeters are, HF dispersion of a single unit was still insufficient.

It's also my opinion that what makes the AR 3/4" tweeter's dispersion unique was its geometry, a hemisphere and its lack of a groove or other recess surrounding the dome that focused acoustic output the way a horn does. This unrestricted lateral and vertical dispersion not only made for flatter direct field FR off axis but increased the number of HF reflections in listening rooms. Tweeters today are designed with a very different goal, they intentionally focus to one degree or another their high frequency energy. This makes them sound initially bright, ear catching (studies show the brain likes hearing HF sonds) but experienced listeners know this is not only unnatural but fatiguing after not too much listening. Nevertheless this is what drives most of the current market and HV's tweeter is not a exception. The Peerless India tweeter might be. It's one drawback it's an inch in diameter instead of 3/4 which isn't quite as good for dispersion as AR's design.

AR's tweeter had its own shortcomings. It did have a HF rolloff which is acknowledged but that rolloff happened at all angles uniformly. Until I read it here, I wondered how AR managed its LvR demos with a speaker that had to my ears a muffled high end (AR3.) The trick was of course equalization, Alison merely turned up the treble on the Dyna PAS3X preamp to flatten response. That did the trick and greatly improves the FR of AR speakers using that tweeter and the later 3/4 inch unit. My own recent experiments with AR2ax demonstrate that when properly balanced and equalized it is an outstanding reproducer without any additional re-engineering help, better in fact in every way than KLH Model 6. This goes against my prior experience of over 45 years with these two seeming competitors (I never previously owned AR2ax and so never could see what was possible from them.)

The mounting problem and crossover modifications are the least of the problems of getting the best result restoring AR2ax or AR3a. Be prepared for cabinet modifications, crossover redesign, and experimentation. The Peerless India 1" driver without a face plate may be the best alternative available yet for restoration. If you try it, please let us know how you make out. I've got a pair of AR2as that I'm considering modifying myself and the Peerless driver is definitely a candidate for the tweeters. I've also got an extra pair of AR2ax midranges I may substitute for the 2 Jensen drivers that have warped cones (I understand that's common for them.)

There are different reasons for people being interested in these old speakers and all are equally legitimate. Some want authentic restoration. Personally I want the best sound I can get so I have no problem making changes using newer hardware. And isn't that what AR was after themselves?

[JohnHeubel]

<SNIP>

The mounting problem and crossover modifications are the least of the problems of getting the best result restoring AR2ax or AR3a. Be prepared for cabinet modifications, crossover redesign, and experimentation. The Peerless India 1" driver without a face plate may be the best alternative available yet for restoration. If you try it, please let us know how you make out. I've got a pair of AR2as that I'm considering modifying myself and the Peerless driver is definitely a candidate for the tweeters. I've also got an extra pair of AR2ax midranges I may substitute for the 2 Jensen drivers that have warped cones (I understand that's common for them.)

There are different reasons for people being interested in these old speakers and all are equally legitimate. Some want authentic restoration. Personally I want the best sound I can get so I have no problem making changes using newer hardware. And isn't that what AR was after themselves?

Thanks for some of the other thoughts on the dispersion aspect. The tweeters are supposed to arrive today, so I'll have a better idea of how I want to mount them. I've currently traced 4.75" and 3.5" circles on 3/16" masonite which I may glue together for added stiffness. The 3.5" would fit right in the opening like the original's magnet. But...if I can find a way to mount the 4.75" circle under the metal plate as shown in the photo, that would leave the entire dome exposed, which for our purposes would be the best. Don't know if the masonite will be up to the task though if I have to cut a large hole in it. I'm also considering using Bondo as the "glue" to hold the pieces together if needed. There's also a plastics supplier near by which I might be able to get some Delrin from, or potentially just a 1/4" piece of plexiglass. Hmmm...

Will definitely be reporting back with photos of the contraption however it works out.

John

[Carlspeak]

If I were doing it, i'd screw the 4 3/4 OD masonite to the face to the Peerless using the 3 screw holes and flat head screws so they're flush with the masonite. Then mount the masonite to the 3a cabinet using the 3 existing holes and flat head screws. Also, cut a hole just a bit larger than the dome surround and taper it away from the dome with a 45 deg or so angle.

[JohnHeubel]

If I were doing it, i'd screw the 4 3/4 OD masonite to the face to the Peerless using the 3 screw holes and flat head screws so they're flush with the masonite. Then mount the masonite to the 3a cabinet using the 3 existing holes and flat head screws. Also, cut a hole just a bit larger than the dome surround and taper it away from the dome with a 45 deg or so angle.

That was the plan I was working on last night by doing the trace on the masonite. I thought also that with the layout of the solder tabs on the tweeter, I may even be able to bend them flat and run the hookup wires to the front terminals to keep it more "original" looking...but use a sturdier 18 guage insulated wire vs the hairlike strand of the original. Electrical tape for the looks.

My concern was that the masonite might not be robust enough to hold the tweeter in position over time, which got me to thinking about the Bondo and/or the smaller masonite ring to double the thickness. If I go the double plate route though, the dome would sit deeper and have even worse dispersion.

There is an approximately 3/8" wide by 1/16" high gap under the tweeter mounting holes. Possibly small rectangular metal plates could be inserted, with the mounting screws going thru the tweeter holes and into the plates. The extended centerlines of these line up with the original mounting holes. So, the masonite ring would actually sit under the square brass tweeter plate. With this setup, there would be nothing in the dome's way, and the metal plates would rest on the top of the masonite providing extra support and linking the tweeter directly to the original mounting holes.

John

[Carlspeak]

I wouldn't worry about the robustness of the masonite holding the tweeter. The tweeter is a high frequency low motion device and thus doesn't exert much motive energy like a woofer would. I certainly wouldn't try mounting a woofer to the cab with 1/8 inch masonite.

[JohnHeubel]

I wouldn't worry about the robustness of the masonite holding the tweeter. The tweeter is a high frequency low motion device and thus doesn't exert much motive energy like a woofer would. I certainly wouldn't try mounting a woofer to the cab with 1/8 inch masonite.

I wasn't worried about vibrations, just the weight of the driver pulling the small screws (M3 0.5mm pitch) through the masonite over time.

Here's what I came up with for mounting the tweeter. Though an above the driver-face plate mounted to the driver via the three holes would be easier to implement, my first dome cutout was a little wider than I wanted. So I expanded the hole for the magnet to fit through and try my other idea. I fashioned three metal tabs which extend far enough to allow the original mounting screws to pass through it and the masonite into the original T nuts. This leaves the dome completely exposed above the baffle and hopefully will help with the dispersion deficiencies of the modern domes vs original. Here's the roughout and two questions:

1. Any problems with the (-) lead being longer than the (+) lead when connecting to the terminal block? I'd normally go for equal length, and could turn the tweeter to do that, but then I'd lose the advantage of having the mounting screws go through the metal tabs.

2. Currently, the (-) lead will pass over one metal tab. It will be an insulated wire, but will there be any problems sonically with the fact that the metal chosen is magnetically attractive.

What do you think?

John

[Carlspeak]

I'd say if you're not concerned about diffraction issues, then you certainly have it installed.

[JohnHeubel]

I'd say if you're not concerned about diffraction issues, then you certainly have it installed.

Carl,

Diffraction issues from what...the cabinet frame? Not going to be able to change that and obviously the original has those issues too. Or are you talking about all the little ridges on the driver itself? Perhaps I'll try one this way and the other with the top-mounted plateand angled cutout.

John

[Carlspeak]

The latter - all of the uneveness of the surface shown in your left picture will create diffraction effects. Exactly how much is the question.

[JohnHeubel]

Sounds like an experiment in the making between the two mounting options. Do you think a heavy vinyl overlay, or even just strips of electrical tape would smooth things out enough?

[dynaco_dan]

Howdy all,

First post here, don't know why I didn't join earlier, anywho, just wanted to say hi. I've gotten the speaker restoration bug over the past couple years, whether just keeping nice cabinets and adding new drivers, or doing full restorations with original equipment. Mainly GoodWill or curbside finds, and there have been some goodies... EPI 100s (4), KLH 17s, AR TSW510s, 410s, BA A60 Series IIs (x4) and now these AR-3as. Almost no sound out of them, woofers badly need refoaming (Oct '72 driver manufacture dates) and I'm sure the pots are badly corroded. Thread started here over on AK: http://audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=371214

I repaired the broken leads to the tweeters today and afterward got good continuity checks, but ohms are a different story. #1 was reading 3.? ohms (I forget what exactly) and the other hovering around 1 ohm. So something's definitely amiss. Is there anything else I can do with this tweeter to see if I can get it up to spec? If not, though I've seen the recommendation for the HiVi and coil, what about this one:

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=279-051

It might be in keeping with the Frankenspeaker look of these old ARs (no offense intended).

John

Hi John

I just went there and saw that these tweeters are going for only $4.00 each.

Obviously there is not a lot of profit there and of limited quantity.

Without altering the cabinetry it certainly can't be any worse sounding than having no tweeter.

Maybe a Microstatic 4 speaker array might be in order here, maybe they can be made for under $20.00 each enclosure.

Maybe Soundminded might go on the buying rampage to build up his tweeter supply. LOL

If they are usable as a replacement hifi tweeter, then they are an insanely outstanding buy at this price.

Based on an A - B comparison, wouldn't it be nice to see how the AR tweeter and this one compared sonically, before they sell out of course.

It wouldn't be a perfect comparison, but for $4.00 who cares.

[Carlspeak]

Sounds like an experiment in the making between the two mounting options. Do you think a heavy vinyl overlay, or even just strips of electrical tape would smooth things out enough?

I like the heavy vinyl overlay idea.

[JohnHeubel]

Hi John

I just went there and saw that these tweeters are going for only $4.00 each.

Obviously there is not a lot of profit there and of limited quantity.

Without altering the cabinetry it certainly can't be any worse sounding than having no tweeter.

Maybe a Microstatic 4 speaker array might be in order here, maybe they can be made for under $20.00 each enclosure.

Maybe Soundminded might go on the buying rampage to build up his tweeter supply. LOL

If they are usable as a replacement hifi tweeter, then they are an insanely outstanding buy at this price.

Based on an A - B comparison, wouldn't it be nice to see how the AR tweeter and this one compared sonically, before they sell out of course.

It wouldn't be a perfect comparison, but for $4.00 who cares.

I may be doing this comparison, as one of the originals had a good ohms reading. There's actually several tests I may run, all subjective as I don't have test equipment, but I may make the second mount today screwing the masonite ring to the tweeter as I was originally thinking. I'll then be able to compare the Peerless with "fins" to the original and "normal" faceplate version. It's the end of the school year though, andone of my daughters is graduating, so don't wait on my reports to purchase them since they could sell out.

Last year I bought some of the Jamo closeouts, 8' woofers and some 1 1/8" soft domes. I had some wood veneer cabinets with junk drivers in them. So I did some box volume calcs and decided to just use a simple 10uF cap xover like EPIs, running the woofers full range. Maybe I got lucky, but they sound pretty good. So, don't let the price fool you.

These were originally Zenith Model 66s, now they're custom.

[JohnHeubel]

Here's the alternate tweeter mount. I must say, it is a much more elegant solution, but would require doing the rear-mount wiring scheme.

[dynaco_dan]

Here's the alternate tweeter mount. I must say, it is a much more elegant solution, but would require doing the rear-mount wiring scheme.

Hi there

Your adaption looks very nice and professional.

[JKent]

. . . would require doing the rear-mount wiring scheme.

Not necessarily. Just drill 2 small holes in your faceplate. Here is a pic of a HiVi tweeter adapted for front wiring (from RoyC I think).

Nice job on those and your Jamos! Be sure to update us on how they sound and what crossover mods may be needed.

Kent