Dayton PA200-8 with Selenium ST200 Super Tweeter

DAYTON PA200 SELENIUM ST200

Dayton PA200-8 with Selenium ST200
Active Bi-amped

In June last year, I tested the Dayton PA200 with the Pyle PDS442 compression driver. This time round, I will match the PA200 with Selenium’s ST200. Like I said before, I’m not a fan of crossing at 4kHz but the ST200 leaves me no choice. Selenium actually recommends crossing at 5kHz at 12dB/oct but that is for 140W Musical Power. I am willing to trade power handling for a lower crossover frequency. All tests are done with my Synergy Bi-amp kit. Active crossover is 18dB/oct. 

Selenium ST200 Super TweeterSELENIUM ST200 RAW 4KFig 1 – Frequency Response of Selenium ST200. Black plot=RAW. Red plot=4kHz (18dB/oct)

The Black plot in Fig 1 is the RAW response of the ST200 (without any crossover). The Red plot is at 4kHz (18dB/oct). It looks promising because the high Fs is not affecting the roll-off.

Dayton PA200 with Selenium ST200

Ported Box = 20 liters. Baffle Width = 10.5″DAYTON PA200 SELENIUM ST200 4K 18dB/OCTFig 2 – Frequency Response of Dayton PA200-8 and Selenium ST200.

The Blue plot in Fig 2 is the PA200 crossed at 4kHz (18dB/oct). Personally, I would avoid crossing so high because the PA200 is about to suffer cone breakup. In fact, we can see this breakup in the jaggedness in the slope. Personally, i would rather cross the PA200 at 2.5kHz~3kHz but unfortunately, the crossover frequency is dictated by the ST200.

The Red plot is the ST200 crossed at 4kHz (18dB/oct). Acoustically, the two drivers cross at 4kHz with their roll-off slopes looking symmetrical. 

Summed Response of Dayton PA200-8 with Selenium ST200
DAYTON PA200 SELENIUM ST200 SUMMED RESPONSE

Fig 3 – Summed Response of PA200 with ST200 at 4kHz (18dB/oct). Nearfield below 500Hz

Fig 3 is the Summed Response of the PA200 and the ST200. The summation at 4kHz is actually quite good, much better than with the PDS442+H07E combo. The hump from 500Hz~1kHz is still there. There’s no running away from that because it’s part of the PA200. The only solution is to EQ it flat.

REW Cumulative Spectral DecayDAYTON PA200 SELENIUM ST200 WATERFALL

Fig 4 – Waterfall plot of PA200 with ST200. Rise Time = 0.10 msec. Window = 1.3 msec ( 769Hz ). Time Range = 1.0 msec

The Waterfall plot in Fig 4 shows extended decay at 4kHz. From 6kHz upwards, the artifacts are virtually non-existent. This indicates an exceptionally clean treble response.

Toneburst Energy Storage
DAYTON PA200 SELENIUM ST200 TES

Fig 5 – PA200 with ST200 Toneburst Energy Storage

The Toneburst Energy Storage plot in Fig 5 shows some stored energy (light blue slices) from 4kHz~6kHz. I suspect it is caused by the cone breakup of the PA200 and not from the ST200.

REW Spectrogram
DAYTON PA200 SELENIUM ST200 SPECTROGRAM

Fig 6 – Wavelet of PA200 and ST200

The Spectrogram in Fig 6 shows most of the energy at 3kHz upwards dissipates by 3ms. Even though they show up in measurements, these artifacts are inaudible in actual playback.

Harmonic DistortionDAYTON PA200 SELENIUM ST200 DISTORTION

Fig 7 – Distortion of PA200 with ST200. Red plot=2nd Harmonic. Violet plot=3rd Harmonic

Fig 7 is the Harmonic Distortion of the PA200 with the ST200. The 2nd and 3rd harmonics are generally -55dB below the fundamental. Nothing out of the ordinary are detected.

Comparing the Selenium ST200 with the Pyle PDS442/H07E combo

Soundwise, the Dayton PA200 with the Selenium ST200 beats the one with the Pyle PDS442.

Strangely, the hardness in the male voices due to the hump from 500Hz~1kHz that was so annoying in the PDS442 version is totally absent. Though I dread crossing at 4kHz, apparently, it doesn’t damage the sound quality. Vocals still stand out and doesn’t blur into the background like some cheap PA speakers.

Would I use this PA200/ST200 for myself?

Yes, most certainly. It’s even good enough for HiFi which says a lot.

We must not forget that the PA200 and the ST200 are budget drivers intended for the PA market. Where most cheap products suffer in quality, it is not the case with these two. When used within their limits, the speaker is excellent.

Frankly, I’m impressed by the sound quality of  the ST200, a $20 bullet tweeter. There’s absolutely no harshness. This tweeter simply disappears into the music. It doesn’t draw attention to itself. 

In commercial use, I would not hesitate to use the PA200 with the ST200. I have installed speakers that cost three times as much in projects and they are no where close to this sound quality. Moreover, the speaker enclosure is compact which is always a plus. Any volume from 20 liters~30 lliters will work with the PA200. It’s high sensitivity is another bonus. Low power chip amps can be used where soft background music is required like in restaurants. Schools can benefit with this speaker too. It’s loud enough for announcements and classrooms.

All said, I’m happy with the way the PA200 + ST200 turned out. This is one speaker that deserves a passive crossover. 

Note: All measurements were made with the mic at 1m, tweeter axis. Impulse Window=5ms. No smoothing applied.