Dayton WT3 testing tweeters - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Design & Build > Equipment & Tools
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Gallery Wiki Blogs Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Equipment & Tools From test equipment to hand tools

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12th January 2011, 02:55 AM   #1
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ga
Default Dayton WT3 testing tweeters

I just purchased some used Morel MDT-44 and like any speaker I purchase I always test with my WT3. And alway after calibration.

The results were not very close to the published specs. Specifically the Fs was 1020 and not 750 Hz and the impedence peaks were off in magnitude and location. I repeated the test several times and the results were consistent. If the tweeter had not been used in a while could they require a second break in period?

Just to make sure it wasn't the WT3 I tested some LPG tweeters and everything turned up zeros. Another LPG tweet tested the same. These tweetes work and sound good. Then I tested some 3" Peerless speakers and my results were the same as published.

Any clues? I have read many things about the WT3 on forums. One person said you needed to always use the same usb port you used when you installed the software. Any truth to that?

  Reply With Quote
Old 18th January 2011, 07:33 AM   #2
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2010
Okay. So you have a test instrument + regimen.
You calibrate the unit and operate it as directed.
You test a sample component, and the test result does not match the published specification.
You re-test multiple times and each time the results are consistent.
You benchmark against known samples and these samples provide results consistent with their respective published specifications.

I woud suggest the specification is wrong, or the sample component is not up to the specification, just as your instrument reports. As those who explore the wilderness would say ... "the map is not the territory". In other words, if the real object is one way the description of that object is another, then the description must be wrong.

Although popular, shooting the messenger is the least satisfactory method to rectify or understand the problem. From your description, you have done a reasonable job of eliminating errors in your method and test gear. Sometimes the obvious answer really is the correct one.
" ... Go back to the beginning of a technology before the priesthood was established; that was the time when people were communicating information, not proving why there needs to be Priests. This is why the old texts tend to be so good. ..."

Last edited by Johnny2Bad; 18th January 2011 at 07:46 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th August 2011, 09:25 AM   #3
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Can I test fs of compression drivers by wt3?

  Reply With Quote


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Dayton WT3 Speaker Tester Loren42 Multi-Way 37 9th November 2011 03:19 PM
Dayton RS28F-4 tweeters GOWA Swap Meet 0 13th December 2010 08:46 PM
Simple DIYable Waveguide testing (dome tweeters) dlneubec Multi-Way 3 14th October 2008 04:10 PM
Dayton WT3 Woofer Tester available next month! BHTX Multi-Way 14 30th October 2007 07:32 PM
Protecting tweeters while testing irb Multi-Way 3 22nd March 2007 09:16 PM

New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15 AM.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2017 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2