# News, As Promised



## 14642

OK. I promised you guys news when I had some. Here it is:


Audiofrog Car Speakers to Launch by 12V Veteran | ceoutlook.com


----------



## HiloDB1

Congratulations! And this is awesome news. Cant wait.


----------



## chithead

Whoa! This is awesome news! Can't wait to see what you have in development Mr. Andy.


----------



## edouble101

I am eager to read more about your business and it's products!


----------



## 69Voltage

Congratulations and best of luck Andy!


----------



## Kevin K

Excellent.


----------



## Serieus

excited to see what comes of this 

anything currently targeted towards the sub-$500 market?


----------



## hpilot2004

With all of the very informative posts you have made on DIYMA, I am sure your Audiofrog product line will be very positive for you in the future. Thanks for all of your knowledge and development for the 12 volt industry. Best of Luck, Andy!


----------



## minbari

good to see you bring a good product to market. excited to see what you guys come up with.

not sure I am digging the name yet though


----------



## chithead

minbari said:


> not sure I am digging the name yet though


Oh come now, I'm sure it will inspire us to "hop" on over and check them out :laugh::laugh::laugh:


----------



## minbari

chithead said:


> Oh come now, I'm sure it will inspire us to "hop" on over and check them out :laugh::laugh::laugh:


lol, I just hope the company doesnt croak. (just couldnt help myself)


----------



## chithead

minbari said:


> lol, I just hope the company doesnt croak. (just couldnt help myself)


----------



## 69Voltage

^^^ You two, lmao.

AudioF(or)R(eally)O(utstanding)G(entlemen).


----------



## IBcivic

Best of luck on your newest adventure, Andy.


----------



## Darth SQ

minbari said:


> lol, I just hope the company doesnt croak. (just couldnt help myself)


Since it Andy's baby it already has a leg up on the competition. 
Can't wait for the introduction of the new ribbot tweeter line up. 


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## chithead

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> Since it Andy's baby it already has a leg up on the competition.
> Can't wait for the introduction of the new ribbot tweeter line up.
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


Will the tweeters be adjustable via a Lily-Pad?


----------



## Horsemanwill

since it's andy i'm sure he'll go through all kinds of leaps and bounds to get great product and service to us all


----------



## IBcivic

^^^

All puns

http://soundfxnow.com/soundfx/Sad-Trombone.mp3


----------



## Mrimstad

Finaly, good news Andy. Looking forward to see what commes ut of this.


----------



## kapone

Sweetness.


----------



## kaigoss69

Awesome, looking forward to seeing what you come up with!


----------



## acidbass303

Wow!


----------



## Serieus

acidbass303 said:


> Wow!


:laugh: i hate that damn thing


----------



## gtsdohcvvtli

Any teaser pics of product?


----------



## knever3

Very cool, I like to see companies trying to make a better product for descriminating customers unlike the offerings from China! Just make sure the products are made here in the USA by Americans and we will support it! I know it's cheaper to outsource your products and the quality will still be there, such as Zapco. Still, if you manufacture it here much respect!!


----------



## boogeyman

Love the puns. Good luck Andy W.


----------



## minbari

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> Since it Andy's baby it already has a leg up on the competition.
> Can't wait for the introduction of the new ribbot tweeter line up.
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


Is that a frog-leg up? >_>

sent from my phone using digital farts


----------



## FreeTheSound

knever3 said:


> Very cool, I like to see companies trying to make a better product for descriminating customers unlike the offerings from China! Just make sure the products are made here in the USA by Americans and we will support it! I know it's cheaper to outsource your products and the quality will still be there, such as Zapco. Still, if you manufacture it here much respect!!


 Will this be ANOTHER designed in America and made in China product?


----------



## squeak9798

Can't wait to see what products you bring to the market Andy.


----------



## JoeHemi57

Can't wait to see what you have on the way, always been a JBL fan and hopefully i'll be ready when they arrive.


----------



## 14642

chithead said:


> Will the tweeters be adjustable via a Lily-Pad?



Probably.


----------



## chithead

That definitely had no disrepect intended. Just some good humor for a great guy and what looks like the start of a wonderful company.


----------



## 14642

No offense taken. It was a great question. The name is causing quite a conversation. I guess it isn't easily forgotten.


----------



## JoeHemi57

Will you offer anything similar to the MSBass Pro SQ? I should have never sold that and carried it from car to car. Can you give any details about the "cosmetic integration"?


----------



## Hanatsu

Any plans for european distribution? 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy 3 via Tapatalk.


----------



## Fast Hot Rod

Nothing like some good natured ribbit... errr... ribbing. 

Best of luck to you on this new venture, Andy.


----------



## james2266

Great news Andy! Any chance of your products landing with any dealers up here in my area? I am really hoping for a 3 incher that can play sub 200 Hz and sound great with volume. I'll have my eyes on this.


----------



## CrossFired

website would be a good start. You could save yourself money and time if you could buy Boston's car audio pats/designs.




Andy Wehmeyer said:


> OK. I promised you guys news when I had some. Here it is:
> 
> 
> Audiofrog Car Speakers to Launch by 12V Veteran | ceoutlook.com


----------



## Bluenote

Hoping to see a new variant of the Logic 7 DSP...


----------



## rton20s

Excellent news Andy! Thanks for keeping us in the loop. Any way we could convince you to drop the product "sneak peeks" here first?


----------



## Ray21

Congrats and good luck! Can't wait to see the new products.


----------



## bassfromspace

knever3 said:


> Very cool, I like to see companies trying to make a better product for descriminating customers unlike the offerings from China! Just make sure the products are made here in the USA by Americans and we will support it! I know it's cheaper to outsource your products and the quality will still be there, such as Zapco. Still, if you manufacture it here much respect!!


I think most Zapco is made in Korea.


----------



## sirbOOm

I'm going to be the assbag-douchemonger-butthole-tool-face and say what I'm thinkin' straight up (please forgive me but this is part of what I do for a day job and I can't help it). Audiofrog? Sounds like a cheap Scosche brand to me. Hybrid Audio, name alone, delivers to me a feeling of high-end. Image Dynamics, same feeling. Focal and Brax and Helix, too. I'm confident beyond all doubts that you're going to create some of the best audio equipment on the market... but I don't want anything in my car to say "Audiofrog" on it and it won't. Of course, I don't so much like the name Kenwood either considering my neighbor growing up was named Ken and he was a total douche - quite like I'm being right now. But I've gotten 4 Kenwood amplifiers in the past year. Anyway, sorry... but frogs have nothing to do with car audio to me. They are delicious treats you take from the pond at the golf course and eat when you get home. I would cover my car with stuff that was great with the name WehmeyerAudio or AW|Phonic or even Anura (which is the scientific name for "frog") on it. 

Okay... let the hate on me begin. We'll start with the name "sirboom" <-- douchy name.



Got it...


----------



## 69Voltage

I must say I like the frog logo. And since I'm new to the forums, how long has this project been in the works Andy? Has to be a good feeling to see it come to fruition.


----------



## rton20s

Given the good-natured ribbing and puns getting thrown out, it appears that a lot here on DIYMA might be questioning the name choice. At first blush it does "feel" a bit cheap, like a company expanding into a water resistant audio line. 

What is in a name though? Some names actually mean something, others are pulled out of thin air. You can bet though, that the names in audio that you associate with high quality did not get there because of their name. They got there because of their products and performance. Andy Weymeyer's "audiofrog" deserves the same opportunity to prove themselves. 

Doesn't mean I'm excited to have green subwoofer baskets that look like frog legs.


----------



## rton20s

69Voltage said:


> I must say I like the frog logo


It could be much, MUCH worse...


----------



## slowsedan01

Congrats Andy. Really looking forward to seeing what you bring to market.


----------



## 69Voltage

^ lmao rton. 

I don't see a problem with the name and I think the "frog" part will allow for easy marketing and name recognition once it's established.


----------



## BuickGN

I didn't like the name at first but I think it has grown on me in a short time. It's different and it won't get mistaken for another brand by a similar name. I think over time the name will be associated with high end audio but it will probably have to earn the reputation which I'm sure it will. I remember when I didn't know the difference in JL and JBL lol.


----------



## rton20s

BuickGN said:


> I didn't like the name at first but I think it has grown on me in a short time. It's different and it won't get mistaken for another brand by a similar name. I think over time the name will be associated with high end audio but it will probably have to earn the reputation which I'm sure it will. I remember when I didn't know the difference in JL and JBL lol.


You and I are thinking along the same lines. My immediate association with the name and the logo was the word "leap." As in Andy taking that leap of faith to go out on his own and do his own thing. In that aspect, I kind of like it. Even if it is only in my own head. 

When I was just a HS kid who didn't have license, I didn't know JBL from JL either. As I got older, I was convinced that JL was the end all, be all because that was what the "best shop in town" pushed. I've come along way from of those levels of understanding and market awareness.


----------



## rton20s

In the vein of the name and logo conversation... 

Something like this certainly would not work, no matter how well it performed...









Something like this, I think could...









I just had to throw something together real quick.  

Andy, I hope you don't mind. If you feel like this is diluting your thread, just let me know and I'll remove it. I have nothing but the utmost respect for you and what you have contributed to the industry and this forum.


----------



## 14642

sirbOOm said:


> I'm going to be the assbag-douchemonger-butthole-tool-face and say what I'm thinkin' straight up (please forgive me but this is part of what I do for a day job and I can't help it). Audiofrog? Sounds like a cheap Scosche brand to me. Hybrid Audio, name alone, delivers to me a feeling of high-end. Image Dynamics, same feeling. Focal and Brax and Helix, too. I'm confident beyond all doubts that you're going to create some of the best audio equipment on the market... but I don't want anything in my car to say "Audiofrog" on it and it won't. Of course, I don't so much like the name Kenwood either considering my neighbor growing up was named Ken and he was a total douche - quite like I'm being right now. But I've gotten 4 Kenwood amplifiers in the past year. Anyway, sorry... but frogs have nothing to do with car audio to me. They are delicious treats you take from the pond at the golf course and eat when you get home. I would cover my car with stuff that was great with the name WehmeyerAudio or AW|Phonic or even Anura (which is the scientific name for "frog") on it.
> 
> Okay... let the hate on me begin. We'll start with the name "sirboom" <-- douchy name.
> 
> 
> 
> Got it...


Hey Sirboom. Maybe someday you'll change your mind. If not, I get it. We thought about many other names and tested several of them. 

Eventually, we went with this one because it's contemporary and friendly. I absolutely refuse to go to market as another forgettable acronym with an "X" in it, ,some name with a Z instead of an S, or some high-falutin' name designed to communicate the preposterous mythology that costs customers a fortune and delivers little in return. I refuse to attempt to stake out a place in the high end segment with yet another industrial design that looks like Optimus Prime or a brand that appeals only to buyers with hypergonadism. 

Love it or hate it, that's the name.


----------



## 14642

rton20s said:


> In the vein of the name and logo conversation...
> 
> Something like this certainly would not work, no matter how well it performed...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Something like this, I think could...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just had to throw something together real quick.
> 
> Andy, I hope you don't mind. If you feel like this is diluting your thread, just let me know and I'll remove it. I have nothing but the utmost respect for you and what you have contributed to the industry and this forum.


Of course I don't mind. I hope you won't mind if I don't steal your design...


----------



## rton20s

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Of course I don't mind. I hope you won't mind if I don't steal your design...


Ha... have at it. I look forward to the product announcements.


----------



## JoeHemi57

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Hey Sirboom. Maybe someday you'll change your mind. If not, I get it. We thought about many other names and tested several of them.
> 
> Eventually, we went with this one because it's contemporary and friendly. I absolutely refuse to go to market as another forgettable acronym with an "X" in it, ,some name with a Z instead of an S, or some high-falutin' name designed to communicate the preposterous mythology that costs customers a fortune and delivers little in return. I refuse to attempt to stake out a place in the high end segment with yet another industrial design that looks like Optimus Prime or a brand that appeals only to buyers with hypergonadism.
> 
> Love it or hate it, that's the name.


Thank you for not following the marketing gimmicks and coming up with something unique. I don't have any problem with the name as long as the cosmetics are contemporary and clean.


----------



## ou812

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Of course I don't mind. I hope you won't mind if I don't steal your design...


The second one looks pretty dam cool.


----------



## 14642

I think you guys will be pleasantly surprised.


----------



## squeak9798

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> I think you guys will be pleasantly surprised.


As a forewarning, I've always enjoyed your postings. The logic, rationale and technical knowledge you bring to a discussion is unrivaled by most on this or any other forum. So now that you are branching out to do your own thing, I'm expecting some pretty epic products from you.

No pressure to deliver


----------



## UNBROKEN

Who are your target competitors?
High end is subjective...just wondering how high you're shooting. Good luck at any rate...it's gotta be hard to bring something new to market these days.


----------



## metanium

It's a catchy name not easily forgotten. Kind of like Apple or Raspberry Pi.


----------



## chithead

I would totally rock some AudioFrog!!!


----------



## chithead

rton20s said:


>


Those are Funky Frogs... and have been known to cause government shutdowns from their extreme VBA.


----------



## 14642

chithead said:


> I would totally rock some AudioFrog!!!


Thanks!


----------



## onebadmonte

Congrats, looking forward to seeing your offerings.


----------



## 14642

UNBROKEN said:


> Who are your target competitors?
> High end is subjective...just wondering how high you're shooting. Good luck at any rate...it's gotta be hard to bring something new to market these days.



I'm not going to answer that by citing brands with whom I'll compete because In years and years of using products from many brands and competitive testing as a product developer, I find little correlation between "brand position" and real product performance. I find a better correlation between marketing hooey and price, informed by what I know about product design and performance and the real cost of products. 

That statement doesn't mean that everyone's high end stuff is BS. Much of it is great. What makes it great is sticking to the knitting. What many companies CLAIM makes it great is often a gimmick. 

I think I've proven over the last several years that my perspective on making cars sound great is a no-nonsense perspective. I always attempt to steer you guys here in the direction of better performance by application of proven processes, proven and accepted acoustic principles and processes that work and that keep mythology and mystery to a minimum. Our products will reflect that perspective. The service that we provide to our dealers and to consumers will also reflect that perspective. 

You'll find that these products will be engineered to provide the highest levels of performance with features designed to make installing them in the best locations more straightforward, to make great cosmetic integration better and easier and to make tuning them much more predictable and successful. The fit and finish will be at the top of their price classes. 

You'll have to decide with which brands to compare them once they are available.


----------



## schmiddr2

I doubt a lack of connections will slow you down, and the plan sounds clever and product oriented. Built for success it would seem. GL and I'm sure this community will do any product testing you need.


----------



## SaturnSL1

I can dig it. The sub with the frog outline looks bad ass. People will see you sporting those and be way interested.

Got amplifiers in the making?


----------



## frontman

Very intriguing! Good luck and best wishes on the new venture!


----------



## 14642

Speakers and subs first and amps next.


----------



## sqnut

GL with the new venture. I'm sure the products will be great. How are you segmenting the offerings? Entry / mid / high or just mid price and high end?


----------



## rton20s

As always... no BS, or is that BFS (Bull Frog ****) from Mr. Wehmeyer! 

I can appreciate not wanting to compare your yet to be announced product line to the competition. Perhaps you can shed some light in another way...

Can you share how many tiers your initial offerings might contain? 

With these tiers are there specific MSRP ranges you are targeting? 

In other words, how low of a price point do you think you'll be competing against, and just how high end will your top tier equipment be?

I'm guessing you aren't in a race to the bottom, but won't be introducing a subwoofer with an MSRP to match a Critical Mass UL12.


----------



## clix`g35

Will there be any dual differential drive type of subs coming our way? That would be exciting.


----------



## asawendo

Just bring that to Indonesia Andy Wehmeyer...


----------



## Kriszilla

I really do like the name. From a marketing standpoint, it *is* contemporary and it's odd enough that it will stick in your head, but not leave a bad taste.

There's a solid history of great companies with ridiculous names. Hell, look at Richard Branson's "Virgin" brand, so-named when he was starting the business one of the girls said, "What about Virgin? We're complete virgins at business."

I'll buy the brand and try it out just because Andy W. is tied with it. I've been around this stuff since the late 80's, and I know his reputation. I replaced a $1200 set of Polk home theater speakers (L,R,C, & rears) with the Pioneer $250 Best Buy special speakers simply because Andrew Jones designed them, and I've listed to his Kef speakers. Best decision ever. I love those cheap speakers. I'd put the $150 extra set of Pioneer Andy Jones designed SP-BS41 monitors I picked up for my computer against almost any other monitor in the $1000 price range.


----------



## 14642

Andy Jones is a good guy. I liked working with him and Laurie Fincham when they were at Infinity.


----------



## BigRed

will there be an AF8 offering? lol


----------



## FreeTheSound

My first question about designed here made in roc was not asked to offend or show lack of respect Mr.Wehmeyer, I just want to clear that up since it was not answered.I apologize if it did.

The timing of your desire manifesting to reality and Grizz coming home seem like such a wonderful happening. Any chance you and Grizz will team up? Has this been a thought?


----------



## t3sn4f2

Bluenote said:


> Hoping to see a new variant of the Logic 7 DSP...





BigRed said:


> will there be an AF8 offering? lol


Congrats! And also interested in this as well.


----------



## Darth SQ

FreeTheSound said:


> My first question about designed here made in roc was not asked to offend or show lack of respect Mr.Wehmeyer, I just want to clear that up since it was not answered.I apologize if it did.
> 
> The timing of your desire manifesting to reality and Grizz coming home seem like such a wonderful happening. Any chance you and Grizz will team up? Has this been a thought?


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
THIS!!!!


OMG the products we'd see if that happened!


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Oscar

clix`g35 said:


> Will there be any dual differential drive type of subs coming our way? That would be exciting.


That patent is held by Harmon and won't expire for a few more years.


----------



## Dubstep

This is GREAT! High End SQ equipment is going to make a real comeback! And made by someone we all can look up to, he's one of us!


----------



## 14642

Thanks Guys. Right now, We are focused on making some seriously great speakers and subs. I have plenty of DSP ideas, and I think no one has done it quite right, yet. 

I think it needs to be easier but also include more adjustability for those who are experienced tuners. And it should be modular. This $1000 cost of entry for good EQ is ridiculous. Equally ridiculous is this idea that in order to make the car sound great, we HAVE to sum all the channels and then divide them again. It creates as many hassles as it solves.

Finally, and I've said it a thousand times before, the power in a DSP is not in preposterous resolution of controls or Burr Brown this or Op-Amp that. All of that is a distraction and a ruse. The power in a DSP is in the tools it provides to fix acoustic problems and the help that a GUI or an algorithm provides in making the adjustments. If all you want are knobs and switches and access to every filter type known to man with resolution that depends only on your patience in keystroking in zeros after the decimal, that's easy. Just get a demo board from any of the DSP hardware companies.

High end for me is what your car sounds like after you've finished installing products that perform as beautifully as they appear. High end is not needless expense in the latest fad or myth, supposedly esoteric materials or materials that are commonplace but have names that only Dr Seuss could invent. 

No tweeter diaphragms made of the foreskin of nordic timberwolf pups from me.


----------



## FreeTheSound

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Thanks Guys. Right now, We are focused on making some seriously great speakers and subs. I have plenty of DSP ideas, and I think no one has done it quite right, yet.
> 
> I think it needs to be easier but also include more adjustability for those who are experienced tuners. And it should be modular. This $1000 cost of entry for good EQ is ridiculous. Equally ridiculous is this idea that in order to make the car sound great, we HAVE to sum all the channels and then divide them again. It creates as many hassles as it solves.
> 
> Finally, and I've said it a thousand times before, the power in a DSP is not in preposterous resolution of controls or Burr Brown this or Op-Amp that. All of that is a distraction and a ruse. The power in a DSP is in the tools it provides to fix acoustic problems and the help that a GUI or an algorithm provides in making the adjustments. If all you want are knobs and switches and access to every filter type known to man with resolution that depends only on your patience in keystroking in zeros after the decimal, that's easy. Just get a demo board from any of the DSP hardware companies.
> 
> High end for me is what your car sounds like after you've finished installing products that perform as beautifully as they appear. High end is not needless expense in the latest fad or myth, supposedly esoteric materials or materials that are commonplace but have names that only Dr Seuss could invent.
> 
> No tweeter diaphragms made of the foreskin of nordic timberwolf pups from me.


 Very well stated and received with excitement.


----------



## david in germany

Very nice! How about a set of affordable 4" quality components? The market has a huge gap at the moment. Either $150 for low quality and then to get quality the price range jumps to $550. 5.25" and 6.5" components are a dime a dozen for quality but some of us are stuck with 4" are screwed. 

By the way, if you improve something like the ms8 to utilize the underseat woofers as they are designed... I am definitely on your team!


----------



## danno14

> No tweeter diaphragms made of the foreskin of nordic timberwolf pups from me.


So quotable 
Good to hear of your news
MEMORABLE name!


----------



## Chaos

If there is one thing that I have learned over the years working in both product development for a commercial manufacturer as well as installing 12V product at a B&M retailer on a daily basis, it is that products which provide the best performance will practically sell themselves. 

If it is built to do whatever it was designed to do better than the competition, the market will come to you. That being the case, you can call it whatever you want.


----------



## clix`g35

Just throwing this out there, I dont know the feasability, But for the life of me I do not understand why a car audio company hasn't tried to make a small format coaxial, something like the 3.5 dual concentrics Kef uses in there egg. 

With most people moving there mids and tweets up to the A pillars I think this is a product that would have many benefits.


----------



## BuickGN

I think I'm most looking forward to the future processors. I think Andy summed it up well. Build it and I will buy it lol.


----------



## sbaumbaugh

Andy,

this is great news, congratulations Sir....

i look forward to supporting your endeavor...

do you anticipate a 2014 launch?


----------



## rton20s

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Thanks Guys. Right now, We are focused on making some seriously great speakers and subs. I have plenty of DSP ideas, and I think no one has done it quite right, yet.
> 
> I think it needs to be easier but also include more adjustability for those who are experienced tuners. And it should be modular. This $1000 cost of entry for good EQ is ridiculous. Equally ridiculous is this idea that in order to make the car sound great, we HAVE to sum all the channels and then divide them again. It creates as many hassles as it solves.


This! Thank you. While it does appear the market may soon be saturated with processor options, I do like the approach you described. A lower cost entry point that will handle what the majority of users need with easy to implement expandability of a modular system for more advanced users. 



Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Finally, and I've said it a thousand times before, the power in a DSP is not in preposterous resolution of controls or Burr Brown this or Op-Amp that. All of that is a distraction and a ruse. The power in a DSP is in the tools it provides to fix acoustic problems and the help that a GUI or an algorithm provides in making the adjustments. If all you want are knobs and switches and access to every filter type known to man with resolution that depends only on your patience in keystroking in zeros after the decimal, that's easy. Just get a demo board from any of the DSP hardware companies.


Yes, please. A simple, *STABLE*, multi-platform (Windows, OSX, iOS, Android) interface for easy adjustments. It is easy for many of us (myself included) to get caught up in spec wars. However, any product that comes to market in this arena and simply does what is claimed it will without giving users a headache and does so at an attractive entry price will be a big winner. Regardless of where is stands in the game of Specification King of the Hill. 



Andy Wehmeyer said:


> High end for me is what your car sounds like after you've finished installing products that perform as beautifully as they appear. High end is not needless expense in the latest fad or myth, supposedly esoteric materials or materials that are commonplace but have names that only Dr Seuss could invent.
> 
> No tweeter diaphragms made of the foreskin of nordic timberwolf pups from me.


So... no answer as to price points just yet. I get it. And while it is a bit of a letdown, I'm sure the nordic timberwolves will be happy. Please tell me you have not abandoned plans to use ecstasy in the woofer cones though!


----------



## sjr033

rton20s said:


> This! Thank you. While it does appear the market may soon be saturated with processor options, I do like the approach you described. A lower cost entry point that will handle what the majority of users need with easy to implement expandability of a modular system for more advanced users.


This reminds me of the old Rockford Fosgate Symmetry system. You bought the base unit and added the eq, 14 or 28 bands.


----------



## pionkej

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Thanks Guys. Right now, We are focused on making some seriously great speakers and subs. I have plenty of DSP ideas, and I think no one has done it quite right, yet.
> 
> I think it needs to be easier but also include more adjustability for those who are experienced tuners. And it should be modular. This $1000 cost of entry for good EQ is ridiculous. Equally ridiculous is this idea that in order to make the car sound great, we HAVE to sum all the channels and then divide them again. It creates as many hassles as it solves.
> 
> Finally, and I've said it a thousand times before, the power in a DSP is not in preposterous resolution of controls or Burr Brown this or Op-Amp that. All of that is a distraction and a ruse. The power in a DSP is in the tools it provides to fix acoustic problems and the help that a GUI or an algorithm provides in making the adjustments. If all you want are knobs and switches and access to every filter type known to man with resolution that depends only on your patience in keystroking in zeros after the decimal, that's easy. Just get a demo board from any of the DSP hardware companies.
> 
> High end for me is what your car sounds like after you've finished installing products that perform as beautifully as they appear. High end is not needless expense in the latest fad or myth, supposedly esoteric materials or materials that are commonplace but have names that only Dr Seuss could invent.
> 
> No tweeter diaphragms made of the foreskin of nordic timberwolf pups from me.


Andy,

I couldn't agree and disagree more at the same time. I think there is value to having resolution, but it needs to be in the right places and it needs to be reserved for those that know how to do it.

I have gone through numerous DSP's and from an adjustment standpoint, I don't think any of them get it perfectly right. Be it limited ability or a bad GUI, I haven't found a perfect solution yet.

If this forum is a potential "test bed", then this is my wish list (Andy, you can probably just read the bold and totally get what I mean, but the reason if for clarity and validation):

*-31-bands of left and right input PEQ:* Even though it's on the input, it would be the last step for most. After each speaker is individually EQ'ed, crossed over, and aligned (so the speakers all play nice together), this cleans the last bit up. For me, I use this to play 31 band pink noise and listen for shifts in center and disparity in output (as I tune for ear flat--and that measured is pretty identical to the MS8/Synthesis target for what it's worth). Since speakers interact with each other at the crossover (even with steep slopes), an input EQ effects the system and not one speaker and this allows you to make adjustments without having to readdress the interactions between drivers. This doesn't need to be on the screen at all times, but could be a tab (I love my miniDSP is simple with INPUT, ROUTING/MIXING, OUTPUT) and it would totally rock if it were two sets of sliders directly above each other (I like to balance the system by "trading" EQ--or +1db left and -1db right so the output relationship is the same while I can help "move" a sound towards center)

*-5+ Bands of PEQ per speaker:* I'll keep this one shorter, but when trying to shape/tame a driver, PEQ is the best tool you could ever have. I use a 660GTi as my midrange and it runs 150hz-3khz (just over 4 octaves) and I can do everything I've ever needed with 5 bands of PEQ on the speaker itself (Q adjustable from 0.5-10 please). To me the '+' would only actually go up if the processor still had power for more bands after the remaining requests. 

*-Choice of BW1,2,3,4+ and LR2,4+ crossovers:* I set my electric crossover based on a summed acoustic response of a LR4. What this means is I measure the speaker with no crossover (or a lower than intended safety crossover on a speaker like a tweeter) and look at the response. I'll use the natural response of the driver and room to help me decide the electrical crossover used to match a LR4 curve. In my current system: sub is [email protected], midbass is [email protected] and [email protected], midrange is [email protected] and [email protected], tweeter is [email protected] I not personally needed Bessel slopes or anything greater than 24db/octave (since that's my target acoustic+electric), but if the processing power allows it, I'd add it after more EQ bands.

*-Level adjustment in 0.1db steps and T/A in 0.02m/s:* This is pretty much a standard and I can say for a fact that this resolution can make a difference. One thing that I think would be really cool though that could make it a MUCH more useful tool is a toggle switch for both coarse and fine adjustment. Like maybe on the left and right side of the display box. I can tell you for a fact that I can add delay to my left midrange and "walk" center across the car. Sometimes pinpointing that with precision is tough, and somtimes clicking through 0.02m/s all the way to 2-5ms is tedious. My idea is that the coarse adjustment is 1ms or 1db and the fine adjustment is the 0.02ms or 0.1db. That way I can jump across and when I go from "almost there" to "whoa too far", I go back to "almost there" and switch to fine adjustment. 

*-Phase adjustment on subwoofer and midbass:* I think this is often misunderstood but can be quite useful to integrating both speakers. A very basic version could be adjustable at the LP point of the speaker and be adjustable at 15/30/45 (there are some that offer more points but less resolution--I say if you can't get within 45-degrees between polarity and crossover slope you don't need to play with phase anyway). Since wavelegnths are shorter above around 300hz, adjusting phase at the crossover is fairly useless...however...an advanced version would be awesome on all channels (though tweeter still isn't needed) and it would be a true Allpass filter instead. So center frequency and Q could be selected. This allows the user to still do the above, but adds one VERY useful feature, I could work with a cancellation in the passband of when left and right sum. To explain, I can't really fix a null in one speaker, but I can fix a null that shows up from left and right trying to sum. They reason a null shows up is because something is out of phase. Nothing can normally fix this as you get that null into phase and then everything else cancels. An Allpass "tips" phase around a chosen frequency, and being able to do that at a null can help eliminate the null.

*-Make it 7 or 10 channels:* Nobody needs stereo subs in a vehicle. I'm saying it and it would take a stupid amount of proving to get me to change me mind. I'd argue that if you cross a midbass under 150hz you likely don't need stereo midbass either. That said, 7 channels allows more DSP power to be used elsewhere and anybody could run up to a 3-way+sub with a 7 channel processor. One thing you have long said is that for good 2-seat, you need some sort of center channel and steering and I completely agree. I even believe it can enhance a single seat car. The problem with most processors is that they effect EVERYTHING with their steering. I have used the MS8, the H800 (both PLII and Euphony) and created PLI by splicing up balanced cables and using an input mixer. The ONLY thing I got to work was chaining two H800's together. The first ran the front 3-way setup and one of the outputs was used as the input on the other. It was a full-range signal that I then put on PLII processing. It fed the center, rears, and sub. It was beautiful. I could reinforce center from both seats and "enhance" depth, width, and height with rear-fill with ZERO "phasiness". The reason is because they supplimented a normal stereo setup instead of controlled everything based on phase. Nothing steered ONLY to center or ONLY to rear. It ALWAYS played on the dominant side (left or right) and ALSO steering to center or rear. I wish I wouldn't have gotten rid of the setup, but I entered a point in my life where I couldn't afford it over going back to a simpler setup. Having said all that, the mention of modules sounds perfect for this. One 7-channel module and one 3-channel (center and fill) that users could combine for up to 10 channels. Maybe even a 5-channel in the future for those that want center, side-fill, and rear-fill. Point being, I think a 10 channel DSP with surround processing interlaced with stereo or a 7-channel stereo plus 3-channel DSP is the current best option for achieving any kind of matrix mixing in a car.

*-A preset selector switch that isn't tied to a huge controller:* I'd love to have a little detented pot (2-5 presets/detents would be perfect) that I could install by drilling a small hole and adding it to a panel like most amps remote gain knobs. I'll keep volume control on my deck thank you and I'm ok with using a laptop to tune, but being able to change presets that easily is so simple and awesome and NOBODY does it!

*-GUI layout simple like miniDSP: * I love the layout of my miniDSP 8x8. There are 5 preset buttons at the top. There are three tabs below that (INPUT, MIXER, OUTPUT). Input would be different as I think only a stereo pair is needed (even if summing for OEM systems is done before this) so make this a left channel (top) and right channel (bottom) and all it has is two stacked 31-band eq boards with sliders and a lock toggle box at the bottom. They should be able to lock and unlock and hold settings. For example, only the Mosconi 6to8 allows you to cut the left side 1db (-1db) and boost the right 1db (+1db) and then link them and increase them both an additional 1db (0db and +2db). Everything else either makes you pick a side, sets the other to it, and then links (so if you pick "right reference" the left goes to +1db and they both move to +2db). Mixer can be whatever you like, but some way to create mono for the sub. Output should be similar to the minidsp layout. Each channel is a column. Order doesn't matter much to me, but each column has dial to adjust level, time, and phase (15/30/45). There is a check box for mute and polarity (0/180). Crossover is a drop down box. PEQ is a call-up (like the miniDSP already has). Since PEQ is for each driver, I don't need to clutter up the rest of the output screen (quickly jumping back and forth for all the others is important--I don't need to enter three submenu's to every speaker but one, but I can deal with having one PEQ up at a time). Right now the miniDSP is NEARLY perfect. The problem are it's slow to load and change presets, it's BIG, and it's noisy. It also doesn't have 31 bands on the input (it has 5 bands PEQ though) and phase adjustment is an all-pass that has to be done via manual bi-quad input (so I have to calculate it on an excel spreadsheet, input it, listen, adjust, ad-naseum).

I think that's all I've got!  I say that part in jest since it's so long, but I'd love if it were taken seriously (or at least taken into account as you are one of the few people Andy that listened to us like our voice mattered). In my opinion that leaves every tool possibly needed on the table in an extremely easy to use format. A comprehensive user manual could help beginners work through tuning without falling waist deep in quicksand too!


----------



## james2266

Wow, are we like minded. I think you hit every single issue/complaint I have had regarding the two processors I have used Audison Bit One and current Mosconi 6to8. If Andy can come up with something that eliminates all of these issues you listed and is surround capable (proper center steering) I will jump all over that. Hell, I would even save my pennies and be willing to drop a solid chunk of change on a 10 channel processor.


----------



## highly

Logical GUI layout with no sliders. The use of sliders looks cool, but it makes fine adjustment from modern touch based devices impractical. Using them with a mouse isn't much better even if they support a scroll wheel as an errant click can jump the slider. The ability to type in a value and to increase or decrease that value with a spinbox (up/down arrows on the screen that react to keyboard up/down) is invaluable. For those with a wheel mouse, being able to pick the box and scroll the mouse wheel is extremely intuitive and precise. 

The UI screen should scale well between smaller and larger devices. Alpine manages this with an MDI interface in the H800, Rane does well with a zoomable element-based interface. I find the 6to8 interface annoying to operate. The PS8 tab-based interface seems adequate.

No matter the physical means of connection to the UI host, the DSP needs to react without causing audible impact during adjustment. 'thumping', 'clicking', and etc. when adjusting frequency or time is simply unacceptable. 

One thing to consider might be a 'limits' screen in the setup options that allows you to define intelligent limits for each output. For instance, when you define a channel as a 'tweeter' channel, the software sets a predefined limit of (let's say) 3Khz to the crossover. The user can change that limit in setup to whatever they like thereafter, but when making crossover adjustments the software can throw a warning box should the user accidentally set the crossover to 200 Hz when they <meant> 2000 Hz. The DSP will do whatever you ask, but being able to set a 'warning event' in case of user error at 3AM the night before a show could be a lifesaver for those that choose not to run protective devices. I for one would rather be warned I am about to exceed my driver's design threshold, and this is pretty easy to add into the UI.

Undo/redo. If you want to get fancy, a Photoshop-like Undo List of X entries in a drop-down box. 

Autosave to temporary files every X time, settable in software. Filenames with date/time stamp. If I set the time for every five minutes, the software saves a snapshot of the current tune every 5 minutes so if my laptop crashes I can at least pick up from there...

Just some thoughts


----------



## sbaumbaugh

Very well said,

I completely agree...

I have everyone of those concerns with the Helix DSP...


----------



## Grizz Archer

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Hey Sirboom. Maybe someday you'll change your mind. If not, I get it. We thought about many other names and tested several of them.
> 
> Eventually, we went with this one because it's contemporary and friendly. I absolutely refuse to go to market as another forgettable acronym with an "X" in it, ,some name with a Z instead of an S, or some high-falutin' name designed to communicate the preposterous mythology that costs customers a fortune and delivers little in return. I refuse to attempt to stake out a place in the high end segment with yet another industrial design that looks like Optimus Prime or a brand that appeals only to buyers with hypergonadism.
> 
> Love it or hate it, that's the name.


Honestly, I like it. I like the tribal-ish frog. And I mentioned the name to my wife, and then asked her a week later and she still remembered it. That's important in my mind. I am sick of everything having to sound so tough, aggressive and deadly. Maybe I'm getting old, but I think your approach is epic and refreshing. Wish you well!


----------



## Grizz Archer

UNBROKEN said:


> Who are your target competitors?
> High end is subjective...just wondering how high you're shooting. Good luck at any rate...it's gotta be hard to bring something new to market these days.


Interesting thought, and I think most people will agree with you buddy. Respectfully, I have to disagree. I can tell you for a fact, from my experience, that the reason why you are seeing less and less new goodies these days is because alot of companies simply will not spend the money. Anything new will require tooling for unique parts, and fresh looking parts. While some of the better companies get this, many simply buy off-the-shelf stuff, some that is well over a decade old, just to save money to offer another "me too" cheap product. I'd bet 2 fingers, 4 toes and 1 nut that Andy is not going to make off-the-shelf crap. He said "high end", not "mainstream", so I have some big expectations...

BRING IT ANDY!!


----------



## Grizz Archer

Quote:
Originally Posted by FreeTheSound View Post
My first question about designed here made in roc was not asked to offend or show lack of respect Mr.Wehmeyer, I just want to clear that up since it was not answered.I apologize if it did.

The timing of your desire manifesting to reality and Grizz coming home seem like such a wonderful happening. Any chance you and Grizz will team up? Has this been a thought?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
THIS!!!!


OMG the products we'd see if that happened!


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR

LOL! That would be badass and a ton of fun! Andy sure does not need my help in designing products, but the brainchild could be something pretty spectacular.  At this point, I am still exploring employment offers and opportunities...


----------



## quality_sound

pionkej said:


> Snipped because it was way too long to quote


The PS8 does most of that. The filters you want are there. The EQ linking and unlinking. The level and TA steps. Granted, the GUI isn't fantastic, but as far as the nuts and bolts, the PS8 does it.


----------



## thehatedguy

Andy, you bringing waveguides out for your tweeters?


----------



## Guest

Now that would be very interesting...!

Plus a true high end OEM interface would be great...


----------



## sqshoestring

Fantastic news Andy, I'm sure this will work out great.


----------



## 14642

The PS8 is a nice processor, but it doesn't adequately process a center signal. It doesn't include any UN-EQ for the factory signal when it sums and it can't remove delay from the factory signal either. If you're using an aftermarket radio with a flat 2-channel signal, and you need basic but high resolution crossover, EQ and delay, it's a good one.


----------



## MacLeod

Great news! Best of luck! I can't wait to see the lineup. 

I just have one humble request: raw drivers. It would be so nice to be a DIY'er and be able to use car specific raw drivers instead of the 6" deep, 8 ohm barely enough Qts to use in a door home drivers. If Focal sold their K2P mids raw, I'd have them by now and maybe a spare. But I can't bring myself to spend $1000 for them when I don't need the X-over and already have the best tweeters known to man (Scan Illuminators). Pretty please with sugar on top! 

Sent from my Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk.


----------



## goodstuff

chithead said:


> Those are Funky Frogs... and have been known to cause government shutdowns from their extreme VBA.


Damn beat me to it. I'm not not licking frogs.


----------



## AAAAAAA

Should'nt this be in the general audio discussion area? 

Very excited to see what you and your team will come out with.


----------



## slowsedan01

I think it would be great to offer a matched component set for those who are running active. Allow the buyer to decide if they want the passive crossover or not.


----------



## mikechec9

First, congratulations on your solo endeavor. I can't stand when my wife says she doesn't want any food then asks for some of mine. "Get your own or allow me to" is what I always say. 

1. a shallow easily incorporated remote to control whatever powerhouse DSP you end up devising for reasoning would be practical if cost allows. Imo optimal tuning takes place over a multitude of instances rarely captured within one initial sitting (clearly I miss my rux).

2. A shallow 8" or 10" dedicated midbass and/or midrange option would be great. I think that would be a plausible market to corner (anyone care to sell me a mw-182?).

3. Also, as a humble consumer, I like the name if its more of an indirect reference to the style of the driver like an allegorical green ring around the motor structure or dust cap of the driver, if anything visually distinguishing at all. Something clean and leading like that, as opposed to a blatant frog jumping up and down with the excursion of the driver (a la Brahma's charging bull), I personally think lends more toward a classy high end driver. "I got frogs in the pillars" goes hard. I like it.


----------



## 14642

Judging by some of these speaker-related requests, maybe I'm on the right track. Thanks Guys.


----------



## kapone

Not that I expect anything less from Andy...  but:

- Full specs of the speakers including various configurations, rolloffs, graphs, would be great. Even more important if you decide to offer raw driver options. I don't mind spending money, but when I have to go spend hours online, just to find specs of a speaker...it turns me off.

- If you do decide to incorporate Bluetooth audio...please please take into account, some of the enhancements in v4.0. Like aptX. I expect you know this already...but one can only request!

Looking forward to interesting products.


----------



## ousooner2

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> No tweeter diaphragms made of the foreskin of nordic timberwolf pups from me.


Well then I'm out.


----------



## kaigoss69

Getting rid of signal cables and transmitting via WiFi or BT, from HU/phone/tablet to processor to amps.


----------



## rton20s

kapone said:


> - Full specs of the speakers including various configurations, rolloffs, graphs, would be great. Even more important if you decide to offer raw driver options. I don't mind spending money, but when I have to go spend hours online, just to find specs of a speaker...it turns me off.


I'm with this one 100%. That is one of the few things that I dislike about JBL (and several other manufacturers). Providing only partial or no T/S parameters is an absolute pain. Honest frequency response graphs wood be a great bonus, but not nearly as "expected." 

Still anxiously awaiting the first product announcements. Are we going to have to wait until January 7 to get information on the initial product offerings?


----------



## Problemhouston

mikechec9 said:


> First, congratulations on your solo endeavor. I can't stand when my wife says she doesn't want any food then asks for some of mine. "Get your own or allow me to" is what I always say.
> 
> 1. a shallow easily incorporated remote to control whatever powerhouse DSP you end up devising for reasoning would be practical if cost allows. Imo optimal tuning takes place over a multitude of instances rarely captured within one initial sitting (clearly I miss my rux).
> 
> 2. A shallow 8" or 10" dedicated midbass and/or midrange option would be great. I think that would be a plausible market to corner (anyone care to sell me a mw-182?).
> 
> 3. Also, as a humble consumer, I like the name if its more of an indirect reference to the style of the driver like an allegorical green ring around the motor structure or dust cap of the driver, if anything visually distinguishing at all. Something clean and leading like that, as opposed to a blatant frog jumping up and down with the excursion of the driver (a la Brahma's charging bull), I personally think lends more toward a classy high end driver. "I got frogs in the pillars" goes hard. I like it.


I was just thinking to myself to suggest drivers that offer a high level of SQ that are shallow. I am having a heck of a time fitting these Focal is2000 8" drivers in the kicks of my 65 Fastback.


----------



## vactor

hot damn andy, this is fantastic news. will be a bit for my next install as i am nursing a nicely broken tibia after a car ran a redlight and i did a superman when my motorcycle hit him 

congrats andy!!


----------



## pionkej

One thing that I think would be cool is LEGIT freq response. Everybody likes to say something stupid like 18-40,000hz for a set of 6.5" components. You're a fan of "spreading the chaos" (sound power) so a good 6.5" should be something like 80-3,000hz. Maybe even break it down for those that want to aim a 6.5" right at there face and go "axis-free" (80-3,000hz) and "axis-dependent" (80-4,700hz).

The only real problem I could see with that is all the bogus info people have been fed for so long, they might think a good (and realistic) 3,000hz isn't very good at all.


----------



## thehatedguy

How about giving the real sensitivity of the speaker...like rated in it's desired pass band. That is more honest IMO...and JBL Pro did/does that with a lot of products, not having an up, down sloping FR or some big bump somewhere and calling the max at the bump the sensitivity like say Audison/Hertz does.


----------



## 14642

rton20s said:


> I'm with this one 100%. That is one of the few things that I dislike about JBL (and several other manufacturers). Providing only partial or no T/S parameters is an absolute pain. Honest frequency response graphs wood be a great bonus, but not nearly as "expected."
> 
> Still anxiously awaiting the first product announcements. Are we going to have to wait until January 7 to get information on the initial product offerings?



I don't understand this. I provided a full set of parameters for all JBL speakers and provided both in-car simulations and standard simulations for woofer enclosures. The low end owner's manuals didn't include frequency response graphs, but the GTi owner's manual provided more info than any manual I've ever read. 

Anyway, for high end stuff, I agree that more complete documentation is necessary.


----------



## 14642

pionkej said:


> One thing that I think would be cool is LEGIT freq response. Everybody likes to say something stupid like 18-40,000hz for a set of 6.5" components. You're a fan of "spreading the chaos" (sound power) so a good 6.5" should be something like 80-3,000hz. Maybe even break it down for those that want to aim a 6.5" right at there face and go "axis-free" (80-3,000hz) and "axis-dependent" (80-4,700hz).
> 
> The only real problem I could see with that is all the bogus info people have been fed for so long, they might think a good (and realistic) 3,000hz isn't very good at all.


This can be easily handled with real response graphs. The problem with graphs is that they're either ******** or easy to complain about. Frequency response specs may give you an idea of the real -3dB points, but they are often just a bunch of made up BS or specs that indicate how low and how high you can use the driver, regardless of its response.


----------



## 14642

thehatedguy said:


> How about giving the real sensitivity of the speaker...like rated in it's desired pass band. That is more honest IMO...and JBL Pro did/does that with a lot of products, not having an up, down sloping FR or some big bump somewhere and calling the max at the bump the sensitivity like say Audison/Hertz does.


The "real sensitivity" of the driver can be determined many ways. One way is to calculate the sensitivity, which is mid-band and has nothing to do with the frequency response curve. The other is to look at the response curve and pick a number (that can be done to help people use the driver or simply to pick the biggest number at the highest nasty-assed peak). 

Once again, this can be easily handled with the calculated number and a response curve.


----------



## thehatedguy

And waveguides for the tweeters.


----------



## .69077

I might have missed it Andy, but do you have a rough ETA (not holding you to anything) on product release?

EDIT: Nevermind just read the news article. Looking forward to it. Maybe I should delay my new speaker purchase.


----------



## pionkej

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> This can be easily handled with real response graphs. The problem with graphs is that they're either ******** or easy to complain about. Frequency response specs may give you an idea of the real -3dB points, but they are often just a bunch of made up BS or specs that indicate how low and how high you can use the driver, regardless of its response.


I agree completely Andy, but for some reason, people in general would rather have a spec they just read and compare instead of a graph they have to decipher. That was the reason for the suggestion.

Parameters and a frequency response graph that shows 0/30/60 (or some iteration of that) is all anyone really needs to make an educated decision on a speaker and I'd love to have that.


----------



## rton20s

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> I don't understand this. I provided a full set of parameters for all JBL speakers and provided both in-car simulations and standard simulations for woofer enclosures. The low end owner's manuals didn't include frequency response graphs, but the GTi owner's manual provided more info than any manual I've ever read.
> 
> Anyway, for high end stuff, I agree that more complete documentation is necessary.


Sorry Andy. I should have been more clear. JBL certainly is not the prime offender on the specification front. The shortcoming there is typically in the manual (in some product lines). Most of the information absent from the manual can be found on the product web page in some instances. And JBL was certainly better at providing the information for the subwoofers than they were for the components. A lot of car audio manufacturers out there are much, MUCH worse. 

I have full confidence that you and audiofrog are going to provide whatever the user/installer may need to successfully implement your products into their build.


----------



## sqnut

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Anyway, for high end stuff, I agree that more complete documentation is necessary.


I'm not big into the numbers largely because besides a few obvious ones, I can't relate the array of numbers with how it sounds. 

I think a lot of speakers have a signature sound. Tuning in a car plays a large part in how the speakers sound but each speaker seems to have its own unique sound. Put another way, my ref sound is from the scan towers at home. Now, if I were to swap out drivers and tune each set for that scan sound, they would each get close but still sound different from the scan and each other. 

Just curious if there is some sort of benchmark on how you want them to sound.


----------



## ErinH

Ill shadow the requests for on and off axis FR data. As long as we have that and T/S (where applicable) that's all that's needed to make an educated decision. Personally, the first thing I look at when comparing drive nuts is the off axis behavior vs on axis. And you already know why. Just restating the need for a more industry wide push for this kind of information. Even if it's gated to above 300hz (we can use T/S below if needed).


----------



## quietfly

AWESOME!!!!!


----------



## Woosey

Wow great news Andy!! Big respect to dive in this adventure!!

Too bad Europe is not planned ( yet ) to introduce the new brand.. ( Designed in California for Audiophiles Everywhere? )

A big beefy sub with the name Bullfrog just came in my mind haha.. 

Are the products in asia called Audioflog? heheh..


For some other people: Why are response graphs so important? they're mostly free air measurements in a test baffle or a huge enclosure right? I bet that most speakers(mounted in a door or whatever ) responses are way off compared to the graph on the paper.. Accurate TS parameters are also harder to get, since mounting them in a door or enclosure alters that too doesn't it? 


People just like number I guess...


----------



## pionkej

Woosey said:


> For some other people: Why are response graphs so important? they're mostly free air measurements in a test baffle or a huge enclosure right? I bet that most speakers(mounted in a door or whatever ) responses are way off compared to the graph on the paper.. Accurate TS parameters are also harder to get, since mounting them in a door or enclosure alters that too doesn't it?
> 
> 
> People just like number I guess...


I'm not sure why you wouldn't want as much data as possible if you could. 

At the most basic level a response graph can provide helpful information in choosing a crossover point (or knowing if the speaker will even fit into you plans if you know what to look for). For example, I like to keep speakers playing omni-directional for as long as I can (basically until the tweeter starts to beam). A 6.5" woofer with 0/30/60 measured response would show where deviation (beaming) occurs. I would want to cross right around that point. I also like to avoid cone breakup whenever possible and try and keep it one octave outside of a passband. HD plots help determine this more, but a sharp spike in response that is seen in all measured axis is typically such a breakup. So when I look at a speaker, I look for divergence at 0/30/60 or a spike across 0/30/60 (and divide that by two) and determine that to roughly be my top-end range. Then I decide if it will work with the tweeters I use/plan to use.

T/S parameters can also be beneficial, ESPECIALLY if you know the volume of the enclosure you are using. Speaker modeling software is surprisingly accurate as long as the info you use is equally accurate. I knew in my Maxima that my doors measured as 2.6cu/ft. In my Murano, my kicks measure at 3.1cu/ft and my dash pods are 6.4cu/ft (they vent externally and are pretty much true IB). I like a speaker with a Q of around 0.5-0.6 and I like to know where the speaker is sitting when xmax runs out. With enclosure volume and T/S parameters I can determine both before I pay a penny for a speaker (as long as the info supplied is considered accurate).

You're correct that the car will change the response of a speaker, but generally not so much that the data becomes useless. Also, I like to know that the speaker should play nice in the car by modeling/measuring outside the car. That way anything that shows up should be a product of the environment and not of the speaker itself. I'm much more comfortable trying to fix an environment problem electronically (except nulls, you can't electronically fix them) than I am a speaker problem.


----------



## Woosey

pionkej said:


> I'm not sure why you wouldn't want as much data as possible if you could.
> 
> At the most basic level a response graph can provide helpful information in choosing a crossover point (or knowing if the speaker will even fit into you plans if you know what to look for). For example, I like to keep speakers playing omni-directional for as long as I can (basically until the tweeter starts to beam). A 6.5" woofer with 0/30/60 measured response would show where deviation (beaming) occurs. I would want to cross right around that point. I also like to avoid cone breakup whenever possible and try and keep it one octave outside of a passband. HD plots help determine this more, but a sharp spike in response that is seen in all measured axis is typically such a breakup. So when I look at a speaker, I look for divergence at 0/30/60 or a spike across 0/30/60 (and divide that by two) and determine that to roughly be my top-end range. Then I decide if it will work with the tweeters I use/plan to use.
> 
> T/S parameters can also be beneficial, ESPECIALLY if you know the volume of the enclosure you are using. Speaker modeling software is surprisingly accurate as long as the info you use is equally accurate. I knew in my Maxima that my doors measured as 2.6cu/ft. In my Murano, my kicks measure at 3.1cu/ft and my dash pods are 6.4cu/ft (they vent externally and are pretty much true IB). I like a speaker with a Q of around 0.5-0.6 and I like to know where the speaker is sitting when xmax runs out. With enclosure volume and T/S parameters I can determine both before I pay a penny for a speaker (as long as the info supplied is considered accurate).
> 
> You're correct that the car will change the response of a speaker, but generally not so much that the data becomes useless. Also, I like to know that the speaker should play nice in the car by modeling/measuring outside the car. That way anything that shows up should be a product of the environment and not of the speaker itself. I'm much more comfortable trying to fix an environment problem electronically (except nulls, you can't electronically fix them) than I am a speaker problem.


What I mean is:"

A driver with "less" than perfect or very good response can behave better in a car than a driver with perfect flat response on paper..


----------



## pionkej

Woosey said:


> What I mean is:"
> 
> A driver with "less" than perfect or very good response can behave better in a car than a driver with perfect flat response on paper..


I understand your point, but I'd argue that the data is all the more important in that case. 

For example, my car has 6.5" mids on the dash, firing WITH the glass. This creates a bit of horn loading in below 1khz and thefore I have uneven response above and below that point. In hindsight, I probably should have ran a 5.25" mid or picked a mid with rising response above 1khz (a lot of pro-audio speakers do this) as the speaker would have "naturally flattened" a bit before having to use EQ like I do now.

So yes, in my own case "less than perfect" probably would have been better than "perfect flat", but there are LOTS of variations of "less than perfect" and only a few of those would have worked well in my car. So I'd still want to see the graph going in and still think it has value. Just my 0.02


----------



## ErinH

Furthermore, let's be real...how many people here really know their car well enough to pick a "non flat" speaker with the explicit use of exploiting the non linear aspects of it? Take the easiest example: how many people know what their door does to the speakers small signal parameters? I've seem maaaaaybe 2 threads on this topic my entire time as a member of this site. And all that really takes is a simple impedance sweep. Now tell me how many people here have legitimately measured their car enough to know how it impacts the response at their listening position. I can name two I know of. And neither of them have documented their efforts here. 

This is why I believe response measurements are incredibly beneficial. It keeps me from buying crap. If you start with smooth response you have less to "fix". I know it's going in a car. All the more reason why I don't want to have to wrestle its free-air response to the ground. ESPECIALLY if it has poor behavior above its pistonic range. FR isn't numbers for the same of numbers. It's numbers for the sake of saving numbers (money/time).


----------



## Kevin K

Never heard the term pistonic range but now that I looked it up, makes sense. Amazing what you can learn in a post.


----------



## 14642

Documentation about the driver can be helpful in figuring out how to use it and help you compare it to other speakers when you're making a purchase. That's precisely why companies don't often include the data...and because few consumers actually know what to do with it. Worst case is providing false or misleading data to dupe people in to buying an unsuitable speaker. 

Unfortunately, the internet in general and forums in particular make providing real data risky because the people least likely to understand it are often the ones who point out the effects of necessary compromise as disqualifiers. The whole misunderstanding about speaker dispersion comes immediately to mind...too many companies claiming in lofty prose that their speaker somehow outperforms what's possible and include no supporting data. 

In some cases, generating the supporting data is far beyond what marketing departments can muster and making god measurements can be really tricky if you don't have a lot of practice. An anechoic chamber is really expensive and one that can allow accurate measurements below about 100 Hz has to be really big. Of course, there are plenty of other ways to do it, but most installers or sales guys turned manufacturer may not know how to do it accurately. 

I'm inclined, like many others, to provide in an owner's manual the instructions necessary to install the speaker and to provide a deeper dive online for those who need it. 

Speakers don't really perform differently in cars than they do in a measurement scenario. The door is a pretty suitable infinite baffle. What you hear is not a change in what the speaker does, it's the effect of the car's interior on the acoustic signal as it travels from the speaker to your ears. If the speaker is flat from 100Hz to 10k, then it's output is still flat from 100Hz to 10k in the car, but all of the reflections and crap in the way change what we hear. You're not going to choose a speaker with a response that's the inverse of all of those things. Eliminating some of that degradation is what equalization is for. 

So, let's say someone who makes speakers says in the marketing materials that their 6" has some dispersion widening technology of some kind. You buy the speaker, put it in the bottom of the door and discover you have a massive hole in the response between the 6" and the tweeeter on the near side and no such hole on the opposite side. Hmmm...The speaker guy said this wasn't the speaker and it has that phase plug thingy so it must be something else...

I like giving and receiving real data, but it can be very frustrating to be on the receiving end of, "Dude, why does your speaker suck?"

"Well, all speakers do that; Some worse than others."

"No they don't. The tech support guy from [insert company X here] said theirs don't."

"He's wrong. It's physically impossible."

"Dude, you're a liar. Why are you bashing the other company?"


----------



## ErinH

I like that post. 

re: providing accurate measurements. It shouldn't be hard to provide useful data above 300hz (floor bounce being the limiting factor and higher resolution (key for those who preach 1/24th smoothed plots but cut the speaker off at 500hz...) can be achieved if you can mitigate this). That's why I mentioned providing something simple like that and then just providing T/S for box sim where applicable. 

ie; a tweeter doesn't need to have resolution as low as 300hz. a midrange may need to. however, with a midrange, the Fs is typically in the 100-200hz ballpark (give or take), and the small signal domain is enough to properly determine the things that are important here such as enclosure size. truth be told, most people in car audio don't use a real enclosure for their mids, so it's a wash. and, frankly, I'm only paying attention to the higher end response just to make sure the driver is smooth and not bouncing all over the place off-axis creating issues you'll never fix with a dsp, much less with a dsp in the car. 

I don't trust many mfg's data. There's a few. I think what would help is if someone said "okay, this is what I did. I measured the driver on a baffle X size, gated above Xhz to remove room interaction, and smoothed the plot to 1/x." You provide that information, and you're miles ahead of any other car audio mfg. And for that matter, most home audio geared vendors. The good ones state on their spec sheet their measurement setup by providing an IEC or equivalent standard. 

blah blah blah... what I'm getting at is if you can provide the basic 0, 30, 60 measurements along with T/S you'll have given us more than most (maybe all) car audio vendors provide in the way of speaker measurements. Obviously application will drive the amount of info (ie; woofers don't necessarily need FR). 

Just my $.02 on the matter. I'm a fan of measurements. It helps me make wiser decisions and at least I know ahead the tradeoffs, as opposed to hoping something will work.


----------



## pionkej

I agree with the last two posts again completely. Too much honest data (and the way most people look at it) could lead to negative impressions of a speaker without ever hearing it. Like I said (and I know Erin and I are in the same page here), at the bottom end accurate T/S is all I need, and at the top I look for divergence point of axis measurements and "peaky" behavior that shows up in all planes. I basically look for a drivers beaming point and breakup type issues. If I have a few possible "candidates" at that point, I look to for symmetry in all planes after beaming.


----------



## Darth SQ

So can my 18 year old daughter design the frog logo?
She a has a real talent for it and is in college pursuing her art major.
She's done I think three album covers and is right now drawing up a bunch of beer label artwork for a local brewery based on Steam Punk Magazine style drawings as per request of the owners.
What do you say Andy?
Give the kid a shot? 

Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## squeak9798

Off topic from speakers.

When you start offering amps, don't put xovers in them. Aside from those of us using fancy processors, almost every aftermarket HU on the market has xovers built in, and often times far more flexible than what is built into an amp.

I don't like having to pay a guy to design the xover, and having to pay for the parts, assembly and markup of xovers in an amp. And I don't like having to double check a bunch of knobs and switches to make sure I didn't accidently mess up a setting on something I don't want or need to start with.

In today's age, amps just need a gain. That's it.


----------



## Darth SQ

squeak9798 said:


> Off topic from speakers.
> 
> When you start offering amps, don't put xovers in them. Aside from those of us using fancy processors, almost every aftermarket HU on the market has xovers built in, and often times far more flexible than what is built into an amp.
> 
> I don't like having to pay a guy to design the xover, and having to pay for the parts, assembly and markup of xovers in an amp. And I don't like having to double check a bunch of knobs and switches to make sure I didn't accidently mess up a setting on something I don't want or need to start with.
> 
> In today's age, amps just need a gain. That's it.


How about taking it one step further making the amp an integral component of the speaker?
Each amp is one channel tailored specifically to the parameters of the driver and are bought as one unit.
The footprint of today's class D amps is small enough and run cool enough that it could be done.
No more trunk space issues.
Just a thought.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Angrywhopper

Congrats Andy!

I have to say good luck on doing this in this economic climate.


----------



## BuickGN

I fully agree with Andy and Erin's posts. I understand the hesitation to post accurate measurements when most others are posting lies to make their speakers look better. It's like my friends Porsche that went 13.2 at the track when my car went 10.60s and puts about 20 car lengths on his. I had a guy ask me what my car runs and I said. 10.6. He looked disappointed and said so you mean the Porsche is quicker than your car. It turns out my so called friend has been telling everyone his Porsche runs 9s and non car guys believe it because they don't know any better. Yes, I had to turn to cars but let's just say I do understand the frustration and the risks of posting accurate specs and while good, might not be as good as someone else's false specs. 

Maybe some slick marketing for the masses with basic info included on the box and in the manual and the "good stuff" online since most who care enough to search for the specs will likely have a clue what to do with them. 

I'm looking forward to getting my hands on anything designed by Andy. I will likely own a set of these speakers one day. I've never forgotten what Andy did for me when I was having issues (caused by myself) with the MS8. I have his personal ear set that he sent me for free when we thought it might be a mic issue. If that's not customer service I don't know what is. 

Now for my selfish part. I would love a sub similar to the IB15 with very low inductance and little inductance change over stroke. Efficient, light moving mass, low distortion, etc. I would like one change though. Take the motor highlights of the IB15 and give it a real suspension and a 30mm+ xmax  It would probably require a large enclosure to combine all of these qualities so let's call it an IB subwoofer. :laugh: Seriously.


----------



## mmiller

Congratulations Andy, I look forward to see your offerings.


----------



## 14642

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> So can my 18 year old daughter design the frog logo?
> She a has a real talent for it and is in college pursuing her art major.
> She's done I think three album covers and is right now drawing up a bunch of beer label artwork for a local brewery based on Steam Punk Magazine style drawings as per request of the owners.
> What do you say Andy?
> Give the kid a shot?
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


Well, that would have been fun, but it's already designed and we've reserved a trademark. Hmmm....


----------



## 14642

squeak9798 said:


> Off topic from speakers.
> 
> When you start offering amps, don't put xovers in them. Aside from those of us using fancy processors, almost every aftermarket HU on the market has xovers built in, and often times far more flexible than what is built into an amp.
> 
> I don't like having to pay a guy to design the xover, and having to pay for the parts, assembly and markup of xovers in an amp. And I don't like having to double check a bunch of knobs and switches to make sure I didn't accidently mess up a setting on something I don't want or need to start with.
> 
> In today's age, amps just need a gain. That's it.


Well...no. I'm not doing that. That's an unreasonable requirement. Think about it this way...you go to the buffet restaurant and you tell them that you don't want to pay for them to clean and cook the broccoli because you aren't going to eat it. The head unit suppliers aren't going to eliminate every feature you don't need and neither are the people who make cars, computers, washing machines, clock radios or phones. An analog crossover in an amp, depending on what it is and how it's implemented is a few bucks by the time it makes its way to the retail shop. 

You don't have to eat your broccoli, but I'mputting it on the buffet anyway. Maybe you'll decide you like my broccoli better than the broccoli in your head unit.


----------



## 14642

BuickGN said:


> I fully agree with Andy and Erin's posts. I understand the hesitation to post accurate measurements when most others are posting lies to make their speakers look better. It's like my friends Porsche that went 13.2 at the track when my car went 10.60s and puts about 20 car lengths on his. I had a guy ask me what my car runs and I said. 10.6. He looked disappointed and said so you mean the Porsche is quicker than your car. It turns out my so called friend has been telling everyone his Porsche runs 9s and non car guys believe it because they don't know any better. Yes, I had to turn to cars but let's just say I do understand the frustration and the risks of posting accurate specs and while good, might not be as good as someone else's false specs.
> 
> Maybe some slick marketing for the masses with basic info included on the box and in the manual and the "good stuff" online since most who care enough to search for the specs will likely have a clue what to do with them.
> 
> I'm looking forward to getting my hands on anything designed by Andy. I will likely own a set of these speakers one day. I've never forgotten what Andy did for me when I was having issues (caused by myself) with the MS8. I have his personal ear set that he sent me for free when we thought it might be a mic issue. If that's not customer service I don't know what is.
> 
> Now for my selfish part. I would love a sub similar to the IB15 with very low inductance and little inductance change over stroke. Efficient, light moving mass, low distortion, etc. I would like one change though. Take the motor highlights of the IB15 and give it a real suspension and a 30mm+ xmax  It would probably require a large enclosure to combine all of these qualities so let's call it an IB subwoofer. :laugh: Seriously.


I'm working on woofers now. Some of what you've asked for is in there, but not all of it. I could sell a whopping 8 of these BuickGN specials,but to recover the development and tooling cost required to do it right in a way that's brand appropriate, I'd need to charge about $20k each. Ain't happenin'


----------



## Hanatsu

Andy, a mix between Beyma's, DLS and Scan-Speak's spec sheets would be a great template. First some text about the intended usage, recomendations etc. Then T/S parameters below, some box simulations (perhaps some average 'in-car response'). FR 0/30/45deg @ 1w would be awesome. 

For amps, perhaps a "power cube" graph could be supplied on how the amp performs into different loads/phase angles. 

For DSP's, the software should have a demo function so people can try out the interface. Take Helix's interface, add auto-tune and L7 processing and 0,5dB increments on the EQ/gain settings and we'll have a perfect unit! Phase increments on the sub channel with 22,5deg steps is a great feature.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy 3 via Tapatalk.


----------



## BuickGN

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> I'm working on woofers now. Some of what you've asked for is in there, but not all of it. I could sell a whopping 8 of these BuickGN specials,but to recover the development and tooling cost required to do it right in a way that's brand appropriate, I'd need to charge about $20k each. Ain't happenin'


Understood. I'll still buy a small box version and take my chances with them IB.


----------



## minbari

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> I'm working on woofers now. Some of what you've asked for is in there, but not all of it. I could sell a whopping 8 of these BuickGN specials,but to recover the development and tooling cost required to do it right in a way that's brand appropriate, I'd need to charge about $20k each. Ain't happenin'


if I buy 2 of em, could you bring the cost down to $15k each?


----------



## rton20s

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Well...no. I'm not doing that. That's an unreasonable requirement. Think about it this way...you go to the buffet restaurant and you tell them that you don't want to pay for them to clean and cook the broccoli because you aren't going to eat it. The head unit suppliers aren't going to eliminate every feature you don't need and neither are the people who make cars, computers, washing machines, clock radios or phones. An analog crossover in an amp, depending on what it is and how it's implemented is a few bucks by the time it makes its way to the retail shop.
> 
> You don't have to eat your broccoli, but I'mputting it on the buffet anyway. Maybe you'll decide you like my broccoli better than the broccoli in your head unit.


I totally get not wanting to remove the crossover. Those of us that would prefer this are definitely the exception and not the rule. So long as it is defetable, I am good with it. Any chance we could convince you to provide a dedicated gain pot per channel though? (I know the amps are still a ways off, so, just something to consider.)


----------



## pionkej

Two things I'd love to see in an amp (that I think are realistic and reasonable):

-The ability to stack them. I think with the footprint of many class D amps today, it's dumb NOT to do this. Make a design that fits the footprint of the largest amps board and then use that as the chassis for all the amps. This gives the option of stacking to the consumer and the reduced production costs of different sized amp cases. Seems like a win-win to me.

-A good 6-channel amp. Many people are running 3-way systems these days and those that don't typically run 2-way (and even "normal consumers" often upgrade front/rear/sub). A 6-channel amp (with something like 100x2/200x2/300x2) gives a GREAT power layout for the entire front stage of a 3-way system. Buy the stackable 1200x1 amp to go with it and round the whole thing out. Only run a 2-way system? Cool, bridge the last two channels for a 5-channel amp that is 100x2/200x2/600x1 (and is pretty typical for other current market 5-channel amps). "Normal consumers" still have good power for that front/rear/sub upgrade as well.

Just more "wishlist" items from the peanut gallery! Oh, and I'm pretty sure I said this already, but congrats! I wouldn't bother making these posts if I didn't think you might listen (or if I thought your products would be junk even if you did). I've got high hopes for Audiofrog!


----------



## james2266

pionkej said:


> Two things I'd love to see in an amp (that I think are realistic and reasonable):
> 
> -The ability to stack them. I think with the footprint of many class D amps today, it's dumb NOT to do this. Make a design that fits the footprint of the largest amps board and then use that as the chassis for all the amps. This gives the option of stacking to the consumer and the reduced production costs of different sized amp cases. Seems like a win-win to me.
> 
> -A good 6-channel amp. Many people are running 3-way systems these days and those that don't typically run 2-way (and even "normal consumers" often upgrade front/rear/sub). A 6-channel amp (with something like 100x2/200x2/300x2) gives a GREAT power layout for the entire front stage of a 3-way system. Buy the stackable 1200x1 amp to go with it and round the whole thing out. Only run a 2-way system? Cool, bridge the last two channels for a 5-channel amp that is 100x2/200x2/600x1 (and is pretty typical for other current market 5-channel amps). "Normal consumers" still have good power for that front/rear/sub upgrade as well.
> 
> Just more "wishlist" items from the peanut gallery! Oh, and I'm pretty sure I said this already, but congrats! I wouldn't bother making these posts if I didn't think you might listen (or if I thought your products would be junk even if you did). I've got high hopes for Audiofrog!


**This** I agree 100%. This type of amp is kind of lacking currently. I think that more like 1000 watts when bridged would be easily doable and more realistic of a 300x2 section. It would make for a super versatile amplifier especially if you could make it under about 22 inches long or so and 8 inches wide max. Have a nice high damping factor too so it would be clean, controlled and powerful sounding. That one I would call the Audison 5.1k killer. lol


----------



## rton20s

I agree with the line of thinking that pionkej is following with his last post about the amps. I am one of the many on DIYMA that has been asking about more staggered power multi-channel amp options. (Who knows how that relates to consumers as whole.) I like it enough that I currently have a staggered power 6 channel amp for my install. And, like pionkej's post, it started out as my only amp and is now my dedicated front stage amp since adding a dedicated subwoofer amp.


----------



## invinsible

Congratulations Andy on your new Endeavor. Look forward to seeing your products here in India.


----------



## quality_sound

BuickGN said:


> Now for my selfish part. I would love a sub similar to the IB15 with very low inductance and little inductance change over stroke. Efficient, light moving mass, low distortion, etc. I would like one change though. Take the motor highlights of the IB15 and give it a real suspension and a 30mm+ xmax  It would probably require a large enclosure to combine all of these qualities so let's call it an IB subwoofer. :laugh: Seriously.


So, the W15GTi?


----------



## BuickGN

quality_sound said:


> So, the W15GTi?


Almost. If only it had more than 20mm xmax. I would settle for a high xmech but no one seems to know if the braking starts right at xmax or if it has another 20mm to go. Inductance is around 1mh, right? Looking at the suspension it looks capable of some serious throw.


----------



## quality_sound

I don't remember the exact numbers off the top of my head but my W12GTi has at least 20mm of throw and the inductance is very low. I'm thinking a pair of the 15s IB once I swap cars.


----------



## BuickGN

quality_sound said:


> I don't remember the exact numbers off the top of my head but my W12GTi has at least 20mm of throw and the inductance is very low. I'm thinking a pair of the 15s IB once I swap cars.


Do it! I would love to see a pair of those 15s IB and your review of them. I'm always open to something new. What kind of car are you thinking about?


----------



## quality_sound

BuickGN said:


> Do it! I would love to see a pair of those 15s IB and your review of them. I'm always open to something new. What kind of car are you thinking about?


It'll either be another E90 M3 or an STI sedan. Leaning towards the STI. WAY less expensive to mod.


----------



## 14642

james2266 said:


> **This** I agree 100%. This type of amp is kind of lacking currently. I think that more like 1000 watts when bridged would be easily doable and more realistic of a 300x2 section. It would make for a super versatile amplifier especially if you could make it under about 22 inches long or so and 8 inches wide max. Have a nice high damping factor too so it would be clean, controlled and powerful sounding. That one I would call the Audison 5.1k killer. lol


Dampomg factor is BS.


----------



## slowsedan01

What do you have in mind regarding midbass and midrange speakers? Will you have a full line of individual speaker components or just coax/comp's initially?


----------



## avanti1960

Best of luck Andy! Make good stuff and you know we'll support it!


----------



## 14642

slowsedan01 said:


> What do you have in mind regarding midbass and midrange speakers? Will you have a full line of individual speaker components or just coax/comp's initially?


The high end line will be components only sold separately. Passive crossovers to support many configurations also sold separately.


----------



## Coppertone

^^^^. Good deal, we look forward to this.


----------



## captainobvious

pionkej said:


> ... A good 6-channel amp. Many people are running 3-way systems these days and those that don't typically run 2-way (and even "normal consumers" often upgrade front/rear/sub). A 6-channel amp (with something like 100x2/200x2/300x2) gives a GREAT power layout for the entire front stage of a 3-way system. Buy the stackable 1200x1 amp to go with it and round the whole thing out. Only run a 2-way system? Cool, bridge the last two channels for a 5-channel amp that is 100x2/200x2/600x1 (and is pretty typical for other current market 5-channel amps). "Normal consumers" still have good power for that front/rear/sub upgrade as well.


^^ ABSOLUTELY^^
This was the driving factor behind my purchase of the Zapco Z-150.6 amps. I wanted more channels (with good power) in fewer chassis'. This one is a 150x6 as opposed to the staggered layout you suggest, but that would be an even better bonus as it would eliminate bridging of channels for the extra power. I would totally be on board for a stackable, staggered configuration like you described. 3-way front plus sub(s) covered with plenty of power in a thoughtful design.

Yes please !


----------



## Angrywhopper

Will there be an "entry level" line?


----------



## quality_sound

I hope not. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## rton20s

Angrywhopper said:


> Will there be an "entry level" line?





quality_sound said:


> I hope not.


Define "entry level."


----------



## Angrywhopper

rton20s said:


> Define "entry level."


Oh I was just asking.. I'm not a fan of anything 'entry level' either.

I define it as $99 6.5 coaxial, $199 component set, $199 500w amp etc etc


----------



## therapture

My "ideal" price range for a "upper medium" line of speakers would be like:

~250-350 for a pair of 6.5's...and I could push that to ~400 max....

~250-300 for a single 12" or 15" sub....OK, call it 350 tops for a single 15".



Any rough idea what initial price points AudioFrog will align to? I love the idea of supporting a new enthusiast line of products. I would buy Andy's speakers for the same reasons I went with HAT last year...different than the "brick and mortar" brands, less "common", high quality, etc.


----------



## 14642

There won't be any $99 speakers. There will be a premium line of coaxials and components.


----------



## Kevin K

How close is there to being product released?


----------



## clix`g35

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> There won't be any $99 speakers. There will be a premium line of coaxials and components.


Coaxials you say,  , maybe some 3-4 inch mid/tweet concentric for the a-pillar nuts out here?

Thank you,


----------



## captainobvious

clix`g35 said:


> Coaxials you say,  , maybe some 3-4 inch mid/tweet concentric for the a-pillar nuts out here?
> 
> Thank you,


That would be pretty bitchin. I like where you're going.


----------



## 14642

I'm sure there will be something suitable for A-Pillar nuts, despite my continual suggestion that there are better places for speakers.


----------



## captainobvious

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> I'm sure there will be something suitable for A-Pillar nuts, despite my continual suggestion that there are better places for speakers.


I ended up deciding to move mine from the kicks because of "interference" from the legs.  To much shift because of the change in frequency response.


----------



## MacLeod

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> I'm sure there will be something suitable for A-Pillar nuts, despite my continual suggestion that there are better places for speakers.


Where is your preference? All my favorite systems had speakers in the kicks but everybody keeps telling me A pillars are where its at. I'm usually wrong so I figured this was the case here. :laugh:


----------



## minbari

my personal opinion is that a-pillar installs only work if you have a DSP. PLD is a ***** when one speaker is 12" away and the other is 36" away. without T/A, I cant see it working at all.


----------



## MacLeod

I guess it depends. If you're using small drivers in little pods it'll be trickier but if you're doing what some guys are and basically bolting down bookshelf speakers to their dash, then that could work better. But I prefer to be able to see out of my windshield. I'm crazy like that.


----------



## Coppertone

I tend to agree meaning I'm not an A pillar type of guy. Would it give me better staging, probably. I just do not like it unless it's factory integrated.


----------



## quality_sound

Andy is a fan of door mounting. I don't disagree but getting the sides matched tonally sucks all kinds of ass for me. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Guest

I would love to know Andy's thoughts on door mounted speakers as opposed to said A-pillars mounted or Kick Panel mounts speakers...


----------



## MacLeod

quality_sound said:


> Andy is a fan of door mounting. I don't disagree but getting the sides matched tomalley sucks all kinds of ass for me.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Now that's very interesting. I hate to derail your thread Andy but I would love to hear more about your thoughts on that. 

Sent from my Galaxy Note 2.


----------



## bkjay

MacLeod said:


> Now that's very interesting. I hate to derail your thread Andy but I would love to hear more about your thoughts on that.
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy Note 2.


http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...audio-discussion/136438-axis-vs-off-axis.html 


Have fun, it's a good read.


----------



## quality_sound

SQ_MDX said:


> I would love to know Andy's thoughts on door mounted speakers as opposed to said A-pillars mounted or Kick Panel mounts speakers...


Look in the MS-8 thread. He goes over that repeatedly. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## thehatedguy

Small mids high in the doors are better because- the door is more like a real baffle, nice big, and flat. It is generally further away from highly reflective surfaces. And you can physically mount the speakers further apart (much wider) than in the a pillars. Put a mid in the pillars and you are already a good 3-4" inside the pillars...how you expecting to magically stage a foot outside the pillars when you just went that far on the inside of them?

Sail panels for tweeters for similar reasons.


----------



## mmiller

minbari said:


> my personal opinion is that a-pillar installs only work if you have a DSP. PLD is a ***** when one speaker is 12" away and the other is 36" away. without T/A, I cant see it working at all.


That's why we make seat extension brackets......


----------



## mmiller

thehatedguy said:


> Small mids high in the doors are better because- the door is more like a real baffle, nice big, and flat. It is generally further away from highly reflective surfaces. And you can physically mount the speakers further apart (much wider) than in the a pillars. Put a mid in the pillars and you are already a good 3-4" inside the pillars...how you expecting to magically stage a foot outside the pillars when you just went that far on the inside of them?
> 
> Sail panels for tweeters for similar reasons.


In any of my pillar builds, stage width goes mirror to mirror. That's it. A lot of people don't realize when doing their first pillar build, that that can often be an obstruction while driving. So anyone that's thinking about building them, keep that in mind.

I've had both, I prefer pillars personally. But seat rail extensions are a must, IMO.


----------



## minbari

Then how do you drive? Extent the pedals and steering wheel too?
You cant gain more than 3-4" that way. Not enough to equalize path lengths 

sent from my phone using digital farts


----------



## MacLeod

thehatedguy said:


> Small mids high in the doors are better because- the door is more like a real baffle, nice big, and flat. It is generally further away from highly reflective surfaces. And you can physically mount the speakers further apart (much wider) than in the a pillars. Put a mid in the pillars and you are already a good 3-4" inside the pillars...how you expecting to magically stage a foot outside the pillars when you just went that far on the inside of them?
> 
> Sail panels for tweeters for similar reasons.


Yeah I totally agree with the width thing. I keep wanting to try kick panels in my Accord but my stock locations are already as low and far forward in the doors that the kick would only add 2-3" more forward but it would be about 5 more inches inside (doing something like a Q forms). 

I've got a set of Morel CDM88's and a set of Fountek FR88EX's I've been racking my brain to figure out a way to use them but never once considered the doors. I guess because all my years in the lanes, you never see that. 

Come to think of it, a friend bought a new BMW 5 series a while back and wanted me to "tune" the stereo in it. I whipped out the MECA disc and knew it would sound like ass with the 3" mid high in the door so close to my ears. I was very surprised at how good it sounded! But after reading this, it makes sense because that was exactly how it was set up. Midbass low in the doors, 3" mids high in the doors and tweeters in the dash I think. 

Definitely learned me something new here. Gonna have to head out to the garage and do some measuring. 

**edit**

Nevermind. Just looked and the way the dash wraps around and meets the doors, there is no space I can put a 3" mid. Oh well back to the drawing board.

Sent from my Galaxy Note 2.


----------



## mmiller

Well hopefully we'll be able to listen to each others cars one day... And I can make you a believer.lol

Telescopic steering, and rubber boots.lol


----------



## Grizz Archer

minbari said:


> Then how do you drive? Extent the pedals and steering wheel too?
> You cant gain more than 3-4" that way. Not enough to equalize path lengths
> 
> sent from my phone using digital farts


You do not need to equalize path lengths at higher frequencies. Assuming you have a 3-way setup with midbass in the door, your mid will likely be crossed over in 300-500Hz range, or maybe even higher with smaller midrange. Regardless, the wave lengths at higher frequencies are shorter than the path lengths, so all you need is EQ. Oh ****! I bet that statement will freak some people out and cause some debate. lol Unless I am wrong, the speed of sound is still 1128' per second. So if the midrange is crossed over at 400Hz... 1128/400=2.82'. Unless somebody drives with their chest against the steering wheel, your ears will be more than 2.82' feet from the closest drivers on the driver side. If you have a system where your dash speakers are crossed over down at 200Hz which would be 5.64', first, there is not need for this imo, but EQ and midbass-to-midrange crossover slopes will take care of this.

When I got my first DSP, I was so excited about time aligning for the perfect center. Ever take your balance and bias to the passenger side a click or two until you get a strong center? Ok, that is similar to EQ boost, or slight right channel gain. It was one of those "DUH!!!" moments for me. I was getting a good center in my installs many years before DSP came out, when all I had was EQ or slightly higher passenger side amplifier gain.

It is not as hard as people make it out to be... Fairly simple, really!


----------



## Grizz Archer

james2266 said:


> **This** I agree 100%. This type of amp is kind of lacking currently. I think that more like 1000 watts when bridged would be easily doable and more realistic of a 300x2 section. It would make for a super versatile amplifier especially if you could make it under about 22 inches long or so and 8 inches wide max. Have a nice high damping factor too so it would be clean, controlled and powerful sounding. That one I would call the Audison 5.1k killer. lol


LOL So, you want a 1200 wrms 6-channel surfboard amp just for components?! Are you insane?!?! If you ever find one, let me know, I want two!  I could not agree with you more. But that would be another thing that would not sell fast, especially since the only people that would really want it, just so happen to be the cheapest enthusiasts on Earth. I loved the AFDS PQ8. That was perfect. For an SQ car that did not need a tone of power, you could do your 3-way comps and your rear ambiance speakers, Or bridge channels 4-8 to your midbass.


----------



## Grizz Archer

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Dampomg factor is BS.


Buahaha! Just had to bring that up didn't you? BTW, is "Dampomg" at all related to "Damping"? I know, I know... You hate your Obamaphone! lol


----------



## Grizz Archer

bikinpunk said:


> Furthermore, let's be real...how many people here really know their car well enough to pick a "non flat" speaker with the explicit use of exploiting the non linear aspects of it? Take the easiest example: how many people know what their door does to the speakers small signal parameters? I've seem maaaaaybe 2 threads on this topic my entire time as a member of this site. And all that really takes is a simple impedance sweep. Now tell me how many people here have legitimately measured their car enough to know how it impacts the response at their listening position. I can name two I know of. And neither of them have documented their efforts here.
> 
> This is why I believe response measurements are incredibly beneficial. It keeps me from buying crap. If you start with smooth response you have less to "fix". I know it's going in a car. All the more reason why I don't want to have to wrestle its free-air response to the ground. ESPECIALLY if it has poor behavior above its pistonic range. FR isn't numbers for the same of numbers. It's numbers for the sake of saving numbers (money/time).


Well said! I happen to be one of those guys that thrives on data, IB small signal parameters, on baffle small signal parameters, in door small signal parameters, and especially in door large signal parameters. Your "less to fix" comment is the key. We have to have a starting point. Otherwise why would we buy anything? Because a manufacturer said their stuff the best, smoothest, loudest, etc? NOT!


----------



## Grizz Archer

Hanatsu said:


> Andy, a mix between Beyma's, DLS and Scan-Speak's spec sheets would be a great template. First some text about the intended usage, recomendations etc. Then T/S parameters below, some box simulations (perhaps some average 'in-car response'). FR 0/30/45deg @ 1w would be awesome.
> 
> For amps, perhaps a "power cube" graph could be supplied on how the amp performs into different loads/phase angles.
> 
> For DSP's, the software should have a demo function so people can try out the interface. Take Helix's interface, add auto-tune and L7 processing and 0,5dB increments on the EQ/gain settings and we'll have a perfect unit! Phase increments on the sub channel with 22,5deg steps is a great feature.
> 
> Sent from my Samsung Galaxy 3 via Tapatalk.


If I were to make a suggestion, it would be to have the EQ in .1dB increments. Tuning is more precise, but RTA is way easier than with .5dB. Too much back and forth to smooth out one frequency...


----------



## Darth SQ

Geez you're all up late.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## JoeHemi57

I'd like to see a simple processor for those of us that don't need a thousand different bands of eq. Basically something to hook up to a stock "premium" system like Bose that will flatten the signal and provide a few bands of basic eq and crossover functions for an active 2 way front with an option for center channel or 3 way on the third output(probably put this on the premium version) along with sub output of course. 

If it had some power built in that would be really cool but price would obviously go up, i can't understand why nobody but Audison offers an entry level and premium processor and they have more stuff on the way. 

Speaker wise i like that you will offer passives as an option, curious to see what direction you go with the subs also because i loved my old MS Bass Pro Sq that you developed. That thing was a beast, i would also like to see something similar to the new Focal powered sub with DSP built in and 2 extra amp channels for front components. I like unique stuff and these type items intrigue me the fewer amount of pieces to buy and install the better.


----------



## Grizz Archer

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> Geez you're all up late.
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


I've been up working on pics and descriptions of my old school stuff to sell...


----------



## sqnut

Grizz Archer said:


> You do not need to equalize path lengths at higher frequencies.


If your tweeters are out of phase with each other or with the other drivers, you will hear that in your response and you won't be able to correct that with the eq at least not without affecting something else.


----------



## Grizz Archer

sqnut said:


> If your tweeters are out of phase with each other or with the other drivers, you will hear that in your response and you won't be able to correct that with the eq at least not without affecting something else.


True, but that is not nearly as common as people think it might be. It can happen, but I have never had it happen in any of my builds. And it were truly out of phase, it is not uncommon for people to flip the phase with the wiring and get decent results, which can then be tune properly with EQ and amplitude.


----------



## Grizz Archer

BTW sgnut, I love New Delhi! Had a blast there last year..


----------



## billymonter

I would like to see the equivalent of the simplicity of the MS-8 connecting to the OEM electronics. I would like to see physical adapters for ANDY'S speakers to go in all sorts of OEM locations. As you well know, it would save countless hours of frustration in trying to come up with a three dimensional shape that would perform acoustically better without resorting to foams sealants, neoprene etc. Did someone say 3d printing = no inventory? Yes the shapes would have to be created one by one but did someone say 3d scanning? I would be delighted to pay $$ for adapters that would allow my new speakers to fit within 25 minutes per speaker. Hook them up to a small processor coded for my vehicle and then turn the OEM radio on. I'm dreaming...


----------



## josby

This is great news! I've learned so much in a short time from your many posts on this forum that I'm very excited about your line of products.

Not related to actual sound, but for installation, how about offering to send potential customers a plastic clone of your speakers? Just a hunk of plastic that has the same dimensions and mounting holes as the speaker they're considering buying, so they can make sure it will fit in their car without modifications before they buy it. You could even offer a downloadable version for people who have 3D printers.


----------



## 14642

I'd love to be able to offer downloadable brackets, adapters, etc for people with 3-D printers. 

I'll have to look into the printer thing. The last time I really checked them out, they weren't ready for prime time.


----------



## cajunner

3D printing has come a long way in creating products with structural rigidity and low failure rates but there's just not enough demand for one-off brackets, unless one were to develop a library of scanned and fitted models that could be produced in a local facility, a university or community college would be a good way to spread it around but the costs are what keep coming into the equation.


say someone can make it on their community printer, and you picked out the size/form/finish you want. Then someone has to be paid to run the machine, and another to ship it out and you're paying shipping.

so a nominal 30 bucks per, becomes maybe 50 bucks per and then you're out of the reach of too much of the population who want this. If it takes profitability then it's a non-starter, imho.


could be wrong though, maybe there is a huge market waiting to be tapped but when was the last time you said to yourself "I wish I had a 3D printer so I could make _______"

not too often, I'd guess after little eyeball mounts for your a pillars or brackets that angle the drivers inside of the door panels.


and people get their cars sounding pretty awesome already, I don't believe a huge increase in quality is going to happen except in the most severely handicapped install locations.

I mean, it would be nice to have a dash kit made from the same dye and match the OEM, but to get it to that aesthetic/ergonomic place they pay engineers to accomplish, you're going to have to be pretty crafty.


----------



## josby

cajunner said:


> when was the last time you said to yourself "I wish I had a 3D printer so I could make _______" not too often, I'd guess after little eyeball mounts for your a pillars or brackets that angle the drivers inside of the door panels.


I agree that few would buy a 3D printer just for their car audio, but they're on a clear trajectory of getting both cheaper and better, so they will become more commonly available. And I see some businesses are starting to offer 3D printing services. I'd definitely pay one, or the speaker manufacturer, a little cash for a mock speaker to test fit before buying. It could save me money on return shipping and restocking fees, and save the retailer and manufacturer the expense of an RMA.

Your idea of various angle rings to put under drivers to experiment to find the best sound is something I'd pay to print too.


----------



## billymonter

Do you remember the time where you had to go to a copy center to get a "B/W xerox"? Remember when you had to go to Kinko's to get a color copy or send a fax? Do you remember when you had to go to a copy center to work on a Mac with Illustrator, photoshop etc.? You still have to go to a copy center to get a large print. A 3d printer is coming to your nearest copy center, you'd better believe it. 

So the interaction goes like this. You show up with a usb drive. They price the complexity or volume. You choose the material AND color (There is 3d color printing already) come back later and find out yes they managed to screw it up but they'll redo it. Eventually you walk away with your "3d color prints" and go to town on your car!!!!! It will happen.


----------



## ECLIPSEsqfan

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> I'd love to be able to offer downloadable brackets, adapters, etc for people with 3-D printers.
> 
> I'll have to look into the printer thing. The last time I really checked them out, they weren't ready for prime time.


If you want brackets/baskets/(whatever you want really) files made up, feel free to drop me a PM, I'd be glad to lend a hand and I have the time. 

3D printers honestly ARE fairly ready for "Prime Time". The main issues are usually related to people not having the knowledge necessary in setting them up, calibrating and maintaining them. 
(I figure if the average person wants a 3D printer they either know or have someone who is familiar with the modeling aspect, so I did not mention this)
It is just a tool in the end. One that can make ideas come to fruition in a tangible form for much less than the cost of traditional machining/molding.
For this aspect, I think they are fantastic. 
You can print in PLA/ABS/WOOD/etc. on even very basic home hobbyist level printers.
Then you can also use a different substrate to act as a "support" material that is solution soluble to create highly complex parts as well.
Then you get things like powder printers, printers that use laser sintering for metals... lots of variety out there. Heck, there are even some industrious folks out there that can print with glass directly from sand. (With a large Fresnel Lens of course  )

I guess my point is that if you look at it as a way to aid in prototyping, it is a great resource that will save you time and money.

If you truly just want to have files created and made available for customers (or the public) you can have them made up and kept available on your site.
If for the general public, then you can post them on Thingiverse. Then they will take on a life of their own. 
For example: http://www.thingiverse.com/search?q=speaker+bracket&sa=

Not in any way trying to offend or preach, just trying to help and offer a perspective.

- Mario


----------



## t3sn4f2

Affordable high resolution 3D scanners are right around the corner as well. You can preorder one right now from Fuel3d for $1500 including software.


----------



## schmiddr2

I bet the replication price for even small things will be expensive until it becomes mainstream. But comparing costs of a CNC machine/machining to a 3D printer/printing leads me to believe it could have astonishingly low production costs. When it will happen is still very much a guess I would think.


----------



## ECLIPSEsqfan

schmiddr2 said:


> I bet the replication price for even small things will be expensive until it becomes mainstream. But comparing costs of a CNC machine/machining to a 3D printer/printing leads me to believe it could have astonishingly low production costs. When it will happen is still very much a guess I would think.


I think you would be pleasantly surprised in the aspect of materials cost.
For a deposition printer that utilizes a (typically) plastic filament, you can save a large amount of material by adjusting the amount of infill. Actually, you can adjust that on any of the various types, but that was the example I chose.
(For any that are unsure, infill is the amount of material deposited around the framework of your design that could otherwise simply be a void)
There are various types of infill structures as well that use more or less material but also have differing levels of structural rigidity. Such as diamond or triangular or circular or hex patterns.
The material itself can vary in price but it is sold per kilo and there are discounts based on volume available as well.

As to 3d printers becoming more mainstream, I think they are already very much headed that way. They have broken into the public consciousness and are very quickly becoming more affordable and more robust as well as more precise. It is not something that is any longer the sole province of engineers and tinkerers.
We live in great times. 

ETA, sorry for the derail.


----------



## crazyirish

billymonter said:


> Do you remember the time where you had to go to a copy center to get a "B/W xerox"? Remember when you had to go to Kinko's to get a color copy or send a fax? Do you remember when you had to go to a copy center to work on a Mac with Illustrator, photoshop etc.? You still have to go to a copy center to get a large print. A 3d printer is coming to your nearest copy center, you'd better believe it.
> 
> So the interaction goes like this. You show up with a usb drive. They price the complexity or volume. You choose the material AND color (There is 3d color printing already) come back later and find out yes they managed to screw it up but they'll redo it. Eventually you walk away with your "3d color prints" and go to town on your car!!!!! It will happen.


Been to a Kinko's lately? (Sorry, FedEx Office) They've had significant downgrades in technology and staff. I wouldnt trust most of the people that work there to pack a box.


----------



## 14642

^^ How long does the preposterous "cost cutting our way to a profit" have to continue before managers and shareholders are willing to sacrifice a little short term gain for revenue generation in the longer term that comes from happier customers? 

Big public companies kinda suck, in my opinion. Of course, there are exceptions, but not many, it seems. 

I'm currently meeting with factories to have them build my designs and I've heard every day for the past two weeks, "We can change your design to make it cheaper" to which I keep replying, "Tell me how you can change my design to make it better, then we'll talk about price. Show me something cool. Do your best work! Almost every one of my competitors is doing everything they can to make tweeters smaller, make magnets smaller, make mounting systems crappier, or just sell some low-performance off-the shelf thing. My customers expect better from me."


----------



## Horsemanwill

if there was a like button i'd be clicking it


----------



## rton20s

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> I'm currently meeting with factories to have them build my designs and I've heard every day for the past two weeks, "We can change your design to make it cheaper" to which I keep replying, "Tell me how you can change my design to make it better, then we'll talk about price. Show me something cool. Do your best work! Almost every one of my competitors is doing everything they can to make tweeters smaller, make magnets smaller, make mounting systems crappier, or just sell some low-performance off-the shelf thing. My customers expect better from me."


Thank you, Thank You, THANK YOU! 

This is the kind of thing that has Audiofrog on my radar in a very big way.


----------



## james2266

Mine too actually. If all heads of speaker companies had the same inspiration as Andy maybe I could finally land on a set of speakers and not feel the need to swap out to something else.


----------



## JoeHemi57

Very nice Andy, i'm sure it will be out of my budget but it's nice to stick to your goals of making the best product instead of worrying about the bottom line.


----------



## Kevin K

Stick with quality. Build it and they will come.


----------



## MUGWUMP

Totally off topic post.

I'm absolutely fascinated with the jump in technology in the past 15 years.

I said it before and I'll say it again. I believe the world only recently left the dark ages.

It's shocking to believe we could possibly have technology like this in the next 50 years.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ef-We-GiRvc


----------



## Mrimstad

Its getting there. Amazing if you ask me.
But something I am looking out for as a diabetic myself, maybe someday il get rid of it!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RMx31GnNXY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80DhBLEhdzk

Sry to derail Andy, but this is something that realy catches my interest.
Along with your product lineup ofcourse. 
When will we se a website?


----------



## james2266

Mrimstad said:


> Its getting there. Amazing if you ask me.
> But something I am looking out for as a diabetic myself, maybe someday il get rid of it!
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RMx31GnNXY
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80DhBLEhdzk
> 
> Sry to derail Andy, but this is something that realy catches my interest.
> Along with your product lineup ofcourse.
> When will we se a website?


Some very cool videos and thanks for posting the links. As someone that works in the medical field, I am excited to see where his tech goes in the future as well.

Of course, I am very excited to see top notch apillar designs made by a similar process even sooner hopefully. It would be cool if it could be done in an hour or so perfectly where as my last set took me weeks with working on them off and on. They are still far from perfect as well.


----------



## Angrywhopper

Anything news considering it's CES week?


----------



## rton20s

From the CES 2014 Rumors thread...



Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Guys, I don't have product samples yet. I'll be at the show, but I won't have a booth this year. Products are in development now, but samples are a few months out. All of this stuff is designed from scratch, so the process is:
> 
> Determine target performance specs, develop industrial design, develop mechanical design, develop acoustic samples to test performance, begin tooling of parts, build first sample using tooled parts, test samples, refine the parts, build second sample, test the second sample, refine if necessary, start production. Depending on the product and the performance targets, this can take between 6 months and who knows?
> 
> The other way is to buy a plane ticket and go choose a bunch of existing stuff and stick a label on it. That takes about two months plus shipping. I'm not doing that, so this is a longer process.


----------



## Darth SQ

rton20s said:


> From the CES 2014 Rumors thread...


Andy you're my hero. :thumbsup:


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## quietfly

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> ^^ How long does the preposterous "cost cutting our way to a profit" have to continue before managers and shareholders are willing to sacrifice a little short term gain for revenue generation in the longer term that comes from happier customers?
> 
> Big public companies kinda suck, in my opinion. Of course, there are exceptions, but not many, it seems.
> 
> I'm currently meeting with factories to have them build my designs and I've heard every day for the past two weeks, "We can change your design to make it cheaper" to which I keep replying, "Tell me how you can change my design to make it better, then we'll talk about price. Show me something cool. Do your best work! Almost every one of my competitors is doing everything they can to make tweeters smaller, make magnets smaller, make mounting systems crappier, or just sell some low-performance off-the shelf thing. My customers expect better from me."


this is what makes Andy ( and audiofrog by extension) a rare breed in this day and age.....


----------



## rton20s

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> Andy you're my hero. :thumbsup


Some of us might spend a little too much time on here.


----------



## ECLIPSEsqfan

I think it's great that Quietfly posted that quote from Andy.
Many times people don't realize just what it takes to bring a product from concept to reality, and it is not a simple process. 

Any way,
Thanks.


----------



## Grizz Archer

ECLIPSEsqfan said:


> I think it's great that Quietfly posted that quote from Andy.
> Many times people don't realize just what it takes to bring a product from concept to reality, and it is not a simple process.
> 
> Any way,
> Thanks.


You got that right. There are so many factors to take into account. Even if you were going to make a new product based off of a preexisting platform, it will take about a year. Concept take a long time, from there you can count on 45-60 days for tooling IF there are not problems encountered. Prototypes rarely sound perfect on the first Alpha round. Changes get made and you move on to Betas. One they are right, which in many cases can be done with off the shelf hard parts and the final soft parts, then you move to the next step. Custom products that are truly unique and require alot of tooling take a long time. By the time the hit the market, the parts have been in-the-works for over a year and in many cases, well over a year and even multiple years. The last thing Andy is going to do is rush. It is one of those things - it'll be done when it is right, and not a moment sooner. I trust 100% that Andy's new goodies will be well worth the wait!


----------



## spl152db

billymonter said:


> Do you remember the time where you had to go to a copy center to get a "B/W xerox"? Remember when you had to go to Kinko's to get a color copy or send a fax? Do you remember when you had to go to a copy center to work on a Mac with Illustrator, photoshop etc.? You still have to go to a copy center to get a large print. A 3d printer is coming to your nearest copy center, you'd better believe it.
> 
> So the interaction goes like this. You show up with a usb drive. They price the complexity or volume. You choose the material AND color (There is 3d color printing already) come back later and find out yes they managed to screw it up but they'll redo it. Eventually you walk away with your "3d color prints" and go to town on your car!!!!! It will happen.


public libraries have them already in johnson county kansas.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

billymonter said:


> Do you remember the time where you had to go to a copy center to get a "B/W xerox"? Remember when you had to go to Kinko's to get a color copy or send a fax? Do you remember when you had to go to a copy center to work on a Mac with Illustrator, photoshop etc.? You still have to go to a copy center to get a large print. A 3d printer is coming to your nearest copy center, you'd better believe it.
> 
> So the interaction goes like this. You show up with a usb drive. They price the complexity or volume. You choose the material AND color (There is 3d color printing already) come back later and find out yes they managed to screw it up but they'll redo it. Eventually you walk away with your "3d color prints" and go to town on your car!!!!! It will happen.


I really can't picture this happening. Almost every single person in the United States has needed a photocopy at one time or another. But how many people need to 3D print a widget?

I have a house near Portland, where the unoffical motto of the city is "Portland: where young people go to retire."
Portland is a city that's just full of young creative unemployed people. It's one of the most artistic cities I've ever been to. Yet even Portland couldn't sustain enough interest in 3D printing to make it viable, despite glowing articles in Wired magazine:

Techshop Portland Going Under

IMHO 3D printing will be a niche item, like print shops that have giant plotters. Something that a handful of people need occasionally, but hardly something that's needed by the majority of the population.

Then again, I have a ****ty track record on making predictions. I was personally involved in the development of the first camera phones at T-Mobile USA, and I thought it was a complete gimmick. I couldn't figure out why you would want to take a ****ty picture with your phone when a 'real' camera did the job so much better. I thought camera phones would fizzle out.

I also thought the internet would fizzle out too. (No, seriously.) I owned a software company in the mid 90s, and I saw a lot of my competitors were getting into selling on the internet, and I just didn't get it. As I saw it, there was no difference between the internet and the online bulletin boards that I'd been using since the 80s. I figured the Internet would be a flash in the pan and that the BBSs would stick around.

No, I am not joking one bit, I seriously thought that.


----------



## spl152db

Patrick Bateman said:


> I really can't picture this happening. Almost every single person in the United States has needed a photocopy at one time or another. But how many people need to 3D print a widget?
> 
> I have a house near Portland, where the unoffical motto of the city is "Portland: where young people go to retire."
> Portland is a city that's just full of young creative unemployed people. It's one of the most artistic cities I've ever been to. Yet even Portland couldn't sustain enough interest in 3D printing to make it viable, despite glowing articles in Wired magazine:
> 
> Techshop Portland Going Under
> 
> IMHO 3D printing will be a niche item, like print shops that have giant plotters. Something that a handful of people need occasionally, but hardly something that's needed by the majority of the population.
> 
> Then again, I have a ****ty track record on making predictions. I was personally involved in the development of the first camera phones at T-Mobile USA, and I thought it was a complete gimmick. I couldn't figure out why you would want to take a ****ty picture with your phone when a 'real' camera did the job so much better. I thought camera phones would fizzle out.
> 
> I also thought the internet would fizzle out too. (No, seriously.) I owned a software company in the mid 90s, and I saw a lot of my competitors were getting into selling on the internet, and I just didn't get it. As I saw it, there was no difference between the internet and the online bulletin boards that I'd been using since the 80s. I figured the Internet would be a flash in the pan and that the BBSs would stick around.
> 
> No, I am not joking one bit, I seriously thought that.


Kansas teen uses 3-D printer to make hand for boy - KansasCity.com


----------



## seafish

Patrick Bateman said:


> I really can't picture this happening. Almost every single person in the United States has needed a photocopy at one time or another. But how many people need to 3D print a widget?
> 
> I have a house near Portland, where the unoffical motto of the city is "Portland: where young people go to retire."
> Portland is a city that's just full of young creative unemployed people. It's one of the most artistic cities I've ever been to. Yet even Portland couldn't sustain enough interest in 3D printing to make it viable, despite glowing articles in Wired magazine:
> 
> Techshop Portland Going Under
> 
> IMHO 3D printing will be a niche item, like print shops that have giant plotters. Something that a handful of people need occasionally, but hardly something that's needed by the majority of the population.
> 
> Then again, I have a ****ty track record on making predictions. I was personally involved in the development of the first camera phones at T-Mobile USA, and I thought it was a complete gimmick. I couldn't figure out why you would want to take a ****ty picture with your phone when a 'real' camera did the job so much better. I thought camera phones would fizzle out.
> 
> I also thought the internet would fizzle out too. (No, seriously.) I owned a software company in the mid 90s, and I saw a lot of my competitors were getting into selling on the internet, and I just didn't get it. As I saw it, there was no difference between the internet and the online bulletin boards that I'd been using since the 80s. I figured the Internet would be a flash in the pan and that the BBSs would stick around.
> 
> No, I am not joking one bit, I seriously thought that.



LOL...based on your track record, then 3d printing is here to stay. But think of what it could for making the horns you like to build!!!


----------



## seafish

spl152db said:


> Kansas teen uses 3-D printer to make hand for boy - KansasCity.com


Thanks for the link...that's the coolest story I have read in awhile...think I'm gonna move to Johnson County, Kansas and get me a library card!!


----------



## rton20s

Working at architectural firms specializing in school architecture since the mid-90s with most of my time spent heavily in various design software I have always had a level of awareness for what is happening in this portion of the tech arena that the average consumer does not. We would be getting information about what was happening both on the design side and on the education side. This ranges from the typical large format plotters and printers, to very large multi-touch screens, to 3d input devices, to the 3D printers being discussed here. 

In my current firm, there has been discussions on several occasions about the option of a 3D printer for the office. We often use 2D presentations of 3D models for our clients, but rarely hand build 3d models like architects and dedicated model builders used to do "in the good old days." With companies like Makerbot and many DIY options out there today, the pricing has gotten to the point that anyone who really wants, and has a use for 3D printing technology can get one. 

I will agree with Patrick though. Building a business, or even a large portion of a business around 3D printing just isn't viable right now. Having 3D printing as an ancillary or secondary offering of a company, like a large format print shop could work. I just don't see 3D printing as a service as a sustainable business model in any way. Yet. 

All that being said, one of the 3D printers I am most excited about (and I haven't done much research in a while) is the Form 1 from Form labs. This reasonably priced, high resolution option would be great for the type of work that we do. Of course, with the size of the build volume, you would likely have to build several 3D models and piece them together. The same would hold true for things like speaker baffles, etc that the car audio community could get excited about. Of course, for car audio, the resolution of the Makerbot Replicator 2 is probably plenty. And, it is cheaper. 

Formlabs - High Resolution Desktop 3D Printer


----------



## 82cj8

This is very cool technology.A place I installed a roll mill at was doing 3D printing with powder titanium.


----------



## Schramm

The real niche advantage and opportunity I see for Audio Frog is not just building quality stand alone products such as transducers, amplifiers, DSP, etc. Certainly such quality is lacking in the market, and such products will be well received. However, even if quality products are introduced, it is still a matter of the consumer integrating the components well in order to achieve a great sounding system. It is much easier to start from the ground up in the OEM market with very specialized measurement equipment and acoustics expertise not available to the average consumer; to engineer a complete system that sounds great.

Of course it can be done in the aftermarket with high quality modular products, but a lot of knowledge is needed for the consumer to implement correctly. Trial and error DIY approaches are often very costly. If Audio Frog can provide high quality modular products specifically designed to work together as a system, and integrate with factory audio system source units, it will go a long way to level the playing field; reducing the knowledge, time, and expense in putting together a great sounding system. A high level of product support, informative spec sheets, and information on how to interpret specs and use the products as a system will really help make the company successful. I value that and will pay extra for it.

I am looking forward to seeing the new product developments from Audio Frog. Given the high number of variables involved, I would love to see a 7.1 surround based DSP + multi-channel IC based AMP that can actively drive all transducers (except sub) without additional passive crossovers, i.e. 3 way on front doors, 3 way rear doors, 2 way rear speakers, 2 way center speaker, and subwoofer. A more sophisticated and controlled tuning process would be advantageous.

Keep up the good work!


----------



## rton20s

The things you describe sound a lot like what OEM Audio Plus is doing with Scion and Subaru (just linked to them yesterday in one of SIS's threads) as well as Audison's new Prima line. Though, I'm not sure how well executed either of those products are. I only know what it is that they are attempting to achieve. 

Regardless of what those other companies are doing, I am probably more excited to see what Andy and his team have up their sleeve than anything else in the industry.


----------



## Schramm

rton20s said:


> Regardless of what those other companies are doing, I am probably more excited to see what Andy and his team have up their sleeve than anything else in the industry.


Some of the latest OEM integration stuff springing up is a step in the right direction for those desiring to upgrade the system a level or two with minimal effort. If you do not have a lot of specialty tools, fabrication equipment, or ability to tune, then things like custom wiring harnesses, custom sub enclosures, DSP black boxes, etc. can be helpful. However, I have found very few products that really excite me or offer true high fidelity. I really enjoy the DIY fabrication and installation process and have many tools and equipment. As such, I am more interested raw drivers, highly custom electronics, etc. *Audio Frog is well poised to leap  ahead and innovate in a niche high fidelity market given its founders' experience and goals. *Andy's posts are well worth the read and highly informative; so naturally I am excited by the start-up company's efforts.


----------



## instalher

so Andy, after reading all your post on here and facebook, I have a couple of questions about your new line of drivers.. Since you have seen all the factories in China, and know what almost everyone out there is doing, I would say you have a leg up on technology as to the how and why speakers are being produced, To that extent, are these drivers 100% new from the ground up or have you taken an already good design and tweeked it to your specs and are selling that as Audiofrog? This is in no way a bash on you, As you know, another company has been doing this for the past 8 yrs and offering the best tech support in the industry to its competitors and he is doing quite well for himself, But his product is good not great and overpriced for what kind of performance you get.. I have been doing this now for 22 yrs so I have heard all the hype seen all the smoke and mirrors, but nothing can speak for real world results and support of a product.. I write this because I haven't read anything yet as to the build, design and enginnering that has gone into these drivers, just that you will offer great support, your resume is outstanding, and they will be a great dollar to value speaker..


----------



## cajunner

can the Chinese offer build spec, on par with what ScanSpeak does in-house, up in Denmark, or wherever they get those beautiful Revelators and Illuminators built?

if the JBL GTi series performs on par with other, European manufactured product, I don't see why it's so important to differentiate between Chinese product and Quality Control, versus the rest of the world.


I believe the GTi series, most notably the 560/660GTi series, do perform at the top tier levels in comparison with other products and have a consistency driver to driver, that compares favorably to when they were produced stateside.

If this is incorrect, please advise...


----------



## 14642

Instalher,
They're all designed from the ground up. Here's some data on the 6" midbass/midrange. I think you'll find this to be quite a bit better than most car audio drivers and on par with the best drivers from many of the European manufacturers.


----------



## rton20s

I'm probably the last guy that should be commenting on the graphs, but as a laymen, they do look pretty nice. 

Any chance you could post a sneak peak of what any of the drivers might look like? Even if it is just renderings? 

Any closer to defined timeline for official product announcement and availability?


----------



## 14642

Sure. Here's a rendering of the 6". This stuff will probably be available late in the summer. We're about to open tooling for all the parts. Most of the acoustic samples have been built and we're finalizing some design and performance details now.


----------



## instalher

can we change out any parts on the fly?


----------



## Kevin K

nice looking


----------



## rton20s

Oooh... shiny! 

Very cool looking. Thanks for the update! 



Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Sure. Here's a rendering of the 6". This stuff will probably be available late in the summer. We're about to open tooling for all the parts. Most of the acoustic samples have been built and we're finalizing some design and performance details now.


----------



## 14642

instalher said:


> can we change out any parts on the fly?


What does that mean?


----------



## 14642

rton20s said:


> Oooh... shiny!
> 
> Very cool looking. Thanks for the update!


Thanks. It sounds good too.


----------



## AAAAAAA

What would be the price range?


----------



## rton20s

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Thanks. It sounds good too.


Wait... what?!


----------



## ErinH

That data is really, really superb.


----------



## 14642

Haven't announced prices yet. This is an expensive driver, though. Sold in pairs with a really cool grille/custom installation kit.


----------



## 14642

This is not like buying some rebadged high end speaker from SB Acoustics (although they are a really good factory with really good engineers) or Vifa for three times the money you can get it for on parts express or madisound. 

These are not rebadged home audio drivers. They are designed for cars, tested for longevity in cars, and built with materials that are designed for or treated for use in cars. They're also designed with attention paid to mounting them in cars and fitting them in popular places, including OE locations.


----------



## 14642

bikinpunk said:


> That data is really, really superb.



Thanks!


----------



## rton20s

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> This is not like buying some rebadged high end speaker from SB Acoustics (although they are a really good factory with really good engineers) or Vifa for three times the money you can get it for on parts express or madisound.


Ouch, that one might hit too close to home for some manufacturers.  I could see this ending up as someone's sig quote.


----------



## knever3

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Sure. Here's a rendering of the 6". This stuff will probably be available late in the summer. We're about to open tooling for all the parts. Most of the acoustic samples have been built and we're finalizing some design and performance details now.


That is beautiful!!!!


----------



## 14642

No, they're great. I met with them. The engineers are fantastic and their drivers are really good. When I showed them our designs and explained why we wanted what we wanted, they got it immediately. 

I didn't choose them because I have a 20-year relationship with the people I did choose and they are faster and they know what I want. They are also really good, as you can see here. The difference between developing a line of speakers from scratch and tweaking some existing drivers can be as much as $300k in design, tooling, and engineering consulting, depending on what's required. It's not easy to engineer something on par with SB, ScanSpeak, Vifa, Dynaudio, or Seas. That's why people buy drivers from those companies. 

There are a thousand other factories that can't build drivers like these because their engineers don't understand the design and can't adapt the design for manufacture and keep the performance that's intended. 

We're not buying drivers. We're designing them and building them at a great factory. It's really expensive, but when you see the rest of the features and the fact they they fit cars easily, you'll understand why. What we want to sell isn't available from anyone else.


----------



## Angrywhopper

AAAAAAA said:


> What would be the price range?


Hopefully not more than $159.99 MSRP.


----------



## rton20s




----------



## 14642

Angrywhopper said:


> Hopefully not more than $159.99 MSRP.


Much more.


----------



## rton20s

Angrywhopper said:


> Hopefully not more than $159.99 MSRP.


Now *THAT* is funny.


----------



## Angrywhopper

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Much more.


I meant Each*.



rton20s said:


> Now *THAT* is funny.


----------



## james2266

Angrywhopper said:


> Hopefully not more than $159.99 MSRP.


I would say move that decimal to the right one spot. 

On another note, as mentioned, one fine looking driver both aesthetically and via measurements.


----------



## REGULARCAB

Yup thats pretty sexy. I also love the fact the speaker wires will point out the back and not the fricken side like so many do.


----------



## james2266

REGULARCAB said:


> Yup thats pretty sexy. I also love the fast the speaker wires will point out the back and not the fricken side like so many do.


Yes, one of the first things I took note of. Very nice touch. Not to jump the gun but any indication of other sizes being produced? I, personally, would love to see what an 8 inch version looks like and what the hell a 3 in her would really get me salivating.:laugh:


----------



## captainobvious

Wow, very symmetrical BL and suspension stiffness, low inductance, 10mm xmax and very low distortion. Looks great from 80hz-3K, all in a 6" driver no less. Not that it matters, but it also looks nice in the rendering. 

If the production models perform as well as the model specs, you'll have a very nice driver on your hands there Andy. Way to go !


-Steve


----------



## 14642

james2266 said:


> Yes, one of the first things I took note of. Very nice touch. Not to jump the gun but any indication of other sizes being produced? I, personally, would love to see what an 8 inch version looks like and what the hell a 3 in her would really get me salivating.:laugh:


There's no 8" in this line, but there's a shallow 8" in another line.

This line will be:
1" Soft Dome Tweeter
1.5" Soft Dome Tweeter
2.5" Midrange (neo motor with low inductance copper cap)
4" Midrange (also neo motor with copper cap)
6" (the one here)
10" dual 4 ohm and dual 2 ohm
12" dual 4 ohm and dual 2 ohm
A bunch of passive crossover models sold separately to make any 2 or 3-way system except for 6", 2.5" and 1.5". That system doesn't really make a lot of sense, so we aren't supporting it with passives. 

Passive crossovers are all aluminum housings with a window on the bottom, air core coils and poly caps and a real L-Pad for a tweeter attenuator. 

All parts are sold separately and in pairs so there's no need to throw away passive crossovers when you do an active system.


----------



## thehatedguy

Looks nice. I like the speaker terminals. Spades are the old school.

Any preliminary T/S on the 6?


----------



## bassfromspace

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> There's no 8" in this line, but there's a shallow 8" in another line.
> 
> This line will be:
> 1" Soft Dome Tweeter
> 1.5" Soft Dome Tweeter
> 2.5" Midrange (neo motor with low inductance copper cap)
> 4" Midrange (also neo motor with copper cap)
> 6" (the one here)
> 10" dual 4 ohm and dual 2 ohm
> 12" dual 4 ohm and dual 2 ohm
> A bunch of passive crossover models sold separately to make any 2 or 3-way system except for 6", 2.5" and 1.5". That system doesn't really make a lot of sense, so we aren't supporting it with passives.
> 
> Passive crossovers are all aluminum housings with a window on the bottom, air core coils and poly caps and a real L-Pad for a tweeter attenuator.
> 
> All parts are sold separately and in pairs so there's no need to throw away passive crossovers when you do an active system.


Will your competition team be called the Tadpoles?


----------



## Grizz Archer

cajunner said:


> can the Chinese offer build spec, on par with what ScanSpeak does in-house, up in Denmark, or wherever they get those beautiful Revelators and Illuminators built?
> 
> if the JBL GTi series performs on par with other, European manufactured product, I don't see why it's so important to differentiate between Chinese product and Quality Control, versus the rest of the world.
> 
> 
> I believe the GTi series, most notably the 560/660GTi series, do perform at the top tier levels in comparison with other products and have a consistency driver to driver, that compares favorably to when they were produced stateside.
> 
> If this is incorrect, please advise...


Good question. I have worked with alot of Chinese factories. The fact is that they can build product just as good as Europe. They can build to spec. But it will cost you, just like it would if you wanted a Euro factory to build the products. There different levels of products. There are tons of them, but for coaxials, most companies use 1 of 3 factories that specialize in these type of drivers. It should come as no surprise that most of the American coaxials are very similar, but all wearing different pretty dresses that suit their style. You may or may not be surprised that some of the factories that make alot of the products for American brands also make them for Euro brands. 

Withe the race to provide a cheap product for mass sales, companies will often choose a lower grade factory that can meet the pricing requirements. There are some outstanding factories in China that make very high end parts, some for high end Euro brands that would shock you. But they will cost more, obviously, and with the typical American consumer wanting the best for nothing, they can be talked into what they think quality should be, but they are actually still price driven.


----------



## thehatedguy

No 8s and 15s? Tisk tisk.


----------



## Grizz Archer

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Instalher,
> They're all designed from the ground up. Here's some data on the 6" midbass/midrange. I think you'll find this to be quite a bit better than most car audio drivers and on par with the best drivers from many of the European manufacturers.


Hi Andy. Not to doubt you in any way, but I just have to comment on this. I spent a couple days at Wonfgang Klippels seminar in Dresden, Germany when I was living there last year. I have ran some very expensive drivers through a Klippel system, and I have seen graphs from very respected brands. These graphs are truly amazing! I mean, REALLY amazing. When can we expect to see more graphs on some of the other component drivers and subs?


----------



## thehatedguy

You mean stuff like "You want your magnets round? Or do you want them exactly round? Exactly round will cost you more."





Grizz Archer said:


> Good question. I have worked with alot of Chinese factories. The fact is that they can build product just as good as Europe. They can build to spec. But it will cost you, just like it would if you wanted a Euro factory to build the products. There different levels of products. There are tons of them, but for coaxials, most companies use 1 of 3 factories that specialize in these type of drivers. It should come as no surprise that most of the American coaxials are very similar, but all wearing different pretty dresses that suit their style. You may or may not be surprised that some of the factories that make alot of the products for American brands also make them for Euro brands.
> 
> Withe the race to provide a cheap product for mass sales, companies will often choose a lower grade factory that can meet the pricing requirements. There are some outstanding factories in China that make very high end parts, some for high end Euro brands that would shock you. But they will cost more, obviously, and with the typical American consumer wanting the best for nothing, they can be talked into what they think quality should be, but they are actually still price driven.


----------



## Grizz Archer

bassfromspace said:


> Will your competition team be called the Tadpoles?


LOL! Or Team Ribbit, The Croakers, Da Kermits...


----------



## vulgamore89

I can dig "Da Kermits" haha


----------



## cajunner

I don't know if it's just me, or if those screws holding the magnetic assembly offer up and down, and side-to-side adjustment of the coil in it's gap.

this would facilitate a near perfect Klippel performance, once all parameters have been suitably corrected by re-positioning of the motor to it's optimum locale.

something I always wanted to do/see, was a speaker with the ability to tweak for lowest distortion, every time.

if those lugs are just cosmetic, disregard above, lol..


----------



## BEAVER

Definitely interested. Keeping an eye in this one. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## rton20s

The more I hear from Andy/Audiofrog, the more I am intrigued. I really appreciate the approach your are taking with the brand Andy. Even if it means I can't afford the best of your drivers. It is good to have something to strive for.


----------



## 14642

cajunner said:


> I don't know if it's just me, or if those screws holding the magnetic assembly offer up and down, and side-to-side adjustment of the coil in it's gap.
> 
> this would facilitate a near perfect Klippel performance, once all parameters have been suitably corrected by re-positioning of the motor to it's optimum locale.
> 
> something I always wanted to do/see, was a speaker with the ability to tweak for lowest distortion, every time.
> 
> if those lugs are just cosmetic, disregard above, lol..


No Cajunner,
The screws hold the cap on. The motor is fixed, but the coil placement has already been adjusted in the design.


----------



## Hanatsu

Nice driver, Andy 

I would be very interested in the 2,5" / 4" drivers. Can we consider them as widebanders or pure midranges?


----------



## Guest

Wonderful looking driver !!

I'm very excited to see more of your plans...


----------



## Golden Ear

Any idea when the products will be available? What sort of distribution model will you be using? Ie. can we buy direct or will it be thru dealers only?


----------



## Guest

I would love to know this as well...


----------



## cajunner

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> No Cajunner,
> The screws hold the cap on. The motor is fixed, but the coil placement has already been adjusted in the design.


thanks!


however it is that you've got such symmetry in your samples, it appears to be better than 98% of the market and that's a lot of drivers, from a lot of venerable institutions of speaker making outfits...

so whatever you're feeding your engineers, don't switch the formula.


----------



## 14642

We'll sell through qualified dealers.

I'd call these midranges. In any speaker design, there's a compromise to be made between power handling (which requires a beefier voice coil), extended low frequency response, flat response in the passband and high frequency response past the frequency where dispersion narrows. We've focused on low frequency extension, power handling and flat response in the passband.

Anyone who's read any of my posts knows that I STRONGLY favor the use of tweeters, so we're making some great tweeters with a cool kit that facilitates custom installation. No one else has anything like it. 

The idea behind all of the systems we'll support with drivers and passive crossovers is that speakers should be easy to place in the right spots and beautiful once they are installed, they should be used in a range where dispersion is wide to eliminate the need for a bunch of ridiculous aiming, and that the directivity index of the systems should be smooth and gradually rising. 

In order to meet those objectives, which are proven to provide the best performance, a 6" 2-way system either has to have some kind of directivity control for the tweeter to narrow the dispersion of the tweeter at the crossover to match the narrowing dispersion of the midrange, or the tweeter has to be big enough and beefy enough to support a low crossover point. We've opted for the big tweeter because the waveguide required to match the directivity is big and difficult to mount. (I've tried that already).

So, the 1.5" tweeter is the optimum tweeter to use with the 6" in a 2-way. You can use the 1" with the 6" too and it will perform better than many other systems that include the same configuration. 

The killer apps will be 6" and 1.5" for a 2-way. 6", 2.5" and 1" for a 3-way with mids and tweeters in the pillars. And 6", 4" and 1" tweeter for speakers in the doors, but if the 2.5" can be put in just the right spot (high in the door), then that might outperform the 4" in the wrong spot. The key is in getting a small midrange high in the door. Once there's a small mid, then aiming of midbass and midrange isn't necessary which makes nicely integrated installations easier.


----------



## 14642

Here are preliminary parameters for the 6"

Fs: 67Hz
Revc: 3.33 ohms
Qms: .62
Qes .55
Qts:: .52
Levc @ 1k: .13mH
Vas: 6.03 liters
Mms: 19.73 grams
BL: 7 Tesla*M


----------



## Guest

Andy,

With each post I get more and more excited about your upcoming products...!!!


----------



## 14642

cajunner said:


> thanks!
> 
> 
> however it is that you've got such symmetry in your samples, it appears to be better than 98% of the market and that's a lot of drivers, from a lot of venerable institutions of speaker making outfits...
> 
> so whatever you're feeding your engineers, don't switch the formula.


I'm feeding them kindness, encouragement and respect. I find that works pretty well.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ

If these speakers are as good as you're making them out to be SERIOUS customers should have no problem paying for quality even if it means saving their pennies for a while to make it happen.


----------



## ErinH

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Instalher,
> 
> They're all designed from the ground up. Here's some data on the 6" midbass/midrange. I think you'll find this to be quite a bit better than most car audio drivers and on par with the best drivers from many of the European manufacturers.




Looking at the data you've provided, what I'm seeing and also assuming on some points is...



Klippel results indicate excellent motor and suspension symmetry which should translate well to very low HD and IMD. Based on my rough math, looking at the plots from my phone, I'm calculating Bl limit of 82% at 7mm and suspension limit of 75% at 7.5mm. Both one-way, for clarification. The 82% and 75% are the standard 10% THD limit values for Klippel. The Le(x) would probably not resolve and indicates it's linear xmax component to be outside of xProt (10mm).



The suspension data shows a good balance of broad/narrow suspension curve which indicates these will not just hit a stop gap in regards to mechanical limits. It looks like you'd get some lee-way before you hit that 'flop' sound if you were to get really silly with them. Having used drivers that had the 'flop', I'd say that's a good thing. 





The inductance over current looks a bit odd.. the inductance being super low in the gap but higher out of the gap? Was this by chance hooked up in reverse? If so, that's fine... doesn't alter the data; just flip the curves around. I should know... I've done this a few times myself. It's so common, in fact, that Klippel removed the "coil in" and "coil out" lables on the X-axis in their newer versions of software. As a beta tester for them, I remember e-mailing them about this and they said as much. 



Either way, it doesn't matter. That overall Le(x) curve looks really good with less than 0.05mH **** over the swing of 7mm linear throw and 0.20mH at rest. That's quite good. Compare to the Scan 18wu with 9.1mm linear throw and about 0.04mH range (0.20mH at rest), or the JBL 660GTi with about 0.02mH range in it’s 7.4mm throw (0.28mH at rest). This means that this particular driver will get down with good linear throw and low intermodulated distortion in the upper frequencies. IOW, a perfect driver for a 2-way system with output. And in this case, the coil out (or, in) on your driver shows a very low distortion profile. 







The HD data looks quite good as well. The fundamental is at about 99dB @ 1khz. I will assume this is done at 1m. In this case, that makes the results even better. I perform my testing in the nearfield (because some of us aren’t lucky enough to have access to an anechoic chamber, lol) but an equivalent volume of 96dB @ 1m. So, your testing would essentially double the power compared to what I do. The THD is down by about 50dB from about 200 – 3.2khz. That’s about 0.30% THD in this range. Excellent. The 3% THD mark doesn’t hit until about 80hz (accounting for the fundamental trailing off and the rising HD creating a gap about 30dB wide). Again, that’s really good for a 6.5” driver. Even more so when you realize these suckers are playing at near 100dB/1m. Incredibly impressive. 


This driver doesn’t exhibit the typical cone edge resonance most drivers have which often result in a dip in FR and a peak in HD in the 1.2khz ballpark (ie; Audio Technology, Scan Speak 18wu, SB Satori, and the JBL 660GTi). Each of these drivers mentioned have about a 2-3% THD narrow Q peak at this range. Some don’t seem to care. But, others do. I thought it was worth noting that Andy’s driver doesn’t exhibit this characteristic. 

There does seem to be a broad Q breakup above 4khz. The thing is, though, it’s really well tamed it seems. Rather than having numerous peaks/bumps after beaming, this particular drivers seems to just have a wide breakup profile and is already outside the band of where I’m sure Andy would suggest crossing (keeping in line with polar response patterns). 





*Overall, this data looks really good. Based on what Andy has shown us, I’d rank it objectively with the Scan 18wu and JBL 660GTi.* Depending on application (ie; do you need more a woofer or a midwoofer) it may trump the other two. And to be in that kind of company is quite excellent. At this point, those are the two best midwoofers I've tested overall. The 18wu retails for over $300/each and the GTI was part of a $1500+ component set. I’m still looking forward to seeing some more data. Particularly on/off axis data.



Kudos to you Andy. Really, man. This stuff looks incredibly promising.


----------



## 14642

Here's a plot of the 6" at 0 degrees, 30 degrees and 60 degrees off axis. The bump at 6k is a common first order bending mode where the center of the cone moves differently than the rest of the cone. For a 6" driver, we've pushed this further out than many others. The reason it's more prominent in the 60 degree measurement is because that sound emanates from the center of the cone, which has a smaller circumference than the whole cone, thus, wider dispersion.


----------



## 14642

Here's a picture of the 6" with the 1" tweeter graph superimposed. You'll see that with a steep crossover at about 2.5k, this will provide a good transition from mid to tweeter pretty far off axis.


----------



## 14642

Finally, here's one with the 1.5" tweeter. With a crossover of 1.5k, this is the killer app in a 2-way system.


----------



## ErinH

Dang. 

I can't say enough about how appreciated it is you are providing this data. Occasionally Manville (JL Audio) or Jacob (Sundown) or Nick (SI) will provide klippel data but outside of that, I can't think of another manufacturer that is willing to do so. And not at the level you have with the HD and FR sweeps.


----------



## 14642

Oh, these measurements are WITH THE GRILLES. They are designed to be used WITH THE TWEETER GRILLES. The midrange is the same with and without.


----------



## rton20s

I agree with Erin. What you are doing is really awesome. 

How many other car audio forums out there would get as excited as we are to look at FR graph p0rn?


----------



## AAAAAAA

Very exiting , thanks for sharing and letting us in on part of the process.


----------



## 14642

And here's a rendering of the 1" tweeter and some of the mounting hardware. The other hardware is a secret.


----------



## rton20s

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Oh, these measurements are WITH THE GRILLES. They are designed to be used WITH THE TWEETER GRILLES. The midrange is the same with and without.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ

Everyone start putting back money NOW


----------



## quietfly

So am i the only one trying to decide which kidney to sell so i can have these beautiful drivers.....  something tell's me a 3 way active system here will be truly special....


----------



## quietfly

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> And here's a rendering of the 1" tweeter and some of the mounting hardware. The other hardware is a secret.



Is that a spring under your tweeter, or are you just happy to see me.....


----------



## rton20s

Hillbilly SQ said:


> Everyone start putting back money NOW


I'm thinking Andy was pretty correct when he stated that he wasn't worried about the name. Despite the fact that so many people expressed concern and even lightheartedly mocked it. Yes, myself included with the photoshop of the subwoofer. Seems to me that Audiofrog (through Andy himself) is already establishing themselves as a brand to be reckoned with before releasing a single product.


----------



## cajunner

do we have confirmation on cone material yet?


----------



## rton20s

quietfly said:


> Is that a spring under your tweeter, or are you just happy to see me.....


There is something oddly appropriate about a company named "Audiofrog" using springs to mount their tweeters.


----------



## 14642

Paper.


----------



## 14642

The spring is the same as those pieces of spring steel that most other companies use, but this will take up a lot less space behind the mounting panel. 

There's also a cool part that can be used as a backstrap mount or to form the basis of a custom door or pillar mount for the fabricators out there. I'm not putting pics of that up, but it'll be cool.


----------



## cajunner

paper, so smooth, so strong...


----------



## rton20s

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Paper.


And I had such high hope...



Andy Wehmeyer said:


> "Dude, I listen to house. Do you have any speakers with cones made of ecstasy?"


----------



## t3sn4f2

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> And here's a rendering of the 1" tweeter and some of the mounting hardware. The other hardware is a secret.


Can you please provide one for the 1.5"?


----------



## 14642

rton20s said:


> And I had such high hope...


What were you hoping for? We were thinking about pulp made from crushed lemur bones...


----------



## 14642

t3sn4f2 said:


> Can you please provide one for the 1.5"?



It looks the same, but it's bigger. It doesn't have the spring mount. It has a threaded housing and a big aluminum nut.


----------



## t3sn4f2

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> It looks the same, but it's bigger. It doesn't have the spring mount. It has a threaded housing and a big aluminum nut.


Cool. It looks like the grill might be removable so you can rear mount it behind an existing OE sail panel grill. Is that possible?


----------



## 14642

Yes, the grille is removable. It can be painted and we'll include a set of replacement logo decals, too. It can also be mounted without the gray aluminum spacer ring, so just a chrome ring shows with the grille. Both tweeters correspond to standard hole-saw sizes.


----------



## rton20s

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> What were you hoping for? We were thinking about pulp made from crushed lemur bones...





Andy Wehmeyer said:


> "Dude, I listen to house. Do you have any speakers with cones made of ecstasy?"


You might have missed your own quote. I was being sarcastic. I do that sometimes.  I could care less what the cone material is, so long as it performs well. 

Save the lemurs!


----------



## t3sn4f2

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Yes, the grille is removable. It can be painted and we'll include a set of replacement logo decals, too. It can also be mounted without the gray aluminum spacer ring, so just a chrome ring shows with the grille. Both tweeters correspond to standard hole-saw sizes.


Awesome, you guys have thought it all out perfectly. Great job!


----------



## 14642

Thanks!


----------



## thehatedguy

Now when you say perfectly to standard hole saw sizes, is that including the extra from the wobble because none of them are ever centered correctly? 

You guys that have used hole saws know what I'm talking about...that perfect 1" hole saw ends up cutting a nice 1 1/8" hole.


----------



## quietfly

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> What were you hoping for? We were thinking about pulp made from crushed lemur bones...


I've heard some Famous Danish company is using powdered NARWHAL horns and pixie hopes and dreams... i was expecting something at least as exotic ...
:laugh:


----------



## cajunner

I like graphite fibers in the paper, like Pioneer uses.

But I also like cellulose, like the Japanese use, with special 'water' for their molding process.

then I like banana fiber paper, isn't that what makes Lowther cones slightly yellow? lol...


it's good, this paper. You can see it in the smooth break-up at speed, but almost 20 grams of MMd, isn't that a little thick on the paper?

and 7 BL, wonder if that's neo hiding under the skirt...


----------



## thehatedguy

I think Fostex uses banana pulp.

Paper is good. It has a high internal damping nature, which can keep the nasties out of the pass band. You can get into trouble with the exotic metals and composites because they have little ability to damp out the resonances for their mass and thickness.


----------



## Angrywhopper

Looking good I'm getting a little excited as well


----------



## Schramm

This is truly impressive data, a very well though out design, and beautiful engineering at every level! This kind of performance is especially exciting considering the drivers are designed specifically for the automotive environment.


----------



## quietfly

The great part here is we have the best of both worlds, the data to support the claims and the designer with "street cred" to excite the people. I'm totally excited about the up coming audiofrog offerings... I just hope my marriage can handle the MSRP


----------



## JVD240

Everything looks lovely so far!

Did I miss mention of a 3-way set?


----------



## Offroader5

It's like being a kid again waiting to see what is unwrapped Christmas morning. Excited to see the final product.


----------



## rton20s

JVD240 said:


> Everything looks lovely so far!
> 
> Did I miss mention of a 3-way set?


Yes. Take a look at posts 267 and 285.


----------



## 14642

cajunner said:


> I like graphite fibers in the paper, like Pioneer uses.
> 
> But I also like cellulose, like the Japanese use, with special 'water' for their molding process.
> 
> then I like banana fiber paper, isn't that what makes Lowther cones slightly yellow? lol...
> 
> 
> it's good, this paper. You can see it in the smooth break-up at speed, but almost 20 grams of MMd, isn't that a little thick on the paper?
> 
> and 7 BL, wonder if that's neo hiding under the skirt...


Mmd also includes the mass of the coil and former and part of the surround. Its a 2" coil. 

Cajunner, don't believe the hoopla about the water. Speakers aren't bagels or pizza dough. In fact, those aren't the secret for great crust. Process is the secret.


----------



## FreeTheSound

Andy

You seem to have covered all the bases bringing your hopes and dreams into reality with the amazing design of Audio Frog (That has to be an amazing feeling).I for one of many look forward to the day my shipment arrives and I can fix a glass of scotch and just look at them and wonder what the future install will sound like.

Was Hemp ever considered a candidate for speaker cone material?

The cultivation of it seems to be on the rise in the states and its uses personally i feel are amazing.Fuel,paper,clothing and even some of my protein shakes are Hemp protein.


Thanks


----------



## cajunner

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Mmd also includes the mass of the coil and former and part of the surround. Its a 2" coil.
> 
> Cajunner, don't believe the hoopla about the water. Speakers aren't bagels or pizza dough. In fact, those aren't the secret for great crust. Process is the secret.


but low Le, is supposed to represent either a short coil, or lots of shielding?

and 2" of coil is a lot of around the pole, I figure we're looking at something atypical in the chart.

XBL enabling, would provide you with that shorter coil but less than optimal top plate run-in space, looking at that motor cover...

so overhung, using light, edge-wound CCAW, but then that low Le... where is the trade-off?

You've got top tier/class Xmax, high BL linearity and low distortion from the suspension, using 2" coils and paper cone, which should be good power handling and "dynamics" so... the low inductance... is it low sensitivity, is there a faraday sleeve?


I don't see the trade-off?


And don't mind me, I'm not trying to pry it's just that the speakers present a puzzle at present, I am quite thick-headed about solving.


----------



## rton20s

I'd hate to press for more, because what you have already provided is incredible. But... Do you have any additional info on the subwoofers in this series? With so much thought put into consideration of where and how the different aspects of the components are to be used, I would be interested to know where you went with the subwoofer line.


----------



## cajunner

March 4, is a great roll-out day.

that it's Fat Tuesday down here in the Mardi Gras state, is just lagniappe...


----------



## 14642

Yes. Shorting ring (Faraday loop) at the base of the pole piece and at the top of the pole piece. So 2 of 'em.


----------



## BEAVER

When will we have prices? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## cajunner

sorry to be so nonchalant about it, Andy.

I know it's got to be tough parceling out the data and the descriptors without crossing some caution signs along the way.

I am quite happy to be humored along, I certainly want to see the additional talking points as they are worked out.

How do the pre-production samples sound, is it as snappy as it sounds, do they share timbre with the JBL series?

You've got some similar design notes, maybe a Dynaudio/GTi hybrid sound? That's what I'm thinking with these specs but then you could easily get into those adjectives that brand a driver, so I understand if you'd forgo defining the sound, at least in this venue/date/time.

looking forward to the rest of the line's particulars!


----------



## quietfly

we're all like addicts here....

_"Please Andy, just a little more info... oh that was AMAZING... can we have just a little more...please.. We won't ask for any more, we swear...."_

I just need my fix.....lol

this is almost better than x-mas. 
We are all very lucky that there are still people dedicated to HQ SQ. so many other manufactures have literally taken the low road. 

These are exciting times we live in.....

:laugh:


----------



## Darth SQ

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> And here's a rendering of the 1" tweeter and some of the mounting hardware. The other hardware is a secret.


Andy,
I think I can speak for many of us when I say you have our complete and undivided attention now. 


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## squeak9798

bikinpunk said:


> Dang.
> 
> I can't say enough about how appreciated it is you are providing this data. Occasionally Manville (JL Audio) or Jacob (Sundown) or Nick (SI) will provide klippel data but outside of that, I can't think of another manufacturer that is willing to do so. And not at the level you have with the HD and FR sweeps.


Not to diminish anything but I'd just like to throw out there that Quentin from Direct Sound Solutions does a similarly awesome job of posting any and all data/graphs/plots/etc he has for his subs.

Back on topic the new drivers look amazing Andy, as you are already aware, and I'm getting pretty excited to see the full details and product selection.


----------



## 14642

cajunner said:


> sorry to be so nonchalant about it, Andy.
> 
> I know it's got to be tough parceling out the data and the descriptors without crossing some caution signs along the way.
> 
> I am quite happy to be humored along, I certainly want to see the additional talking points as they are worked out.
> 
> How do the pre-production samples sound, is it as snappy as it sounds, do they share timbre with the JBL series?
> 
> You've got some similar design notes, maybe a Dynaudio/GTi hybrid sound? That's what I'm thinking with these specs but then you could easily get into those adjectives that brand a driver, so I understand if you'd forgo defining the sound, at least in this venue/date/time.
> 
> looking forward to the rest of the line's particulars!


I'm not sure I want to engage in attempting to define the sound of this brand using other some lofty prose and colorful descriptions. I don't really know how to do that. I'm used to communicating the sound of systems and speakers using graphs and data, because I think it's a much more accurate way to do it. To me, speaker design isn't like making wine or cheese. It isn't really subjective. It's not about flavor, it's about accuracy and adherence to proven criteria for quality. Making music is about flavor. 

I'll let you guys and some magazine reviewers write the poetry when you finally hear these speakers.


----------



## diy.phil

Andy, those green connectors/wiring terminals are very pretty! That's a nice design language and consistent your various speakers! Looks like it will work well too.

I still remember you said something like "process is important" in the last page or few pages ago (that's actually a keyword that only some here will catch/know; like those that get audited often lol).

Best wishes!


----------



## cajunner

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> I'm not sure I want to engage in attempting to define the sound of this brand using other some lofty prose and colorful descriptions. I don't really know how to do that. I'm used to communicating the sound of systems and speakers using graphs and data, because I think it's a much more accurate way to do it. To me, speaker design isn't like making wine or cheese. It isn't really subjective. It's not about flavor, it's about accuracy and adherence to proven criteria for quality. Making music is about flavor.
> 
> I'll let you guys and some magazine reviewers write the poetry when you finally hear these speakers.


from the outset, it appears that you have targeted your competitors at the highest level.

if this is the bar, then it will be difficult to avoid obvious comparisons with products in that upper echelon.

it does appear to me, that styling cues and aesthetic detail is an important part of the Audio Frog mission. People will hopefully want to incorporate the design, as part of a build philosophy where brand recognition offers a value.

the tweeter grill is especially noted to be part of the design, is that something that had to be engineered, or was it just a happy coincidence that the graphs show a very well behaved driver?


----------



## quality_sound

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> And here's a rendering of the 1" tweeter and some of the mounting hardware. The other hardware is a secret.


That is sex.


----------



## carztoon1

Great work, product looks flawless. Is there a chance we get to have a group buy option? Is there a DSP in the works?
What amps will you suggest to use with this app. Are u making you own amp line?


----------



## 14642

cajunner said:


> from the outset, it appears that you have targeted your competitors at the highest level.
> 
> if this is the bar, then it will be difficult to avoid obvious comparisons with products in that upper echelon.
> 
> it does appear to me, that styling cues and aesthetic detail is an important part of the Audio Frog mission. People will hopefully want to incorporate the design, as part of a build philosophy where brand recognition offers a value.
> 
> the tweeter grill is especially noted to be part of the design, is that something that had to be engineered, or was it just a happy coincidence that the graphs show a very well behaved driver?


Engineered.

I have no problem making comparisons to other similar products, I'm just not going to do it using the marketing prose that supposed high end audio companies use, which often describes speakers as if they were food or art and cites passion as a key technical ingredient because I think such descriptions and claims are ********. About this, I am passionate.


----------



## quietfly

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Engineered.
> 
> I have no problem making comparisons to other similar products, I'm just not going to do it *using the marketing prose* that supposed end audio companies use, which often *describes speakers *as if they were *food or art *and cites passion as a key technical ingredient because I think *such *descriptions and *claims are *********. About this, I am *passionate*.


Love this!!!!


----------



## t3sn4f2

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> We'll sell through qualified dealers.
> 
> I'd call these midranges. In any speaker design, there's a compromise to be made between power handling (which requires a beefier voice coil), extended low frequency response, flat response in the passband and high frequency response past the frequency where dispersion narrows. We've focused on low frequency extension, power handling and flat response in the passband.
> 
> Anyone who's read any of my posts knows that I STRONGLY favor the use of tweeters, so we're making some great tweeters with a cool kit that facilitates custom installation. No one else has anything like it.
> 
> The idea behind all of the systems we'll support with drivers and passive crossovers is that speakers should be easy to place in the right spots and beautiful once they are installed, they should be used in a range where dispersion is wide to eliminate the need for a bunch of ridiculous aiming, and that the directivity index of the systems should be smooth and gradually rising.
> 
> In order to meet those objectives, which are proven to provide the best performance, a 6" 2-way system either has to have some kind of directivity control for the tweeter to narrow the dispersion of the tweeter at the crossover to match the narrowing dispersion of the midrange, or the tweeter has to be big enough and beefy enough to support a low crossover point. We've opted for the big tweeter because the waveguide required to match the directivity is big and difficult to mount. (I've tried that already).
> 
> So, the 1.5" tweeter is the optimum tweeter to use with the 6" in a 2-way. You can use the 1" with the 6" too and it will perform better than many other systems that include the same configuration.
> 
> The killer apps will be 6" and 1.5" for a 2-way. 6", 2.5" and 1" for a 3-way with mids and tweeters in the pillars. And 6", 4" and 1" tweeter for speakers in the doors, but if the 2.5" can be put in just the right spot (high in the door), then that might outperform the 4" in the wrong spot. The key is in getting a small midrange high in the door. Once there's a small mid, then aiming of midbass and midrange isn't necessary which makes nicely integrated installations easier.


Andy, do you have more inf. on the 2.5" mid? Curious to see if it is going to be a true midrange.


----------



## Offroader5

May I suggest something?

In lieu of phillips head (as shown in the wire clamps on the tweets), how about hex head grub screws? One thing that irritates me is when I see phillips or flat head hardware used on quality products. I realize there is no need to crank down on the tweeter connections...but it's just that hardware can easily cheapen the product soley on looks.

Kinda like the phillips grubs in the Phantom amps...can't understand why they didn't go with hex head.


----------



## MacLeod

Offroader5 said:


> May I suggest something?
> 
> In lieu of phillips head (as shown in the wire clamps on the tweets), how about hex head grub screws? One thing that irritates me is when I see phillips or flat head hardware used on quality products. I realize there is no need to crank down on the tweeter connections...but it's just that hardware can easily cheapen the product soley on looks.
> 
> Kinda like the phillips grubs in the Phantom amps...can't understand why they didn't go with hex head.


Disagree on this. I hate hex. Yeah it looks spiffy and all that but I have a billion Phillips head screwdrivers lying around, hell my knife even has one, but I can never find the right size hex driver ever and they're too easy to strip out. Ill give up looks for ease of use any day.


----------



## minbari

How about torx! Cant strip those out

sent from my phone using digital farts


----------



## HiloDB1

minbari said:


> How about torx! Cant strip those out
> 
> sent from my phone using digital farts


Id beg to differ  lol. I'd rather have hex or torx too. Only thing that annoys me about hex is that manufacturers like to put different sized on the same product. I hate having to find 3 different hex bits to install an amp.


----------



## MacLeod

Like I said, at just about any point and time, I have a phillips head screwdriver within reach and one size basically fits all. For this reason alone I hate hex and torx. HAHA!


----------



## minbari

What about robertson? >_>

sent from my phone using digital farts


----------



## Darth SQ

minbari said:


> How about torx! Cant strip those out
> 
> sent from my phone using digital farts


Yes torx.....and the correct sized torx bit should accompany the owner's manual in the box. 


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## vulgamore89

I'd rather have hex over torx, i feel like a torx style screw is easier to strip out compared to a hex style


----------



## thehatedguy

Ever install any JL HD amps have you?




HiloDB1 said:


> Id beg to differ  lol. I'd rather have hex or torx too. Only thing that annoys me about hex is that manufacturers like to put different sized on the same product. I hate having to find 3 different hex bits to install an amp.


----------



## Darth SQ

vulgamore89 said:


> I'd rather have hex over torx, i feel like a torx style screw is easier to strip out compared to a hex style


Well, here's the reality of either option.......
Your fastener and tool are only as good as the materials used, tolerance specifications, and process to make them.
So since we're talking about Audiofrog and the high quality level path already chosen by Andy, stripped out fasteners will likely be a nonissue. 


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## 14642

Actually, the terminal screws will be hex and we'll include a bit in the box. 

I agree that Phillips is much more convenient, but in my 30 years of experience, people just can't seem to use the right driver. #1? #2? The heads always get screwed up and I have to overnight five cents worth of screws. Or, people tighten the screws with an 18V driver set on the highest torque setting available. 

We're not doing that. Hex is much more difficult to screw up and they look much nicer.


----------



## Angrywhopper

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Actually, the terminal screws will be hex and we'll include a bit in the box.
> 
> I agree that Phillips is much more convenient, but in my 30 years of experience, people just can't seem to use the right driver. #1? #2? The heads always get screwed up and I have to overnight five cents worth of screws. Or, people tighten the screws with an 18V driver set on the highest torque setting available.
> 
> We're not doing that. Hex is much more difficult to screw up and they look much nicer.


:thumbsup:


----------



## finbar

I like the hex heads, ball tip driver ftw.


----------



## FG79

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Engineered.
> 
> I have no problem making comparisons to other similar products, I'm just not going to do it using the marketing prose that supposed high end audio companies use, which often describes speakers as if they were food or art and cites passion as a key technical ingredient because I think such descriptions and claims are ********. About this, I am passionate.


It's one thing to possibly be all about marketing and no technical info.

But are you opposed to a speaker that may not have the "ideal" measurements but sounds good to people? 

When I evaluate speakers from a technical viewpoint, I care about the cone material/weight, voice coil, magnet, efficiency, and maybe one or two T/S parameters to get an idea of what it might sound like, but I would never make a definitive judgment on them without hearing them. 

I feel a lot of people in this community do just that, and become biased based on specs alone clouding their judgment when they finally hear speakers, subwoofers, amps, etc.


----------



## Hanatsu

Measurements describe the full performance of a speaker. Nothing else is needed, the graphs Andy supplies is far far better than the usual subjective descriptions.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy 3 via Tapatalk.


----------



## 14642

FG79 said:


> It's one thing to possibly be all about marketing and no technical info.
> 
> But are you opposed to a speaker that may not have the "ideal" measurements but sounds good to people?
> 
> When I evaluate speakers from a technical viewpoint, I care about the cone material/weight, voice coil, magnet, efficiency, and maybe one or two T/S parameters to get an idea of what it might sound like, but I would never make a definitive judgment on them without hearing them.
> 
> I feel a lot of people in this community do just that, and become biased based on specs alone clouding their judgment when they finally hear speakers, subwoofers, amps, etc.


Of course I believe that one should listen to speakers. A speaker can sound good with some music even if the design is bad. A well designed speaker will sound better with all kinds of music. 

If you are auditioning speakers in a car and attempting to decide which is the better speaker simply by listening, it's not a very good evaluation of the actual performance of the speaker. It is a useful evaluation if only your preference for listening in that car matters. When one designs a speaker, an attempt to appeal to preference without considering verifiable and objective performance criteria isn't a recipe for success.

0-60 MPH time is objective. "Fun" is subjective. If your idea of fun includes speedy acceleration wouldn't you want to know the 0-60 MPH time? Would it be helpful for the car company to include some copy that reads, "You'll have a lot of fun because this car goes fast"?

We'll write some marketing copy one of these days, but for now, I only have objective information to share.


----------



## captainobvious

FG79 said:


> It's one thing to possibly be all about marketing and no technical info.
> 
> But are you opposed to a speaker that may not have the "ideal" measurements but sounds good to people?
> 
> When I evaluate speakers from a technical viewpoint, I care about the cone material/weight, voice coil, magnet, efficiency, and maybe one or two T/S parameters to get an idea of what it might sound like, but I would never make a definitive judgment on them without hearing them.
> 
> I feel a lot of people in this community do just that, and become biased based on specs alone clouding their judgment when they finally hear speakers, subwoofers, amps, etc.


The parameters shouldn't be used to judge how it "sounds", rather what is the best application for the driver (pass band, enclosure type and size, etc)to be used in. I agree, your ears are the best tool.


----------



## cajunner

I'm in the group that says objective data that we can trust, is hard to come by and usually is only reserved for the most well-behaved of drivers. The people who would prefer their drivers remain unexposed by tests, are usually justified because their drivers suck.

And the opposite is true. The companies that go out of their way to divulge every little bit of testing scrap they can about their drivers are usually the ones proud of the performance.

that's not to say that a manufacturer hasn't fudged a little, played around with scale or made smoothing adjustments to the real time analysis, or tried to go CSI on their Klippel charts with colors and shading, here and there...

but that's okay too. The marketplace is filled with examples of "me-too" engineering and turn-key approaches that come from the Chinese order template, it's not that easy to strike a path that clears new ground.

I like the use of the 1.5" tweeter, I hope it's extension is suitable for those who lack the "air" in 3" drivers of recent release.

It answers that age-old question of what can go low enough to meet with a down in the door mid bass, and yet still maintain a top end that doesn't get all goofy.


----------



## Offroader5

MacLeod said:


> Disagree on this. I hate hex. Yeah it looks spiffy and all that but I have a billion Phillips head screwdrivers lying around, hell my knife even has one, but I can never find the right size hex driver ever and they're too easy to strip out. Ill give up looks for ease of use any day.


Another reason I like hex is if you have to work in tight areas, the hex key has the short end that can be used in much tighter spots than a screw driver, plus with the ball tip hex keys, you can even work at odd angles if need be. You're not going to strip out a hex IF you are using the right size hex key.



Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Actually, the terminal screws will be hex and we'll include a bit in the box.
> 
> I agree that Phillips is much more convenient, but in my 30 years of experience, people just can't seem to use the right driver. #1? #2? The heads always get screwed up and I have to overnight five cents worth of screws. Or, people tighten the screws with an 18V driver set on the highest torque setting available.
> 
> We're not doing that. Hex is much more difficult to screw up and they look much nicer.


:thumbsup:


----------



## pocket5s

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> And here's a rendering of the 1" tweeter and some of the mounting hardware. The other hardware is a secret.


Maybe i'm just too dense, but how is this supposed to work? I would think the first thing an installer is going to do is open the box, look at the slinky, toss it out and install the tweeter.


----------



## Horsemanwill

pocket5s said:


> Maybe i'm just too dense, but how is this supposed to work? I would think the first thing an installer is going to do is open the box, look at the slinky, toss it out and install the tweeter.


i would hope the first thing the installer does is rtfm. especially if it's something he has not worked with yet.


----------



## HiloDB1

Its pretty obvious how the springs and hardware work to mount those tweeters. If your installer cant figure it out I would suggest you find new one.


----------



## BuickGN

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> No, they're great. I met with them. The engineers are fantastic and their drivers are really good. When I showed them our designs and explained why we wanted what we wanted, they got it immediately.
> 
> I didn't choose them because I have a 20-year relationship with the people I did choose and they are faster and they know what I want. They are also really good, as you can see here. The difference between developing a line of speakers from scratch and tweaking some existing drivers can be as much as $300k in design, tooling, and engineering consulting, depending on what's required. It's not easy to engineer something on par with SB, ScanSpeak, Vifa, Dynaudio, or Seas. That's why people buy drivers from those companies.
> 
> There are a thousand other factories that can't build drivers like these because their engineers don't understand the design and can't adapt the design for manufacture and keep the performance that's intended.
> 
> We're not buying drivers. We're designing them and building them at a great factory. It's really expensive, but when you see the rest of the features and the fact they they fit cars easily, you'll understand why. What we want to sell isn't available from anyone else.


And this is exactly why I would pay Dynaudio prices for these. I love the idea of something unique from the ground up, not just a tweaked (or not tweaked) cheap speaker marked up 10X.


----------



## BEAVER

I have a feeling that I won't be able to afford any of this stuff when it arrives, but I'll be saving my pennies, anyway. Thoroughly intrigued.


----------



## rdubbs

BEAVER said:


> I have a feeling that I won't be able to afford any of this stuff when it arrives, but I'll be saving my pennies, anyway. Thoroughly intrigued.


In the same boat  I am thankful that you've undertaken this great task Andy! I totally see your brand as one of the few that will push car audio into the new frontier


----------



## 14642

The spring is the opposite of a slinky. It works exactly the same as many of the other tweeter kits that use a piece of spring steel with legs, it just takes up less space behind the panel.


----------



## neal00

"My preference would be to put crossover and EQ in the amplifiers and upmixing, summing and UN-EQ in a separate processor" Andy, could this possibly be the direction Audiofrog amps and processors will go?


----------



## 14642

^^ Maybe


----------



## Angrywhopper

:bump: It's been 5 days, there must be new news!


----------



## sundownz

Everything looks / sounds solid so far -- good stuff Andy.


----------



## FG79

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Of course I believe that one should listen to speakers. A speaker can sound good with some music even if the design is bad. A well designed speaker will sound better with all kinds of music.
> 
> If you are auditioning speakers in a car and attempting to decide which is the better speaker simply by listening, it's not a very good evaluation of the actual performance of the speaker. It is a useful evaluation if only your preference for listening in that car matters. When one designs a speaker, an attempt to appeal to preference without considering verifiable and objective performance criteria isn't a recipe for success.
> 
> 0-60 MPH time is objective. "Fun" is subjective. If your idea of fun includes speedy acceleration wouldn't you want to know the 0-60 MPH time? Would it be helpful for the car company to include some copy that reads, "You'll have a lot of fun because this car goes fast"?
> 
> We'll write some marketing copy one of these days, but for now, I only have objective information to share.


You're in the business of selling speakers to a wide audience, so I get your viewpoint. Especially to most enthusiasts in this community who live and die off of technical literature. 

I'm not saying specs are useless. Even the most hardcore romantic subjective guys will still talk about efficiency of a driver, crossover points, how deep the cabinet can play to, etc. We all have a bit of audio geek in us. But it's not the first thing that's talked about, and shouldn't be IMO. 

I think with tweeters in particular, specs can be more misleading than with woofers. Some might attempt to sell tweeters because the frequency response is better than the competition, and from my experience that doesn't mean much and might actually be a detriment because the added treble sucks out midrange. Woofers with too much excursion, or too low an FS might play very deep but not sound as punchy or as natural. Gone are the days of the early '90s when a 6.5" woofer could play flat past 5 khz.....you're lucky to get 3 khz these days. 

You *read* enough stuff on the internet long enough, and stuff gets drilled in your head. A good amount of it misleading. This excursion thing for instance. People think you need insane amount of xmax for everything. It started with subwoofers, now migrated to regular woofers. Maybe in a few years, tweeters will need excursion too, LOL!! 

A properly installed "high end" 6.5" woofer I used to run with 4.25 mm xmax (hint, hint for those that memorize these #s) put out PLENTY of bass when installed and amplified properly (the big door helped too). Going to a woofer with 7-8 mm had a bit more but wasn't night and day difference like people would have you believe. 

So where am I going with this? I think speaker manufacturers must sell to specs unfortunately these days. Your new speaker company Andy, I'm sure has been influenced one way or another by the perception of how it should "measure". 

Not going to speculate how (not that it matters anyways), but I know it's there. Our friend from Georgia who is celebrating his 10th anniversary of his company as a revolution against the old guard....even his stuff seems affected, when I read his literature and forum posts. And I like and own his speakers. He argues more than most about "the sound" and it brings on a cadre of angry people saying it's all about the measurements. 

At the end of the day it's a business, and if you really care about the bottom line, there is an inherent conflict at stake with making money and creating the product you really want to create as opposed to what your consumers want. 

I'm a big fan of paper in most home speakers, but my favorite car audio brand ever was strictly polypropylene cones (Nakamichi SP series). Ok, that was a surprise, but I'll accept it and not let it ruin my preconceived notions that paper is an all conquering cone material and cannot be defeated under any circumstances.  

It's all good, now let's go back to the sound.

Not learning to ever "let things go" is a problem I have with the extreme objective SQ crowd. It's what is holding them back, IMHO. 

If they ever klippel tested the SP-50, SP-60 woofers I'm not sure if it would "dominate" the newer woofers in the measurements but I'd push all my chips to the middle of the table if it came down to the actual sound quality preferences. The SP-10 tweeter and SP-15 dome midrange I'd like to test out of curiosity.....the day I hear something better from the new jack names of car audio, I will come on DIY and be the biggest fanboy ever of them. 

Of course they all say they have something better (all the big name manufacturers, and some of the boutiques), but I don't know that I've heard it yet. I've heard a ton of big name home audio and esoteric brands, and know where my preferences lie -- it ain't in the backpages of Stereophile or The Absolute Sound. 

Car audio is a different animal, like you said......listening in the car. And how it changes car to car.

Except I don't think the differences are enormous. I listened to a bunch of Focal speakers on a sound board one day, and liked them in reverse order of price down to maybe the $300 level (starting from about $1000). I listen for a tonal signature in an open room and figure it gets x% worse in a car, and all uniformly. I would be extremely confident in my buying decision under that scenario. I don't worry about on-axis, off axis.

Too many audio buying decisions nowadays seems overly complicated. Many people feel the need to make an electrical engineering degree a pre-requisite to making purchasing decisions. The irony is I have such a degree and rarely ever use it as it pertains to this hobby. I only wish I was into audio 15 years ago so I could appreciate the calculations I was doing for Class A, A/B, D amps in EE112, junior year. 

It would be nice to have these perfect scientific tests of speakers in a car, but that is one of the most impractical and unrealistic things one can do without spending tons of money or having a great hookup. It would be easier to compare a few $100k sports cars than compare speakers in cars -- no lie!!

So there's the ammo for the "specs camp" since objective data is easy to put out there. However, if I have to do something blindly I'd like to take a lot of the data into consideration but also factor in cone properties, magnets, etc. and compare to other drivers I like. 

I've been trained over the years to interpret what people say about gear, and what gear is very popular and know how to "model" that in my head. 

It's not perfect but it's pretty accurate. In life, one has to go with the gut a lot more than we do now. And even if you make a mistake, it's not the end of the world. 

A bit of a ramble, but I felt I had to get my contrarian viewpoint out there on this subject. This stems a lot more from amplifier comparisons than speakers, but it wouldn't surprise me if some really great sounding speakers might measure worse in some areas than the latest raw driver of the day. It's always a possibility. I wouldn't let it bother me though. 

Best of luck with your venture. I'd like to hear your drivers some day. 

And if I ever get a chance to review them, it will be mostly words, few numbers, if any.


----------



## Darth SQ

FG79 said:


> You're in the business of selling speakers to a wide audience, so I get your viewpoint. Especially to most enthusiasts in this community who live and die off of technical literature.
> 
> I'm not saying specs are useless. Even the most hardcore romantic subjective guys will still talk about efficiency of a driver, crossover points, how deep the cabinet can play to, etc. We all have a bit of audio geek in us. But it's not the first thing that's talked about, and shouldn't be IMO.
> 
> I think with tweeters in particular, specs can be more misleading than with woofers. Some might attempt to sell tweeters because the frequency response is better than the competition, and from my experience that doesn't mean much and might actually be a detriment because the added treble sucks out midrange. Woofers with too much excursion, or too low an FS might play very deep but not sound as punchy or as natural. Gone are the days of the early '90s when a 6.5" woofer could play flat past 5 khz.....you're lucky to get 3 khz these days.
> 
> You *read* enough stuff on the internet long enough, and stuff gets drilled in your head. A good amount of it misleading. This excursion thing for instance. People think you need insane amount of xmax for everything. It started with subwoofers, now migrated to regular woofers. Maybe in a few years, tweeters will need excursion too, LOL!!
> 
> A properly installed "high end" 6.5" woofer I used to run with 4.25 mm xmax (hint, hint for those that memorize these #s) put out PLENTY of bass when installed and amplified properly (the big door helped too). Going to a woofer with 7-8 mm had a bit more but wasn't night and day difference like people would have you believe.
> 
> So where am I going with this? I think speaker manufacturers must sell to specs unfortunately these days. Your new speaker company Andy, I'm sure has been influenced one way or another by the perception of how it should "measure".
> 
> Not going to speculate how (not that it matters anyways), but I know it's there. Our friend from Georgia who is celebrating his 10th anniversary of his company as a revolution against the old guard....even his stuff seems affected, when I read his literature and forum posts. And I like and own his speakers. He argues more than most about "the sound" and it brings on a cadre of angry people saying it's all about the measurements.
> 
> At the end of the day it's a business, and if you really care about the bottom line, there is an inherent conflict at stake with making money and creating the product you really want to create as opposed to what your consumers want.
> 
> I'm a big fan of paper in most home speakers, but my favorite car audio brand ever was strictly polypropylene cones (Nakamichi SP series). Ok, that was a surprise, but I'll accept it and not let it ruin my preconceived notions that paper is an all conquering cone material and cannot be defeated under any circumstances.
> 
> It's all good, now let's go back to the sound.
> 
> Not learning to ever "let things go" is a problem I have with the extreme objective SQ crowd. It's what is holding them back, IMHO.
> 
> If they ever klippel tested the SP-50, SP-60 woofers I'm not sure if it would "dominate" the newer woofers in the measurements but I'd push all my chips to the middle of the table if it came down to the actual sound quality preferences. The SP-10 tweeter and SP-15 dome midrange I'd like to test out of curiosity.....the day I hear something better from the new jack names of car audio, I will come on DIY and be the biggest fanboy ever of them.
> 
> Of course they all say they have something better (all the big name manufacturers, and some of the boutiques), but I don't know that I've heard it yet. I've heard a ton of big name home audio and esoteric brands, and know where my preferences lie -- it ain't in the backpages of Stereophile or The Absolute Sound.
> 
> Car audio is a different animal, like you said......listening in the car. And how it changes car to car.
> 
> Except I don't think the differences are enormous. I listened to a bunch of Focal speakers on a sound board one day, and liked them in reverse order of price down to maybe the $300 level (starting from about $1000). I listen for a tonal signature in an open room and figure it gets x% worse in a car, and all uniformly. I would be extremely confident in my buying decision under that scenario. I don't worry about on-axis, off axis.
> 
> Too many audio buying decisions nowadays seems overly complicated. Many people feel the need to make an electrical engineering degree a pre-requisite to making purchasing decisions. The irony is I have such a degree and rarely ever use it as it pertains to this hobby. I only wish I was into audio 15 years ago so I could appreciate the calculations I was doing for Class A, A/B, D amps in EE112, junior year.
> 
> It would be nice to have these perfect scientific tests of speakers in a car, but that is one of the most impractical and unrealistic things one can do without spending tons of money or having a great hookup. It would be easier to compare a few $100k sports cars than compare speakers in cars -- no lie!!
> 
> So there's the ammo for the "specs camp" since objective data is easy to put out there. However, if I have to do something blindly I'd like to take a lot of the data into consideration but also factor in cone properties, magnets, etc. and compare to other drivers I like.
> 
> I've been trained over the years to interpret what people say about gear, and what gear is very popular and know how to "model" that in my head.
> 
> It's not perfect but it's pretty accurate. In life, one has to go with the gut a lot more than we do now. And even if you make a mistake, it's not the end of the world.
> 
> A bit of a ramble, but I felt I had to get my contrarian viewpoint out there on this subject. This stems a lot more from amplifier comparisons than speakers, but it wouldn't surprise me if some really great sounding speakers might measure worse in some areas than the latest raw driver of the day. It's always a possibility. I wouldn't let it bother me though.
> 
> Best of luck with your venture. I'd like to hear your drivers some day.
> 
> And if I ever get a chance to review them, it will be mostly words, few numbers, if any.


Seriously wtf?


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## rton20s

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> Seriously wtf?
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


:lol:


----------



## 14642

FG79,
It's not all that complicated. For the most part, speakers sound like they measure. After nearly 100 years of humans designing, listening to and measuring the performance of speakers, we're pretty good at characterizing the performance using data. For people who aren't engineers or who have no interest in understanding how the objective data correlates to preference, then a controlled audition and comparison with other speakers can provide some empirical information on which to base a purchase decision.

However...not understanding the correlation doesn't make it inapplicable. The problem in the audio industry is that too many companies prey on the non-understanding of the correlation to sell hogwash. 

My objective is to provide objective data as I have it, to help people understand how to use these (and other speakers) to extract the best performance and to let happy and unhappy customers (i hope there won't be too many of those) provide their own subjective assessments. My job isn't to refute one's preference. My job is just to help you guys make your cars sound great.


----------



## Hanatsu

FG79 said:


> You're in the business of selling speakers to a wide audience, so I get your viewpoint. Especially to most enthusiasts in this community who live and die off of technical literature.
> 
> I'm not saying specs are useless. Even the most hardcore romantic subjective guys will still talk about efficiency of a driver, crossover points, how deep the cabinet can play to, etc. We all have a bit of audio geek in us. But it's not the first thing that's talked about, and shouldn't be IMO.
> 
> I think with tweeters in particular, specs can be more misleading than with woofers. Some might attempt to sell tweeters because the frequency response is better than the competition, and from my experience that doesn't mean much and might actually be a detriment because the added treble sucks out midrange. Woofers with too much excursion, or too low an FS might play very deep but not sound as punchy or as natural. Gone are the days of the early '90s when a 6.5" woofer could play flat past 5 khz.....you're lucky to get 3 khz these days.
> 
> You *read* enough stuff on the internet long enough, and stuff gets drilled in your head. A good amount of it misleading. This excursion thing for instance. People think you need insane amount of xmax for everything. It started with subwoofers, now migrated to regular woofers. Maybe in a few years, tweeters will need excursion too, LOL!!
> 
> A properly installed "high end" 6.5" woofer I used to run with 4.25 mm xmax (hint, hint for those that memorize these #s) put out PLENTY of bass when installed and amplified properly (the big door helped too). Going to a woofer with 7-8 mm had a bit more but wasn't night and day difference like people would have you believe.
> 
> So where am I going with this? I think speaker manufacturers must sell to specs unfortunately these days. Your new speaker company Andy, I'm sure has been influenced one way or another by the perception of how it should "measure".
> 
> Not going to speculate how (not that it matters anyways), but I know it's there. Our friend from Georgia who is celebrating his 10th anniversary of his company as a revolution against the old guard....even his stuff seems affected, when I read his literature and forum posts. And I like and own his speakers. He argues more than most about "the sound" and it brings on a cadre of angry people saying it's all about the measurements.
> 
> At the end of the day it's a business, and if you really care about the bottom line, there is an inherent conflict at stake with making money and creating the product you really want to create as opposed to what your consumers want.
> 
> I'm a big fan of paper in most home speakers, but my favorite car audio brand ever was strictly polypropylene cones (Nakamichi SP series). Ok, that was a surprise, but I'll accept it and not let it ruin my preconceived notions that paper is an all conquering cone material and cannot be defeated under any circumstances.
> 
> It's all good, now let's go back to the sound.
> 
> Not learning to ever "let things go" is a problem I have with the extreme objective SQ crowd. It's what is holding them back, IMHO.
> 
> If they ever klippel tested the SP-50, SP-60 woofers I'm not sure if it would "dominate" the newer woofers in the measurements but I'd push all my chips to the middle of the table if it came down to the actual sound quality preferences. The SP-10 tweeter and SP-15 dome midrange I'd like to test out of curiosity.....the day I hear something better from the new jack names of car audio, I will come on DIY and be the biggest fanboy ever of them.
> 
> Of course they all say they have something better (all the big name manufacturers, and some of the boutiques), but I don't know that I've heard it yet. I've heard a ton of big name home audio and esoteric brands, and know where my preferences lie -- it ain't in the backpages of Stereophile or The Absolute Sound.
> 
> Car audio is a different animal, like you said......listening in the car. And how it changes car to car.
> 
> Except I don't think the differences are enormous. I listened to a bunch of Focal speakers on a sound board one day, and liked them in reverse order of price down to maybe the $300 level (starting from about $1000). I listen for a tonal signature in an open room and figure it gets x% worse in a car, and all uniformly. I would be extremely confident in my buying decision under that scenario. I don't worry about on-axis, off axis.
> 
> Too many audio buying decisions nowadays seems overly complicated. Many people feel the need to make an electrical engineering degree a pre-requisite to making purchasing decisions. The irony is I have such a degree and rarely ever use it as it pertains to this hobby. I only wish I was into audio 15 years ago so I could appreciate the calculations I was doing for Class A, A/B, D amps in EE112, junior year.
> 
> It would be nice to have these perfect scientific tests of speakers in a car, but that is one of the most impractical and unrealistic things one can do without spending tons of money or having a great hookup. It would be easier to compare a few $100k sports cars than compare speakers in cars -- no lie!!
> 
> So there's the ammo for the "specs camp" since objective data is easy to put out there. However, if I have to do something blindly I'd like to take a lot of the data into consideration but also factor in cone properties, magnets, etc. and compare to other drivers I like.
> 
> I've been trained over the years to interpret what people say about gear, and what gear is very popular and know how to "model" that in my head.
> 
> It's not perfect but it's pretty accurate. In life, one has to go with the gut a lot more than we do now. And even if you make a mistake, it's not the end of the world.
> 
> A bit of a ramble, but I felt I had to get my contrarian viewpoint out there on this subject. This stems a lot more from amplifier comparisons than speakers, but it wouldn't surprise me if some really great sounding speakers might measure worse in some areas than the latest raw driver of the day. It's always a possibility. I wouldn't let it bother me though.
> 
> Best of luck with your venture. I'd like to hear your drivers some day.
> 
> And if I ever get a chance to review them, it will be mostly words, few numbers, if any.


Eh? Seriously... what? I dislike that you're constantly implying that "we" are somehow incompetent and doesn't know anything just because the majority here don't wanna use silly, useless subjective terms that means absolutely nothing to describe the performance of audio equipment. I'm truly thankful that this site haven't become overrun with audiophile foolishness with preposterous claims that cannot the quantified by any reasonable logic. I think it's absolutely wonderful with useful information that Andy is supplying. 

Having said that, a speaker can be evaluated FULLY by the measured performance. This is widely understood and are not filled with the same mysticism as "audiophile-grade" electronics. I've measured countless drivers, I know precisely what to look for, a driver that measures good - sounds good. In all cases, period. If it doesn't sound good it's because of user error and incorrect system implementation. 

How the driver interacts with the environment (dispersion) and how the user intend to use it (install/tuning) affect the final performance. Evaluating drivers by ear while the driver is part of a system is a recipe for fail.


----------



## Hanatsu

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> FG79,
> It's not all that complicated. For the most part, speakers sound like they measure. After nearly 100 years of humans designing, listening to and measuring the performance of speakers, we're pretty good at characterizing the performance using data. For people who aren't engineers or who have no interest in understanding how the objective data correlates to preference, then a controlled audition and comparison with other speakers can provide some empirical information on which to base a purchase decision.
> 
> However...not understanding the correlation doesn't make it inapplicable. The problem in the audio industry is that too many companies prey on the non-understanding of the correlation to sell hogwash.
> 
> My objective is to provide objective data as I have it, to help people understand how to use these (and other speakers) to extract the best performance and to let happy and unhappy customers (i hope there won't be too many of those) provide their own subjective assessments. My job isn't to refute one's preference. My job is just to help you guys make your cars sound great.


Precisely... Me loves objective data xD

I would love buying gear from you


----------



## Ryanu

rton20s said:


> :lol:


+1 ?

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk


----------



## 14642

Hanatsu said:


> Precisely... Me loves objective data xD
> 
> I would love buying gear from you


I'd like that too.


----------



## captainobvious

FG79 said:


> You're in the business of selling speakers to a wide audience, so I get your viewpoint. Especially to most enthusiasts in this community who live and die off of technical literature.
> 
> I'm not saying specs are useless. Even the most hardcore romantic subjective guys will still talk about efficiency of a driver, crossover points, how deep the cabinet can play to, etc. We all have a bit of audio geek in us. But it's not the first thing that's talked about, and shouldn't be IMO.


The speakers are not readily available...not sure what else you'd like us to discuss besides the specs/measurements which are quite valid and extremely useful, actually.



FG79 said:


> I think with tweeters in particular, specs can be more misleading than with woofers. Some might attempt to sell tweeters because the frequency response is better than the competition, and from my experience that doesn't mean much and might actually be a detriment because the added treble sucks out midrange.


Sucks it out? Where does it go? Sounds like an amplitude issue. If we're shooting for an accurate system, why would better frequency response not be ideal?



FG79 said:


> Woofers with too much excursion, or too low an FS might play very deep but not sound as punchy or as natural. Gone are the days of the early '90s when a 6.5" woofer could play flat past 5 khz.....you're lucky to get 3 khz these days.


You realize a 6.5" speaker begins beaming at roughly 1K...right? If you care nothing for power response, go right ahead and run those 90's 6.5's on up to 5Khz, but you'll have vastly different off axis response characteristics between your mid and tweeter. If you need to meet a tweeter at a higher crossover point, you really need a dedicated midrange to bridge the gap.




FG79 said:


> A properly installed "high end" 6.5" woofer I used to run with 4.25 mm xmax (hint, hint for those that memorize these #s) put out PLENTY of bass when installed and amplified properly (the big door helped too). Going to a woofer with 7-8 mm had a bit more but wasn't night and day difference like people would have you believe.


There are plenty of other factors that are involved, but depending on the output and passband the driver will be playing in, I would say xmax is certainly a useful specification.



FG79 said:


> So where am I going with this? I think speaker manufacturers must sell to specs unfortunately these days. Your new speaker company Andy, I'm sure has been influenced one way or another by the perception of how it should "measure".
> 
> Not going to speculate how (not that it matters anyways), but I know it's there. Our friend from Georgia who is celebrating his 10th anniversary of his company as a revolution against the old guard....even his stuff seems affected, when I read his literature and forum posts. And I like and own his speakers. He argues more than most about "the sound" and it brings on a cadre of angry people saying it's all about the measurements.


You use the measurements to determine how well it might perform in a given application. Of course at the end of the day it's about the sound. No one shows up to an audio competition, loses and then says "yeah, but my speakers have nicer specs". We all are on the quest for better sound. If you understand and know how to interpret the data provided for a driver in question, you have a much better chance of successfully integrating it into a complete system. When a manufacturer (_*most*_ in this case) produces very little actual data, that job becomes much more difficult. In fact, in many cases I would argue that it's because they want to hide some negative performance portion that the data reveals. The fact that Andy (and select others) choose to provide complete data is certainly a BENEFIT and not a detractor. 
Picture this: You go to an auto website to look for a car to purchase. Would you be more likely to purchase the car listed as a "red 2 door coupe, or the one that lists all of the specifications, HP and torque, options, etc? You don't just buy one to see how it performs, you look intelligently at all of the data provided to determine if the specifications fit your application. (Maybe you need a 4wd or larger trunk). 
Maybe your application calls for a driver that will play in a passband with low frequency requirements and you want to ensure that it has low distortion and won't run out of xmax with the power you'll be supplying inside of that passband. Make sense? More data is ALWAYS a good thing. You don't have to choose to use it though 




FG79 said:


> I'm a big fan of paper in most home speakers, but my favorite car audio brand ever was strictly polypropylene cones (Nakamichi SP series). Ok, that was a surprise, but I'll accept it and not let it ruin my preconceived notions that paper is an all conquering cone material and cannot be defeated under any circumstances.


Interesting thing...If you had full measurements of both speakers I'm sure the data could quantify why you liked one versus the other. 







FG79 said:


> Car audio is a different animal, like you said......listening in the car. And how it changes car to car.
> 
> Except I don't think the differences are enormous. I listened to a bunch of Focal speakers on a sound board one day, and liked them in reverse order of price down to maybe the $300 level (starting from about $1000). I listen for a tonal signature in an open room and figure it gets x% worse in a car, and all uniformly. I would be extremely confident in my buying decision under that scenario. I don't worry about on-axis, off axis.


The problem there is that the sound board is a completely different environment that where you'll actually use the drivers. The response you heard in the sound room is NOT the response you will hear in the car.




FG79 said:


> A bit of a ramble, but I felt I had to get my contrarian viewpoint out there on this subject. This stems a lot more from amplifier comparisons than speakers, but it wouldn't surprise me if some really great sounding speakers might measure worse in some areas than the latest raw driver of the day. It's always a possibility. I wouldn't let it bother me though.


Speakers play about 1000x more into a change in a systems sound than an amplifier so there's no comparison there. 

I think the best way to paint the visual of all of what you've said is that your approach to finding your preferred car audio "sound" is more along the lines of using a Broad Axe whereas the 'data crunchers' are using a scalpel. Again, more data is always a good thing.


----------



## thehatedguy

How does a 6 begin to beam at roughly 1k? More like around 2.5k...but I digress.


----------



## cajunner

Audiofrog!

whereyat, big time...




man, as soon as someone says "I'm not going subjective pigeonhole" the words start flying...

I love reading sales pitches that throw down on the useless word scrabble, it's gotten to become a fine art to decipher the bogus from bonafide.

If anything, this debate over sonics being subjective or not should heat up simply because there are actual differences in approach so far, and this may not be the only tricks up Andy's sleeve-

I'm starting to grow on the jump in game, name...


----------



## Darth SQ

cajunner said:


> Audiofrog!
> 
> whereyat, big time...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> man, as soon as someone says "I'm not going subjective pigeonhole" the words start flying...
> 
> I love reading sales pitches that throw down on the useless word scrabble, it's gotten to become a fine art to decipher the bogus from bonafide.
> 
> If anything, this debate over sonics being subjective or not should heat up simply because there are actual differences in approach so far, and this may not be the only tricks up Andy's sleeve-
> 
> I'm starting to grow on the jump in game, name...


For me, there's really no debate to be had.
This is Andy's thread and he'll do product releases in a manner and time he sees fit that works for his company's product timeline.
I'm very glad that he's chosen this forum and has the desire to bring all of us along for the ride. :thumbsup:

Now considering Andy's resume and previously documented successes in this arena, I would think the naysayers might give him some credit that he knows exactly what he's doing and that our chosen hobby will benefit greatly from his new approach and solutions. 
At the very least, we're going to have some innovative and high quality new toys to play with and at the very most, Andy's going to change the car audio industry and pull it out of the rut that the race to zero has created. 

What's that license plate frame saying?
Sit down, shut up, and hold on!


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## captainobvious

thehatedguy said:


> How does a 6 begin to beam at roughly 1k? More like around 2.5k...but I digress.


13500 (sos in sq inches) / 6.5 is the wavelength in sound of the 6.5" cone size. Then roughly half of that to find appx beaming point.


13500/6.5= 2076 
2076/2= 1038hz

Unless my math is wrong? 

If 6.5" drivers _began_ beaming around 2.5Khz, it would be an easy task to mate them up to most any tweeter without regard for power response, no ?


----------



## james2266

captainobvious said:


> 13500 (sos in sq inches) / 6.5 is the wavelength in sound of the 6.5" cone size. Then roughly half of that to find appx beaming point.
> 
> 
> 13500/6.5= 2076
> 2076/2= 1038hz
> 
> Unless my math is wrong?
> 
> If 6.5" drivers _began_ beaming around 2.5Khz, it would be an easy task to mate them up to most any tweeter without regard for power response, no ?


I'll take a stab at this even if I am not 100% on it. I think your math is flawed. A 6.5 inch driver does not have 6.5 inch radiating area and I think that is what you need to take for the calculation. I think the radiating area of a typical 6.5 is somewhere around 4.5 inch or so which would put the number around the 2.5 kHz that was mentioned. Sorry if I have all of this wrong.


----------



## minbari

You have it right... the wavelength of the radiating diameter is equal to the beaming freq

sent from my phone using digital farts


----------



## Grizz Archer

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> FG79,
> It's not all that complicated. For the most part, speakers sound like they measure. After nearly 100 years of humans designing, listening to and measuring the performance of speakers, we're pretty good at characterizing the performance using data. For people who aren't engineers or who have no interest in understanding how the objective data correlates to preference, then a controlled audition and comparison with other speakers can provide some empirical information on which to base a purchase decision.
> 
> However...not understanding the correlation doesn't make it inapplicable. The problem in the audio industry is that too many companies prey on the non-understanding of the correlation to sell hogwash.
> 
> My objective is to provide objective data as I have it, to help people understand how to use these (and other speakers) to extract the best performance and to let happy and unhappy customers (i hope there won't be too many of those) provide their own subjective assessments. My job isn't to refute one's preference. My job is just to help you guys make your cars sound great.


Well said Andy. While SQ is subjective, I have always believed that sound reproduction is quite objective. Making a transducer that can reproduce the sound uncolored still allows the user to EQ it the way he/she likes it. But making a speakers to sound in any other fashion requires EQ just to fix it. Combine that with the task of EQing the vehicle's signature acoustics and you end with insane amounts of EQ to get to try to make it right, which in many cases, can sound "over processed" IMO. I think engineering a great driver is 100% objective, and EQing is subjective (to a point), but sadly, most of the industry thinks otherwise, or simply does not care. Maybe I'm stupid, but that is my philosophy and I'm stickin' to it. lol


----------



## Grizz Archer

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> For me, there's really no debate to be had.
> This is Andy's thread and he'll do product releases in a manner and time he sees fit that works for his company's product timeline.
> I'm very glad that he's chosen this forum and has the desire to bring all of us along for the ride. :thumbsup:
> 
> Now considering Andy's resume and previously documented successes in this arena, I would think the naysayers might give him some credit that he knows exactly what he's doing and that our chosen hobby will benefit greatly from his new approach and solutions.
> At the very least, we're going to have some innovative and high quality new toys to play with and at the very most, Andy's going to change the car audio industry and pull it out of the rut that the race to zero has created.
> 
> What's that license plate frame saying?
> Sit down, shut up, and hold on!
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


Agreed. I'm thinking "at the very most"...


----------



## FG79

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> FG79,
> It's not all that complicated. For the most part, speakers sound like they measure. After nearly 100 years of humans designing, listening to and measuring the performance of speakers, we're pretty good at characterizing the performance using data. For people who aren't engineers or who have no interest in understanding how the objective data correlates to preference, then a controlled audition and comparison with other speakers can provide some empirical information on which to base a purchase decision.
> 
> However...not understanding the correlation doesn't make it inapplicable. The problem in the audio industry is that too many companies prey on the non-understanding of the correlation to sell hogwash.
> 
> My objective is to provide objective data as I have it, to help people understand how to use these (and other speakers) to extract the best performance and to let happy and unhappy customers (i hope there won't be too many of those) provide their own subjective assessments. My job isn't to refute one's preference. My job is just to help you guys make your cars sound great.


That is fair my friend, and I appreciate that.

I guess the real gist of what I was trying to say without being long winded about it is I have seen numerous times on this forum and elsewhere people saying "XYZ cannot be good because of _____". This is not everybody here, but enough that it carries a lot of weight. 

I see it all the time with subs for instance. 

Obviously you are not doing any of that, but anytime I see the specs word focused on a little too much, it triggers that Pavlov response. 

My apologies. 

Back on track because I'm not sure it was mentioned, but what is the voice coil diameter of your 6.5" woofer?


----------



## FG79

captainobvious said:


> Sucks it out? Where does it go? Sounds like an amplitude issue. If we're shooting for an accurate system, why would better frequency response not be ideal?
> 
> Frequency response per se isn't bad, but in general if a system has more treble, it will have less midrange and bass (and vice versa coming up from the other side of the spectrum). I use this as an example of how someone could argue that a tweeter won't sound as good because it doesn't play as high, and I'm here to say it probably will sound better because it doesn't play as high. Don't take this as a blanket statement, just making an example. And yes, I've seen it once or twice in real life.
> 
> 
> You realize a 6.5" speaker begins beaming at roughly 1K...right? If you care nothing for power response, go right ahead and run those 90's 6.5's on up to 5Khz, but you'll have vastly different off axis response characteristics between your mid and tweeter. If you need to meet a tweeter at a higher crossover point, you really need a dedicated midrange to bridge the gap.
> 
> I don't know if that is true, because if it was you'd never have a good sounding 2 way ever. How would you explain a good sounding vintage pro audio 2 way crossed at 800 hz using an 18" woofer?
> 
> 
> There are plenty of other factors that are involved, but depending on the output and passband the driver will be playing in, I would say xmax is certainly a useful specification.
> 
> The problem with xmax is the idea that more of it is better without any consequences. Really, is that the case?
> 
> This is not like weight, where less is usually a better thing. Extra xmax is more distance for the cone to travel. At some point you will sacrifice transient response, the ability to play higher frequencies with flat response, and also with too much bass you will throw off the tonality.
> 
> You need some xmax, but I argue you need a lot less of it than is commonly accepted as necessary. It seems to be a new trend the last few years. Is the physical property of xmax sound like something that was a complete mystery in the 1940s? They already had field coil speakers and alnico magnets back then, but couldn't figure out displacement?
> 
> You use the measurements to determine how well it might perform in a given application. Of course at the end of the day it's about the sound. No one shows up to an audio competition, loses and then says "yeah, but my speakers have nicer specs". We all are on the quest for better sound. If you understand and know how to interpret the data provided for a driver in question, you have a much better chance of successfully integrating it into a complete system. When a manufacturer (_*most*_ in this case) produces very little actual data, that job becomes much more difficult. In fact, in many cases I would argue that it's because they want to hide some negative performance portion that the data reveals. The fact that Andy (and select others) choose to provide complete data is certainly a BENEFIT and not a detractor.
> Picture this: You go to an auto website to look for a car to purchase. Would you be more likely to purchase the car listed as a "red 2 door coupe, or the one that lists all of the specifications, HP and torque, options, etc? You don't just buy one to see how it performs, you look intelligently at all of the data provided to determine if the specifications fit your application. (Maybe you need a 4wd or larger trunk).
> Maybe your application calls for a driver that will play in a passband with low frequency requirements and you want to ensure that it has low distortion and won't run out of xmax with the power you'll be supplying inside of that passband. Make sense? More data is ALWAYS a good thing. You don't have to choose to use it though
> 
> As I've said before, I'm not saying provide no specs or very, very little specs. But there comes a point where it gives you some idea but ultimately no final conclusion. I've argued that this stuff is too complicated to resolve completely on paper. And that basis comes from equipment that is theoretically supposed to sound better because of measurements but don't. It's not to say all measurements are meaningless, but some of them can be or maybe they're misleading.
> 
> For instance, look at cars. You have the Nissan GTR which is the theoretical engineer's wet dream. A supercomputer on wheels that will lap the Nurburgring better than many Ferraris, Porsches, Lamborghinis. The question is, have you ever driven those cars back to back? The GTR would be the least desirable car in terms of the overall feel and experience driving the car at anything but racing conditions. It's quite boring, relatively speaking and I'm not in the minority who feels that way. You read a comparison in Motor Trend, Road & Track, Car & Driver, etc....they provide all the objective, measured data and they provide their subjective feedback. The fastest or best handling cars don't always win the desirablity contest. How do you quantify the panache of a Ferrari? You cannot do it with that data sheet, that's for sure.
> 
> This is very applicable with audio. Amongst a few drivers that measure in the same relative ballpark, you'll need to use ears to make final judgment.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting thing...If you had full measurements of both speakers I'm sure the data could quantify why you liked one versus the other.
> 
> Yeah, if I get around to it and have the time I'd do it for fun. My approach is to do it the opposite way......measure what I like and see if I can correlate. Measure what I don't like and see if I can correlate as well.
> 
> 
> 
> The problem there is that the sound board is a completely different environment that where you'll actually use the drivers. The response you heard in the sound room is NOT the response you will hear in the car.
> 
> It isn't, but if a tweeter is bright as s**** in speaker A, whereas it is a lot smoother in speaker B, you don't think that's enough evidence to make a decision?
> 
> 
> Speakers play about 1000x more into a change in a systems sound than an amplifier so there's no comparison there.
> 
> I think the best way to paint the visual of all of what you've said is that your approach to finding your preferred car audio "sound" is more along the lines of using a Broad Axe whereas the 'data crunchers' are using a scalpel. Again, more data is always a good thing.


Speakers matter, and they are nice. We'll have to agree to disagree on amps.


----------



## FG79

Hanatsu said:


> Eh? Seriously... what? I dislike that you're constantly implying that "we" are somehow incompetent and doesn't know anything just because the majority here don't wanna use silly, useless subjective terms that means absolutely nothing to describe the performance of audio equipment. I'm truly thankful that this site haven't become overrun with audiophile foolishness with preposterous claims that cannot the quantified by any reasonable logic. I think it's absolutely wonderful with useful information that Andy is supplying.
> 
> Having said that, a speaker can be evaluated FULLY by the measured performance. This is widely understood and are not filled with the same mysticism as "audiophile-grade" electronics. I've measured countless drivers, I know precisely what to look for, a driver that measures good - sounds good. In all cases, period. If it doesn't sound good it's because of user error and incorrect system implementation.
> 
> How the driver interacts with the environment (dispersion) and how the user intend to use it (install/tuning) affect the final performance. Evaluating drivers by ear while the driver is part of a system is a recipe for fail.


I just lost an entire manuscript of a response just now (web browser just did something crazy).

Just out of curiousity.....tell me what you look for in measuring a driver in determining it's performance, and what are you looking to achieve exactly with this performance?

BTW, I see nothing wrong with evaluating a speaker in a system so long as you can keep it consistent. If you had a system at home or in a car, and had the opportunity to audition two different speakers for an upgrade......why wouldn't you just plug and play? 

The philosophy of trying to study everything in a vacuum is overrated.


----------



## sundownz

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> *However...not understanding the correlation doesn't make it inapplicable. The problem in the audio industry is that too many companies prey on the non-understanding of the correlation to sell hogwash.*


Thank you.

My segment is a bit different from your segment... but there is too much "voodoo" being spouted out constantly.

PS : It's not often I run across someone on the forums who posts information that I enjoy reading these days; but thanks for doing that Andy -- and keep it up, the products sound like they will be incredible.


----------



## WLDock

Wow, been away for awhile and come back to see Andy no longer with Harmon but heading a no holds barred speaker company. Looks exciting!

Don't personally know Andy but he sure was an extremely helpful fella on the forums and through email and PM's with Harmon. Best of luck to you with this startup...subscribed!


----------



## captainobvious

james2266 said:


> I'll take a stab at this even if I am not 100% on it. I think your math is flawed. *A 6.5 inch driver does not have 6.5 inch radiating area and I think that is what you need to take for the calculation.* I think the radiating area of a typical 6.5 is somewhere around 4.5 inch or so which would put the number around the 2.5 kHz that was mentioned. Sorry if I have all of this wrong.


Good point. Yes, you're supposed to calculate based on the diameter from midpoint of surround to midpoint of surround. I was calculating by 6.5" of radiating surface so good catch there.

Even still, if you take a "6 1/2" driver and assume it has 5" of radiating surface, you still end up with beaming beginning at appx 1350hz.

13500 / 5= 2700hz. 2700hz / 2 = 1350hz.

No bueno?



minbari said:


> You have it right... the wavelength of the radiating diameter is equal to the beaming freq



Quoting from Bikinpunk's post on the subject. Note the bolded part. Unless the calculation is incorrect?



Bikinpunk said:


> For example, let's look at the Scan Speak 10f midrange.
> The Madisound Speaker Store
> 
> *This is called a 4" mid, but the diameter is only about 78mm, measured from surround to surround. That's roughly 3 inches.
> 13,500 (speed of sound in/s) / 3inches = 4,500 hz.
> 
> This number is just the wavelength in sound of 3 inches. We need to get one-half of this to determine approximate beaming. So, we get:
> 4500hz/2 = ~ 2250hz*
> 
> The above means at about 2250hz, the response between on axis vs off axis begins to diverge. Looking at the measurements below, you can see this is pretty close to an accurate calculation:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This image has been resized. Click this bar to view the full image. The original image is sized %1%2.





And sorry for taking your thread off point Andy. If I'm incorrect in my math for approximating where beaming begins, then please let me know. I think that's an important consideration in system design for even power response between the drivers.


.


----------



## cajunner

is this not the point of having a 1.5" tweeter to use with the 6.5" woofer, so that you can actually cross over low enough at the tweeter to avoid most of the beaming issue?

and if this 1.5" tweeter is capable of response upwards of 17K on axis, and still good at -3db at 30 degrees off axis, then that would be cool..

especially if you can cross it below 1.8K without blowing it on 100W of clean power, or hearing it distort.


----------



## captainobvious

FG79 said:


> BTW, I see nothing wrong with evaluating a speaker in a system so long as you can keep it consistent. If you had a system at home or in a car, and had the opportunity to audition two different speakers for an upgrade......why wouldn't you just plug and play?
> 
> The philosophy of trying to study everything in a vacuum is overrated.


I think that's part of the problem right there. We dont have the ability to simply "audition/demo" drivers in our system. That's why we have to make the most educated decision possible (especially with cost considerations).
I can't just say "Hey I like those brand Y drivers, I think I'll demo them in my system"- because there isn't a demo program for speakers like this first off, and because of that there is a cost and _gamble_ associated with these purchases. In addition, I can't simply demo them in someone else's vehicle and get an accurate representation of what they will do in my vehicle because it's a totally different environment, with different dimensions, angles, enclosure types and sizes, materials, system components, installation and tuning, etc. 
This is expressly why you use the specifications and data provided to give you the best idea of the _correct application_ for the driver and determine if that fits the system being designed.

In short, the data is important because we cant simply demo the product in our specific environment.


----------



## captainobvious

cajunner said:


> is this not the point of having a 1.5" tweeter to use with the 6.5" woofer, so that you can actually cross over low enough at the tweeter to avoid most of the beaming issue?


Precisely. Or a dedicated midrange as part of the complete system.


----------



## Hanatsu

captainobvious said:


> I think that's part of the problem right there. We dont have the ability to simply "audition/demo" drivers in our system. That's why we have to make the most educated decision possible (especially with cost considerations).
> I can't just say "Hey I like those brand Y drivers, I think I'll demo them in my system"- because there isn't a demo program for speakers like this first off, and because of that there is a cost and _gamble_ associated with these purchases. In addition, I can't simply demo them in someone else's vehicle and get an accurate representation of what they will do in my vehicle because it's a totally different environment, with different dimensions, angles, enclosure types and sizes, materials, system components, installation and tuning, etc.
> This is expressly why you use the specifications and data provided to give you the best idea of the _correct application_ for the driver and determine if that fits the system being designed.
> 
> In short, the data is important because we cant simply demo the product in our specific environment.


Exactly my point...


----------



## Hanatsu

cajunner said:


> is this not the point of having a 1.5" tweeter to use with the 6.5" woofer, so that you can actually cross over low enough at the tweeter to avoid most of the beaming


A very good idea, yes


----------



## cajunner

captainobvious said:


> I think that's part of the problem right there. We dont have the ability to simply "audition/demo" drivers in our system. That's why we have to make the most educated decision possible (especially with cost considerations).
> I can't just say "Hey I like those brand Y drivers, I think I'll demo them in my system"- because there isn't a demo program for speakers like this first off, and because of that there is a cost and _gamble_ associated with these purchases. In addition, I can't simply demo them in someone else's vehicle and get an accurate representation of what they will do in my vehicle because it's a totally different environment, with different dimensions, angles, enclosure types and sizes, materials, system components, installation and tuning, etc.
> This is expressly why you use the specifications and data provided to give you the best idea of the _correct application_ for the driver and determine if that fits the system being designed.
> 
> In short, the data is important because we cant simply demo the product in our specific environment.


and this goes back to the larger point that home audio is the audiophile's domain, where after speaker placement and slight room correction using a floor carpet, you have nothing left to do but toe-in, or toe-out. 

and who wants to do that all day?

much better to believe interconnects are going to magically remove the veil, or speaker wires made of silver will give you 30% clearer windows, when 3% more conductivity is the basis for the claim...

it's strange brew when you take a known quantity and subject it to a unknown quantity, and car audio is about as unknown quantity as you'll get.

you like a-pillar tweeters? how about kick panel mids? maybe you like door-mounted mid bass and dash mounted midrange?

you can't hardly diagram out all the various combinations in installation alone, much less the mapping of the interior with each permutation.

there is something to be said that an accurate driver will make every car installation better, when you're trying to defend the lesser performing drivers on "tests" that aren't subjective in nature. 

car audio requires the extra detail, the polar plots, the Klippel, the impulse response, because the installation varies so much. At home you can do apples to apples all day long, and benefit from some variations like floor bounce (Allison) or vertical directivity (D'Appolito) or just changing up the crossover slopes (1st order) but when you apply some of these techniques to the car environment, the home audio guru science falls flat, it doesn't address the basics.


----------



## BEAVER

I'm sure I've missed it somewhere, but when should we expect to see some of these products hit the streets?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## WLDock

cajunner said:


> and this goes back to the larger point that home audio is the audiophile's domain, where after speaker placement and slight room correction using a floor carpet, you have nothing left to do but toe-in, or toe-out.
> 
> and who wants to do that all day?
> 
> much better to believe interconnects are going to magically remove the veil, or speaker wires made of silver will give you 30% clearer windows, when 3% more conductivity is the basis for the claim...
> 
> it's strange brew when you take a known quantity and subject it to a unknown quantity, and car audio is about as unknown quantity as you'll get.
> 
> you like a-pillar tweeters? how about kick panel mids? maybe you like door-mounted mid bass and dash mounted midrange?
> 
> you can't hardly diagram out all the various combinations in installation alone, much less the mapping of the interior with each permutation.
> 
> there is something to be said that an accurate driver will make every car installation better, when you're trying to defend the lesser performing drivers on "tests" that aren't subjective in nature.
> 
> car audio requires the extra detail, the polar plots, the Klippel, the impulse response, because the installation varies so much. At home you can do apples to apples all day long, and benefit from some variations like floor bounce (Allison) or vertical directivity (D'Appolito) or just changing up the crossover slopes (1st order) but when you apply some of these techniques to the car environment, the home audio guru science falls flat, it doesn't address the basics.


Wow, I had to re-quote that, it was good. The hurdles in car audio are not few!


----------



## t3sn4f2

t3sn4f2 said:


> Andy, do you have more inf. on the 2.5" mid? Curious to see if it is going to be a true midrange.


Gonna bump this back up, guess it got lost in all the screw talk.


----------



## 14642

OK, let's clear up something about dispersion. 

The formula for round drivers is basically driver circumference divided by wavelength. When the result is greater than 1, the dispersion is into all angles--that means the output is the same on axis and at all forward angles off axis. Where the result is 2, the dispersion has begun to narrow. At 3, on axis and off axis response are the same up to about 30 degrees. At 4, dispersion is a lobe centered at 0 degrees and the off axis limit is about 15 degrees. At 5 you're good to about 10 degrees and a couple of side lobes begin to form. At 10, the speaker is good on axis only and two lobes begin to form on either side. 

Now, you can do the math. 

The moral of the story here is that if you use speakers at frequencies below the point at which circumference/wavelength=1, you don't have to aim them *and it doesn't matter if you do*. If you use them much higher than that, the reflected sound will PROBABLY have a hole and the direct sound may not. That's sometimes a PITA to EQ.

Those are the rules. These rules aren't undone by some slick new cone material. Phase plugs don't undo them either. There's no magic and anyone who tells you that there's something fundamentally different about his speaker that YOU CAN'T SEE, that DOESN'T LOOK LIKE OR ACT LIKE AN ADDITIONAL RADIATOR ATTACHED TO THE CENTER OF THE CONE, THAT DOESN'T USE MULTIPLE DRIVERS AND SOME DSP TO DO SOME KIND OF BEAM FORMING has either invented something that 100 years of trying was unable to invent or is pulling your leg.


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

Andy, what measurement unit are we using for driver circumference here?


----------



## ErinH

Depends on the unit you use for speed of sound. If you is m/s then you need to divide by driver size in meters. If you use in/s, you use driver size in inches. 

Speakers beam based on the geometry. Meaning circular speakers beam the same in regards to size because it's the same radius all the way around, but a rectangular speaker beams differently based it's dimension. A ribbon is a good example of this. Look at RAAL specs and you'll see that the horizontal beaming point is different than the vertical beaming point.

edit: for clarification


----------



## cajunner

bikinpunk said:


> Depends on the unit you use for speed of sound. If you is m/s then you need to divide by driver size in meters. If you use in/s, you use driver size in inches.
> 
> Speakers beam based on the smallest geometry. Meaning circular speakers beam the same in regards to size, but a rectangular speaker beams based it's smallest dimension. A ribbon is a good example of this. Look at RAAL specs and you'll see that the horizontal beaming point is different than the vertical beaming point.


and the "beaming" of a ribbon, is also like a line array in that it produces narrowed vertical energy and that increases gain on the horizontal.

this gain is how concert speaker line arrays get the sound to throw so far into the audience, with the normal rate of energy loss per meter halved.

you wouldn't think it, that a little 8mm wide by 45 mm high ribbon exhibits characteristics of a line array, but that's what I've read.


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

Ah stupidity on my part. For some reason I was seeing frequency instead of wavelength. Ill blame it on long hours.


----------



## t3sn4f2

Andy, is the 2.5" speaker an insensitive 250Hz+ speaker or is it a more sensitive limited low end speaker?


----------



## 14642

t3sn4f2 said:


> Andy, is the 2.5" speaker an insensitive 250Hz+ speaker or is it a more sensitive limited low end speaker?


We're still tweaking the design of the 2.5". It's a midrange. It's designed to bridge the gap between the 6" and the 1" tweeter so everything can be crossed over where the dispersion is wide. 

The idea that a tiny driver should play down to 200Hz so all the vocals come from one driver is unnecessary and has some serious drawbacks in terms of distortion of several kinds, power handling and it just isn't necessary.


----------



## quietfly

Purdy......


----------



## Dodslobber

Beautiful! I really hope these will be in my price range when released, I WANT!


----------



## rton20s

Rendering looks great. Just like the others. 

That is one beefy looking crossover. Is the chrome dial the tweeter attenuation switch? I couldn't really read what the labels said.


----------



## sqnut

Very pretty, would love to tune and hear a pair.


----------



## sjr033

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> OK, let's clear up something about dispersion.
> 
> The formula for round drivers is basically driver circumference divided by wavelength.


What I am missing here? The wavelength gets shorter the higher the frequency. So dividing by a small number will get a larger number. For example...
A 6" driver has a circumference of 18.84" and 4,000Hz has a wavelength of 3.39". 18.84/3.39=5.56 and 5,000Hz is 2.71". 18.84/2.71=6.95.


----------



## 14642

^^I'm an idiot. I typed the inverse of the numbers. 

C/W<1, All directions
C/W=2, begins to narrow
C/W=3, more narrowing, good to 30 degrees
C/W=4, lobe good to a little less than 30 degrees
C/W=5, good to 15 degrees, side lobes begin to form
C/W=10, on axis only, two small lobes on either side. 

Sorry about that.


----------



## 14642

Fixed the original post. Sorry about that.


----------



## Schizm

I'm just hoping to see an 8 to 10" mid bass soon after the main sets release


----------



## t3sn4f2

Schizm said:


> I'm just hoping to see an 8 to 10" mid bass soon after the main sets release


Probably going to have to wait till they make 8" midbass's standard in cars. These top of the line models are great and pricey but they are just as importantly install friendly for the masses (ie the ones who pay the bills and make it all possible ).


----------



## Infinity

Almost a shame to mount those through a baffle. The rendering is beautifully simplistic


----------



## Schizm

t3sn4f2 said:


> Probably going to have to wait till they make 8" midbass's standard in cars. These top of the line models are great and pricey but they are just as importantly install friendly for the masses (ie the ones who pay the bills and make it all possible ).


So true and probably more so at his quality level


----------



## 14642

Under the knob is a big-ass L-Pad for adjusting the tweeter without screwing with the crossover frequency and slope.


----------



## Electrodynamic

Everything looks great Andy!


----------



## Grizz Archer

Here is a link to a new thread that includes the press release from CE Outlook...

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...ofrog-attracts-industry-vets.html#post2083907


----------



## Darth SQ

About damn time! :thumbsup:


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## thehatedguy

Congrats Grizz and Gary!


----------



## deeppinkdiver

sub'd to keep a close eye on your progress. Late to dinner but always ready to eat!

Congrats to you on your venture Andy.


----------



## robtr8

Just curious about the passive crossover cost vs going active. Stuff looks really nice. Looking forward to the final product!


----------



## Grizz Archer

robtr8 said:


> Just curious about the passive crossover cost vs going active. Stuff looks really nice. Looking forward to the final product!


The xovers are not cheap, but they are proper. Rather than put a bunch of resistors on the board for attenuation, there is a big-ass, heavy-ass solid potentiometer. You cannot attenuate a tweeter with resistors and keep the exact same crossover points. Each level of attenuation changes the characteristics of the crossover. These pots are expensive, but they allow a crossover to work properly and still yield the ability to adjust the level of the tweeter. They are not practical for the masses because will not spend the money and they do not understand the benefits. But for our target customers, it is the only way to go.

So, back to your original thought - cost vs active. I would not say that it is a matter of cost but a matter of simplicity. If you do not want a bazillion channels, several amps, and crazy processing, the passive networks would certainly be the way to go. My current build will have 3-way front comps, 2-way center, 2-way rear ambiance, and sub. So I need 13 channels. 4/6/8 channel amps make this possible, but signal processing could very well be a nightmare. An 8-channel processor simply is not going to cut it. Or is it?!


----------



## Coppertone

^^^ As an aside for both if those amps that I've purchased from you. One I've donated to a Church bus build, and the second one is in my car audio room waiting for a build that will maximize its talent. Thank you once again for bringing that one to my attention.


----------



## Grizz Archer

Coppertone said:


> ^^^ As an aside for both if those amps that I've purchased from you. One I've donated to a Church bus build, and the second one is in my car audio room waiting for a build that will maximize its talent. Thank you once again for bringing that one to my attention.


I heard about the church bus donation. That is AWESOME!!! Going to take intricate system to utilize the D'Artagnan to it's potential...


----------



## Coppertone

I know and sadly my Legacy is done and I'm not swapping out anymore gear. I really feel as this rate, it will go on to a display board for me to cherish.


----------



## Grizz Archer

Coppertone said:


> I know and sadly my Legacy is done and I'm not swapping out anymore gear. I really feel as this rate, it will go on to a display board for me to cherish.


Buddy, I do not believe you, and I would not believe anybody else either.  It will stare at you and beg to be used. But saving it for the perfect install is better than just using it to use it.


----------



## Darth SQ

Grizz Archer said:


> The xovers are not cheap, but they are proper. Rather than put a bunch of resistors on the board for attenuation, there is a big-ass, heavy-ass solid potentiometer. You cannot attenuate a tweeter with resistors and keep the exact same crossover points. Each level of attenuation changes the characteristics of the crossover. These pots are expensive, but they allow a crossover to work properly and still yield the ability to adjust the level of the tweeter. They are not practical for the masses because will not spend the money and they do not understand the benefits. But for our target customers, it is the only way to go.
> 
> So, back to your original thought - cost vs active. I would not say that it is a matter of cost but a matter of simplicity. If you do not want a bazillion channels, several amps, and crazy processing, the passive networks would certainly be the way to go. My current build will have 3-way front comps, 2-way center, 2-way rear ambiance, and sub. So I need 13 channels. 4/6/8 channel amps make this possible, but signal processing could very well be a nightmare. An 8-channel processor simply is not going to cut it. Or is it?!


OMG all that you just typed keeps me up at night as well trying to work through my self imposed nightmare.
Thanks for reading my mind. 


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Coppertone

Grizz Archer said:


> Buddy, I do not believe you, and I would not believe anybody else either.  It will stare at you and beg to be used. But saving it for the perfect install is better than just using it to use it.


I concur as I would need a 2 way front stage, and an IB configuration in my opinion for this to work well.


----------



## cajunner

Coppertone said:


> I concur as I would need a 2 way front stage, and an IB configuration in my opinion for this to work well.


which you may get to, in time.

If the reality is you are crushed by the risk/reward ratio, of using an NIB collector's item and not in it's full capacity at first, then maybe the amp is not for you. 

I know, it sounds kind of insulting that someone else out there will use that amp and you say to yourself, "I wouldn't have gotten everything out of that amp" as a way of explanation, but don't kid yourself.

You have just as much right to break the seals, and tie that amp to a load as anyone else. Letting it sit on a shelf while a car is in need of amplification is an ascetic exercise, and I have too many ascetic exercises already, I can't condone someone not using what they have on account of their feelings that they aren't worthy or whatever.


if you just want to retain resale value in the amp, I understand that approach, and cannot remain disagreeable but the other way... no.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

now about this passive crossover L-Pad, I've been looking at several older model home audio crossovers with these, and the more watts, the bigger the pad it seems.


has there been any new art, that allows for smaller L-pads soaking up higher power?

does this mean the Audiofrog is, in it's passive, or "captive" state, only going to be rated for 100W of RMS, which anything more puts the tiger out of the cage?

And in true DIY fashion, is it feasible for me to copy whatever new tech is up Andy's sleeve by utilizing some home audio drivers and L-pads, for a rough approximation?

I really like this idea, and the run on legacy, older crossovers has made the getting, not so good as ebay continues to increase the prices on the parts, I used to see crossovers going for a song and now you can't get your hands on a pair for less than 35 bucks... and with a snazzy high-RMS rated L-pad in the mix, even more!


----------



## Mrimstad

Havent been paying much attention to this forum in a wile. To much work.
But great news Andy you have my attention once again


----------



## 14642

So the reason for the L-Pad is, as Grizz stated, precision adjustment without altering the crossover frequency or slope. It's not a potentiometer, it's a pair of adjustable resistors that are designed to maintain a constant load impedance, when coupled with the speaker's impedance. One of the resistors is in parallel with the tweeter and the other is in series. There are plenty of links on google that explain how an L-Pad works. What makes it cool here is that the range of attenuation isn't 0dB to -infinity as it would be with just a pot. It's 0- -12dB and the rotation allows us to provide markings in 1/4dB steps. You can see that in the photo above. 

FWIW, you can build an L-Pad for a specific value once you've determined the appropriate value of attenuation using a pair of resistors placed after the crossover circuit. To provide several steps requires lots of resistors. That isn't often done in car audio component crossovers because it's expensive. So are these adjustable L-Pads. 

cajunner, I'd like to respond to your post, but I can't figure out what you're trying to say, other than expressing some chagrin at a 100W RMS power rating for a tweeter.


----------



## captainobvious

100watts on a tweeter with even _average _sensitivity is enough to make things beyond extremely loud


----------



## JVD240

I highly doubt any dealer would do that. You're adding unnecessary labor and reducing margins.

You think like a DIY'er... 

Why not tune a system with a loaner DSP and then build all of the appropriate circuits to replace it once dialed in?


----------



## 14642

Why don't we just provide schematics of the crossover circuits and you guys can find your own capacitors, wind your own inductors and calculate your own L-Pads and do all the experiments you want? 

It's funny to me that passive crossover design is often thought of as being a simple calculation and a bucket full of parts. It's a really complicated process and lots of things have to be taken into account. Distance between drivers, coil offset, driver response and impedance. These have been designed to minimize the effect of differing driver placement. If you don't have a chamber or a way to make reliable gated measurements and a program that helps you optimize, then you're in for weeks and weeks of work.


----------



## Darth SQ

I like shiny things.
Thanks Andy. 


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## rton20s

Andy, I do not recall if you have stated or not. Are the passives bi-amp or tri-amp capable (depending on configuration)?


----------



## 14642

Hey, they aren't bi-amp capable. All of the signal grounds are shared. The idea with these things is that you can hook up a big beefy amp to the passives when the tweeter and the mid are located near each other without having to do two amps. Then, if you want to do a 3-way, you should use a separate amp for the midbass. 

These are all 2-way models for use with any of the mids and any of the tweeters. There's only one configuration that isn't supported--the 2.5" mid and the 1.5" tweeter.


----------



## cajunner

Q&A: Andy Wehmeyer of Audiofrog


in case anyone missed it...


----------



## Fast Hot Rod

Good stuff, Cajunner... thanks for sharing.


----------



## Darth SQ

cajunner said:


> Q&A: Andy Wehmeyer of Audiofrog
> 
> 
> in case anyone missed it...


That's not Andy W., that's Steven Spielberg. 


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## 14642

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> That's not Andy W., that's Steven Spielberg.
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


You have no idea how often I hear that in languages all over the world.


----------



## quietfly

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> You have no idea how often I hear that in languages all over the world.



lol if i were you i'd prolly use it to get free drinks everywhere......


----------



## Militarymisfit

Is it summer yet? It feels like it. 

I'm still catching up on this thread since i've been gone but I'm digging what you guys are doing.

That L-Pad (Lilypad) cross over is awesome.


----------



## Darth SQ

Before it gets too far into the rumor mill which has already begun to gain steam, my very good friend Grizz Archer is no longer with Audiofrog. 
More to come on this I am sure.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## quietfly

Yikes......


----------



## ErinH

Grizz posted it on his FB page. He didn't make it sound overly dramatic. Just not a place for him there is essentially how he put it. He didn't make a big deal of it that I saw, so I don't see the need to get anything started here.


----------



## Darth SQ

ErinH said:


> Grizz posted it on his FB page. He didn't make it sound overly dramatic. Just not a place for him there is essentially how he put it. He didn't make a big deal of it that I saw, so I don't see the need to get anything started here.


No one is starting anything here Erin; just getting ahead of the rumors.
BTW, I just checked and there's no fb post on his page about it so I'm not sure what you're talking about.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Angrywhopper

How long was Grizz with Audiofrog?


----------



## ErinH

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> No one is staring anything here Erin; just getting ahead of the rumors.
> 
> BTW, I just checked and there's no fb post on his page about it so I'm not sure what you're talking about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bret
> 
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR



No one has posted here in nearly two months so I just don't see the need to stop a something that hadn't carried over here. Even more so because I don't understand what the rumor could even be.  

You're right. Not Facebook. LinkedIn. My bad.


----------



## quietfly

From what i've read. It was an amiable parting. with Grizz wishing Andy much success, and restating publicly that they are still friends......

Sometime the timing of things is just off...


----------



## 14642

Guys, it was a sad day for all of us. Grizz is a great guy and I like him very much--always have.


----------



## Grizz Archer

Everybody... Just to avoid blanks being filled in with rumors, it was as simple as Audiofrog is not ready for a guy like me yet. Andy hired me in advance of need to help me out when I came back to the states from Germany. It also takes awhile to build up a clientele large enough to keep me busy with traveling, training, and other tasks. It is just too early for that. Andy and I will always be friends...


----------



## sqnut

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> That's not Andy W., that's Steven Spielberg.
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR





Andy Wehmeyer said:


> You have no idea how often I hear that in languages all over the world.


Serious look alike. Wow


----------



## quietfly

Which witch is which.......


----------



## Angrywhopper

Thread needs a :bump:


----------



## rton20s

I'm thinking that information and user experiences should start trickling in soon. Audiofrog was at Knowledgefest, and I know at least one shop has a set of drivers in hand for a customer build.


----------



## Angrywhopper

rton20s said:


> I'm thinking that information and user experiences should start trickling in soon. Audiofrog was at Knowledgefest, and I know at least one shop has a set of drivers in hand for a customer build.


I tweeted some random guy on Twitter who was at their booth and he had good things to say about them.


----------



## mrpeabody

I've seen some pics from knowledgefest and the drivers look fantastic!


----------



## t3sn4f2

Anything, new to share?


----------



## Darth SQ

t3sn4f2 said:


> Anything, new to share?


Here...........like this page and you will be updated more often. 

https://www.facebook.com/audiofrogInc


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## rton20s

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> Here...........like this page and you will be updated more often.
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/audiofrogInc
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


Or just know which shops to frequent for some hands on. :wiseguy:


----------



## spl152db

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> Here...........like this page and you will be updated more often.
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/audiofrogInc
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


That's annoying and not an answer to the question. Also not related to the forum.


----------



## rton20s

spl152db said:


> That's annoying and not an answer to the question. Also not related to the forum.


It absolutely is. Audiofrog has chosen to use one of the most popular social media sites in the world to push information out to the public. In some instances, sooner than to our little community forum. Crazy that they might want to reach a broader audience than just us, isn't it? 

Bret's response was perfectly legitimate. You don't have to like Facebook, but it doesn't change the fact that it and other social media outlets have become the fastest way to reach the broadest audience possible. 

(From someone whose side business is based almost entirely on social media sales and marketing.)


----------



## spl152db

rton20s said:


> It absolutely is. Audiofrog has chosen to use one of the most popular social media sites in the world to push information out to the public. In some instances, sooner than to our little community forum. Crazy that they might want to reach a broader audience than just us, isn't it?
> 
> Bret's response was perfectly legitimate. You don't have to like Facebook, but it doesn't change the fact that it and other social media outlets have become the fastest way to reach the broadest audience possible.
> 
> (From someone whose side business is based almost entirely on social media sales and marketing.)


That's not even what I'm saying. But if that's the answer then that should replace all posts on this thread and the thread closed. Since it's now a refer to facebook thread rather than news as promised. Plus the promised news was already delivered so no need for this and I guess the expectation of updates was out of line. Either way lock the thread seems like the best answer.


----------



## Darth SQ

spl152db said:


> That's annoying and not an answer to the question. Also not related to the forum.


Lol....sorry that doesn't work for you.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Darth SQ

spl152db said:


> That's not even what I'm saying. But if that's the answer then that should replace all posts on this thread and the thread closed. Since it's now a refer to facebook thread rather than news as promised. Plus the promised news was already delivered so no need for this and I guess the expectation of updates was out of line. Either way lock the thread seems like the best answer.


FTR, I would prefer that AudioFrog post news and updates here as well but I don't own the company.
I do have Andy's ear just like you do since he reads this, but I can't make him continue updating us if he chooses not to.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## spl152db

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> FTR, I would prefer that AudioFrog post news and updates here as well but I don't own the company.
> I do have Andy's ear just like you do since he reads this, but I can't make him continue updating us if he chooses not to.
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


Oh i know and really I get it. You do something small and insignificant in your eyes (as the owner) and everyone on 30 different boards and social media sites want you to update. It's much easier to pick one site, showcase, and move on.


----------



## captainobvious

I'm sure once there is something of significance to update, Andy will SURELY provide us those updates. He always has, so why think otherwise ?


----------



## spl152db

captainobvious said:


> I'm sure once there is something of significance to update, Andy will SURELY provide us those updates. He always has, so why think otherwise ?


thank you captainobvious.


----------



## BuickGN

I've been slowly putting money aside to try these new products and now that I have a new car, I actually have somewhere to put them. I can't wait till there's a 3-way with a 7-8" midbass and shallow 3.5-4" mid (or I might stick with Dyn for the mid) available.

Hopefully Andy updates this thread. I'm practically never on Facebook. If that's what it takes to see updates, I'll log on but it would be nice to see updates here. Even if it's limited to only major updates, that's fine with me.


----------



## Coppertone

^^^ new car! what did you end up getting ?


----------



## Darth SQ

captainobvious said:


> I'm sure once there is something of significance to update, Andy will SURELY provide us those updates. He always has, so why think otherwise ?


Well the speakers have already been out for weeks now but there's been nothing added here so I just don't know.
Maybe it's a dead thread now for AF. :shrug:


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Guest

The speakers are already out ?
I wish I had known.... Would have bought a set in a heartbeat !

Sent from my SM-G900V


----------



## rton20s

I wouldn't say "out." But they are out there. It is still very early.


----------



## BuickGN

Coppertone said:


> ^^^ new car! what did you end up getting ?


I thought I was getting a car but apparently I got it for my fiancée lol. I got a 328i almost fully optioned out. I had a nice 335 picked out with a lot of the M series features but the fiancée didn't like it. So we tried a 535 and it was too big for her. So she pretty much got the car she wants, a white 328i. I really like the turbo 4 cylinder. Power is good for what it is, power delivery is very impressive with full torque available just off of idle. I generally I hate 4 bangers but this car has won me over. I also ran a Hemi Challenger a few days ago and put a couple car lengths on it. 

Anyway, it's a nice "regular" BMW. I'll keep driving my TL for another few years and when it turns 12, it's my turn to get what I want. The fiancée has never had a nice car and it's totally worth it with how happy she is to drive it. 

I know that was way too much information but I'm kind of glad she talked me out if a $700/mo payment, I was surprised at just how much you get for the money with his car when I always thought they were overpriced. 

So under the seat midbass, 4" mids, and tweeters somewhere up front lol. Another learning curve that I'm dreading. I've thought about throwing a ported 10" easily removable sub in there and calling it quits. It destroys my Acura's factory system and it "good enough" at least for now. Ask me again in a few years lol.


----------



## FG79

I've been away for awhile and just catching up on this thread.

L-pads for commercial car audio crossovers?

Impressive, nice work Andy. That's big boy tuning right there.


----------



## cajunner

spl152db said:


> That's not even what I'm saying. But if that's the answer then that should replace all posts on this thread and the thread closed. Since it's now a refer to facebook thread rather than news as promised. Plus the promised news was already delivered so no need for this and I guess the expectation of updates was out of line. Either way lock the thread seems like the best answer.


It's entirely possible to imagine that Andy wants to get a few 'beta' testers to provide feedback, before coining any phrases on the marketing angle.

One aspect of grassroots advertisements, is there has to be a trial period elapsing before you can use those comments in your product launch.

I don't Facebook, I might click a link and read that first page, but the likes system and the obvious distortion from reality that social media provides in lieu of an actual intercourse between real people in real time, prevents me from joining the masses and becoming a number in the race to become meaningless.


so I feel your pain, I too would like to see Andy Wehmeyer more forthcoming on this site, as he has been in the past while working for other companies, but it may be that this new venture simply swamps him for time... no, that can't be it, haha....


he takes time to answer questions here, of general knowledge nature, so he's deliberately choosing to ignore this thread for some reason that although possibly well known to people "in the circle of trust," eludes others who just would like to see more eye candy on the roll-out.

One thing is certain, it sometimes appears you can't win for trying with the bunch of critical, self-appointed expert inspectors of the merchandise, so it may be a little of that approbation stays the update hand...


----------



## deeppinkdiver

^ very well put good sir! I thank you for your views on the subject, seriously.


----------



## 14642

Sorry guys. Been really busy. 

We did show some products at MERA's Knowledgefest in Dallas. Production starts next week and products should be available for sale here starting at the end of this month with a larger shipment arriving in October. Boat takes 3 weeks. 

We're also working on the website, which will have some product information and some photos, which are being taken and retouched now.


----------



## 14642

cajunner said:


> It's entirely possible to imagine that Andy wants to get a few 'beta' testers to provide feedback, before coining any phrases on the marketing angle.
> 
> One aspect of grassroots advertisements, is there has to be a trial period elapsing before you can use those comments in your product launch.
> 
> I don't Facebook, I might click a link and read that first page, but the likes system and the obvious distortion from reality that social media provides in lieu of an actual intercourse between real people in real time, prevents me from joining the masses and becoming a number in the race to become meaningless.
> 
> 
> so I feel your pain, I too would like to see Andy Wehmeyer more forthcoming on this site, as he has been in the past while working for other companies, but it may be that this new venture simply swamps him for time... no, that can't be it, haha....
> 
> 
> he takes time to answer questions here, of general knowledge nature, so he's deliberately choosing to ignore this thread for some reason that although possibly well known to people "in the circle of trust," eludes others who just would like to see more eye candy on the roll-out.
> 
> One thing is certain, it sometimes appears you can't win for trying with the bunch of critical, self-appointed expert inspectors of the merchandise, so it may be a little of that approbation stays the update hand...


I'll put some additional stuff up here when I have it.


----------



## Darth SQ

rton20s said:


> I wouldn't say "out." But they are out there. It is still very early.


I should clarify that I know Bing has had a set of 3-ways for a month now, I think Gary Biggs put some in his old Buick show car, and I am sure others do as well.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Darth SQ

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Sorry guys. Been really busy.
> 
> We did show some products at MERA's Knowledgefest in Dallas. Production starts next week and products should be available for sale here starting at the end of this month with a larger shipment arriving in October. Boat takes 3 weeks.
> 
> We're also working on the website, which will have some product information and some photos, which are being taken and retouched now.


Lol I should have continued reading.
Thanks for the info Andy. 
This is a very exciting time for you and we all wish you the best. 


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## bigbubba

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> I should clarify that I know Bing has had a set of 3-ways for a month now, I think Gary Biggs put some in his *old Buick show car*, and I am sure others do as well.
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


Are you referring to his Buick Regal. I thought he sold that.


----------



## Darth SQ

bigbubba said:


> Are you referring to his Buick Regal. I thought he sold that.


I saw that he pulled it out of storage recently and had it in the AudioFrog booth at an expo....maybe the Dallas one that Andy mentioned above. There's pics of it on FB.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## captainobvious

BuickGN said:


> I thought I was getting a car but apparently I got it for my fiancée lol. I got a 328i almost fully optioned out. I had a nice 335 picked out with a lot of the M series features but the fiancée didn't like it. So we tried a 535 and it was too big for her. So she pretty much got the car she wants, a white 328i. I really like the turbo 4 cylinder. Power is good for what it is, power delivery is very impressive with full torque available just off of idle. I generally I hate 4 bangers but this car has won me over. I also ran a Hemi Challenger a few days ago and put a couple car lengths on it.
> 
> Anyway, it's a nice "regular" BMW. I'll keep driving my TL for another few years and when it turns 12, it's my turn to get what I want. The fiancée has never had a nice car and it's totally worth it with how happy she is to drive it.
> 
> I know that was way too much information but I'm kind of glad she talked me out if a $700/mo payment, I was surprised at just how much you get for the money with his car when I always thought they were overpriced.
> 
> So under the seat midbass, 4" mids, and tweeters somewhere up front lol. Another learning curve that I'm dreading. I've thought about throwing a ported 10" easily removable sub in there and calling it quits. It destroys my Acura's factory system and it "good enough" at least for now. Ask me again in a few years lol.



Sorry to take this off topic, but did you guys look at the new Mercedes CLA? I know it's a little step down from the 335i, but still a nice looking car for quite a bit less coin. 

Congrats!


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

As someone who had a CLA on order and cancelled it, I would avoid it. It seems like a half finished idea. Lousy ride, clunky transmission, and too much road noise for a car costing as much as it does. Plus near impossible to put adults in the rear seat without smashing your face on the c-pillar.


----------



## 14642

You can buy a 3-year old CLS for the same price. Much more car.


----------



## captainobvious

Good to know. I was considering one for the wife's next car, but I guess not anymore


----------



## rton20s

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> You can buy a 3-year old CLS for the same price. Much more car.


And you aren't out thousands of dollars in value the second you drive off the lot.


----------



## 2010hummerguy

CLA is basically a really expensive Civic with a star on the front.


----------



## diy.phil

The first all-new C already showed up the other day. The old C (new stock) is on clearance sale now. The CLA is actually nice because it's something like 38 MPG (that's what the salesdude said; I sure don't like giving money to gas stations because they raise prices so fast and then down slowly if any (they're gouging)). Like the CLS, the E price also drops quite a bit too after 3 years. Some people want small cars (local driving or for the mistress, and have big cars for other places/purposes).


----------



## tyroneshoes

Beautiful speakers. I mean thank you for using quality materials. I hate a $1000 comp set with plastic tweeters even though Im using a set now (boston spz). 

Excellent addition with the lpad, sometimes -2, -4 isnt enough and I have returned to passives with eq and find it just as easy to dial in with well designed crossovers. Passives get a bad rep here. I mean Ive been active with 4 amps in the truck for years but I miss nothing and find my current passive speakers sounds as good as any active setup I had. But if you make home audio speakers, you know its the way to go. And a fixed lpad doesnt account for different cars/location of drivers or taste. 

I think It would be great if you added the schematics of the passive xover. I sometimes want higher quality crossover components in a car audio passive. I do believe that high end caps and air core (not as much) and ribbon coils make a nice change to the cheap components usually used in car audio.

kudos


----------



## Angrywhopper

It's now close to being the end of the month! What dealers have these for sale and on demo?!


----------



## Hanatsu

Passives tend to work great when drivers are put close to eachother. The l-pad settings are adequate imo, you'll need EQ in addition to any system so any response issues can be fixed with that.


----------



## rton20s

Well, how about that?! 

audiofrog at Crutchfield.com


----------



## Guest

Getting closer...


----------



## Angrywhopper

rton20s said:


> Well, how about that?!
> 
> audiofrog at Crutchfield.com


Woah! Surprised Crutchfield picked it up!

But then again, I thought this brand was going to be super specialty retailer?
:worried:


----------



## rton20s

Angrywhopper said:


> Woah! Surprised Crutchfield picked it up!
> 
> But then again, I thought this brand was going to be super specialty retailer?
> :worried:


If I had to guess, this was the best choice for Andy and crew to deal with potential customers who do not have an Audiofrog dealer near by. The alternative is dealing with customers directly, or directing them to a dealer who is too far away and isn't accustomed to working with "long distance" customers. 

I think Crutchfield has proven themselves to be one of the only large scale, reliable, online retailers that can be trusted by manufacturers.


----------



## mrpeabody

rton20s said:


> If I had to guess, this was the best choice for Andy and crew to deal with potential customers who do not have an Audiofrog dealer near by. The alternative is dealing with customers directly, or directing them to a dealer who is too far away and isn't accustomed to working with "long distance" customers.
> 
> I think Crutchfield has proven themselves to be one of the only large scale, reliable, online retailers that can be trusted by manufacturers.


Agreed.

I bought my P99 from crutchfield. They called me the day it arrived to make sure everything was good.


----------



## Kevin K

Crutchfield has great customer service. Was a little surprised that Audiofrog is being sold there but is probably a good move all things considered.


----------



## Angrywhopper

rton20s said:


> If I had to guess, this was the best choice for Andy and crew to deal with potential customers who do not have an Audiofrog dealer near by. The alternative is dealing with customers directly, or directing them to a dealer who is too far away and isn't accustomed to working with "long distance" customers.
> 
> I think Crutchfield has proven themselves to be one of the only large scale, reliable, online retailers that can be trusted by manufacturers.


Crutchfield is a magnificent etailer. Probably the best online merchant of consumer electronics.

That's not the point.

I was under the impression (I could be wrong, usually am ) that this was a very specialized and targeted brand/company. In fact, under description on one of their products, I read "While their speakers will fit into a large number of vehicles, *Audiofrog's emphasis is definitely on custom installations."*

Every business has an audience they cater to. I, once again could be wrong, thoroughly believe that Crutchfield caters to the DIY guy who wants to throw speakers in the stock locations, add a deck, and an amp/sub to round it out. Not exactly your custom car/truck shop person..


----------



## rton20s

I agree with you on the DIY nature of Crutchfield's typical customer. And while it might not be because this is a DIY site, DIYMA is where Andy has chosen to share more information about this new brand than anywhere else. That includes social media sites like Facebook. I think he understands that DIYers are interested in his brand and likely won't have a B&M option to buy his products. 

I think it is a smart move on their part to shift some of that customer service "opportunity" onto a company like Crutchfield. They have proven that they can handle it and it provides the same insulation from the customer as your local brick and mortar. Of course, it doesn't mean that Andy & Co. won't be having to field hundreds of calls and emails a week from customers who don't go through "proper channels."


----------



## Angrywhopper

rton20s said:


> I agree with you on the DIY nature of Crutchfield's typical customer. And while it might not be because this is a DIY site, DIYMA is where Andy has chosen to share more information about this new brand than anywhere else. That includes social media sites like Facebook. I think he understands that DIYers are interested in his brand and likely won't have a B&M option to buy his products.
> 
> I think it is a smart move on their part to shift some of that customer service "opportunity" onto a company like Crutchfield. They have proven that they can handle it and it provides the same insulation from the customer as your local brick and mortar. Of course, it doesn't mean that Andy & Co. won't be having to field hundreds of calls and emails a week from customers who don't go through "proper channels."


I see your point. Always good talking car audio with you. :thumbsup:


----------



## rton20s

Angrywhopper said:


> I see your point. Always good talking car audio with you. :thumbsup:


You, too. And now that I've spewed my BS theories, we can all sit and wait for Andy to chime in. I'm sure he'll be by any minute. Shouldn't be busy with anything else.


----------



## Angrywhopper

rton20s said:


> You, too. And now that I've spewed my BS theories, we can all sit and wait for Andy to chime in. I'm sure he'll be by any minute. Shouldn't be busy with anything else.


:laugh::laugh::laugh: It's not like he has a major new product roll out next month or anything.


----------



## el_bob-o

At least with Crutchfield we will know whether the speakers are actually in stock or not. That's been my biggest problem with buying online from other places, they never seem to stock the higher end products and it's always a crapshoot with mid range items. If there is a dealer local to me then that is my preference but if not I think Crutchfield is the next best thing. Well, as long as it doesn't go down like it did with the Pioneer Stage IV line.


----------



## t3sn4f2

rton20s said:


> I agree with you on the DIY nature of Crutchfield's typical customer. And while it might not be because this is a DIY site, DIYMA is where Andy has chosen to share more information about this new brand than anywhere else. That includes social media sites like Facebook. I think he understands that DIYers are interested in his brand and likely won't have a B&M option to buy his products.
> 
> I think it is a smart move on their part to shift some of that customer service "opportunity" onto a company like Crutchfield. They have proven that they can handle it and it provides the same insulation from the customer as your local brick and mortar. Of course, it doesn't mean that Andy & Co. won't be having to field hundreds of calls and emails a week from customers who don't go through "proper channels."


They are also catering to a larger customer base than just hardcore DIYer's. To me the quote posted by Angrywhopper implies that these products are designed around an easy install (physical and tuning wise). But _if_ you want to get the most out of them, a more involved custom install is recommended. And Crutchfield is a great platform for that since obviously it has the DIY side, but it is also a place _we_ to go to since it's reliable and high quality.


----------



## spl152db

rton20s said:


> Well, how about that?!
> 
> audiofrog at Crutchfield.com


Do they not make any Midwoofers? Kinda surprising.


----------



## Bluenote

Hmm...it's funny there were some midwoofers up yesterday...


----------



## spl152db

Bluenote said:


> Hmm...it's funny there were some midwoofers up yesterday...


I found them, but they didn't show up because they're sold out.


----------



## Bluenote

Wow  I didn't think they were for sale yet...


----------



## rton20s

Everything is "out of stock." This is all pre-order right now. They also call it "risk free." Your card will not be charged until the item ships. So you place your order now, it reserves whatever you want to order out of the stock they will be receiving, then you are charged and it ships once they get product. If you decide you don't want the Audiofrog stuff after all, just cancel your order before it ships.


----------



## quality_sound

spl152db said:


> Do they not make any Midwoofers? Kinda surprising.


Click on "See All" next to the tweeters and midrange header speakers. You'll see the 4" and 6".

Audiofrog Tweeters and Midrange Speakers at Crutchfield.com


----------



## rton20s

For reference...
Focal Utopia Be No.6 6-3/4" component speaker system at Crutchfield.com

Brax Matrix M2CPP 6-3/4" 2-way component speaker system at Crutchfield.com

Focal Utopia Be 165W-RC 6-3/4" component speaker system at Crutchfield.com

Rockford Fosgate T5652-S Power T5 Series 6-3/4" component speaker system at Crutchfield.com

Not to mention the stuff from Hybrid, Ground Zero, Sinfoni and several others. The price may be substantial, yes. But let's not pass judgement until someone actually has a chance to *HEAR* them. Very few people have even seen these drivers in person. Even fewer have heard them. And I would be willing to bet less than a handful have heard them actually installed in a car. 

Lastly, if it is too rich for your blood, I believe they have some lower tier products coming down the pike as well.


----------



## MayLegacy

Hmm, I haven't purchased a sub to go with my 3 way Hybrid Audio front stage yet, I might have to look into an audiofrog 10"


----------



## Patrick Bateman

DonutHands said:


> $1500 for a 2 way passive set, am i seeing this correctly??
> 
> Do those $800 6" mids come with a certain number of blow jobs? or just the one ass ramming?


Andy is being smart. There's only two types of things that make money nowadays:

1) Selling thousands of widgets at a razor thin profit margin. For instance, the Vizio televisions that you see at Costco

and

2) Selling hundreds of widgets at a fat profit margin. For instance, speaker brands like Dynaudio, HAT, Morel.

Nobody makes money in the middle. Even companies like Sony hemorrhage money. How many midrange car audio companies have come and gone?


----------



## Golden Ear

I saw the pics of the subs on crutchfield and they look great. Hopefully they sound as good as they look.


----------



## MayLegacy

Golden Ear said:


> I saw the pics of the subs on crutchfield and they look great. Hopefully they sound as good as they look.


yeah, that's where I was just checking them out, they do look nice!


----------



## Hanatsu

Angrywhopper said:


> I actually expected them to cost _more_. :surprised:


Same here... ^^


----------



## Golden Ear

Angrywhopper said:


> I actually expected them to cost _more_. :surprised:


The 3-way set is like $2200, is that enough for ya? Lol


----------



## rton20s

Golden Ear said:


> The 3-way set is like $2200, is that enough for ya? Lol


Only if you go passive.  $1600 for the active set. 

$600 is a long way toward a processor.


----------



## Golden Ear

Wait, wasn't it like $2200 for the passive 2-way set? Is it $1600 for the active 3-way?


----------



## rton20s

2 Way Passive Build = $1600 ($100 less if you use the 1" tweeter*)
Audiofrog GB60 6" midrange car speakers (pair) at Crutchfield.com
Audiofrog GB15 1-1/2" soft dome tweeters at Crutchfield.com
Audiofrog GB615C 2-way passive crossover networks (pair) at Crutchfield.com

I didn't see an option for a 3 way passive. 

3 way active = $1500 ($100 more if you use the 4" midrange)
Audiofrog GB60 6" midrange car speakers (pair) at Crutchfield.com
Audiofrog GB25 2-1/2" midrange speakers (pair) at Crutchfield.com
Audiofrog GB10 1" soft dome tweeters at Crutchfield.com

*I thought I recalled Andy mentioning, and Griz telling me in person that the 1.5" was designed for use primarily in 2 way installations and the 1" was designed primarily for 3 way installations.


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

For those worried about price lets not forget the 6" offering is supposed to be LINEAR to about 9mm. That's significantly better than most other car audio branded speakers.


----------



## bkjay

I think the prices are not that crazy. They are cheaper than Legatia SE's. Now are they out of my range HELL YEAH! Andy said he was going high end and they were not going to be cheap,so he gave us a heads up. I bet these are going to be on par or better than the JBL 660GTI set. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Valdemar

From just looking at the tweeter and housing for the drivers it looks like you have designed a high yield product. You don't see that too often. Can I ask what sigma levels you are seeing?

Sugar mama to the rescue!


----------



## Angrywhopper

Why did my posts get deleted?


----------



## rton20s

Angrywhopper said:


> Why did my posts get deleted?











Looks like a mod came through and cleaned out some posts related to a confectionery appendaged members comments.


----------



## 14642

We didn't do a midbass/midrange passive. You should really run an active crossover there. 

Just got back from the factory. Mids, tweeters and crossovers are done. Subwoofers will be built next week. Then it all goes on the boat on October 10. 

We chose Crutchfield because they provide excellent customer service. They chose us because our approach to high-end and custom installation appeals to them and because in a six hour listening demo, our speakers trounced everything else in their catalog.


----------



## FreeTheSound

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> We didn't do a midbass/midrange passive. You should really run an active crossover there.
> 
> Just got back from the factory. Mids, tweeters and crossovers are done. Subwoofers will be built next week. Then it all goes on the boat on October 10.
> 
> We chose Crutchfield because they provide excellent customer service. They chose us because our approach to high-end and custom installation appeals to them and because in a six hour listening demo, our speakers trounced everything else in their catalog.


 
I already have a separate frog account set up for the purchase!


----------



## Angrywhopper

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> We didn't do a midbass/midrange passive. You should really run an active crossover there.
> 
> Just got back from the factory. Mids, tweeters and crossovers are done. Subwoofers will be built next week. Then it all goes on the boat on October 10.
> 
> We chose Crutchfield because they provide excellent customer service. They chose us because our approach to high-end and custom installation appeals to them and *because in a six hour listening demo, our speakers trounced everything else in their catalog.*


Was this your opinion or is that what they said? Because they do sell some impressive Focal lines


----------



## rton20s

Andy, I'm guessing the 6 hour listening demo was in a room and not a car installation? Or did they get to hear in-car as well?


----------



## Angrywhopper

rton20s said:


> Andy, I'm guessing the 6 hour listening demo was in a room and not a car installation? Or did they get to hear in-car as well?


Great question. That makes a big difference.


----------



## DonutHands

Angrywhopper said:


> Why did my posts get deleted?


because its that kind of forum.


----------



## REGULARCAB

Angrywhopper said:


> Was this your opinion or is that what they said? Because they do sell some expensive Focal lines


Fixed that for ya


----------



## cajunner

trounce, huh?

them's some mighty fine descriptors there, Andy...


----------



## 2010hummerguy

I'd love to try a pair against my Esotars.


----------



## 14642

In a room. Great speakers are great speakers. There are differences between rooms and cars and it matters when you tune systems and design crossovers, but a great tweeter that sounds better than another tweeter doesn't all of a sudden sound worse than the other in a car or vice versa.


----------



## robtr8

Which begs the question, what makes a great tweeter?

And secondarily, are there any plans for an AMT?


----------



## 14642

Same thing that makes a great speaker. Low distortion, smooth and flat frequency response and uniform roll off off axis. 

For cars, they should also be easy to mount and should be designed to work with the grilles.


----------



## andy335touring

Are the mids best used IB or sealed ?


----------



## captainobvious

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> In a room. Great speakers are great speakers. There are differences between rooms and cars and it matters when you tune systems and design crossovers, but a great tweeter that sounds better than another tweeter doesn't all of a sudden sound worse than the other in a car or vice versa.



Bingo.

Testing in a car is only relevant in *your *specific car anyway, because of said differences.


----------



## Hanatsu

You can never improve the non-linear distortion performance in a speaker with processing. Since we often listen to music considerably louder in a car, this becomes quite important. Linear performance in terms of dispersion in the 'beaming range' is also important. Especially in 2-way fronts. These are major contributors to what makes a speaker, a great speaker.


----------



## ErinH

FWIW, Andy/Audiofrog posted some on-axis FR plots of some of their drivers (the 6.5", 2.5", 4", and tweeters) on facebook sometime last night. The responses look EXCELLENT. I was most impressed by how well controlled the breakup of the mid(s) cones are outside of the typical passband. Why does this matter? Because it makes mating a tweeter to them much easier and it means you're less likely going to run in to out-of-passband linear distortion from the breakup. 

I think each of the mids had no more than 5dB breakup peaks. That's superb. Even highly-regarded, well engineered cones have as much as 10dB peaks. 



Additionally, there is no rise in response; they're pretty dang flat through the typical passband (ie; below the beaming point). Again, another feature that makes it much easier to mate a higher-crossing driver to. 
For example, imagine crossing this midrange at 2khz. Look at the 5dB rise in response starting at 1khz:










How well do you think you're going to mitigate that with a standard 'textbook' crossover? It's not going to be as easy to mate with the driver who's response looks like this:











Based on what was posted on FB, and the Klippel data I've seen, I'm telling you guys these are some seriously well-engineered drive units. The engineering I'm seeing on these through the data is at least on par with Scan engineering. You can absolutely tell these aren't simple "off the shelf/rebranded" drive units with an incredible mark up to create a sense of superiority. The data tells the tale: these are indeed a superior driver to I'd say 90% of what I've tested in every sense of the word. 

I'm looking forward to seeing the off-axis FR data, and if it's like what I've seen thus far, I imagine it's superb as well.


----------



## Jroo

I received a flyer from Crutchfield last night about the drivers. I want to hear them and that I guess is going to be the closest place for me. Only problem is Crutchfield has changed the store closest to me to mimic how the apple stores look I guess. Everything is on tables and in cool looking plastic open air displays, which are not good for listening to anything if they are lucky enough to have them on dispay. Very interested in the tweeters as they look like they will play below 2K easily.


----------



## Jroo

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> We chose Crutchfield because they provide excellent customer service. They chose us because our approach to high-end and custom installation appeals to them and because in a six hour listening demo, our speakers trounced everything else in their catalog.


I hope this works. Crutchfield seems to be very "Best Buyish" the last couple of times I have been there or talked to someone. The phone experience is better but my experience in store hasnt been great. The sales staff refer most car audio questions to the installers and the installer always seem to be gone or the "one" installer working is too busy to answer questions. Ask about a flat screen or some headphones and they are your best friend.


----------



## claydo

Crutchfield offers exemplary customer service when it matters most......After the sale. I can't speak on the "stores", but all my dealings with them have been smooth as silk. The prices aren't bargain basement, but the confidence they have built with me over the years more than makes up for the small % markup compared to the bargain basement websites who sell and forget. They have reliable phone service, always answer, and always follow through. They are authorized for every brand they carry, and even offer free advice and support if needed. Add in the installation freebies to all this and you have a winning company. All these reasons are why they are still around, and they thrive off of repeat customers happy with the way they have been treated. If you haven't ever dealt with these guys, you should give them a go. I never hesitate to purchase there, something I can't say about anywhere else I've ever shopped. Ok......they have given me nothing......so I'm not making any more of a case for them, lol. If I was in the market, these audio frog goodies look pretty nice! I do wish the name exuded a little more machismo tho........


----------



## captainobvious

I checked the FB page and skimmed through this thread again, but didn't see...

Andy do you have the full specs of these drivers available now? (TS Params, dimensions for installation, etc ?)


The frequency response charts look fabulous. Can't wait to see the full Klippel data on these as they certainly look to be head and shoulders above almost everything else out there. Wow!


----------



## tyroneshoes

Nice. Crutchfield cover


----------



## rton20s

tyroneshoes said:


> Nice. Crutchfield cover


Huh?


----------



## tyroneshoes

Audiofrog is on the cover of crutchfield and the tweeters and lpad xovers look wonderful


----------



## Golden Ear

Where can I find more info on those 2.5" mids? They might be exactly what it need for a new build.


----------



## rton20s

tyroneshoes said:


> Audiofrog is on the cover of crutchfield and the tweeters and lpad xovers look wonderful


Hadn't seen the catalog. Just checked out the digital version. Not really any more info, but the press shots do look good.


----------



## Angrywhopper

No one is arguing the reputation of Crutchfield. They are, no doubt, one of the best online companies. They're customer service is superb.

I think the question that is brought up is how well is AudioFrog going to do through that outlet. Put the forums aside for a moment (remember, we/you, are the vast minority), tell someone a component set costs $1600 and see their reaction. :laugh: The only way to sell a product of that caliber is for the client/customer to audition for themselves. That's what turns a person into a believer! That's what gets them to open their wallet! Can't exactly do that on the interwebz...


----------



## Mike Bober

I think the have a few sets at least $2,000.00.......im sure the dont have truckloads of them, but they do have quite a few very expensive pieces of car audio stuff.


----------



## Angrywhopper

Mike Bober said:


> I think the have a few sets at least $2,000.00.......im sure the dont have truckloads of them, but they do have quite a few very expensive pieces of car audio stuff.


Are you referring to other brands?


----------



## rton20s

AW... you are forgetting one other type of buyer. The guy who is willing to buy whatever because someone tells him it is "the best" or just because he likes throwing money around. 

Remember this? 









Of course, those people might tend more toward the Focal Utopia options. And I'm not saying AF won't be worth the money. Just that there is a buyer out there for just about everything. Even if there has been nothing set forth to them to prove value.


----------



## Mike Bober

Angrywhopper said:


> Are you referring to other brands?


Yes....other brands


----------



## Angrywhopper

Mainstream "best" is Focal. That guy will buy that.


----------



## AAAAAAA

Angrywhopper said:


> No one is arguing the reputation of Crutchfield. They are, no doubt, one of the best online companies. They're customer service is superb.
> 
> I think the question that is brought up is how well is AudioFrog going to do through that outlet. Put the forums aside for a moment (remember, we/you, are the vast minority), tell someone a component set costs $1600 and see their reaction. :laugh: The only way to sell a product of that caliber is for the client/customer to audition for themselves. That's what turns a person into a believer! That's what gets them to open their wallet! Can't exactly do that on the interwebz...


Most of us buy everything without listening to it. I think the internet has proven we will buy everything and anything without hands on experience with it.


----------



## Hanatsu

The complete performance of a speaker can be shown in a proper set of measurements. The rest is install and tuning. Those plots I've seen suggest that these are well performing drivers, I wouldn't be afraid buying them


----------



## bbfoto

Andy, congrats on the product launch of AudioFrog! Great to see this finally come to fruition after all of your hard work...which will continue, I'm sure. 

Do you currently have a setup in one of your vehicles that I could demo sometime soon??? My photo/motion picture grip & lighting business is based in South Pasadena with an additional office in Pasadena near the 210 & Allen. Should be close by. 

I don't get on here enough to check my PMs, so please EMAIL me if this is a possibility. Thanks!

bbfoto AT hotmail DOT com

Congrats Again! I'm super stoked for you and the future of AudioFrog.


----------



## Angrywhopper

I think they get on the boat on the 10th of this month. Will we see installs done before Thanksgiving?!


----------



## rton20s

Angrywhopper said:


> I think they get on the boat on the 10th of this month. Will we see installs done before Thanksgiving?!


I would say absolutely yes. I know there are shops that already have product in hand.


----------



## Angrywhopper

rton20s said:


> I would say absolutely yes. I know there are shops that already have product in hand.


We're *pretty* close to eachother. If you run across anyone or shop willing to demonstrate let me know!


----------



## rton20s

For those that missed it...

A progress shot of an A pillar featuring the GB25 and GB10 from one of the first Audiofrog installs being performed by Simplicity in Sound.


----------



## Bluenote

Nice!


----------



## Angrywhopper

Today's the 10th! Everything on the boat?


----------



## Darth SQ

rton20s said:


> For those that missed it...
> 
> A progress shot of an A pillar featuring the GB25 and GB10 from one of the first Audiofrog installs being performed by Simplicity in Sound.


I truly can't wait to hear these.
Thanks for the pic rton20s. :thumbsup:


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## 14642

Angrywhopper said:


> Today's the 10th! Everything on the boat?


Container leaves on Oct 20. Arrives Long Beach Nov. 5.


----------



## Golden Ear

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Container leaves on Oct 20. Arrives Long Beach Nov. 5.


Can we pick up some gear at the docks?


----------



## jpswanberg

diamond bar to Long beach is 45 min. When did you say the container is coming in? I do believe I need a new 6" woofer and 1.5" tweeter. Where in SoCal can I see/hear/fondle these? 

JPS


----------



## Angrywhopper

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Container leaves on Oct 20. Arrives Long Beach Nov. 5.


Thanks for the update. 



jpswanberg said:


> diamond bar to Long beach is 45 min. When did you say the container is coming in? I do believe I need a new 6" woofer and 1.5" tweeter. Where in SoCal can I see/hear/fondle these?
> 
> JPS


:laugh::laugh: Fondle


----------



## fcarpio

Are those the REAL prices? For example, The Alpine SWR-T12 is $650 in Crutchfield, but you can EASILY get these for just under $300 pretty much anywhere. What are the real street prices for the Audio Frog stuff???


----------



## diy.phil

It's like a fixed fondle price maaaaan 
To think about it, it's still cheaper than buying some purse/handbag for a mistress lol.


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

Those online shops selling the alpine for 300 are not authorized. Local shops selling it for that price are not authorized or are taking the hit on their end.


----------



## 2010hummerguy

The T12 is also a bad example, no one was buying them at full MSRP so street prices dropped to market preference levels.


----------



## Hoptologist

Their website lists the GB12 for $699. Crutchfields price seems very good to me, its the same price as the IDMAX, Gladen SQX Extreme, not far off from the Arc Black, cheaper than the C12 XL. Another couple weeks and I should have enough money for one. Much excitement!


----------



## Angrywhopper

fcarpio said:


> Are those the REAL prices? For example, The Alpine SWR-T12 is $650 in Crutchfield, but you can EASILY get these for just under $300 pretty much anywhere. What are the real street prices for the Audio Frog stuff???



I'm an authorized Alpine dealer and your post is the EXACT reason why my alpine business has dropped significantly over the years. I barely even look at the product anymore when a customer comes in.


----------



## captainobvious

There aren't any "street prices" because they aren't out on the streets yet. Plus, I'm sure this is not exactly a product that you're going to find at the usual online culprits. I'd expect to pay the Crutchfield price or maybe a little less from a B&M dealer, especially if they are installing.


----------



## truckerfte

captainobvious said:


> There aren't any "street prices" because they aren't out on the streets yet. .


About an hour ago I got about a 10 minute demo of the drivers at the CCHeatwave show. The shop guy said that they were the first retail set sold. And they sounded incredible. They quoted me $1800 for the 6,2,1 drivers raw. I'm saving my pennies for these after hearing them.


----------



## fcarpio

Angrywhopper said:


> I'm an authorized Alpine dealer and your post is the EXACT reason why my alpine business has dropped significantly over the years. I barely even look at the product anymore when a customer comes in.


Well off course, people are not going to pay a lot for the same thing they can get for less somewhere else. I am now strictly speaking about the Alpine SWR-T12 now. $650 vs $300 for the same thing, it is not a difficult decision. You can't blame my post or posts like mine for your misfortune, take ownership of your business and be a businessman. I'd figure someone like you would know that.


----------



## Niebur3

fcarpio said:


> You can't blame my post or posts like mine for your misfortune, take ownership of your business and be a businessman. I'd figure someone like you would know that.


How exactly is a dealer supposed to "take ownership and be a businessman" to deal with the fact that people like you buy product unauthorized, meaning it has no warranty, possible B-stock and/or fake product, for less then what a dealer pays for the item. Take ownership??? In what way??? There are ZERO ways for a shop to combat this except by selling the "authorized" benefits of the product and their knowledge/customer service.

I have even read several threads of upset consumers that purchased unauthorized, knew they did and what that meant, but is pissed when the manufacturer or local dealer of the product won't warranty the unauthorized product. I mean, come on man!

I personally had a guy bad mouth me on 2 forums because I didn't answer his question about issues he was having fast enough. The kicker is, he didn't buy a single damn thing from me and was 1000 miles away!


----------



## fcarpio

Niebur3 said:


> How exactly is a dealer supposed to "take ownership and be a businessman" to deal with the fact that people like you buy product unauthorized, meaning it has no warranty, possible B-stock and/or fake product, for less then what a dealer pays for the item. Take ownership??? In what way??? There are ZERO ways for a shop to combat this except by selling the "authorized" benefits of the product and their knowledge/customer service.


If I knew I'll be making it killing selling car audio. Also, if I knew I wouldn't tell you. 

Times have changed and things are not the same anymore. I believe that you cannot blame other people for YOUR problems. Whether you like it or not, these "issues" have become your problems now. They are for you to solve if you want to succeed. You can't keep doing the same thing and expect different results.

I think we have hijacked this thread enough, if you want to keep going at it (I don't see the point) just create another thread.


----------



## 2010hummerguy

Niebur3 said:


> I personally had a guy bad mouth me on 2 forums because I didn't answer his question about issues he was having fast enough. The kicker is, he didn't buy a single damn thing from me and was 1000 miles away!


That is messed up!!! Sorry to hear that Jerry


----------



## gumbeelee

fcarpio said:


> If I knew I'll be making it killing selling car audio. Also, if I knew I wouldn't tell you.
> 
> Times have changed and things are not the same anymore. I believe that you cannot blame other people for YOUR problems. Whether you like it or not, these "issues" have become your problems now. They are for you to solve if you want to succeed. You can't keep doing the same thing and expect different results.
> 
> I think we have hijacked this thread enough, if you want to keep going at it (I don't see the point) just create another thread.


I have enjoyed reading your alls post on this issue, but I agree, definately "hijacked" this thread, but i would love to hear more in a new thread


----------



## Darth SQ

The first shipment of AudioFrog speakers hit the Long Beach Harbor in just 5 days!
This has to be a really great moment for you Andy.
For those of us that know you personally, we so very proud of you taking an entrepreneurial risk and making your dream become a reality. 

A very big :thumbsup: to you and Gary Biggs!!!


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## JoshHefnerX

Congratz Andy. Milestone made. I'm really sad to have missed you here in phx at the Handcrafted grand opening. Really wanted to hear those things!

Josh


----------



## gumbeelee

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> The first shipment of AudioFrog speakers hit the Long Beach Harbor in just 5 days!
> This has to be a really great moment for you Andy.
> For those of us that know you personally we so very proud of you taking an entrepreneurial risk and making your dream become a reality.
> 
> A very big :thumbsup: to you and Gary Biggs!!!
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


I second that, I don't know you personally Andy, but you don't know how much your post on diy have helped me with my individual set-up. Thanks for everything u do for the diy community, and once again a big CONGRATULATIONS, i personally can't wait to get my first set of Audiofrog. 

Congrats, 

Anthony Lee
"gumbeelee"


----------



## Angrywhopper

fcarpio said:


> Well off course, people are not going to pay a lot for the same thing they can get for less somewhere else. I am now strictly speaking about the Alpine SWR-T12 now. $650 vs $300 for the same thing, it is not a difficult decision. You can't blame my post or posts like mine for your misfortune, take ownership of your business and be a businessman. I'd figure someone like you would know that.


Oh HAHA you completely misread my post!

I'm not blaming you for anything! I was just making a statement out loud on a forum so I can be part of the group! :hug: :blush:

I'm doing extremely well. It's just that I'm doing it using products other than Alpine !


----------



## It_Hertz

truckerfte said:


> About an hour ago I got about a 10 minute demo of the drivers at the CCHeatwave show. The shop guy said that they were the first retail set sold. And they sounded incredible. They quoted me $1800 for the 6,2,1 drivers raw. I'm saving my pennies for these after hearing them.


Glad you enjoyed the Demo. We had a lot of great response from all the Demos this weekend. 

We have our second vehicle to get an AF treatment in the shop now. (this will be a two way setup, 1.5" 6")

I promised Andy a review, I will get that done after I have done the two way kit and had time with them as well.


----------



## ndm

It_Hertz said:


> Glad you enjoyed the Demo. We had a lot of great response from all the Demos this weekend.
> 
> We have our second vehicle to get an AF treatment in the shop now. (this will be a two way setup, 1.5" 6")
> 
> I promised Andy a review, I will get that done after I have done the two way kit and had time with them as well.


Is Louis still at audio visions?


----------



## bbfoto

Andy, we're all really looking forward to when these are readily available in a week or so.  I'm located in Pasadena/South Pasadena. What would be the nearest Audiofrog dealer? (I didn't see a dealer list on the web site).

Also, I have a very special request. Please purchase the licensing & tooling from your former cohorts at Harmon/JBL and reproduce the JBL GTi660 6.5" mids under your Audiofrog line as an "SE" (Special Edition) mid! PLEASE, Andy?!?!  I'd imagine that the tooling is already close-by in Guangzhou. Or is the af GB60 based on the GTi660 already??? It looks a bit similar in some aspects...

They (JBL) are obviously not doing anything with the GTi660 product/design as it's been discontinued for quite a while now and it hasn't even been available as replacement parts for several years (which I need...I punctured/tore the surround on one mid with a screwdriver when installing, DOH!  ) so there should be no reason that they would not allow you access, right??? Oh, Gary B., if you're reading this, you still have a set of these that you're willing to part with, right? 

...I can only dream! It kind of blows when even a large company like Harmon/JBL completely drops support for their über Flagship model, and left customers who've spent a very large chunk of change on their products hanging!  

Normally, I buy a backup of everything that I end up keeping in my installs, but #1, it was cost-prohibitive, and #2, when I tried to get a backup of the GTi660 mids a few months later, no dice! So I guess I might have to purchase 2 sets of the GB60 mids right off the bat! #pocketbooknothappy  

Please keep us updated and let us know as soon as the AF lineup will be available to the public! I wouldn't be surprised if the current batch arriving at the docks in LB are already spoken for!


----------



## Darth SQ

bbfoto said:


> Andy, we're all really looking forward to when these are readily available in a week or so.  I'm located in Pasadena/South Pasadena. What would be the nearest Audiofrog dealer? (I didn't see a dealer list on the web site).
> 
> Also, I have a very special request. Please purchase the licensing & tooling from your former cohorts at Harmon/JBL and reproduce the JBL GTi660 6.5" mids under your Audiofrog line as an "SE" (Special Edition) mid! PLEASE, Andy?!?!  I'd imagine that the tooling is already close-by in Guangzhou. Or is the af GB60 based on the GTi660 already??? It looks a bit similar in some aspects...
> 
> They (JBL) are obviously not doing anything with the GTi660 product/design (as it's been discontinued for quite a while now and it hasn't even available as replacement parts for several years now, which I need...I punctured/tore the surround on one mid with a screwdriver when installing, DOH!  ) so there should be no reason that they would not allow you access, right???
> 
> I can dream, right? It kind of blows when even a large company like Harmon/JBL completely drops support for their über Flagship model!
> 
> Normally, I buy a backup of everything that I end up keeping in my installs, but when I tried to get a backup of the GTi660 mids a few months later, no dice! So I guess I might have to purchase 2 sets of the GB60 mids right off the bat! #pocketbooknothappy
> 
> Please keep us updated and let us know as soon as the AF lineup will be available to the public! I wouldn't be surprised if the current batch arriving at the docks in LB are already spoken for!


You have no idea just how close you live to AudioFrog headquarters.
Maybe you can knock on the door and get lucky. 


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Angrywhopper

I guess they haven't arrived as Crutchfield still shows OOS.


----------



## quality_sound

bbfoto said:


> Andy, we're all really looking forward to when these are readily available in a week or so.  I'm located in Pasadena/South Pasadena. What would be the nearest Audiofrog dealer? (I didn't see a dealer list on the web site).
> 
> Also, I have a very special request. Please purchase the licensing & tooling from your former cohorts at Harmon/JBL and reproduce the JBL GTi660 6.5" mids under your Audiofrog line as an "SE" (Special Edition) mid! PLEASE, Andy?!?!  I'd imagine that the tooling is already close-by in Guangzhou. Or is the af GB60 based on the GTi660 already??? It looks a bit similar in some aspects...
> 
> They (JBL) are obviously not doing anything with the GTi660 product/design as it's been discontinued for quite a while now and it hasn't even available as replacement parts for several years (which I need...I punctured/tore the surround on one mid with a screwdriver when installing, DOH!  ) so there should be no reason that they would not allow you access, right??? Oh, Gary B., if you're reading this, you still have a set of these that you're willing to part with, right?
> 
> ...I can only dream! It kind of blows when even a large company like Harmon/JBL completely drops support for their über Flagship model, and leave customers hanging who've spent a very large chunk of change on their products!
> 
> Normally, I buy a backup of everything that I end up keeping in my installs, but #1, it was cost-prohibitive, and #2, when I tried to get a backup of the GTi660 mids a few months later, no dice! So I guess I might have to purchase 2 sets of the GB60 mids right off the bat! #pocketbooknothappy
> 
> Please keep us updated and let us know as soon as the AF lineup will be available to the public! I wouldn't be surprised if the current batch arriving at the docks in LB are already spoken for!



What makes you think he didn't build these to be better than the JBLs? Hell, he could have used them as his benchmark. I'm not saying he did, but no reason to look backward when I'm sure these will be better.


----------



## Darth SQ

quality_sound said:


> What makes you think he didn't build these to be better than the JBLs? Hell, he could have used them as his benchmark. I'm not saying he did, but no reason to look backward when I'm sure these will be better.


Excellent point. 


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

I think these actually should be a little better than the jbl's from what I remember from their klippel results.


----------



## dratunes

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> Excellent point.
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


x2
I would love too try these out!


----------



## bbfoto

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> You have no idea just how close you live to AudioFrog headquarters.
> Maybe you can knock on the door and get lucky.
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


LOL, Yep, I know that I'm right around the corner from Monrovia.  I just didn't want to show up at his door uninvited. I don't want to be _that_ guy.  ...or maybe wielding a black ski mask & gun, "Okay, hand over all of your _audiofrogs_, NOW!" haha



quality_sound said:


> What makes you think he didn't build these to be better than the JBLs? Hell, he could have used them as his benchmark. I'm not saying he did, but no reason to look backward when I'm sure these will be better.


Well, I did allude to that in my post.  And I sincerely hope that the 660GTi's _were_ in fact used as a reference/benchmark...I'd honestly be surprised if they weren't. But my dilemma remains...I already HAVE one good JBL mid, and replacing the bad one _should_ be the much cheaper option, as they already accomplished everything I needed & wanted + more (no reason to fix what is already awesome and ain't broke (in my particular circumstance)).

I'd definitely rather spend $150-$300 for a single replacement driver, instead of $700-$800 for a new set of GB60 mids (even though I _REALLY_ would like to try them). I'd like to put that extra money towards a new DSP PRO, or maybe Andy's new processor, depending on when it would be released.


----------



## Darth SQ

bbfoto said:


> LOL, Yep, I know that I'm right around the corner from Monrovia.  I just didn't want to show up at his door uninvited. I don't want to be _that_ guy.  ...or maybe wielding a black ski mask & gun, "Okay, hand over all of your _audiofrogs_, NOW!" haha
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I did allude to that in my post.  And I sincerely hope that the 660GTi's _were_ in fact used as a reference/benchmark...I'd honestly be surprised if they weren't. But my dilemma remains...I already HAVE one good JBL mid, and replacing the bad one _should_ be the much cheaper option, as they already accomplished everything I needed & wanted + more (no reason to fix what is already awesome and ain't broke (in my particular circumstance)).
> 
> I'd definitely rather spend $150-$300 for a single replacement driver, instead of $700-$800 for a new set of GB60 mids (even though I _REALLY_ would like to try them). I'd like to put that extra money towards a new DSP PRO, or maybe Andy's new processor, depending on when it would be released.


Of what I gleaned from Andy is that this delivery is already spoken for and will likely not get at all comfortable in the AF warehouse before being shipped off. 
If you have to have the first arrivals, I would bet Crutchfield will likely be the only source and that will be for a brief window before they're all sold out. 
However, I think it's safe to say the 2nd and 3rd shipments are not too far behind since Andy is as efficient as his speakers. 


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## bbfoto

^Thanks, Bret!


----------



## Angrywhopper

Any new news?


----------



## JVD240

Angrywhopper said:


> Any new news?


Yeah... Christmas bonus season is coming...

DSP?


----------



## 14642

bbfoto said:


> Andy, we're all really looking forward to when these are readily available in a week or so.  I'm located in Pasadena/South Pasadena. What would be the nearest Audiofrog dealer? (I didn't see a dealer list on the web site).
> 
> Also, I have a very special request. Please purchase the licensing & tooling from your former cohorts at Harmon/JBL and reproduce the JBL GTi660 6.5" mids under your Audiofrog line as an "SE" (Special Edition) mid! PLEASE, Andy?!?!  I'd imagine that the tooling is already close-by in Guangzhou. Or is the af GB60 based on the GTi660 already??? It looks a bit similar in some aspects...
> 
> They (JBL) are obviously not doing anything with the GTi660 product/design as it's been discontinued for quite a while now and it hasn't even been available as replacement parts for several years (which I need...I punctured/tore the surround on one mid with a screwdriver when installing, DOH!  ) so there should be no reason that they would not allow you access, right??? Oh, Gary B., if you're reading this, you still have a set of these that you're willing to part with, right?
> 
> ...I can only dream! It kind of blows when even a large company like Harmon/JBL completely drops support for their über Flagship model, and left customers who've spent a very large chunk of change on their products hanging!
> 
> Normally, I buy a backup of everything that I end up keeping in my installs, but #1, it was cost-prohibitive, and #2, when I tried to get a backup of the GTi660 mids a few months later, no dice! So I guess I might have to purchase 2 sets of the GB60 mids right off the bat! #pocketbooknothappy
> 
> Please keep us updated and let us know as soon as the AF lineup will be available to the public! I wouldn't be surprised if the current batch arriving at the docks in LB are already spoken for!


GB60 is better than the 660. Only dealer in LA so far is Michael Thompson at Method Sound in Costa Mesa.


----------



## 14642

Products will be delivered to me on Friday and I'll ship orders to dealer immediately. We're working on the dealer locator now and It should be up soon.


----------



## jflexp21

I am looking forward to hearing the Audiofrogs as well as they are currently being install in my car..yeah!


----------



## rton20s

Andy, any chance you have a dealer lined up in the Fresno, Visalia or Bakersfield area yet?


----------



## 14642

rton,
Not yet. San Luis Obispo, maybe.


----------



## 14642

jflexp21 said:


> I am looking forward to hearing the Audiofrogs as well as they are currently being install in my car..yeah!


Cool.


----------



## captainobvious

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> rton,
> Not yet. San Luis Obispo, maybe.



Would be great to have one up here in the Northeast as well  I'd love to go demo these.

PA/NY/NJ/DE/MD


----------



## ErinH

Man, I'm really excited to see how these perform across the line. Some solid looking results so far.


----------



## SO20thCentury

...sooo if a person were wiring their system to be powered by MS-A amps and wanted to wire for some sort of processor in the future what kind of wires would they add in?


----------



## JVD240

SO20thCentury said:


> ...sooo if a person were wiring their system to be powered by MS-A amps and wanted to wire for some sort of processor in the future what kind of wires would they add in?


:laugh:

RCA cables.


----------



## 14642

captainobvious said:


> Would be great to have one up here in the Northeast as well  I'd love to go demo these.
> 
> PA/NY/NJ/DE/MD


Westminster Speed and Sound, Driven Mobile Electronics,Syracuse Customs


----------



## robtr8

STL?


----------



## captainobvious

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Westminster Speed and Sound, Driven Mobile Electronics,Syracuse Customs



Syracuse Customs...badass!  

Steve's a great guy. This is excellent news. Thanks Andy!


----------



## SO20thCentury

Couldn't find dealers on AF website. FB page doesn't always say what city, state dealers are located in. Maybe back burner with the shipment just showing up...:rolleyes2:
Don't know why I even care- my system's pretty much nailed down...but frogs are awesome, favorite color is green, co-workers named my car Kermit cuz it's green...just need me some frog...


----------



## SO20thCentury

JVD240 said:


> :laugh:
> 
> RCA cables.


Isn't that BACK to the future


----------



## 14642

robtr8 said:


> STL?


Still talking to Josh at JML.


----------



## 14642

For those of you who are interested, we began shipping products to all of our dealers last week. Check the website on Monday for a dealer locator to help you find a local expert, or go to Crutchfield. They'll have their stuff next week.


----------



## Hanatsu

Any idea, when/if it arrives in Europe?


----------



## Darth SQ

What no AudioFrog Black Friday specials?

WTF? 


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## BlackHHR

The guys next door at Audition Audio "Salon" just installed a 3 way set in a car. I must say Andy & Gary , very nice set of drivers. Cannot wait to hear the end result.


----------



## jsketoe

BlackHHR said:


> The guys next door at Audition Audio "Salon" just installed a 3 way set in a car. I must say Andy & Gary , very nice set of drivers. Cannot wait to hear the end result.


Is that volmer's place? Used to be hat salon?


----------



## BlackHHR

jsketoe said:


> Is that volmer's place? Used to be hat salon?


Yes, that would be correct.


----------



## bkjay

Wait.Is the Hat.salon gone already?


----------



## BlackHHR

bkjay said:


> Wait.Is the Hat.salon gone already?


Not gone, Ben purchased the Salon for expansion in his growing company. 
This is Andy`s thread and we do not need to clutter it with non Audio Frog related post.


----------



## bkjay

Ok. Thanks. Just wondering as a HAT. fan.


----------



## 14642

BlackHHR said:


> The guys next door at Audition Audio "Salon" just installed a 3 way set in a car. I must say Andy & Gary , very nice set of drivers. Cannot wait to hear the end result.


Thanks!


----------



## GravityDrNo

Anxiously waiting for Chris at Driven to get these in.....might just have to completely re-thinki my install


----------



## LBaudio

Hanatsu said:


> Any idea, when/if it arrives in Europe?


x. 2


----------



## jflexp21

jsketoe said:


> Is that volmer's place? Used to be hat salon?





BlackHHR said:


> The guys next door at Audition Audio "Salon" just installed a 3 way set in a car. I must say Andy & Gary , very nice set of drivers. Cannot wait to hear the end result.


That is my car that got the Audiofrog 3 way install . Will post pictures later today. I just picked up my car yesterday and it has a rough tune, but I can say the Audiofrogs will not disappoint at all. The 2.5 inch midrange is quite ballzy and the mid-bass kicks hard. That is one beefy 6.5 as its a lot heavier than I expected it to be. Heard a lot of new details in my music that I have never noticed before. Truly awesome speakers.

IMHO, its up there with the Morel and Dyns....a little more aggressive and not as laid back....with no sacrifice in quality at all.


----------



## Golden Ear

Are you running the AF subs too?


----------



## 14642

jflexp21 said:


> That is my car that got the Audiofrog 3 way install . Will post pictures later today. I just picked up my car yesterday and it has a rough tune, but I can say the Audiofrogs will not disappoint at all. The 2.5 inch midrange is quite ballzy and the mid-bass kicks hard. That is one beefy 6.5 as its a lot heavier than I expected it to be. Heard a lot of new details in my music that I have never noticed before. Truly awesome speakers.
> 
> IMHO, its up there with the Morel and Dyns....a little more aggressive and not as laid back....with no sacrifice in quality at all.



That's what I like to hear. Awesome and thanks.


----------



## jflexp21

Makes my hour and a half commute easier to handle...


----------



## jflexp21

Golden Ear said:


> Are you running the AF subs too?


Not at this time, but if Andy and Ben decide that's the next move than I am for it. Right now have some JL's for subs.


----------



## Hanatsu

jflexp21 said:


> Makes my hour and a half commute easier to handle..


Looks great ^^


----------



## mrpeabody

Install looks fantastic.


----------



## kaigoss69

That looks sick!


----------



## Golden Ear

jflexp21 said:


> Not at this time, but if Andy and Ben decide that's the next move than I am for it. Right now have some JL's for subs.


Same here. But the AF subs look really nice, I like the wide surround on them. I'd really like to hear one.


----------



## Rs roms

jflexp21 said:


> Makes my hour and a half commute easier to handle...


Thats epic, share more pics if you have


----------



## Angrywhopper

Any updated news? Haven't heard or seen much of Audiofrog..


----------



## kaigoss69

Yes, and more reviews of the 4" and the small tweeter would be great!


----------



## Golden Ear

It's funny, there was more talk about AF before anything was released and now almost nothing. I hope sells are doing ok.


----------



## Darth SQ

Unlike other manufacturers, I don't think Andy is "asking" for the review from the distributors, dealers, installers, car owners who get first product so no one is feeling obligated to do so? 

I like the approach Andy is taking letting the speaker performance "speak" for him. It's just a matter of time before a bunch of the regulars on DIYMA get a set and then the chatter will begin on it's own. 


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## 2010hummerguy

It is also the holiday season here is the USA so not many people are getting installs done at the moment. We are watching football, eating god food and opening presents. 

I bet things will get busy in January.


----------



## rdubbs

They've also got their CES booth coming up in January so I'm sure more info will be dropped after that


----------



## Angrywhopper

rdubbs said:


> They've also got their CES booth coming up in January so I'm sure more info will be dropped after that


I saw that! Very excited for them as I know a booth at CES is very expensive.


----------



## 2010hummerguy

And seems like almost no car audio engages at CES anymore...it's all cameras and tablets now  So that is very cool to hear AF will be there. Wish I was going! Maybe next year...


----------



## ErinH

I'll toss this out there... if someone is interested in a 3rd party review, I'd be willing to do some testing and post the data on my site if you can send me what you have. That said, with what Andy has posted, I think that really speaks for itself.


----------



## Babs

I feel a klippel or three comin' on! Yeah man!


----------



## [email protected]

rdubbs said:


> They've also got their CES booth coming up in January so I'm sure more info will be dropped after that


I think they are doing a hotel suite, not a booth at the show.


----------



## rdubbs

[email protected] said:


> I think they are doing a hotel suite, not a booth at the show.


You're correct, they're setting up at the Palms Hotel, forgot it wasn't right at the heart of the action. I'm excited to hear about what they showcase.


----------



## porscheman

there is no heart of the action at ces for car audio anymore


----------



## diy.phil

Palms is all suite. Every room is either large or really large (can fit lots of people and stuff).


----------



## 14642

Sorry guys. I haven't posted much stuff lately because I've been killed filling orders and finishing the development of the next series of "normal" car audio speakers and subs which will launch in the spring.

Also, working on a special project for CES. I'll post some pics when it's done (if my parts arrive on time, which isn't a sure thing...).

I have put up some pics of the next two series of subs on the Audiofrog FB page.


----------



## Angrywhopper

Is the AudioFrog suit by invite only? I'm a JL Signature dealer and they're hosting their suit at the Palms. Would love to come by and check out AudioFrog if it's open.


----------



## 14642

No, it's not invite only. Please come see us. I won't know the suite number until we check in, but we'll put it on the website and on the Audiofrog FB page.


----------

