# AudioFrog



## lizardking (Nov 8, 2008)

I would have thought by now we would have seen some reviews on the gear from the Bandwagen camp. Anyone?


----------



## BlackHHR (May 12, 2013)

I had the chance to hold the mid range in my hand before it was installed in a car. Nice looking product but unfortunately the project was completed on a Saturday and I was unable to take a listen.


----------



## lizardking (Nov 8, 2008)

The 4" midrange peaks my interest.


----------



## lizardking (Nov 8, 2008)

I read the midrange subjective shootout again. Something that was interesting is that the Scan 12m and the Dynaudio 430 were the only drivers that the chair move could be heard on 9 Crimes from Damien Rice. I decided to download that song and listen for it with my headphones and then once again listen in my truck. I heard the same chair move with the Scan 10f's....four times. I guess we can take that shootout with a grain of salt. Got me thinking.....on midranges.


----------



## SO20thCentury (Sep 18, 2014)

I was trying to figure if I could fit those 4inchers in somewhere but saw they need 3 liters of enclosure. 
I'd really love to hear an all frog system too.


----------



## miniSQ (Aug 4, 2009)

Bing has written a very nice review of the product, do a search. i don't have the link handy.


----------



## Audiophilefred (Oct 24, 2012)

I'm waiting on the sub still


----------



## sirbOOm (Jan 24, 2013)

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...rog-sq-build-review-arc-mosconi-illusion.html


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

lizardking said:


> I read the midrange subjective shootout again. Something that was interesting is that the Scan 12m and the Dynaudio 430 were the only drivers that the chair move could be heard on 9 Crimes from Damien Rice. I decided to download that song and listen for it with my headphones and then once again listen in my truck. I heard the same chair move with the Scan 10f's....four times. I guess we can take that shootout with a grain of salt. Got me thinking.....on midranges.


I downloaded it as well now just for that reason. Is it the chair you hear between 0,57-1,10 in the song? 

It's is my firm belief than listening tests are not really required, all relevant data can be extracted from the measurements. Especially when it comes to speakers. Those plots I've seen of Audiofrog's drivers imply that they are among the best drivers on the market.


----------



## sirbOOm (Jan 24, 2013)

Listening matters - no speaker can sound the same in different vehicle environments.


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

gregerst22 said:


> I was looking for that the other day and couldn't find it. I found the thread but not the link to the results.


http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...-thread-midrange-subjective-review-report.pdf


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

Hanatsu said:


> *I downloaded it as well now just for that reason. Is it the chair you hear between 0,57-1,10 in the song? *
> 
> It's is my firm belief than listening tests are not really required, all relevant data can be extracted from the measurements. Especially when it comes to speakers. Those plots I've seen of Audiofrog's drivers imply that they are among the best drivers on the market.


yeah


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

t3sn4f2 said:


> yeah


I see... That was audible with my computer speakers playing an v2 mp3 file.


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

sirbOOm said:


> Listening matters - no speaker can sound the same in different vehicle environments.


x2
Agreed


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

sirbOOm said:


> Listening matters - no speaker can sound the same in different vehicle environments.


No speaker sounds the same, agreed. That wasn't what I said.

... and the speaker won't sound different in different environments. That doesn't even make sense. It's the transfer function of the "room" that sounds different. The speaker distortion and the distortion from the environment must be treated as separate events.


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

lizardking said:


> Something that was interesting is that the Scan 12m and the Dynaudio 430 were the only drivers that the chair move could be heard on 9 Crimes from Damien Rice. I decided to download that song and listen for it with my headphones and then once again listen in my truck. I heard the same chair move with the Scan 10f's....four times. I guess we can take that shootout with a grain of salt. Got me thinking.....on midranges.


I just want to quote this again.

There simply isn't anything magical with highend speakers. Everything can be seen and compared by doing a measurement. That's why I said, listening is not required. It can be determined which is the better driver just by looking at the plots. Detail doesn't really exist, better separation of instruments, vocals etc are to a large degree connected to more/less distortion and that can accurately be measured. In almost every case, the speakers that measures good also sound stellar and vice versa. It can be correlated accurately. 

I recently tested the Vifa TC9 and found that it was basically on par with the Scan-Speak 12m (which I also own). After listening to them, they sounded just as good to me in the 300-4000Hz region. The Vifa can be had for a fraction of the price. If this was a sighted test I predict the Scan will win every time - it must be the better driver right? Blind tests remove the bias which makes it lot more reliable. Still there are a ton of factors here, which range are you gonna use them, what playback levels etc. It would be immensely comprehensive to do a "full" test on such things. A measurement is much more convenient - if you learn how to correlate what it means "in real life" that is.


----------



## JVD240 (Sep 7, 2009)

sirbOOm said:


> Listening matters - no speaker can sound the same in different vehicle environments.


So a bad speaker can be made to sound good by placing it in a car?

If it sounds better than other speakers outside of the car(free air) then it will sound better than the others IN the car.

Maybe I'm not understanding what you mean.

EDIT: Didn't read down to Hanatsu's replies.


----------



## lizardking (Nov 8, 2008)

gregerst22 said:


> I was looking for that the other day and couldn't find it. I found the thread but not the link to the results. Do you have it? My 10f's should be delivered today. I'm looking forward to comparing them to the L3SE's.





Here you go...


----------



## lizardking (Nov 8, 2008)

Hanatsu said:


> I downloaded it as well now just for that reason. Is it the chair you hear between 0,57-1,10 in the song?
> 
> It's is my firm belief than listening tests are not really required, all relevant data can be extracted from the measurements. Especially when it comes to speakers. Those plots I've seen of Audiofrog's drivers imply that they are among the best drivers on the market.


I hear right before the guy starts singing....and then again after. I'm not familiar with the singer so if thats his name.....


----------



## TheHulk9er (Oct 28, 2010)

Hanatsu said:


> I just want to quote this again.
> 
> There simply isn't anything magical with highend speakers. Everything can be seen and compared by doing a measurement. That's why I said, listening is not required. It can be determined which is the better driver just by looking at the plots. Detail doesn't really exist, better separation of instruments, vocals etc are to a large degree connected to more/less distortion and that can accurately be measured. In almost every case, the speakers that measures good also sound stellar and vice versa. It can be correlated accurately.
> 
> I recently tested the Vifa TC9 and found that it was basically on par with the Scan-Speak 12m (which I also own). After listening to them, they sounded just as good to me in the 300-4000Hz region. The Vifa can be had for a fraction of the price. If this was a sighted test I predict the Scan will win every time - it must be the better driver right? Blind tests remove the bias which makes it lot more reliable. Still there are a ton of factors here, which range are you gonna use them, what playback levels etc. It would be immensely comprehensive to do a "full" test on such things. A measurement is much more convenient - if you learn how to correlate what it means "in real life" that is.


I agree with some of this but sometimes personal preference has an impact. The great thing about the shootout is it was done double blind so no one knew which speaker he was hearing and reviewing. Your comment that the Vifa sounds basically on par is equally biased because you knew which speaker was which. Now if you can do a double blind test with a bunch of speakers that have equally great specs and the cheaper one wins out or is close I'm all ears.


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL (Jan 31, 2011)

You missed the point, both speakers were measured, and they were basically equals. He never said anything about himself doing a listening test.

Full accurate measurements tell you all you need to know about a speaker.


----------



## McKinneyMike (Jul 24, 2014)

I worked in hi-end home audio for many years. I will always trust my ears before any measurements. Science has many doors left to open. It is a great measuring stick, but my ears are the only thing that I trust. They have never let me down.


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

McKinneyMike said:


> I worked in hi-end home audio for many years. I will always trust my ears before any measurements. Science has many doors left to open. It is a great measuring stick, but my ears are the only thing that I trust. They have never let me down.


Senses aren't exactly the most trustworthy things..especially in comparisons.


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL (Jan 31, 2011)

^yep, any minute little thing will change the way you hear, and the placebo effect has proven many times to be more powerful at affecting what we hear than reality is.


----------



## McKinneyMike (Jul 24, 2014)

AAAAAAA said:


> Senses aren't exactly the most trustworthy things..especially in comparisons.


Long term satisfaction trumps any instrument IMO. If you are the type that changes your mind if the wind changes direction then I would not trust my senses either. Developing a long term appreciation of live music helps to hone ones listening skills. If you want to trust a tool then so be it. They have their place, but not the final judge. To each their own.

I never make snap judgements, but prefer to live with something for an extended period of time to decide if it is worthy of its place in my system. I rarely change things just to change as it has taken me a long time to get the sound that I feel meets my needs with respect to dynamics, tone and presentation. Nothing and I mean nothing in audio is perfect. There are just tradeoffs with some things having fewer and fewer egregious errors to deal with and to address.


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

TheHulk9er said:


> I agree with some of this but sometimes personal preference has an impact. The great thing about the shootout is it was done double blind so no one knew which speaker he was hearing and reviewing. Your comment that the Vifa sounds basically on par is equally biased because you knew which speaker was which. Now if you can do a double blind test with a bunch of speakers that have equally great specs and the cheaper one wins out or is close I'm all ears.


No just as toostubborn said you miss the point I made. I measured them and from the data I concluded they were on par with eachother. I later listened to them and confirmed they sounded very similar. I've done blindtests more than once and I usually can spot the lower distortion drivers, below a certain threshold any differences will be inaudible though. There are too many variables involved in listening, I think it's a flawed method of evaluating the performance of anything against another. For example;

*At what SPL is the test performed?

*SPL matching (EQ)?

*Which frequency range?

*Different baffle size? Diffraction?

It's takes an immense amount of listening to take all these into account. One driver might be good between 400-4000Hz but has a nasty breakup at 6.5k. The listening test setup might use a lowpass of 6k for all drivers. A driver in every other way inferior might sound better in the test with the given LPF because its breakup node occurs at 10k instead. Is the test fair? How to account for it? Add the fact that senses are unreliable, I want to see a double blind test where they conclude the exact same subjective descriptions twice. 

I'm not picking on blindtests now but it should be known that any test only is valid under the exact circumstance of the test.

The Scan 12m and Dyn430 have one thing in common; A very controlled upper end and very low non-linear distortion. I believe that's why they where the winners of that test. If they used another listening volume and LPF the outcome might have been different. Get what I'm saying here? 

Measurements do not suffer from the same issue.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S5 using Tapatalk


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

Hanatsu said:


> No just as toostubborn said you miss the point I made. I measured them and from the data I concluded they were on par with eachother. I later listened to them and confirmed they sounded very similar. I've done blindtests more than once and I usually can spot the lower distortion drivers, below a certain threshold any differences will be inaudible though. There are too many variables involved in listening, I think it's a flawed method of evaluating the performance of anything against another. For example;
> 
> *At what SPL is the test performed?
> 
> ...


killin' it...

anyone who depends on their own subjective impressions to give advice about speakers, and refers to the measurements as a secondary concern is living a life of illusion...

unless of course, they prefer to do so, as we know there are those who appreciate the elevated speaker wire, and the crystal rock that harmonizes the audio in the preamplifier, simply by sitting on top in the correct orientation...

but here in car audio, it's more sensible to use specific data, like distance with arrival times, and frequency response nulls due to reflection, than it is to linger on the salesman's spiel filled with buzzwords that don't mean very much in the real working parts of car sound.


----------



## McKinneyMike (Jul 24, 2014)

cajunner said:


> killin' it...
> 
> anyone who depends on their own subjective impressions to give advice about speakers, and refers to the measurements as a secondary concern is living a life of illusion...
> 
> ...


No one should depend upon anyone else for their own listening standards. Sound processing is a big part of getting any car stereo to sound its best I would agree, but that will not turn a sow's ear into a silk purse either. I have seen far too many things measure as great vs another or even extremely similar only to have it not be all that when it comes down to its long term appeal.


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL (Jan 31, 2011)

All that means is that you have a preference that is separate from actual best performance. There are plenty of people like that, but it doesn't make it accurate. Human ears are just not as good as measurement equipment at telling what the better speaker actually is. 

There are plenty of people who don't like low distortion subwoofers. Does that mean subwoofers with higher distortion, are better? No, they are worse. It just means those people prefer a less accurate subwoofer.


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL said:


> All that means is that you have a preference that is separate from actual best performance. There are plenty of people like that, but it doesn't make it accurate. Human ears are just not as good as measurement equipment at telling what the better speaker actually is.
> 
> There are plenty of people who don't like low distortion subwoofers. Does that mean subwoofers with higher distortion, are better? No, they are worse. It just means those people prefer a less accurate subwoofer.


Agreed ^^

Also, "long term listening" = "getting used to whatever you listening at"


----------



## CDT FAN (Jul 25, 2012)

lizardking said:


> I read the midrange subjective shootout again. Something that was interesting is that the Scan 12m and the Dynaudio 430 were the only drivers that the chair move could be heard on 9 Crimes from Damien Rice. I decided to download that song and listen for it with my headphones and then once again listen in my truck. I heard the same chair move with the Scan 10f's....four times. I guess we can take that shootout with a grain of salt. Got me thinking.....on midranges.


Are you sure that is a chair being moved? On my headphones, I twice hear what sounds like the rattling of the string on a Chelo, but I don't hear what sounds like a chair.


----------



## CDT FAN (Jul 25, 2012)

Hanatsu said:


> Agreed ^^
> 
> Also, "long term listening" = "getting used to whatever you listening at"


When people talk about speakers, and especially electronics, needing a "burn-in" period, I wonder if they are actually just hearing the effects of getting acclimated to a new balance of sound.


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

CDT FAN said:


> Are you sure that is a chair being moves? On my headphones, I twice hear what sounds like the rattling of the string on a Chelo, but I don't hear what sounds like a chair.


Not a chair or chelo; the hot blonde qweefed. 
My speakers are soooo good the reproduce smell.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## CDT FAN (Jul 25, 2012)

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> Not a chair or chelo; the hot blonde qweefed.
> My speakers are soooo good the reproduce smell.
> 
> 
> ...


Ooooo yea, baby.. I think I can smell it on my headphones now.


----------



## sundownz (Apr 13, 2007)

The Audio Frog stuff does look very impressive; hope they do well


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

gregerst22 said:


> Long term listening is the more accurate way to a/b speakers imo.


It's most certainly not. A/B testing needs to be done with quick changes between sources. You simply can't "remember" how all of that content sounded last month vs what you're listening to now.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

sundownz said:


> The Audio Frog stuff does look very impressive; hope they do well


Agreed!

I hope to get a proper demo sometime soon.


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

captainobvious said:


> It's most certainly not. A/B testing needs to be done with quick changes between sources. You simply can't "remember" how all of that content sounded last month vs what you're listening to now.


Agree.


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

sundownz said:


> The Audio Frog stuff does look very impressive; hope they do well


I'm quite sure everything will be top performing stuff. Andy knows what he's doing.


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

gregerst22 said:


> If I listen to a pair of midranges, subwoofers or tweeters in my car every single day with a variety of tracks that I know intimately well, because I've heard them hundreds, if not thousands of times over the years, and I then switch out lets say those midranges with a different pair. I can more easily hear the differences because I was acclimated to the sound of the previous speakers. Quick A/B testing obviously works too. But I think long-term listening is more accurate and a better indicator.
> 
> It's like driving your car. The longer you drive it the more you get used to it. How it turns, accelerates, brakes etc the more easily it can be distinguished between a different car.
> If you go to the car dealer and test drive two different cars by just taking a quick drive around the block yes you'll notice some difference but take those same two cars for an extended period lets say a week each, drive them all over town and on the highway, to work etc, you're going to really notice a lot more differences between them.


That analogy is flawed. As I said before, there are lots of variables. If you shift midranges changes are that you need to retune the system, how do you know that the frequency response is similar to the old setup without measuring it? Of course there will be differences, I'm not questioning that. I'm questioning the ability to EVALUATE differences by ear and make an educated answer which are the better driver while taking all the considerations required into account. 

Listening tests should be done in a controlled environment and A/B instant switching is the best form of testing imo.


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL (Jan 31, 2011)

Audio reviewers that work for magazines can be taken with a grain of salt. Most of them have at one point or another endorsed some magical bs product, that literally can't work as described, but the reviewer says it does because their mind believed in it.


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL (Jan 31, 2011)

Or to put it another way, I played violin for a number of years. And I was pretty good, able to pick up and play a majority of songs just by listening. I also usually tuned my instrument by ear. That said, as close as it always was, it was NEVER perfect. Small incremental changes in anything, from the cleanliness of your ears that day, to what you were around the day before, to the level of sinus congestion ALL have effects on your hearing. Listening long term throws in too many variables.


----------



## kaigoss69 (Apr 2, 2008)

CDT FAN said:


> Are you sure that is a chair being moved? On my headphones, I twice hear what sounds like the rattling of the string on a Chelo, but I don't hear what sounds like a chair.


I'm listening to the track now and I fully agree, but I hear it 5 or 6 times on my headphones. I wish someone could tell us at exactly what points in the song the "chair move" occurs...driving me crazy now!


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL (Jan 31, 2011)

I call it how I see it. I have yet to find a reviewer that works for a magazine that hasn't at some point let the placebo effect have an effect on their review. My biggest irritation is the power cable shoot outs. Their is no bigger load of crap than saying a special power cable "lifted a veil from the sonics", or "widened the soundstage".


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

gregerst22 said:


> It's like driving your car. The longer you drive it the more you get used to it. How it turns, accelerates, brakes etc the more easily it can be distinguished between a different car.


Actually, I think you just proved the other point.

When you have something longer, you are also more forgiving. You adapt to the sound over time. I definitely think there's merit to keeping speakers for a while so you can 'test drive' them over many different 'roads' and different 'speeds', but at the same time, your hearing adapts and changes your perception.

_If _you were to have the ability to simultaneously drive two different cars, any differences would be immediately noticeable. Even the most subtle ones. Driving the cars at separate times makes any immediate comparisons impossible. All you have left is your memory. Luckily, there are objective measurements for these kind of things such as 0-60mph times, etc. Same with speakers. Unfortunately, it's not possible to do this kind of comparison so at best you just go with very fast A/B/X type comparisons. Or you use whatever data is available to make a decision. 

The problem with listening tests is not only relying on the aural memory (which isn't great), but also the sighted aspect. Both of those can and will sway your subjective analysis in some way. Still, there's the unquantifiable aspect of "pride of ownership" and I additionally concede psychoacoustics itself is a legitimate purchase reason (ie; some people like the look of X driver over Y driver).


----------



## sundownz (Apr 13, 2007)

Hanatsu said:


> I'm quite sure everything will be top performing stuff. Andy knows what he's doing.


Indeed. I always enjoy reading what he posts up.


----------



## McKinneyMike (Jul 24, 2014)

Hanatsu said:


> Agreed ^^
> 
> Also, "long term listening" = "getting used to whatever you listening at"


I sincerely feel sorry for you if you truly believe that  I have spent many years listening to uber expensive hi end audio gear and not all that shines is gold. Some extremely highly touted and ultra accurate measuring equipment has not passed the ear tests. I fully believe that testing is paramount, but science does not know everything and never will. There is still some luck and maybe a little magic in creating true greatness. I am not a computer and listen to what sounds like real music to my ears. If you are an android, then listen to your specs and measurements. I will always trust what I hear over an extended period of time and not what someone "thinks" that I should enjoy.

You will never truly become familiar with a component in the blink of eye (A/B testing). You will hear differences, but longer exposure to an item will allow it to fully expose its good and bad traits far better. I do not trust quick A/B testing. I need to listen for awhile to find out if I really like something (other than something that is just simply nasty).


----------



## CDT FAN (Jul 25, 2012)

McKinneyMike said:


> I sincerely feel sorry for you if you truly believe that


Why would you feel sorry for him? Does that mean he isn't smart enough or have the golden ears to recognize what he should be hearing? 

From your post, it seems like you are saying there is more to what we hear than what can be measured by equipment. I would agree that our brains are much more complicated than the testing equipment and that the equipment can't measure whatever is in the music to make it come to life. At the same time, our complex brains have a way of adapting to a particular sound and that sound becomes "normal" to us. I have experienced it over the years when I switch vehicles after driving the same one for a while. The system may not sound right at first, but after I get used to the way it sounds, it does. That becomes my new normal. Then, when I go back to the previous vehicle, which previously sounded good, it no longer sounds right. Each time, if I drive that vehicle for a while, it will become my new "normal". Neither one of these vehicles has a high-end system, but I think it shows how our brains adapt. I have experienced the same effects when using different headphones. Each pair sound great in their own way, but it always takes a while for my brain to normalize to the change.


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL (Jan 31, 2011)

I feel sorry for you that you truly believe long term listening is a reliable way to judge equipment. It's just not. Read Erin's post.


----------



## fullergoku (Jun 21, 2009)

I'm curious to know when the midrange shoot out was done was it a listening test only or were the measurements looked at too? I know that the Dynaudio Esotar2 430 finished 1st and Scan speak 12mu finished 2nd overall but how did they look on measurements too? I'd also be interested to know how Audio Frog 2.5 and 4 inch midrange driver compare to the Dynaudio and Scan Speak.


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

Never argue with golden ear audiophiles... They keep claiming every method available is flawed except long term sighted tests. This discussion is turning into that "high end amp myth" thread so I'm out.


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

fullergoku said:


> I'm curious to know when the midrange shoot out was done was it a listening test only or were the measurements looked at too? I know that the Dynaudio Esotar2 430 finished 1st and Scan speak 12mu finished 2nd overall but how did they look on measurements too? I'd also be interested to know how Audio Frog 2.5 and 4 inch midrange driver compare to the Dynaudio and Scan Speak.


Most likely in the same league or better. This is pure conjecture of course, haven't seen the test data on the AF 2,5". The drivers should also the measured in a combined testing so the data in derived by the same method but that's another story.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

What I'm taking from this completely derailed thread is that people who choose a speaker for how it sounds vs how it measures don't know what the hell they're doing. And people who glance at measurements as a guide but in the end choose what sounds best to them anyway SOMEWHAT don't know what the hell they're doing. For the record, my speakers are far from "perfect" but they do the job nicely for my terrible measurement devices (ears). And I don't like extremely low distortion subs. I guess that's an indication that I don't know wtf I'm doingWhen I swapped my H-Audio x2's (similar to the Fountek 2") with my Discovery 2" the improvement was immediate. Only got better with tuning. My ears say they're a superior driver. When I swapped my Audible Physics Arians with the Discovery 7" fiberglass woofers the improvement IN THE BANDWIDTH THEY'RE USED IN was much better. On paper the Arian is much much better but IN THE INTENDED BANDWIDTH the Discovery is the better driver FOR ME. Guess I REALLY don't know wtf I'm doing as well as everyone else that trusts their ears


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL (Jan 31, 2011)

What it means is you don't like accurate sound. That's what it means. That's what saying you prefer higher distortion drivers means. There are plenty of people like that, and that's fine, as long as you don't recommend speakers to someone without mentioning your stated preference for higher distortion drivers.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

fullergoku said:


> I'm curious to know when the midrange shoot out was done was it a listening test only or were the measurements looked at too? I know that the Dynaudio Esotar2 430 finished 1st and Scan speak 12mu finished 2nd overall but how did they look on measurements too? I'd also be interested to know how Audio Frog 2.5 and 4 inch midrange driver compare to the Dynaudio and Scan Speak.


I did some testing of the Dyn 430 and based on the results, it makes sense the 430 did well in the subjective tests. It's a well behaved, very linear driver even outside of its intended passband. The same can be said for the 12m which has been tested and reviewed numerous times (spec can be found here).

This is a fine example of how good data is useful and can be used to vet purchase decisions. Both of these perform very well on paper and both did well in a subjective listening test. I don't think that's just coincidence. But, the key is how a driver is used. 


Compare those two to the Scan 10f and it's no wonder I recommend the 10f practically all the time:
http://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/pdf/10f-8414g10.pdf


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL said:


> What it means is you don't like accurate sound. That's what it means. That's what saying you prefer higher distortion drivers means. There are plenty of people like that, and that's fine, as long as you don't recommend speakers to someone without mentioning your stated preference for higher distortion drivers.


There is some truth to this, however, in what circumstance can you ever get "accurate sound?" At a concert, almost all of the sound you hear has been processed, amped and then sent through speakers that have their own limitations and distortion profile. What is the absolute perfect sound that everyone is trying for? The only thing that comes close is live music without any electronics involved. There can't be any speakers involved in reproducing the sound, if there are they will be adding something to the music that wasn't part of the live recording.

Some people shoot for a theoretical perfection that can only occur if the music was played live and acoustic and since almost all of the music we listen too has never and will never be played that way, why would that be the goal of the system to replicate?


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL said:


> What it means is you don't like accurate sound. That's what it means. That's what saying you prefer higher distortion drivers means. There are plenty of people like that, and that's fine, as long as you don't recommend speakers to someone without mentioning your stated preference for higher distortion drivers.


I like accurate sound and lower distortion in the fronts. I never said I don't so don't be putting words in my mouth. The subs is where a little "character" in the sound goes a long way. Gotta let the inner basshead out every now and again


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL (Jan 31, 2011)

It sounded like what you said about the Arians vs the discoveries made it seem like that about the fronts as well. Like I said l, it doesn't bother me except when people suggest speakers without mentioning what their preferences are.

For instance, when I suggest speakers, I let people know that I always look for the lowest distortion speakers in the given price range.


Gijoe, the goal would be to be as accurate as possible to the source material. You can never replicate live music, but you can closely reproduce what is on your source media.


----------



## Niebur3 (Jul 11, 2008)

With all the new offerings coming to market, maybe it's time to do the 4" shootout again??? 




J/K, I want no part of that **** storm again....lol!


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL said:


> It sounded like what you said about the Arians vs the discoveries made it seem like that about the fronts as well. Like I said l, it doesn't bother me except when people suggest speakers without mentioning what their preferences are.
> 
> For instance, when I suggest speakers, I let people know that I always look for the lowest distortion speakers in the given price range.
> 
> ...


I probably made it sound that way by mistake. The Arian has a HUGE usable bandwidth where if perfectly on axis could easily play from 80-8k or even higher. I don't think I ever heard an audible breakup node. Not even when playing fullrange. It's the most well behaved speaker I've ever used. The Discovery 7" I'll NEVER recommend if mated to a tweeter and always make sure to mention that fact if it comes up in conversation. It just needs too much eq work to pull out the rough spots. As a midbass below 1khz it's killer and works a lot better in a car door (the 8 ohm version anyway because winisd says it's about 3db higher at 80hz IB than the 4 ohm version iirc which is why I got it instead of the 4 ohm version). When selecting the right speaker for the job a speaker can have imperfections (every speaker has its flaws) as long as those imperfection don't interfere with the range it's being used.

As for the difference in timbre between the Arian and Discovery so people will know my opinion of their timbre...Arian had somewhat of a damped and to my ears overly tame (black tie) sound while the Discovery 7" has a very open sound that seems to be equally low in distortion to the ear yet VERY different in sound. Guess that's the damped aluminum cone vs fiberglass cone causing that?


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL said:


> Gijoe, the goal would be to be as accurate as possible to the source material. You can never replicate live music, but you can closely reproduce what is on your source media.


I agree, and because of this I agree that you can see everything you need to know about a speaker's performance from accurate measurements. Listening tests are great, but not necessary if you have accurate data and know how to read it.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

gijoe said:


> The only thing that comes close is live music without any electronics involved. There can't be any speakers involved in reproducing the sound, if there are they will be adding something to the music that wasn't part of the live recording.
> /?


the notion that a live performance is indicative of an ideal sound is flawed because even then, the room, heck even the other people's _bodies _in the audience are 'processing' what you hear. 

Let's take this example and go with it:
let's say two mics are in a large audience of an acoustic concert, at different places. one is front and center, 5 rows back. the other mic is 50 rows back, on one far side, next to a wall with wood paneling. the mics records the sound in each location. you listen to a cd of what was recorded by each mic separately... you are not going to hear the same thing. period. yet, they are both live recordings.

Musical instruments themselves are directional. This is fact. For example, a violin at one angle sounds differently than the same violin at another angle, etc. This is why some instruments have multiple mics at different locations/angles on them. This is why some mic types are preferred over others for a given instrument. 

What a true reference system should be trying to achieve is what the engineer/mixer/master.... whoever has the final say in what goes on that disc ... intended. That's the ultimate reference: to achieve a playback system that is completely faithful to reproducing what is on the *media *itself. From there, subjectivity intervenes and we all go our own way.


----------



## kaigoss69 (Apr 2, 2008)

Nice discussion guys, but let's come back to the moving chair for a second.


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

ErinH said:


> the notion that a live performance is indicative of an ideal sound is flawed because even then, the room, heck even the other people's _bodies _in the audience are 'processing' what you hear.
> 
> Let's take this example and go with it:
> let's say two mics are in a large audience of an acoustic concert, at different places. one is front and center, 5 rows back. the other mic is 50 rows back, on one far side, next to a wall with wood paneling. the mics records the sound in each location. you listen to a cd of what was recorded by each mic separately... you are not going to hear the same thing. period. yet, they are both live recordings.
> ...


Agreed, that's why I said "the only thing that comes close is live music." I was admitting that even live music is being "processed" by the environment. My point is just to back some of the other statements that all you need to know can be derived from the data.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

There comes a point where low distortion measurements aren't worth considering...once the distortion is below audibility, you will only see the results in the measurements. But what good is that other than bragging rights?

I would rather have a driver that had low linear distortion than non-linear distortion.

And further more, there isn't any published data or studies that link distortion measurements with perceived SQ differences. And if you are using drivers well within their designed range, non-linear distortion drops out of the picture.


----------



## McKinneyMike (Jul 24, 2014)

TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL said:


> I feel sorry for you that you truly believe long term listening is a reliable way to judge equipment. It's just not. Read Erin's post.


I have been in and around extremely high end home audio for over 35 years. I do not need to read what someone else thinks about sound quality. It is truly a shame that people are so brainwashed to only trust what a graph tells them versus their own hearing and deductive reasoning. I have heard all of the arguments over the years. I would never tell someone that that they can hear anything. If they chose to not care about sound quality unless a distortion analyzer tells them that it sounds good or if a frequency response chart says that it must be good it measures great!


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

thehatedguy said:


> There comes a point where low distortion measurements aren't worth considering...once the distortion is below audibility, you will only see the results in the measurements. But what good is that other than bragging rights?
> 
> I would rather have a driver that had low linear distortion than non-linear distortion.
> 
> And further more, there isn't any published data or studies that link distortion measurements with perceived SQ differences. And if you are using drivers well within their designed range, non-linear distortion drops out of the picture.



each of these sentences can be cherry picked and stand on their own.

x2 on each one.


----------



## lizardking (Nov 8, 2008)

ErinH said:


> I did some testing of the Dyn 430 and based on the results, it makes sense the 430 did well in the subjective tests. It's a well behaved, very linear driver even outside of its intended passband. The same can be said for the 12m which has been tested and reviewed numerous times (spec can be found here).
> 
> This is a fine example of how good data is useful and can be used to vet purchase decisions. Both of these perform very well on paper and both did well in a subjective listening test. I don't think that's just coincidence. But, the key is how a driver is used.
> 
> ...



Agree with this Man!!! 

As for the chair move, I think it's the seat squeaking or creaking is what we hear.....not the chair moving across the floor. Either way, the Scan 10f's produce the sound...time and time again.


----------



## bkjay (Jul 7, 2009)

Audiofrog just post two new subs on FB. A G and GS series.They look more budget friendly,I hope they do the same for the components.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

And hope there's a _multi-channel_ processor soon to follow..........


----------



## simplicityinsound (Feb 2, 2007)

we just finished a build using the two way set witih the bigger tweeter, along with the GB10 sub...and i have to say, i am perhaps even more impressed than the 3 way review we did earlier.

are these the best thing since sliced bread? no, but they are certainly proving themselves to be another very nice high end brand, and that really doesnt come around that often in this industry if you think about it...crap brands jump up from time to time, but stuff that truely performs? HAT is about the only example i can think of from recent times. 

i will try and get that review up soon.

Bing


----------



## legend94 (Mar 15, 2006)

The frog invasion comment is great!


----------



## diy.phil (May 23, 2011)

oooooh a banana tree on the right. Are these Audio Frog pallets on vacation in Puerto Rico or what?!! j/k


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

have you guys seen the FB posts from CES?

Andy has a killer active 2-way bookshelf setup using his drivers (and a waveguide). also, there are coaxial speakers on the horizon, it seems.

definitely very interesting.


----------



## legend94 (Mar 15, 2006)

diy.phil said:


> oooooh a banana tree on the right. Are these Audio Frog pallets on vacation in Puerto Rico or what?!! j/k


I just saw it on the Facebook page. Luckily anyone can view the page!


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

legend94 said:


> The frog invasion comment is great!


YAY!
AndyFrog product is arriving! :thumbsup:


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

ErinH said:


> have you guys seen the FB posts from CES?
> 
> Andy has a killer active 2-way bookshelf setup using his drivers (and a waveguide). also, there are coaxial speakers on the horizon, it seems.
> 
> definitely very interesting.


Erin...any pics?
Last I saw of the bookshelf speakers were of Gary Biggs using a branch clipper on the internal wiring. 


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> Erin...any pics?
> Last I saw of the bookshelf speakers were of Gary Biggs using a branch clipper on the internal wiring.
> 
> 
> ...


yea, Ben Voellmer posted some through his shop's FB account (Audition Audio & Electronics).


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Link to FB post:
https://www.facebook.com/AuditionAudio/posts/773552462719004


----------



## legend94 (Mar 15, 2006)

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> Erin...any pics?
> Last I saw of the bookshelf speakers were of Gary Biggs using a branch clipper on the internal wiring.
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

ErinH said:


> Link to FB post:
> https://www.facebook.com/AuditionAudio/posts/773552462719004


link didn't work, heads up.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

cajunner said:


> link didn't work, heads up.


You gotta login to facebook


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

t3sn4f2 said:


> You gotta login to facebook


dun dun duuuunnnnnnn.


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

thanks for the correction.


----------



## legend94 (Mar 15, 2006)

I was able to search on Google for their Facebook and see everything without logging in.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

Direct links also work.....


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

legend94 said:


>


So cool!
Thank you.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

t3sn4f2 said:


> Direct links also work.....


I wish I could here these.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Justin Zazzi (May 28, 2012)

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> I wish I could here these.


They sound every bit as good as they look, and Andy is a great guy on top of that!

The 2nd model line, the GS series, has the 4" coaxial driver. Looks beefy too.

From what I remember, the GS line will be without the copper shorting ring, a stamped basket, minus a few of the cosmetic finishes, and much more affordable.


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

Jazzi said:


> They sound every bit as good as they look, and Andy is a great guy on top of that!
> 
> The 2nd model line, the GS series, has the 4" coaxial driver. Looks beefy too.
> 
> From what I remember, the GS line will be without the copper shorting ring, a stamped basket, minus a few of the cosmetic finishes, and much more affordable.


High praise from someone with a good ear for all this. 
Thanks Justin!


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## etroze (Dec 24, 2013)

Um did anyone see their tweeter material video this morning? That stuff looks awesome and guys with demo boards will love that they "repair" themselves.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Yea. I actually replied to that post.


----------



## etroze (Dec 24, 2013)

Ill have to check out that convo cause seriously I watched him poke that tweeter with that kind of force and my mind was blown.


----------



## 2010hummerguy (Oct 7, 2009)

I want more info about that DSP plate amp!


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

Jazzi said:


> The 2nd model line, the GS series, has the 4" coaxial driver. Looks beefy too.
> 
> 
> 
> From what I remember, the GS line will be without the copper shorting ring, a stamped basket, minus a few of the cosmetic finishes, and much more affordable.




Doesn't appear stamped to me. WANT! 
Does look unlike about any 4" current offering coaxial driver in construction quality I've seen, save maybe the C4CX Illusion Audio or possibly Erin's KEF drivers.


----------



## Justin Zazzi (May 28, 2012)

Babs said:


> Doesn't appear stamped to me. WANT!
> Does look unlike about any 4" current offering coaxial driver in construction quality I've seen, save maybe the C4CX Illusion Audio or possibly Erin's KEF drivers.


Oops, I may have been remembering the stats for the GS line of subwoofers when it comes to the basket.


----------



## Huckleberry Sound (Jan 17, 2009)

Looking good, there should be some nice installs with this...


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

Huckleberry Sound said:


> Looking good, there should be some nice installs with this...


I've already got one stuck in my head I can't shake. Must resist!


----------



## lizardking (Nov 8, 2008)

I'm still waiting for reviews and test measurements.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

The subs from the backs look a lot like the old Aura RPM subs (to me).

The plate amp was probably a Digimoda or something similar with his logo etched on it.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

Here's a little snippet on frame materials for anyone interested......

Abmolech:

*""*Mr Jeff Smith

Quote:
*"*no matter what, i'll NEVER give high marks for construction quality to a stamped-steel driver. Just a thing with me, many may disagree ... which is fine. I've personally bent a stamped steel driver just by installing the damn thing. Nor will I give high marks to a "composite" frame driver which is noticeably "bent" or "curved" just by looking at it, with the idea being that mounting it will "flatten" it. I just can't believe that coil alignment will be well-maintained if the basket is flimsy, or flexible. As I said, i'm happy to be disagreed with here ... but for old-skool-me, it's gotta be cast in something inherently stiff.*" *

Flimsy, out of shape, yes this bad.

Personally, I give higher marks to drivers designed to held at the motor. Anyway that is a person bias.

Cast versus "stamped" versus forged versus machined from a solid block.(added for stupidity's)

Casting, various methods from pored (gravity feed) to injection, to centrifuge.

Cost being the main difference, however there are important structural tendencies.
Pored, have major porosity problems, with a high reject rate. These can be from high moisture content in the sand(releasing hydrogen), to temperature and poring problems. They tend to suffer from "stress risers" due to uneven cooling.

Injection and centrifuge both use greater than atmospheric pressure to overcome air pockets inherent in the pore. Because of this the moulds are often metal to withstand the extra pressure exerted. They are more accurate than sand casted, and require less machining, however they suffer from "stress" due to the sudden cooling. These castings are more rigid than there sand counter-parts, and they suffer from embrittlement unless tempered.(Unlikely)

Stamped by their nature must be more ductile, and since they are unlikely to be "upset" (metal thickness increased at a three dimensional geometry), they "thin out" over the stretching stamp.
Because of the speed and least amount of waste material, these are common method of producing baskets.

Forged, Limited stress risers, maximum strength on three dimensional geometry. Downside - expense.

Solid block.
Normally aluminium and steel are cold rolled at 200 tonnes per square inch, these have very little porosity and no stress risers.

Point
Cast are only "better" because they can maintain structural thickness versus stamped. However they are brittle, and are easily broken.

A thicker stamped basket would be superior in every way.*""*


----------



## wrager (Feb 24, 2014)

McKinneyMike said:


> I have been in and around extremely high end home audio for over 35 years. I do not need to read what someone else thinks about sound quality. It is truly a shame that people are so brainwashed to only trust what a graph tells them versus their own hearing and deductive reasoning. I have heard all of the arguments over the years. I would never tell someone that that they can hear anything. If they chose to not care about sound quality unless a distortion analyzer tells them that it sounds good or if a frequency response chart says that it must be good it measures great!


Wow! Are you out of touch with reality. Please go read some articles by Sean Olive, Tom Danley or Mark Seaton before you sound more foolish. But denial is so much easier for "audiophiles."


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

I recently picked up a handful of new drivers to test. Among them are the AF 4" mid and 1.5" tweeter. I can say one thing for sure: the tweeter is a beast.


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

ErinH said:


> I recently picked up a handful of new drivers to test. Among them are the AF 4" mid and 1.5" tweeter. I can say one thing for sure: the tweeter is a beast.


Is it me Erin or does the GB40 cone surround look distorted in the sideview pic?


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## jflexp21 (Jun 2, 2014)

I will be at SBN if anyone who has not heard them and wants to have a listen.


----------



## Huckleberry Sound (Jan 17, 2009)

I'm Looking!!!!


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL (Jan 31, 2011)

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> Is it me Erin or does the GB40 cone surround look distorted in the sideview pic?
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


Not just you, I saw it too. In a couple of places actually.


----------



## Huckleberry Sound (Jan 17, 2009)

Good Eyes!!!
Before your review I am pretty sure they will get you another set.


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

Might have had a little glue oopsy on the surround.

That tweet is most definitely a beast. Certainly a good looker too.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL said:


> Not just you, I saw it too. In a couple of places actually.


Yep, not lens distortion for sure.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

yea, I see what you guys are saying... didn't notice it in person but I see the concern in the picture. I'll look at them closer when I get home. I'm not worried about it, TBH. It'll get resolved if it's a real issue.


----------



## gregerst22 (Dec 18, 2012)

ErinH said:


> I recently picked up a handful of new drivers to test. Among them are the AF 4" mid and 1.5" tweeter. I can say one thing for sure: the tweeter is a beast.


Awesome. Did you buy them or were they donated / loaned to you for testing?


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

picked them up used from a fellow here... wanted some to test, he made me a fair price (I'm not about to pay top dollar for something just to test it). but I'm not worried about it. I'll get it taken care of if there's a need.


----------



## gregerst22 (Dec 18, 2012)

I agree, I'm sure you'll get it fixed if needed. I'm just glad to hear that you're testing drivers again. It'll give me more reason to make a donation.


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

ErinH said:


> picked them up used from a fellow here... wanted some to test, he made me a fair price (I'm not about to pay top dollar for something just to test it). but I'm not worried about it. I'll get it taken care of if there's a need.


If they boogie, would you be considering breaking out the pillars yet once more? hmmmmm Might be a squeeze, though I bet no worse than those KEF's.  Grabbing the popcorn for your assessment.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Babs said:


> If they boogie, would you be considering breaking out the pillars yet once more? hmmmmm Might be a squeeze, though I bet no worse than those KEF's.  Grabbing the popcorn for your assessment.


I've ordered up a couple other drivers to test as well. No plans on using any of them... just wanted to play. But, if I wanted to put the AF 4" in my pillars it would be no problem at all. See below for a comparison with the Kef, AF 4" and Satori 5"...



My car is the last thing I'm worried about right now. Gotta get the home theater completed. Just wanted to share the update that these will be tested at some point in the coming months. Whether or not my car gets an upgrade is so far from a concern right now that discussing it is pointless.


----------



## JVD240 (Sep 7, 2009)

ErinH said:


> I've ordered up a couple other drivers to test as well. No plans on using any of them... just wanted to play. But, if I wanted to put the AF 4" in my pillars it would be no problem at all. See below for a comparison with the Kef, AF 4" and Satori 5"...
> 
> 
> 
> My car is the last thing I'm worried about right now. Gotta get the home theater completed. Just wanted to share the update that these will be tested at some point in the coming months. Whether or not my car gets an upgrade is so far from a concern right now that discussing it is pointless.


Hahah. Holy crap. That really puts things into perspective.


----------



## teldzc1 (Oct 9, 2009)

Man that Satori is pretty beefy too.


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

I look forward to seeing your test results.


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

ErinH said:


> I've ordered up a couple other drivers to test as well. No plans on using any of them... just wanted to play. But, if I wanted to put the AF 4" in my pillars it would be no problem at all. See below for a comparison with the Kef, AF 4" and Satori 5"...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's an awesome comparison shot!
Yeah you've got quite the project going on for sure.


----------



## fullergoku (Jun 21, 2009)

rton20s said:


> I look forward to seeing your test results.


I couldnt agree more!!!


----------



## nstaln (Feb 11, 2009)

Went to Crutchfield and made the leap...GB10, GB25, and GB2510c...feelin froggy.


----------



## Lycancatt (Apr 11, 2010)

the 1.5 tweeters really have my interest! anyone on the west coast in cali using them yet? I really really want to hear them..i'm partial to crossing tweeters low.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Bing has installed them.


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

thehatedguy said:


> Bing has installed them.


Yep so it's possible that vehicle will be at SIS's next GTG.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

rton20s said:


> I look forward to seeing your test results.


alright... testing of the GB15 & GB40 are done. I posted up separate threads on them here:
http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...iofrog-gb15-1-5-tweeter-objective-review.html

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...diofrog-gb40-4-midrange-objective-review.html


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

Thanks for the reviews. They both seem to have great non-linear distortion, about higher tier Scan-Speak performance I'd say. 2kHz (gb15) and 200Hz (gb40) respectively with 4th order slopes as highpass would probably work. Tweeter shows some irregularities in the FR but nothing I'd worry about.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S5 using Tapatalk


----------



## Jroo (May 24, 2006)

This weekend had a chance to listen to a audio frog demo truck. I will say demo truck because the shop used all audio frog with the exception of the subs which were JL. They said once they get audio frog subs, they will go in. In the a pilliar they had the 1 inch tweets, 2.5 mids and lower doors had the 6.5 midbasses. The truck had a lot of processing through an Alpine 800 but they sounded incredible. The midbass had a great deal of attack. One of the best cars I have sat in a long long time. We demoed a bunch of music and everything from rock, rap, and classical sounded great. 

On a side note, the shops sells Arc Black which were very close. The Arcs seem to be brighter on the tweeter, but the mid bass was very close. I was impressed by both, but if I could afford the Frogs, would pick them. I dont know if any thing is coming down the pike, but if they had a more budget friendly pair coming I certainly would entertain them.


----------



## diy.phil (May 23, 2011)

^ummm.... need pictures!!


----------



## Arete (Oct 6, 2013)

lizardking said:


> I read the midrange subjective shootout again. Something that was interesting is that the Scan 12m and the Dynaudio 430 were the only drivers that the chair move could be heard on 9 Crimes from Damien Rice. I decided to download that song and listen for it with my headphones and then once again listen in my truck. I heard the same chair move with the Scan 10f's....four times. I guess we can take that shootout with a grain of salt. Got me thinking.....on midranges.


I know this is an old but I take but of those "Shootouts" with a grain of salt. I thought I was the only person that felt this way about them. Don't get me wrong I enjoyed reading it but I wouldn't base my decision on a speaker on it.


----------



## DDfusion (Apr 23, 2015)

Same here. I just heard it 4 times off a YouTube video. That doesn't seem hard not to hear, maybe I was just listening for it. It was around the 1 minute 20 mark. Right before the guy started singing. 

Hertz XLs.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

FWIW, I did a review of the GB25 and posted about it here:
http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...ctive-review-audiofrog-gb25-2-5-midrange.html


----------



## legend94 (Mar 15, 2006)

ErinH said:


> FWIW, I did a review of the GB25 and posted about it here:
> http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...ctive-review-audiofrog-gb25-2-5-midrange.html


too objective, Erin. they want someone saying how one tweeter is bright vs one that is smooth as a baby's ass.


----------



## boricua69 (Oct 14, 2009)

TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL said:


> Not just you, I saw it too. In a couple of places actually.


So that confirms that is made in china or what?
I saw a youtube video that someone comments about made in china.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

I visited couple of chinese facilities , I was impressed to say the least. Completely revisited my previous opinion on PRC manufacturing. I can`t disclose what facilities it was but a lot of people here use equipment made there. I`m still big fan of European manufacturing but chinese closing up that gap quick.


----------



## I800C0LLECT (Jan 26, 2009)

They clearly print designed in U.S.A. and made in China on the backs of the drivers. You can see it in Erin's medleymusings objective review.

These are phenomenal drivers. I think the price is worth it if they truly stand the test of time in a vehicle environment. That's a lot of abuse with a quality driver. I'm a frog convert now.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

I800C0LLECT said:


> They clearly print designed in U.S.A. and made in China on the backs of the drivers. You can see it in Erin's medleymusings objective review.
> 
> These are phenomenal drivers. I think the price is worth it if they truly stand the test of time in a vehicle environment. That's a lot of abuse.


It take tremendous dedication to push new product to market and it must be real good to win over established brands. I personally don`t see AF taking over established brands to any appreciable market share numbers.
Not because they not as good as competition but due to conservative approach of most people. 
JL gained market share by being present in retail stores as highest quality brand they offered. Since there no more retail stores left new approach needed.
If product is good it will make upward move at some point.
they need more reviews and promotions, hard ass pricing is not necessarily a best thing in todays world. Jobs and Musk could afford to be that way, AF- I have no idea.


----------



## I800C0LLECT (Jan 26, 2009)

It would be nice if they had a larger presence with reviews and installs.

I'm definitely not down on the price but I probably wouldn't have ever ventured into this side of the market on my own.

I think persistence in quality and customer service will be key for their emergence. I think they're doing a great job. Unfortunately, this industry revolves around a lot of hype. I've seen more come out of their Asian partners than I have state side (removing Bing and his installs from the equation).


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

I think rich people need a place to spend their money and the Audiofrog product is relying on the sales pitch of the proprietor who is an industry veteran.

People who are "in the know" will take a chance on Audiofrog based on that, and the slight presence of the brand in the marketplace will gradually increase if the product is good, and by tests and owner reports, it is good.

so, I don't know why it would be conceivable to believe Audiofrog won't grow and become larger than the upstart, based on how internet products are vetted by today's consumer of luxury goods.


being in Crutchfield was a smart move, because a lot of people still use their information and the price match with local business is how a lot of people decide whether or not the price is reasonable on higher tier product, Crutchfield fills that niche in legitimizing a price point.

I don't know how much of a premium can be expected since we are moving out of the old days, where a sales rep trained their distribution networks how to push product, to that of online review "internal polls" where one juggles reports based on the integrity of the reviewer, and internalizes the opinion rather than sets factual data side-by-side with another product in the price point...

not everyone is as in-depth on value or performance, but the aesthetics and general build quality should allow Audiofrog a place in the upper tiers even where car audio based marketing by ScanSpeak or SEAS has floundered, using very good speakers...


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

One review on some humbler GS42's coming except I'm a slow-poke on acquiring and doing the A-pillars.. I can say just messing with them free-air they were quite impressive little 2-way's. Chose that route as I suspected it'd be easier to get 200-300hz up top leaving the mid-basses to do mid-bass. They're still going to be a challenge in the pillars, so gauntlet is laid out for me to bring it.


----------

