Looking for a replacement tweeter for MD102

[Sir-Lancelot 216]

Today I pulled out my 3 way Dynaudio 362 set today and I see that I have one tweeter blown.

I don't know that I want to spend $300 on a replacement set either. I didn't love them that much. lol

I am going to run passive as I have the 3-way passive crossovers and dont want to add all the extra amps to go active. I am trying to keep this to a minimum both with weight and equipment used.

I am going to put the 8" woofer in the door and 3" mids with 1" tweeters in the kicks. I found that worked better when I was passive on this set so thats where I am going to start first.

The passive tweeeter is a second order @ 3.5khz (12db), the mid and woofer are first order 900-3500 (6db), and the woofer is 900hz (6db).

I like my tweeter to be a little bright and have a sense of air about it. More open and pronounced than most, but not overpowering or too silibant like some metal domes are. My HU is undecided as I never had a use for a DD until now. I do have the Alpine PXA-H100 so maybe I will look at Alpine for the HU and use that. I was looking at the Clarion NX702 also.

The MD102 is an 8ohm tweeter and has a power handeling of 100w. It is a little larger than some 1" tweeters so it had a little more surface area, that said it was always a little too laid back for my taste. That could be because it was on the floor of the Yukon which was not optimum placement, IMO.

Ideas on something would be a nice match for this?

Edited April 14, 2012 by Sir-Lancelot

[edouble101 314]

This really is a shot in the dark. You have two very well matched drivers and now you want to find a tweeter to fit that pair. Check out the Morel CAT 408. It might be a good fit for your set and a good candidate for kick panel mounting location.

I still prefer tweeters up high. Too bad the cross over point is right in the middle of vocals. You are limited to mounting the tweeter and mid very near each other. I prefer a-pillar setups. Have you considered that?

[Impious 1,476]

What is your budget?

The crossover doesn't have a zobel or anything else funky on the tweeter outputs, correct? If so, results will be more unpredictable.

[///M5 2,833]

Can you measure the response of either the high pass or the t/s of the tweeter you are replacing? I would completely ignore Dyn's specs on what they "claim" the crossover is as I'd doubt it. Also curious if it seems to share any components with the Mid or LP? If not, you could replace the HP portoin of the crosover as well.

[Sir-Lancelot 216]

This really is a shot in the dark. You have two very well matched drivers and now you want to find a tweeter to fit that pair. Check out the Morel CAT 408. It might be a good fit for your set and a good candidate for kick panel mounting location.

I still prefer tweeters up high. Too bad the cross over point is right in the middle of vocals. You are limited to mounting the tweeter and mid very near each other. I prefer a-pillar setups. Have you considered that?

I like the tweeter up high too. I could mount the mid in the stock location in the dash and the tweeter in the A pillar, yes. Beyond that, I do not want to cut anything I cant cover up and return to stock. When I was running passive, I had better luck with the MB in the door and the mids/tweeter in the kick.

What is your budget?

The crossover doesn't have a zobel or anything else funky on the tweeter outputs, correct? If so, results will be more unpredictable.

Well since I am looking at $300 for a new set, I would like to keep my budget is south of $300. I was never in love with these tweeters, they were nice yes, but I prefer a brighter tweeter. Tho that could have been because I had them in the kick of my Yukon and couldnt get the soundstage higher than the radio.

As for the zobel, if i understand that is to correct impedance rise. Dynaudio says the crossover has impedance correction for the woofer and a protection circut for the tweeter, but I honestly do not know what to look for to answer your question.

Here is a picture if that helps. I can take a better one on my own if that would be better.

Can you measure the response of either the high pass or the t/s of the tweeter you are replacing? I would completely ignore Dyn's specs on what they "claim" the crossover is as I'd doubt it. Also curious if it seems to share any components with the Mid or LP? If not, you could replace the HP portoin of the crosover as well.

I am sorry, but I do not know how to do this. If this is something I can do with basic tools I am willing to try. I do not have any measuring equipment at my disposal. Sorry.

I can link to literature and possibly responce graphs, but not sure that would be of any use to you. I know you are a believe it when I see it with my own eyes type.

Edited April 16, 2012 by Sir-Lancelot

[///M5 2,833]

I'm actually rather impressed with the component selection....and it looks like they didn't do anything funny, but without seeing the complete signal path it is pretty hard to tell.

What you propose without any knowledge or measurements is a bit of a crapshoot. You need the same nominal impedance to make the crossover point the same, but you may find that the tweeter you choose is more or less sensitive as well. Hopefully it'd be more and you could just add an Lpad to take it down a notch, but if it's less you'd have to pad the other two speakers. Or of course if you had enough eq you could maybe do this by cutting the louder drivers...but again it's all compromises.

I don't believe that driver is anything off the shelf either as Dyn usually "designs" their own. Using quotes as modifying a current design is possible as well.

You have one good tweeter. If you measured the full impedance curve then even if there is a zobel you might find a driver that is rather similar. This may not cure your bright enough problem though.

Last option. Run the system in 2 way active mode. ie, get an amplifier with a highpass circuit and run the tweeters you choose off that and the rest of the component set as is. This may be the cheapest and easiest route and also the most cost effective way for you to regain control of the brightness you are looking for.

[Sir-Lancelot 216]

I'm actually rather impressed with the component selection....and it looks like they didn't do anything funny, but without seeing the complete signal path it is pretty hard to tell.

What you propose without any knowledge or measurements is a bit of a crapshoot. You need the same nominal impedance to make the crossover point the same, but you may find that the tweeter you choose is more or less sensitive as well. Hopefully it'd be more and you could just add an Lpad to take it down a notch, but if it's less you'd have to pad the other two speakers. Or of course if you had enough eq you could maybe do this by cutting the louder drivers...but again it's all compromises.

I don't believe that driver is anything off the shelf either as Dyn usually "designs" their own. Using quotes as modifying a current design is possible as well.

You have one good tweeter. If you measured the full impedance curve then even if there is a zobel you might find a driver that is rather similar. This may not cure your bright enough problem though.

Last option. Run the system in 2 way active mode. ie, get an amplifier with a highpass circuit and run the tweeters you choose off that and the rest of the component set as is. This may be the cheapest and easiest route and also the most cost effective way for you to regain control of the brightness you are looking for.

By signal path do you mean on the circut board?

I could take a good pic of that, but it seems I am going to be beating my head against a wall and possibly throwing money at something that (without proper measuring equipment to test) may not be as good as what I have.

I had actually thought about running them partially active. I was looking at the graph on the 8" woofer and I think that could make a nice 2 way set up with a proper tweeter or fullrange and just ditch the dome mid. That said, I really want to keep this to one 4ch amp with 2ch bridged to the subs.

So I am thinking maybe I post up a WTB on a couple of forums and see if someone has a single tweeter or possibly a pair and if not, I will just get a new set. With my limitations on equipment I think that would be the safe bet.

To go in a little bit different direction, what would your opinion be of me adding a second pair of tweeters in the stock location on the corners of the dash or in the a pillar running off the head unit power to brighten and raise the soundstage?

Bear in mind I am not going for 100% accuracy, just trying to have very good tonal qualities with higher possibly wider soundstage that sounds good to me and the front passenger. I have read about people adding tweeters up high with the mid/tweeter in the kick, but I have no personal experience doing so.

Edited April 17, 2012 by Sir-Lancelot

[Impious 1,476]

By signal path do you mean on the circut board?

The circuit board & traces (really a schematic would be MUCH easier to decipher) to know what components were in-line with each output.

I could take a good pic of that, but it seems I am going to be beating my head against a wall and possibly throwing money at something that (without proper measuring equipment to test) may not be as good as what I have.

Yes.

I had actually thought about running them partially active. I was looking at the graph on the 8" woofer and I think that could make a nice 2 way set up with a proper tweeter or fullrange and just ditch the dome mid. That said, I really want to keep this to one 4ch amp with 2ch bridged to the subs.

If you want something more bright & airy on the top end than the Dyn tweeter, I don't think a full range is going to be for you.

Given Dyn crosses the 8" mid @ 900hz on a ridiculously shallow slope, it's possible you might be able to run it a little higher on a steeper slope to mate with a low playing tweeter. If that graph is from the manufacturer I wouldn't put a lot of faith into it.

What 4-channel amp do you have?

So I am thinking maybe I post up a WTB on a couple of forums and see if someone has a single tweeter or possibly a pair and if not, I will just get a new set. With my limitations on equipment I think that would be the safe bet.

Really that tweeter is crossed high enough that most any tweeter would "work" on that crossover as long as the impedance worked out close enough as to not significantly change the crossover frequency, the sensitivity was similar, and there weren't any funky additions to the tweeter section of filter (which from glancing at the picture in the manual, doesn't appear to be anything besides tweeter attentuation). So it's not easy, it's possible something else might "work" well, but going with another MD102 would definitely be a much safer bet.

You might e-mail Dyn, they might be able to supply the rated sensitivity to give you a basis to start working from.

To go in a little bit different direction, what would your opinion be of me adding a second pair of tweeters in the stock location on the corners of the dash or in the a pillar running off the head unit power to brighten and raise the soundstage?

Bear in mind I am not going for 100% accuracy, just trying to have very good tonal qualities with higher possibly wider soundstage that sounds good to me and the front passenger. I have read about people adding tweeters up high with the mid/tweeter in the kick, but I have no personal experience doing so.

Ehh....personally, I'm not a big fan of the idea. If you want to try mounting your tweeters up high, you can try it & see what you think. Personally I wouldn't add a 2nd pair. Hell, just moving your tweeters up high might be enough of a pyschoacoustic effect to trick you mind into thinking the stage was higher. IME I get a lot worse response & a lot worse integration with tweeters up high, especially passive.....but that's just my ears.

[Sir-Lancelot 216]

By signal path do you mean on the circut board?

The circuit board & traces (really a schematic would be MUCH easier to decipher) to know what components were in-line with each output.

I could take a good pic of that, but it seems I am going to be beating my head against a wall and possibly throwing money at something that (without proper measuring equipment to test) may not be as good as what I have.

Yes.

I had actually thought about running them partially active. I was looking at the graph on the 8" woofer and I think that could make a nice 2 way set up with a proper tweeter or fullrange and just ditch the dome mid. That said, I really want to keep this to one 4ch amp with 2ch bridged to the subs.

If you want something more bright & airy on the top end than the Dyn tweeter, I don't think a full range is going to be for you.

Given Dyn crosses the 8" mid @ 900hz on a ridiculously shallow slope, it's possible you might be able to run it a little higher on a steeper slope to mate with a low playing tweeter. If that graph is from the manufacturer I wouldn't put a lot of faith into it.

What 4-channel amp do you have?

So I am thinking maybe I post up a WTB on a couple of forums and see if someone has a single tweeter or possibly a pair and if not, I will just get a new set. With my limitations on equipment I think that would be the safe bet.

Really that tweeter is crossed high enough that most any tweeter would "work" on that crossover as long as the impedance worked out close enough as to not significantly change the crossover frequency, the sensitivity was similar, and there weren't any funky additions to the tweeter section of filter (which from glancing at the picture in the manual, doesn't appear to be anything besides tweeter attentuation). So it's not easy, it's possible something else might "work" well, but going with another MD102 would definitely be a much safer bet.

You might e-mail Dyn, they might be able to supply the rated sensitivity to give you a basis to start working from.

To go in a little bit different direction, what would your opinion be of me adding a second pair of tweeters in the stock location on the corners of the dash or in the a pillar running off the head unit power to brighten and raise the soundstage?

Bear in mind I am not going for 100% accuracy, just trying to have very good tonal qualities with higher possibly wider soundstage that sounds good to me and the front passenger. I have read about people adding tweeters up high with the mid/tweeter in the kick, but I have no personal experience doing so.

Ehh....personally, I'm not a big fan of the idea. If you want to try mounting your tweeters up high, you can try it & see what you think. Personally I wouldn't add a 2nd pair. Hell, just moving your tweeters up high might be enough of a pyschoacoustic effect to trick you mind into thinking the stage was higher. IME I get a lot worse response & a lot worse integration with tweeters up high, especially passive.....but that's just my ears.

Good stuff guys. I appreciate the feedback and advice.

I am going to buy the 4ch ZED Dreadnought. I think it will be a good match with 1&2 on the Dyns and 3&4 on a pair of sealed Gcons. Smallish footprint, current draw should not be terrible as its class D, and has the power I am looking for.

I think I will call Dyn in the morning. From my research I am hearing the Dyn MD130 has less rolloff up top than the MD102 does and it cost $80 less to boot. That could be more to my taste if so.

I do not see a sensitivity on the MD102 (90db on the MD130), but Dyn should be able to tell me if the 130 will play nice with the 362 passive crossovers, no?

Honestly, this prolly has a lot to do with my age and all the loud music I have listen to over the years as much as it does the rolloff in the higher frequencies of the MD102 tweeter. Combine the two and it's not bright enough. lol Getting old is the suck!

I may experiment a little bit with the tweeter location. This install may turn out completly different then it did in the truck, but I found it more to my liking with everything right there together running them passive. Woofer in the door and M&T in the kick. I could easily put the mid in the factory dash location and the tweeter close. That would actually be the easiest way to do get them in there, but I am afraid the dome mid would be shit firing off the windshield and I really dont want a pod on the dash to get them on axis.

Again, thank you for the guidance.

[///M5 2,833]

I'm a huge fan of the full range, but it is a far cry from what you need.

I also wouldn't even try that 8" in a 2way. In general it's a pretty bad idea to use an 8 with a tweeter. Definitely exceptions, but I don't think so here.

If you do, decide to go partially active just add a small 2chn amp. If you don't find one with a crossover then you can easily build a quick simple passive one to go with the amp. I had an Alpine 30wx2 amp that was about 5" x 5" that would have worked perfectly. Don't think i could have sold it for $20 on here but am sure you can find something similar. Almost no money and it will let you choose a tweeter that makes sense for your ears.

Even if Dyn says the 130 will work, i wouldn't believe them. Ask them how different the impedance, sensitivity, and I am sure that you'll find it's just another wrong tweeter. In my mind you only really have three options pony up and buy the tweeter that goes with the set, do a partially active setup, or seriously compromise a rather spendy component set. For me that only leaves one option which requires another amp.

[Impious 1,476]

According to the manual the tweeter highpass uses a 2nd order filter. Running the passive without the tweeter connected could potentially present a near dead short to the amplifier around the crossover frequency, potentially causing damage to the amplifier.

And I really think the "best" bet is to try to locate a direct replacement for the crossover. Anything else will be a bit of a crapshoot on that crossover, and I personally wouldn't try running the crossover without the tweeter connected since there's no zobel & it's 2nd order.

[Sir-Lancelot 216]

I called Dynaudio USA today and was told I would get a call back. Emmelio? SP??? The gentelman that answered the phone asked him if using the MD130 with the 362 passive crossover was a viable option and he said yes it was, but couldnt elaborate as he was on the phone. I will try to call him again tomorrow as that return call didnt happen.

I am going to ask him about using the MD130 as a replacement to the MD102 as I read it did not have the roll off in the higher frequencies that the MD102 has. I will ask about the impedance and sensitivity as Sean advised, but what else specifically would you have me to ask him?

If it has a little more detail on the higher end, thats what I am after, but what questions should I be asking besides sensitivity to ensure that this is a direction I want to go in? If it doesnt work it doesnt work and I will just spring for the MD102 and play it safe.

Thank you for the helpfull replies.

Edited April 18, 2012 by Sir-Lancelot

[Sir-Lancelot 216]

Case closed.

Ordered the md102. Better safe than sorry.

Thanks anyway guys.