# Anyone seen the audiofrog A-2450dsp pic on facebook?



## fullergoku (Jun 21, 2009)

Just checking if anyone saw the pic of the audiofrog A-2450dsp on facebook?


----------



## I800C0LLECT (Jan 26, 2009)

Um. I need to...post pics¿


Edit


----------



## I800C0LLECT (Jan 26, 2009)

24 channel DSP amplifier


----------



## fullergoku (Jun 21, 2009)

https://www.facebook.com/audiofrogInc/photos/a.249476721898710.1073741827.249474071898975/480181632161550/?type=3&theater


----------



## Niick (Jun 3, 2015)

I've been very anxiously awaiting a DSP from AF. Can't wait to learn more about this thing.....


----------



## I800C0LLECT (Jan 26, 2009)

What do I do with 24 channels? 12 bridged channels?!


----------



## truckguy (Sep 2, 2013)

Whoa...


----------



## Bluenote (Aug 29, 2008)

Yes! I see the DTS logo, MS8 v2 with more control? Can't wait for more info!


----------



## Sine Swept (Sep 3, 2010)

3 way front L/C/R = 9 channels
2 way side L/R + 3 way rear L/R = 10 channels
sub out = 1

I could only figure 20/24


----------



## adriancp (Feb 12, 2012)

Of course we haven't seen detailed pics but it looks like only 8 rca connections. 

Wonder if it will have some version of auto tune like the MS-8?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## capea4 (Sep 2, 2010)

Feel like it belongs right here


----------



## Sine Swept (Sep 3, 2010)

That looks like the safe side to be on ^


----------



## Kevmoso (Jun 4, 2013)

Sine Swept said:


> 3 way front L/C/R = 9 channels
> 2 way side L/R + 3 way rear L/R = 10 channels
> sub out = 1
> 
> I could only figure 20/24


Thats easy.
One of these in each corner and your out of channels.










Maybe link a second processor to cover your center channel array, midbass array and subs?


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

3 way for each of l c r sl sr rl rr, sub and of course 2 way ceiling makes for 24 channels. Nice!


----------



## johnbooth3 (Feb 26, 2008)

So 24 channels of 50 watts. I know some of the newer pro audio amplifiers can strap multiple channels together to get larger wattages of power. So strap 4 channels together and you have a 8 channel 200 watt amplifier. Or maybe you can strap up to 8 channels together, then you have a 4 channel 400 watt amplifier or any combination of the above, like two channels of 50w for tweets L/R, 4 Channels (2 Channels strapped) for 100w for midrange, 8 channels (4 channels strapped for 200w for midbass) and I still have 10 channels left over. Maybe two for rear passive and strap the remaining for 400w for sub?

I am very intrigued. I need to hurry up my install or I may change it completely again. It never ends. Dang this hobby.


----------



## Kevmoso (Jun 4, 2013)

johnbooth3 said:


> Dang this hobby.


!!!!


----------



## MB2008LTZ (Oct 13, 2012)

24 channels = movie theater on wheels...!!!!


----------



## diy.phil (May 23, 2011)

That looks like a nice/interesting product!


----------



## Huckleberry Sound (Jan 17, 2009)

Mmmmmmm


----------



## Weigel21 (Sep 8, 2014)

Damn, that's twice as many channels as I would ever need. Wonder if they'll be less channel models below this, as I'm sure this thing will be way beyond what I can afford. 

Still, it's got a very elegant look to it, I like it.


----------



## crxsir121 (Oct 18, 2006)

Sine Swept said:


> 3 way front L/C/R = 9 channels
> 2 way side L/R + 3 way rear L/R = 10 channels
> sub out = 1
> 
> I could only figure 20/24


Dolby Atmos!!! Hahahaha!!! J/k:laugh:


----------



## Rrrrolla (Nov 13, 2008)

Holy crap, that thing is beautiful! 24 channels at 50w is a dream for anyone wanting to play with arrays of any kind in a car. What is the price tag on this beauty?? I just bought a c-dsp, but if I'd known about this, I would have held off for sure.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

i saw it and saw it posted in a few places.. is the 50 watts per channel just an assumption?


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

Rrrrolla said:


> Holy crap, that thing is beautiful! 24 channels at 50w is a dream for anyone wanting to play with arrays of any kind in a car. What is the price tag on this beauty?? I just bought a c-dsp, but if I'd known about this, I would have held off for sure.



Hehehe.. I imagine the c-DSP is but a fraction of what this thing will go for. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

SkizeR said:


> i saw it and saw it posted in a few places.. is the 50 watts per channel just an assumption?


What do you mean Nick?
It printed right on the unit.
This won't be a piece for everyone but for me and my Suburban it's a damn game changer. :thumbsup:


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Imagine this in a limo.... zones.


----------



## I800C0LLECT (Jan 26, 2009)

johnbooth3 said:


> So 24 channels of 50 watts. I know some of the newer pro audio amplifiers can strap multiple channels together to get larger wattages of power. So strap 4 channels together and you have a 8 channel 200 watt amplifier. Or maybe you can strap up to 8 channels together, then you have a 4 channel 400 watt amplifier or any combination of the above, like two channels of 50w for tweets L/R, 4 Channels (2 Channels strapped) for 100w for midrange, 8 channels (4 channels strapped for 200w for midbass) and I still have 10 channels left over. Maybe two for rear passive and strap the remaining for 400w for sub?
> 
> I am very intrigued. I need to hurry up my install or I may change it completely again. It never ends. Dang this hobby.



I was thinking it...But if it was true...omg.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> What do you mean Nick?
> It printed right on the unit.
> This won't be a piece for everyone but for me and my Suburban it's a damn game changer. :thumbsup:
> 
> ...


true, but still thats only speculation. and at what impedance? 4 ohms?


----------



## kaigoss69 (Apr 2, 2008)

I had a feeling Andy had an itch to improve on the MS-8. Can't wait to find out more!!!


----------



## Niick (Jun 3, 2015)

Oh......the possibilities......I ABSOLUTELY LOVE the idea of being NOT limited by number of channels. This is WAAYYYY COOL!!!!! 

ESPECIALLY if they are bridgeable.


----------



## quickaudi07 (May 19, 2010)

Niick I agree with you. 
Looks like Audio Frog is really putting their name out their 

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk


----------



## fullergoku (Jun 21, 2009)

Now who's going to CES in a few days to get the scoop on this and all other things car audio?


----------



## oabeieo (Feb 22, 2015)

Dam ! I am so getting one


----------



## oabeieo (Feb 22, 2015)

It looks like you could possibly hardwire RCA directly into the board , like cut off the RCA ends and use screw terminals instead . 8in 24 out.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

to be honest, i wouldnt doubt if/when they do come out with something, this isnt it. something like this would cost so much money and 99.9% of us (who are also a major minority) wouldnt need. maybe though.


----------



## I800C0LLECT (Jan 26, 2009)

...says the guy with 6 amps.

Since when did excess stop anybody here?


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

I800C0LLECT said:


> ...says the guy with 6 amps.
> 
> Since when did excess stop anybody here?


i really cant picture 24 channels ever being used. like i cannot even figure out how. even in a 7.1 (all 7 being 3 way active) and two subs, thats only 23 channels. so i guess 3 subs it is? jesus thats crazy


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

24 channels for a car is overkill, unless you can bridge channels. What I'm _really_ curious about is if the TA is manual or auto like the MS8. Does each channel have an eq and the resolution on the eq and TA.


----------



## fullergoku (Jun 21, 2009)

sqnut said:


> 24 channels for a car is overkill, unless you can bridge channels. What I'm _really_ curious about is if the TA is manual or auto like the MS8. Does each channel have an eq and the resolution on the eq and TA.


Thats what im really interested in as well. Maybe it will have fir filters too.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

sqnut said:


> 24 channels for a car is overkill, unless you can bridge channels. What I'm _really_ curious about is if the TA is manual or auto like the MS8. Does each channel have an eq and the resolution on the eq and TA.


i guess we will have to wait for CES


----------



## crackinhedz (May 5, 2013)

So this has its own amplifier output for direct speaker connection?

Any RCA outs for those with amps aleady? Or even the stand alone DSP, no amp?


----------



## Patrick Bateman (Sep 11, 2006)

Kevmoso said:


> Thats easy.
> One of these in each corner and your out of channels.
> 
> 
> ...


Hey that's my car!

But, yeah, I'm having a hard time making my system work with eight channels. I could use up 24 channels pretty easily.


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

SkizeR said:


> to be honest, i wouldnt doubt if/when they do come out with something, this isnt it. something like this would cost so much money and 99.9% of us (who are also a major minority) wouldnt need. maybe though.


Don't piss me off.
I want this piece.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Patrick Bateman (Sep 11, 2006)

SkizeR said:


> i really cant picture 24 channels ever being used. like i cannot even figure out how. even in a 7.1 (all 7 being 3 way active) and two subs, thats only 23 channels. so i guess 3 subs it is? jesus thats crazy


In my situation, I wound up using a ton of channels because of time alignment. For instance, I can get four channels of DSP, four amp channels, and a power supply for under $200.

At those prices, passive crossovers start to seem kinda silly. I'm not OPPOSED to passive crossovers, but when a channel of amplification and a channel of processing costs me $50, it's hard to justify spending $40 on a passive low pass crossover. (Due to the high price of copper, it's pretty easy to blow $20 on an inductor these days, and a third order low pass requires two of those.)


Now, obviously, you need to be using arrays for all of this to make sense. But it's 2016 people; why on earth WOULDN'T you use arrays? I can't imagine why you wouldn't.


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

SkizeR said:


> i really cant picture 24 channels ever being used. like i cannot even figure out how. even in a 7.1 (all 7 being 3 way active) and two subs, thats only 23 channels. so i guess 3 subs it is? jesus thats crazy


The 24th is for a rear center channel actually.
Not something I've considered but lets see what is said about it.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

AndyW really needs to get on here and give us some details.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

AAAAAAA said:


> AndyW really needs to get on here and give us some details.


i can promise there are going to be no details release on here until ces. his FB has been going crazy and hes been very vague about it


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

SkizeR said:


> i can promise there are going to be no details release on here until ces. his FB has been going crazy and hes been very vague about it



It's a teaser.. Like who's the dude in the storm trooper outfit and holy **** that guys got a light saber with two hand guards!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Niick (Jun 3, 2015)

fullergoku said:


> Now who's going to CES in a few days to get the scoop on this and all other things car audio?


I'm not but my buddy and co-worker Mike is. I'll relay all he tells me when he get back.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

SkizeR said:


> to be honest, i wouldnt doubt if/when they do come out with something, this isnt it. something like this would cost so much money and 99.9% of us (who are also a major minority) wouldnt need. maybe though.


Another way to look at it would be, 50x24 = 1200 watts. Assuming channels are bridgeable, you'd get 6x100 for a 3 way and 600 watts for the sub. If you were going to invest in amps to do the same you'd probably be looking at what, 800-1000ish? (reg amps that make rated power). Then a full dsp would be another 800 on top, so 1.8-2K. So now at $ 1,499, it's an all in 1 solution....or something like that .


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

Patrick Bateman said:


> Now, obviously, you need to be using arrays for all of this to make sense. But it's 2016 people; why on earth WOULDN'T you use arrays? I can't imagine why you wouldn't.


Lobing?


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

AAAAAAA said:


> AndyW really needs to get on here and give us some details.


HI Guys. Sorry. Been really busy getting ready for CES. Amplifiers and DSP are in our product plan. 

Yes, it's a 24 channel amp.
Yes, it's 50 x 24 @ 4 and 50 x 75 @ 2. Channel pairs can be bridged, so it could be a 12-channel amp. 
Yes, this one has 8 analog inputs, but 18 analog inputs are available as well as three SPDIF inputs. I built this thing with the 8 analog inputs because that's what I needed.
It also includes direct control inputs that can be used for pots, switches and rotary encoders that can be programmed to control all kinds of filters and level controls without a microprocessor.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

Does it have all functions of a stand alone dsp?


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

sqnut said:


> Does it have all functions of a stand alone dsp?


In terms of processing, anything is possible. In terms of available touch screen controllers and bluetooth and wifi and all manner of peripherals, no. 

No, you can't tune it from your phone. Why watch Ben-Hur on a 3" screen?


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> In terms of processing, anything is possible.


That's all that matters, flexibility and resolution.



Andy Wehmeyer said:


> In terms of available touch screen controllers and bluetooth and wifi and all manner of peripherals, no. No, you can't tune it from your phone. Why watch Ben-Hur on a 3" screen?


Meh, that is just bells and whistles for me. I'm quite happy plugging in the USB cord to the laptop, and tuning from there. In any case I hate using the touch screen on my phone, probably because I'm so clumsy at it.

Good luck with the product launch, I'm sure it will do well. Is the pricing final?


----------



## Kevmoso (Jun 4, 2013)

Patrick Bateman said:


> Hey that's my car!
> 
> But, yeah, I'm having a hard time making my system work with eight channels. I could use up 24 channels pretty easily.


HAH! Yeah sorry to grab your image there. Arrays was the first thing I thought of when 24 channels got mentioned and your arrays were the first ones I thought of. 24 channels could easily get gobbled up.


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> HI Guys. Sorry. Been really busy getting ready for CES. Amplifiers and DSP are in our product plan.
> 
> Yes, it's a 24 channel amp.
> Yes, it's 50 x 24 @ 4 and 50 x 75 @ 2. Channel pairs can be bridged, so it could be a 12-channel amp.
> ...


Thanks!

woaho that is absolutely killer! Talk about differentiation!

Does it do center channel?
Does it have auto tune? What does it use...audissey...l7? Something else or proprietary?
It doesn't look big for a uhmmmm ...is that right 1800watt amp? Whats the foot print?

And what about MSRP? I need to start working on my wife and figuring out purchasing angles on why I need this haha.


----------



## kyheng (Jan 31, 2007)

Price of this gem will be interesting.


----------



## billw (Jun 30, 2008)

Are there preamp outputs to connect to a more powerful subwoofer amp?


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

billw said:


> Are there preamp outputs to connect to a more powerful subwoofer amp?


If it does then this unit solves so many issues for me.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> HI Guys. Sorry. Been really busy getting ready for CES. Amplifiers and DSP are in our product plan.
> 
> Yes, it's a 24 channel amp.
> Yes, it's 50 x 24 @ 4 and 50 x 75 @ 2. Channel pairs can be bridged, so it could be a 12-channel amp.
> ...


Waow. Didn't see that coming.


----------



## knever3 (Mar 9, 2009)

24 channel amp, well I will have to just wait to upgrade my next Cadillac CT6 when they come out with a 34 channel one. lol

2016 Cadillac CT6 gets 34-speaker Bose audio system | Digital Trends

I guess I can run some 2 ohm and use passive crossovers.

And a/d/s was crazy for having an 8 channel amp in the 90's.


----------



## oabeieo (Feb 22, 2015)

Andy, 

Do you have to use the built in amp? 
Can we switch it off and use the outs as analog pre-amp? 

Thanks, 
Andy


----------



## knever3 (Mar 9, 2009)

Can someone do me a huge favor? I can't see any pictures of anything posted on facebook, can someone post them on the site so I can see them on another host?


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

https://goo.gl/photos/x7em1qrcyUPPQrkz5


----------



## oabeieo (Feb 22, 2015)

oabeieo said:


> Andy,
> 
> Do you have to use the built in amp?
> Can we switch it off and use the outs as analog pre-amp?
> ...


Also , will it use the headphones mic setup. That sh1t works awesome!


----------



## Weigel21 (Sep 8, 2014)

knever3 said:


> Can someone do me a huge favor? I can't see any pictures of anything posted on facebook, can someone post them on the site so I can see them on another host?


There was just the one photo of the unit, showing the top/front with the wiring, which was posted early in the thread and just a coulpe posts up, if following the link. Not really much to see, unfortunately, but still enough to stir up MUCH interest.


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

Andy,

Someone said Dts logo?


Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Weigel21 (Sep 8, 2014)

Yep, it's on the top of the amp in the lower right corner if you look at the photo.


----------



## knever3 (Mar 9, 2009)

AAAAAAA said:


> https://goo.gl/photos/x7em1qrcyUPPQrkz5


Thank you, I appreciate your effort.


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

I'm sure someone will beat me to it, and Andy will probably divulge more detail before then, but I plan to check out the demo car at CES toward the end of the week. If there are still questions then, I'll try and get answers.


----------



## bbfoto (Aug 28, 2005)

rton20s said:


> I'm sure someone will beat me to it, and Andy will probably divulge more detail before then, but I plan to check out the demo car at CES toward the end of the week. If there are still questions then, I'll try and get answers.


That would be awesome! I can't make it to CES. 

Bring your test discs and/or USB thumb drive with SQ Test/Demo tracks. I'd also like to know what tracks Andy uses to demo it...particularly anything that's DTS encoded. 


If there is a pamphlet/brochure with a bullet-point list of features and/or specs, please snap a smartphone pic of them to post here. 

Would also love to see a simple smartphone video interview (landscape orientation please) of Andy going over its features and specs.  

I'd be really interested to know how Andy has implemented the 24 Channels of Amplification, DSP, and to which/how many speakers in what specific locations in the vehicle?

Thanks!


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

bbfoto said:


> That would be awesome! I can't make it to CES.
> 
> Bring your test discs and/or USB thumb drive with SQ Test/Demo tracks. I'd also like to know what tracks Andy uses to demo it...particularly anything that's DTS encoded.
> 
> ...


I'll definitely get some pics. I actually had the same thought about a short interview, if Andy was up for it. I think Spielberg might prefer to be behind the camera. 

And you won't find a single portrait video on any phone I have ever owned.


----------



## #1BigMike (Aug 17, 2014)

Subbed


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

Audiofrog Shows 24-Channel DSP Prototype | ceoutlook.com

Audiofrog will display during the CES Show this week a prototype 24-channel amplifier with digital signal processing (DSP).

It includes DTS Neural Surround for providing superior sound in all four vehicle seats rather than just the driver’s seat.

The new DSP amp, model A2450, can power an entire multi-channel system through one amplifier and it has an ouput for an additional higher powered subwoofer amplifier.

“Few of the DSPs available include the ability to extract a correct center signal or side and rear signals or include enough channels to make use of all the existing speaker locations in the car. ‘Surround’ in the car isn’t for movie playback or for decoding discrete signals, it’s for dramatically improving the sound for all of the passengers,” said Audiofrog founder Andy Wehmeyer.

The A2450 delivers 50 watts x 24 channels at 4 ohms or 75 watts x 24 channels at 2 ohms. It has 8 analog inputs and 6 inputs for programmable pots, switches or rotary encoders for custom user adjustable parameters like EQ, volume, bass control.

The unit also includes three Analog Devices ADAU 1446 Signal Processors. Dimensions are: 11.5- x 19- x 2-1/4 inches.

The DSP amp will be on view during CES across the street from the Las Vegas Convention Center at the Residence Inn. For more information contact Audiofrog via Facebook or at Frontpage - AUDIOFROG.

The A2450 is a prototype that may eventually become a production product.

Wehmeyer said, “Is it vaporware? Well…there’s plenty of vaporware at CES. I can’t buy a self-driving car, yet. I don’t know that there’s currently a big market for a 24-channel DSP amplifier in the aftermarket. Certainly there’s a need for a good one with fewer channels and with the features technicians need to not only integrate successfully with all kinds of OE systems that range from simple to complex, but to do it in a way that actually provides a much better listening experience for every seat in the car. We built this to show what we can do and what we’re working on. We’re a startup. With most startups, the limitation is funding. Every month, we sock away some money from speaker sales to pay for this development. All the other pieces are in place.”


----------



## billw (Jun 30, 2008)

After reading that, I really hope this statement piece leads the way to a smaller 10/12 channel unit with a sub out and all the processing power.


----------



## Onyx1136 (Mar 15, 2009)

I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for this piece.


----------



## annoyingrob (Aug 24, 2007)

I couldn't imagine needing 24 channels.....

....until I read this thread, now I can't get the idea out of my head.


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

billw said:


> After reading that, I really hope this statement piece leads the way to a smaller 10/12 channel unit with a sub out and all the processing power.


Something tells me that changing this 24 channel DSP amp into an 8 or 16 channel (or both) DSP amp would be a pretty straight forward proposition. Taking it into production would be a different story. 

I have faith that Andy and his team are going to come through with _something_ for production, eventually.


----------



## mitchyz250f (May 14, 2005)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> HI Guys. Sorry. Been really busy getting ready for CES. Amplifiers and DSP are in our product plan.
> 
> Yes, it's a 24 channel amp.
> Yes, it's 50 x 24 @ 4 and 50 x 75 @ 2. Channel pairs can be bridged, so it could be a 12-channel amp.


Thats a typo. It is supposed to be 50 x 24 @ 4 and 75 x 24 @ 2

What is the power at 8ohms?

Also, if its in the prototype stage think about a unit that has no amplification too.


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

mitchyz250f said:


> Thats a typo. It is supposed to be 50 x 24 @ 4 and 75 x 24 @ 2
> 
> What it at 8ohms?
> 
> Also, if its in the prototype stage think about a unit that has no amplification too.


Just a Freudian slip. His next DSP unit is going to be 75 channels.


----------



## Justin Zazzi (May 28, 2012)

Andy's demo car (with 21 channels of processing) was fun. I think the car and dsp/amp combo is a good platform to showcase what is possible. The 7.1 DTS Neural processing was the best multi-seat demo I've heard in a car.

After a little chat, they mentioned aiming for a multi-channel DSP/Amp with around 8-12 channels, a standalone subwoofer amp, and a standalone 4-6 channel amp. The details for these are not set yet and will be the subject of further research into what the market needs.


----------



## diy.phil (May 23, 2011)

Ok please post pictures of the AF demo vehicle!! Thanks!


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

Thanks for the info Justin. I'm looking forward to my seat time in the car.


----------



## Justin Zazzi (May 28, 2012)

diy.phil said:


> Ok please post pictures of the AF demo vehicle!! Thanks!


Sorry, didn't take any. I think it was a silver Mercedes C550 sedan. The DSP/Amp is in a false floor in the trunk and looks gorgeous (also fairly large in person). There is a three way front stage, center channel, two-way (I think?) side stage in the rear doors, a two-way (I think?) rear stage, and a subwoofer. Somewhere in there is 21 channels of processing. There will be no "auto-tune" functionality so don't hold your breath for a remake of the MS-8. This is an entirely new beast.




rton20s said:


> Thanks for the info Justin. I'm looking forward to my seat time in the car.


If you haven't been to Audiofrog's booth last year, they still have the 2.1 home system on demo as well. Pretty good stuff and also worth a listen.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

The center is 2 way- dual 4s and a tweeter on a badassed aluminum baffle.

The car is Andy's personal car.


----------



## diy.phil (May 23, 2011)

Thanks. That must be the CLS550 boss car!!
come on somebody... still need pictures.... now want to see the badass dash speakers too!!!


----------



## Weigel21 (Sep 8, 2014)

NOOO, I want there to be an auto tune feature in the unit, much like the MS-8, but also have the ability to tune/fine tune the system yourself. Perhaps an auto and manual mode, be nice IMO. Just needs the quirks of the MS-8 worked out. Also like at least 8 channels, but 10 or even 12 wouldn't be bad. Personally would like to have a dedicated set of RCA inputs for the sub processing, so I could retain sub volume control via the HU. 

However, I'm sure I'm among a small percentage wanting such.


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

Weigel21 said:


> NOOO, I want there to be an auto tune feature in the unit, much like the MS-8, but also have the ability to tune/fine tune the system yourself. Perhaps an auto and manual mode, be nice IMO. Just needs the quirks of the MS-8 worked out. Also like at least 8 channels, but 10 or even 12 wouldn't be bad. Personally would like to have a dedicated set of RCA inputs for the sub processing, so I could retain sub volume control via the HU.
> 
> However, I'm sure I'm among a small percentage wanting such.


I could have sworn I read a post from Andy clearly saying this unit will make manual tuning obsolete but I can't find it now. How can it make manual tuning obsolete if it doesn't have autotune?


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> I could have sworn I read a post from Andy clearly saying this unit will make manual tuning obsolete .....
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


Manual tuning will never be obsolete, at least in the current scenario. While we can measure the cars response to death and calibrate processing accordingly, the fact remains that we just don't know enough about how we hear and how the brain processes sound. For that reason alone, manual tuning in the right hands will always trump any auto tune.


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

Yeah Andy's been at that car most of the year I think. I'm hoping he'll bring a while compilation on the installation as over time he's posted some really beautiful work. 


Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Bluenote (Aug 29, 2008)

A lil vid of the car... https://m.facebook.com/l.php?u=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hf5POoa_axI&h=2AQGf_ORk


----------



## #1BigMike (Aug 17, 2014)

Thank you for posting that video! This is exactly what I wanted to originally do with the 12 speaker system + aftermarket sub in my Touareg and make it bad ass from all seats. I wanted to give ALL the speakers more power and DSP Processing. 


I thought I was crazy for thinking the things Andy said lol. 
I hope this comes to market 



Bluenote said:


> A lil vid of the car... https://m.facebook.com/l.php?u=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hf5POoa_axI&h=2AQGf_ORk


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

Andy is singlehandedly* bringing the market forward. When you have all these companies coming out with products claiming "SQ" and other non-concrete "slogans"... he is working on kick as tech like multi-multi channel amps with big power, lots of features and small footprint, and pioneering in car surround sound systems with autotune, actually focusing on ADDRESSING existing in car problems.

Car audio has been lying in the tech gutters for to long.

When you see what OEM's are doing, an amp and speakers...even a "dumb" processor really is not enough anymore.

*Alpine too.


----------



## capea4 (Sep 2, 2010)

that El'****** dude got a pretty nice system.


----------



## capea4 (Sep 2, 2010)

This is kind of amusing, cause I just had to explain in another thread, that THIS is what I wanted in my new car, and was told logic 7 isn't for the auto environment.....that is until Andy says it is....lol


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

Agreed.. I think Andy is saying "well why the hell not?!" for car audio, which is a great thing. Hey so there's stepping stones.. For all it's mixed reviews, it's obvious the MS-8 was a giant leap forward for processing in-car for it's time. We all now enjoy the fruits of that. Think back what was available for DSP when the MS-8 came out. Short list I'd say.. Alpine was pushing Imprint boxes and maybe one or two other legacy products. Now look at the DSP market since the MS-8 proved to manufacturers "hey them numbnut car audio guys really want that stuff, let's sell it to them". I think Andy's hard work is hugely responsible for that.

Now, I think Andy's pioneering into that taboo question "why can't both seats sound good?!" and being dissatisfied with "driver-seat-only" SQ will prove to be a significant leap, though subtle, in car sound again. It's the subject we avoid like the freakin' plague.. I have every confidence Andy will figure out how to beat it with what's been learned from Logic-7 and the MS-8.

I'll say Bravo el ******!


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

^It's what the OEMs are doing. So generally speaking for highish end OEM systems going aftermarket would be an inferior proposition.


----------



## capea4 (Sep 2, 2010)

AAAAAAA said:


> ^It's what the OEMs are doing. So generally speaking for highish end OEM systems going aftermarket would be an inferior proposition.


boom. The exact reason I have no current build. My car sounds pretty damn good. From every seat....I can't justify ripping it out to go backwards for 3 other seats, just for a marginal improvement at mine. never mind it cost thousands to do just that. Ill take Andys dsp amp right now


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

Does anyone have details on the rear deck speakers in Andy's car. Is the sub IB or enclosed? Rears IB or enclosed? Basically looking to see if there are any VBA issues.


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

We had a fun day of demos yesterday and I'm proud to have finally had my secret life of El ****** exposed by my buddy Ricardo at Monster. 

I'm not the first person to suggest building cars that sound good in at least two seats. Gary has been building two seat cars for 20 years using installation processes to get good sound in both seats. That's what kick panel installations were designed for. My first kick panel installation was in 1990 or so and Ive been using center speakers for 25 years. In the 90s and early 2000s, we actually had DSP that included upmixers and they even came in upscale head units. 

Then there was basic DSP and the industry lost its mind and decided that only one seat mattered and used every excuse available to pretend that a two channel style system was the pinnacle of performance as the OEMs gravitated toward multichannel and home audio did too. 

I guess what's old is new again if you wait long enough. Tuning something like this is the same process, but with a few more tools.


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

That doggone speed of sound thing.. Gets ya every time though don't it. 
Andy when you can, gotta post up all kinds of goods and details on that car build. Looks fabulous from bits that I saw on FB.


----------



## diy.phil (May 23, 2011)

Awesome video!! Thanks! Glad to see all the speakers, amp, car, everything!
Andy is definitely intelligent and articulate, and all-around fun/cool guy!!


----------



## Niick (Jun 3, 2015)

Can anybody tell me which processors currently available have an up-mixer for center channel output? I used to think, not too long ago, that tuning for just one seat was stupid. I've since learned that with only two channels (no center channel) tuning for a single seat is sounds much better IN THAT SINGLE SEAT then tuning for both front seats sounds IN EITHER SEAT. 

I would love to do a few cars with BOTH seats sounding awesome, and the fact that many, many new cars these days have factory provisions for center speakers means it just might be possible. 

But that brings me to which processor to sell?


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> We had a fun day of demos yesterday and I'm proud to have finally had my secret life of El ****** exposed by my buddy Ricardo at Monster.
> 
> I'm not the first person to suggest building cars that sound good in at least two seats. Gary has been building two seat cars for 20 years using installation processes to get good sound in both seats. That's what kick panel installations were designed for. My first kick panel installation was in 1990 or so and Ive been using center speakers for 25 years. In the 90s and early 2000s, we actually had DSP that included upmixers and they even came in upscale head units.
> 
> ...


I have to have his unit Andy.
I already knew it was going to be expensive but I need that 2450.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Bluenote (Aug 29, 2008)

I recall my first two builds done buy very reputable shops. I had no idea that two-seat sound was possible, One of those builds was with the MS8 build and full Logic 7. I think Andy will empower the consumer / hobbyist to require more from Instalers to build systems with true options for one or two seat listening. Loving Andys perspective on this!


----------



## diy.phil (May 23, 2011)

Niick said:


> Can anybody tell me which processors currently available have an up-mixer for center channel output? I used to think, not too long ago, that tuning for just one seat was stupid. I've since learned that with only two channels (no center channel) tuning for a single seat is sounds much better IN THAT SINGLE SEAT then tuning for both front seats sounds IN EITHER SEAT.
> [ ... ]


Alpine, Eton and JBL. Plus the new Audiofrog.
Had the Eton with proper center channel decoding in my previous vehicle/build//thread. The iasca 7-snares/drum test track pans and sits in all the correct spots (great imaging anywhere... and we're free to shift/move our body left/right/anywhere while in the same driver's seat).
Both current vehicles have factory center channels now... also passes the 7-snares test.

Andy's new one is definitely very exciting!!

edit: when you guys do center channel please try to use the same speakers or same family/series of speakers for matching timbre/tonality. 
My silly examples: 
All the same size/brand/series for door, center and other door = great (and easy tuning)
Big 6.5" on doors and tiny 3" mid or different brand for center = hmm... maybe not too hot.


----------



## Niick (Jun 3, 2015)

diy.phil said:


> ...............All the same size/brand/series for door, center and other door = great (and easy tuning)
> Big 6.5" on doors and tiny 3" mid or different brand for center = hmm... maybe not too hot.


Now see, I agree. And that right there is exactly the reason why, at least in my mind, a center channel system DONE RIGHT is FAR FROM COMMON. Most clients aren't going to want to go forward with the intense dash modifications necessary to pull it off, especially if their vehicle doesn't have provisions for a center speaker from the factory. 

And even those that do, I have yet to see one that has provisions to fit a 6 1/2" two way component in the center of the dash. 

Maybe Andy can tell us how necessary it is to have the same kind of lower frequency transducer in the center that you'd have in the left/right?


----------



## capea4 (Sep 2, 2010)

It requires the speakers to heave the same "voicing" I think it will take a bunch of smart people an trials to find out how low that center needs to perform. But the speakers would need to have the same sound I believe. It may not even require a center tweeter.


----------



## I800C0LLECT (Jan 26, 2009)

As far as I can remember Andy has always said that mid-bass performance is what's most important and not speaker matching.

Therefore...biggest speaker you can fit as a center channel.


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

For reference (and this was in the video posted) Andy uses the GB60, GB25 and GB10 drivers in each of the front and rear doors, a pair of GB40s and a GB10 for the center channel, a GB40 and a GB10 on either side of the rear deck and a GB10 sub in the center of the rear deck. 

So he is matching the same line of speakers (obviously), but uses the larger midrange in the dash than the doors.


----------



## diy.phil (May 23, 2011)

hmmm but I think the midrange on his front door is the GB60 along with the GB25 (combined, but separated by the crossover). The GB60 can do the 150Hz or 300 Hz about the same as the GB40.

Yeah, we'll need a tweeter on the center too or the higher pitch singers and instruments will sound kinda muted. There are some setup/test tracks that do a hard pan to the left or right and mono it to the center. We like the 3 places to sound identical other than the position. After the test/setup we just play the usual everyday music and don't think/rethink about it any more ha ha. However it's usually the rears in old school setups where we don't need a tweeter so that the main sound does not get pulled to the rear. These are the plain fader type with no time alignment/separation. With the modern/active processing boxes, people put tweeters in the rear now because there is time delay or steering/logic to push the sound to the correct rear location if it's supposed to be there for one reason or another.


----------



## Bluenote (Aug 29, 2008)

Andy stuck to his principles by mounting the tweets in the sails and mids high in the door. I would def like to hear this...


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

Bluenote said:


> I would def like to hear this...


Hopefully I will be shortly. On a shuttle from the hotel to LVCC. AF is probably going to be one of my first stops.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

My IS300 has a huge spot in the factory location for a center channel, and it was even larger when I opened it up some. I can do an 8 in there easy. 6.5 and large format tweeter, no problem.

You only need to get down to 150 or so in the center. My last install I had the center playing to 80.



Niick said:


> Now see, I agree. And that right there is exactly the reason why, at least in my mind, a center channel system DONE RIGHT is FAR FROM COMMON. Most clients aren't going to want to go forward with the intense dash modifications necessary to pull it off, especially if their vehicle doesn't have provisions for a center speaker from the factory.
> 
> And even those that do, I have yet to see one that has provisions to fit a 6 1/2" two way component in the center of the dash.
> 
> Maybe Andy can tell us how necessary it is to have the same kind of lower frequency transducer in the center that you'd have in the left/right?


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

Niick said:


> Now see, I agree. And that right there is exactly the reason why, at least in my mind, a center channel system DONE RIGHT is FAR FROM COMMON. Most clients aren't going to want to go forward with the intense dash modifications necessary to pull it off, especially if their vehicle doesn't have provisions for a center speaker from the factory.
> 
> And even those that do, I have yet to see one that has provisions to fit a 6 1/2" two way component in the center of the dash.
> 
> Maybe Andy can tell us how necessary it is to have the same kind of lower frequency transducer in the center that you'd have in the left/right?


If you're running for example 3 ways in the left right and want to do the same in the center, the 6.5 doesn't have to be mounted up on the top of the dash. 


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Only because he didn't have the space for the 6 and tweeter in the center.



rton20s said:


> For reference (and this was in the video posted) Andy uses the GB60, GB25 and GB10 drivers in each of the front and rear doors, a pair of GB40s and a GB10 for the center channel, a GB40 and a GB10 on either side of the rear deck and a GB10 sub in the center of the rear deck.
> 
> So he is matching the same line of speakers (obviously), but uses the larger midrange in the dash than the doors.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

The sub is sealed and suspended from the rear deck. He got inventive with the grill trim for it to make it match the other speakers.

Are you guys not on Facebook? He's posted a ton of pictures of various things in the car on there.


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

thehatedguy said:


> The sub is sealed and suspended from the rear deck. He got inventive with the grill trim for it to make it match the other speakers.
> 
> Are you guys not on Facebook? He's posted a ton of pictures of various things in the car on there.


Yep.
If you're not on FB you're missing half of this story.
Search Andy Wehmeyer and Audiofrog

BTW Happy Birthday Jason. 


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Niick (Jun 3, 2015)

thehatedguy said:


> My IS300 has a huge spot in the factory location for a center channel, and it was even larger when I opened it up some. I can do an 8 in there easy. 6.5 and large format tweeter, no problem.
> 
> You only need to get down to 150 or so in the center. My last install I had the center playing to 80.


thats awesome, now if only all cars were built this way.......


----------



## Niick (Jun 3, 2015)

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> If you're running for example 3 ways in the left right and want to do the same in the center, the 6.5 doesn't have to be mounted up on the top of the dash.
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


yes, IF you're running 3 ways.......that does seem to be the way to go for this type of setup in most scenarios. So, it's safe to say then that the center channel signal derived by processors that have such a thing doesn't carry with it much low freq. info? If that is the cas, then I'm gonna keep my eyes peeled for a car that would be a good fit for a system like this. It will happen, oh yes, it wil happen.  

Remember the first (I think it was the first) Wayne's World movie, when he sees the guitar, and also when he sees Cassandra.......("it will be mine, Oh Yes! It will be mine") LOL


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

Niick said:


> yes, IF you're running 3 ways.......that does seem to be the way to go for this type of setup in most scenarios. So, it's safe to say then that the center channel signal derived by processors that have such a thing doesn't carry with it much low freq. info? If that is the cas, then I'm gonna keep my eyes peeled for a car that would be a good fit for a system like this. It will happen, oh yes, it wil happen.
> 
> Remember the first (I think it was the first) Wayne's World movie, when he sees the guitar, and also when he sees Cassandra.......("it will be mine, Oh Yes! It will be mine") LOL


It depends on the software that comes with the unit.
The Alpine H800 and H990 (sold in Japan) use pl2 and don't have the derived lower frequencies but the JBL MS-8 that uses Logic7 does.
I believe DTS has a the low frequencies included as well however, I am sure when Andy has time he can elaborate on this more.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## optimaprime (Aug 16, 2007)

Thanks for posting this !!! Car is sickkk


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

thehatedguy said:


> The sub is sealed and suspended from the rear deck. He got inventive with the grill trim for it to make it match the other speakers.
> 
> Are you guys not on Facebook? He's posted a ton of pictures of various things in the car on there.


Thanks for the feedback. Yup, I'm on Facebook just not religiously. Have not looked at it....._today_.


----------



## josby (May 8, 2011)

Niick said:


> I have yet to see one that has provisions to fit a 6 1/2" two way component in the center of the dash.
> 
> Maybe Andy can tell us how necessary it is to have the same kind of lower frequency transducer in the center that you'd have in the left/right?


Here are some quotes I saved from posts Andy has made in the MS-8 thread on the subject:

"For midbass frequencies that the left and right will play but the center channel won't, pathlengths are critical. A phantom center has to be generated for those sounds. If your center channel is a 3" and you have big-ass 8" speakers for right and left mounted in your doors, there's gonna be trouble. So, for front right left and center, you'd be better off with three 5" speakers (R,L, and C) than with 8s in the doors and a 3 in the center. If all you can get in the center is a 3", then try to move the midbass to the kick panels. If you can't do either, the car will still sound great, but the image for center-steered midbass sounds will be larger than it should be and will be biased a little bit to the side on which you sit. Not such a big deal. IF you can get your center down to 120Hz, that’s great"

"In my last car, I used L7 and a setup very similar. I had big 6" speakers in the doors and a pair of 3-1/2" speakers in the center. It sounded great. 6" speakers were 60hz and up and 3-1/2' speakers were 170Hz and up. I took a second place at IASCA the first year out. In my current car, there is no high-pass on the doors and a 100Hz HP on the center--sounds great."

"A 3-1/2" midrange/tweeter is the smallest driver I recommend. We just demo'ed a Saab 9-5 at IFA that used 6" speakers in the doors and a 3-1/2" 2-way in the center that sounded great. The frequency at which you'll have to limit the small midrange will depend greatly on the amount of power you'll apply. A 150Hz crossover on a 3" is fiine for low power, but if you'll use 75 watts or so, you'll need a higher crossover frequency. gary's BMW uses all the factory 4" speakers for mains and the 8" woofers under the seats for midbass. Since all the speakers are driven by 100-watt amplifiers, we had to cross the 4" over at about 200Hz."


----------



## Huckleberry Sound (Jan 17, 2009)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> We .....


Andy first off, Amazing Job!!! I know according to the video, you said that the price for this unit retail would be a bit high. How high I am not sure, but the possibilities that this brings in amazing. It shows a lot of strengths. One being, it does not take 400 watts to drive a speaker effectively. Two having a unit that is all in one, just simplifies the whole equation. The automotive industry has cars with multiple speakers. It would be amazing just to place this unit in a car and start there. That is the market I see for this unit. Then for those like us, who feel factory speakers are not enough, will place a nice three ways in each door, with the center channel in the front.

Over all this is impressive. If this was up for grabs and at the right price, this is going to cause the industry to go into a frenzy. Because they are now getting a little peek at what the people like, and it was not at their expense.

Youngman, continue to do what you all do best. This is amazing! People jumped on the Helix Psix - 6 Channel DSP with Power for $1300. If this was to be produced at the right price - that I will not suggest. This would put some things in a choke hold. The only one thing that I would suggest is an optical input, so that those that use it now. Can use it this unit to.

Much success to you all!


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

For most upmixers, the center needs to play down to about 200 Hz. I disagree that the speakers have to have the same voicing. That's useful in home audio, especially when EQ for every channels isn't often used. In the car, the dash location is going to sound different than the doors anyway and they have to be equalized so the response of the dash matches the doors. That EQ can address the differences in the speakers too.


----------



## capea4 (Sep 2, 2010)

Well, I guess being a home audio guy, that's why I thought the voicing would need to be the same. I want that amp....lol


----------



## oabeieo (Feb 22, 2015)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> For most upmixers, the center needs to play down to about 200 Hz. I disagree that the speakers have to have the same voicing. That's useful in home audio, especially when EQ for every channels isn't often used. In the car, the dash location is going to sound different than the doors anyway and they have to be equalized so the response of the dash matches the doors. That EQ can address the differences in the speakers too.


100% agree and would add having the same type of speaker in the same amount of power going to the center makes it that much better also


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

This has been an amazing read and the video was just eye-popping. 

It goes to show how useful tons of channels would really be. Andy's car, as a demo vehicle goes, probably hits the channel limit of practicality but I'm also sure it sounds friggin' amazing. 

I could definitely use lots of channels. I have a Durango R/T and I could easily see 3-way front, 2-way center, 2-way rear door and 2-way D-pillar along with the sub channel being implemented. That's 17 if I counted right. I could live with a 1-way rear and D-pillar so that would be 13 channels. That's sorta the sweet spot by what I can tell, if the car can support a side and rear channel setup like a lot of them can.

Andy, I love what you're doing and as big a fan of the MS-8 as I am, I would love to get my hands on your next project. I may not be able to readily afford Audiofrog gear (right now) but I really respect what you're doing for the industry. My Durango would likely kick serious ass with a processor like this. As it stands, I'm going to try to get my Ms-8 to play nice with it by just mixing the rear channels, that seems a decent compromise.

edit: On a personal level, I'm vehemently against Facebook and all it stands for, and if people really read (and properly understood the ramifications) of the T&C they'd probably give pause to the data mining that goes on, and the lot. That said, I'd really appreciate it if you ever get a chance to share these little nuggets via another source.


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

El ****** lol... finally got around to watching the video. Pretty funny. The video makes it clear that there won't be this 24 channel amp\dsp for production as it would be way to expensive. But maybe a couple of them run together if one really wanted 24 channels.


----------



## Weigel21 (Sep 8, 2014)

Yeah, I appreciate his work as well, not too many manufacturers seem to be pushing to move forward anymore. 

I always wanted to get an MS-8, but the string of issues I'd heard about with them kept me putting off on buying one in hopes JBL would release an updated version that addressed some of the issues. Still, it seems the best processor for me to date, but the issues just keep me at bay, not to mention the now ridiculous prices of them both new and used. 

I can't guarantee I'll be a customer when you do release a processor, but I do know that I am looking forward to see what you come up with and what the retail pricing will be. Personally don't see myself "wanting" to spend more than $500, but that 's probably not going to happen. I do know I won't pay $1k or more for a processor, I just can't justify it, or afford it.


----------



## Huckleberry Sound (Jan 17, 2009)

In a situation such as this. All in one situation would ease a whole lot of pain, staying away from multi amps and etc. this is a game changer. Not being funny IF THIS WAS $2000 for the sake of the argument. This would fly off the rakes. I imagine we will never know the retail estimated pric but $2500 would not scare me wither.


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

My impressionàguess would be more aroudn 5-8K ish


----------



## Huckleberry Sound (Jan 17, 2009)

It's possible. Very possible. There are some that will scrap everything to start over and to gain there whole trunk back.


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

AAAAAAA said:


> My impressionàguess would be more aroudn 5-8K ish


I did see somewhere and I was sure it was in that CES announcement at the top left a price of $3999 but like many things that get posted, they get edited after a fashion.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

Huckleberry Sound said:


> It's possible. Very possible. There are some that will scrap everything to start over and to gain there whole trunk back.


If I may speak for myself and if I can purchase one of these from AndyFrog, I will do exactly the above.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## benny z (Mar 17, 2008)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> For most upmixers, the center needs to play down to about 200 Hz. I disagree that the speakers have to have the same voicing. That's useful in home audio, especially when EQ for every channels isn't often used. In the car, the dash location is going to sound different than the doors anyway and they have to be equalized so the response of the dash matches the doors. That EQ can address the differences in the speakers too.



Hi Andy!

Isn't there more to timbre matching than the freq response? The cone material of the drivers comes into play, doesn't it? For instance - if the left/right drivers are say paper cones with a silk tweeter, and someone used say a composite/carbon/whatnot driver with an aluminum tweeter in the center, regardless of freq response matching, the timbre would be different. No?

Also, I can't get my head around the left/right seats being equally good. I understand how the center / rear content would be similar from seat to seat, but how do you compensate for the amplitude differences of the front left/right information for each side? I'd imagine the same problem happens with the rear door left/right amplitude affecting the front seats differently. Have you come up with a way around this?

Wish I could have been in Vegas this week to hear it!

Cheers!


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> I did see somewhere and I was sure it was in that CES announcement at the top left a price of $3999 but like many things that get posted, they get edited after a fashion.
> 
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


Maybe that's more realistic. I wouldn't be able to afford that price. Many wouldn't. I'd sure want it though


----------



## Elgrosso (Jun 15, 2013)

Wow amazing car, I was hesitating for few months to buy an old cls just for this kind of setup!
One of the best midrange spot probably, in doors, but still half on axis etc. what a great install. Now that I see that gb25 fits...


----------



## capea4 (Sep 2, 2010)

Can I have mine with a "mobuss" or whatever it's called, so I don't need the mobridge. Now that's a game changer.


----------



## Patrick Bateman (Sep 11, 2006)

I totally wanted to see the AudioFrog demo, but the traffic was horrendous yesterday. I was at CES for three hours, and spent about three hours getting there and back from my home in Vegas. ****ing ridiculous.

At that rate, I would've spent three hours trying to get a fifteen minute demo today.


----------



## Bluenote (Aug 29, 2008)

Anyone get shots of the center channel install? I heard it was handcrafted out of aluminum. Plz post if you can.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

Bluenote said:


> Anyone get shots of the center channel install? I heard it was handcrafted out of aluminum. Plz post if you can.


xxxx2


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

Bluenote said:


> Anyone get shots of the center channel install? I heard it was handcrafted out of aluminum. Plz post if you can.


It is a horrible picture from my cell phone with a lot of reflection from the windshield. But it is all that I got.


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

Check Andy's timeline maybe. It's beautiful work


Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Bluenote (Aug 29, 2008)

rton20s said:


> It is a horrible picture from my cell phone with a lot of reflection from the windshield. But it is all that I got.


Thank You!!! It looks so OE-awesoM!


----------



## Huckleberry Sound (Jan 17, 2009)

Any construction pics with the grill removed?


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

Huckleberry Sound said:


> Any construction pics with the grill removed?


Not that I've seen anywhere.
Andy made sure to give credit to the center channel builder friend of his but so far has not posted any pics of the fine work.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## benny z (Mar 17, 2008)

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> Not that I've seen anywhere.
> 
> Andy made sure to give credit to the center channel builder friend of his but so far has not posted any pics of the fine work.
> 
> ...



He did...


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

Gary Bell machined that for me. I drew it in solidworks and I made the grille.


----------



## benny z (Mar 17, 2008)

Hi again Andy!

Any thoughts here?



benny z said:


> Hi Andy!
> 
> Isn't there more to timbre matching than the freq response? The cone material of the drivers comes into play, doesn't it? For instance - if the left/right drivers are say paper cones with a silk tweeter, and someone used say a composite/carbon/whatnot driver with an aluminum tweeter in the center, regardless of freq response matching, the timbre would be different. No?
> 
> ...


----------



## diy.phil (May 23, 2011)

^oooh... nice!!


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

benny z said:


> He did...


Is that gorgeous work or what! Every build should be so done.


----------



## mrpeabody (May 26, 2010)

That's a slick install. Diggin it.


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

benny z said:


> Hi Andy!
> 
> Isn't there more to timbre matching than the freq response? The cone material of the drivers comes into play, doesn't it? For instance - if the left/right drivers are say paper cones with a silk tweeter, and someone used say a composite/carbon/whatnot driver with an aluminum tweeter in the center, regardless of freq response matching, the timbre would be different. No?
> 
> ...


Well, yes and no. Obviously different materials sound different. If the differences are linear, they can be equalized. If one cone contributes some nonlinear distortion, then that can't be equalized.


----------



## Bluenote (Aug 29, 2008)

Andy, this may require another thread altogether, but could you offer some guidelines for two seat tuning for a full surround set up like this? Goal being to attain same or similar listening experience for both driver and passenger seats. Much appreciated


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

Bluenote said:


> Andy, this may require another thread altogether, but could you offer some guidelines for two seat tuning for a full surround set up like this? Goal being to attain same or similar listening experience for both driver and passenger seats. Much appreciated


Well, my process is basically,

1. set delays for the front speakers to a point midway between the front headrests.
2. Set crossovers based on dispersion patterns and low frequency safety for small speakers
3. Set levels between tweeters, mids, midbass, and subs to get as close to the target as possible
4. Make measurements of the front left speakers and the sub in both of the front seats. I use a regular mic and stand with a little thing I can rotate to make six measurements in a 7" circle. 
5. Average the measurements. Smooth the average to 12th octave. Run REW's Auto EQ. Input the filters. 
6. Repeat for right speakers.
7. Repeat for center and surround.
8. Move mic to the back seats and repeat for side speakers.
9. Set delays for sides so the arrival time to the back seat matched that of the front speakers.
10.Add 12-20mS of delay to rear surround speakers.
11. Listen. 
12. Tune upmixer settings for the widest stage possible while maintaining center image placement and stability. 
13. Listen in back seat. Adjust the level of the side speakers to be as loud as possible for rear seat passengers while not causing the front left and right images to move rearward.


----------



## Bluenote (Aug 29, 2008)

Wow, for a novice tuner like myself, this should keep me busy for a while! Andy thanks for offering this as a guideline!


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

I would like more info on what exactly you're doing with REW and its auto EQ. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Niick (Jun 3, 2015)

benny z said:


> Hi again Andy!
> 
> Any thoughts here?


Ben, I think I get what you're asking. I too wonder about the differences between "steady state" frequency response and a loudspeaker's ability to move back and forth from rest in relation to the input voltage. 

Now, let me make this clear, I HAVE NOT YET PERFECTED A METHODOLOGY TO TEST THESE THINGS, but I will, someday. (beyond impulse response and step response) 

I would imagine that two different speakers, with different suspensions, different motor forces, different inductances, different moving assembly masses, all of these differences, would effect the transient response of the speaker. 

Even if you EQ'd the two speakers to have similar freq. responses, their time domain behavior would remain different, wouldn't it? And would this time domain behavior not have some effect on the resulting character of the sound? 

OR, are two speakers with identical frequency responses (whether arrived at via EQ or not) then therefore the same in the time domain? 

I didn't think so, but then again Im ALWAYS learning new things......

So much to investigate......so many questions.


----------



## benny z (Mar 17, 2008)

Yeah, I'm not technical enough to understand _why_ like that. I've just always been able to tell that there are distinct characteristics of speakers beyond frequency response/distortion that make us prefer one speaker over another. It's what I describe as "timbre"...that certain characteristic that makes you say "oh, I *really* like the sound of these hybrid speakers" - or - "damn, those hertz speakers really sound like shiz". 

Mix them up in the same system, and IMO you are asking for coherency issues regardless of skillful tuning. 

Just my thoughts. Maybe I'm off base.


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Well, my process is basically,
> 
> 1. set delays for the front speakers to a point midway between the front headrests.
> 2. Set crossovers based on dispersion patterns and low frequency safety for small speakers
> ...


What about as far as levels for center and rears? Are they attenuated?
Or is center the same level as left and right and rears same level as fronts? Are rears delayed to arrive at same central point as fronts or ...?

Also. As far as XO points. You mentioned the center should play down to 200....how high do you run the center? Is it all the to 20k or band limited 200 to ...?
Same question with rearsn is there any reason for reara to run above 3000hz?


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

I have a lot of different home speakers that we swap out of the system depending on what we are going to listen to or watch. 

For example, last night, we watched the little mermaid and we used a set of speakers with cones made of seaweed. Those seem designed specifically to reproduce the mermaid's voice and the underwater sounds of the fish.

Then, we listened to a box set of Van Morrison and we swapped out the speakers for some with cones made of potato skins. Since Van Morrison is Irish, these speakers are better for reproducing his voice. 

After that, we watched Star Wars, and swapped out the speakers for some with cones made of carbon fiber, a high tech material, which is obviously better for science fiction.

Finally we listened to Faure's Requiem so we swapped out the speakers for some with paper cones--best for reproducing the acoustic orchestral sounds because it's a natural material.


----------



## benny z (Mar 17, 2008)

Did you watch Sesame Street and swap in some "Brand F" speakers when Oscar the Grouch came on, because they sound like trash? Lmao!


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

Niick said:


> I would imagine that two different speakers, with different suspensions, different motor forces, different inductances, different moving assembly masses, all of these differences, would effect the transient response of the speaker.
> 
> Even if you EQ'd the two speakers to have similar freq. responses, their time domain behavior would remain different, wouldn't it? And would this time domain behavior not have some effect on the resulting character of the sound?
> 
> OR, are two speakers with identical frequency responses (whether arrived at via EQ or not) then therefore the same in the time domain?


At low frequencies,where the cone's motion is pistonic, speakers are minimum phase devices. That means that the time domain response is the frequency response. The time domain response at resonance (low frequencies) is represented in the frequency response as Q. 

Consider these analogues

F=M*A
E=R*I

So, Force in a mechanical system is Voltage in an electrical system. Mass in a mechanical system is Inductance in an electrical system. Friction in a mechanical system is resistance in an electrical system. Compliance in a mechanical system is capacitance in an electrical system. Velocity in a mechanical system is Current in an electrical system. 

This is the basis for understanding the low frequency behavior of of loudspeakers and the basis for Thiele and Small parameters. 

Above the frequency where the motion is no longer pistonic, where the speaker is no longer a simple minimum phase device, peaks and dips in the frequency response and the distortion curve are caused by motor, cone and suspension nonlinearities. The cone changes it's shape differently at different frequencies. The voice coil and former and dust cap vibrate differently than the rest of the cone. These things depend on the stiffness of the material. which depends on the material. 

But...the material doesn't impart some mysterious sound quality based on ridiculous word association.


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

Mic10is said:


> What about as far as levels for center and rears? Are they attenuated?
> Or is center the same level as left and right and rears same level as fronts? Are rears delayed to arrive at same central point as fronts or ...?
> 
> Also. As far as XO points. You mentioned the center should play down to 200....how high do you run the center? Is it all the to 20k or band limited 200 to ...?
> Same question with rearsn is there any reason for reara to run above 3000hz?


With the upmixer disengaged, the center, sides and rears should measure at the same level. All of this gets adjusted by the upmixer settings and the amount of ambient content in the program material. All of the speakers should be full range above their HPF frequency.


----------



## Niick (Jun 3, 2015)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> At low frequencies,where the cone's motion is pistonic, speakers are minimum phase devices. That means that the time domain response is the frequency response. The time domain response at resonance (low frequencies) is represented in the frequency response as Q.
> 
> Consider these analogues
> 
> ...


What I was thinking was, not that the MATERIAL itself was possibly responsible for the different "sound" of different speakers, but that the different mass in relation to the compliance of the suspension couples with the different motor forces, all of THESE differences MIGHT make the speaker react diffently to the input voltage.

Here is my dilemma, does a speaker, so long as you're operating it within its linear operating range, does a speaker's cone movement EXACTLY track the input signal voltage? 

OR, if the input signal had a quick, sharp transient, might the speaker not track it perfectly. For example, might it keep moving, or ringing, after the signal ceases. Or might it not START moving as quickly as the voltage rises. 

It is this that I thought MIGHT be one of the reasons for different speakers "sounding" diffently. 

according to my QUITE POSSIBLY flawed logic, the seaweed speaker might sound different from the potato skin speaker because the seaweed speaker has a more (or less) come mass in relation to its motor force? IF the seaweed speaker and the potato skin speaker had exactly the same cone mass, stiffness, and exactly the same motor design, then I suppose they would then sound exactly the same. But is a seaweed speaker likely to have been built to the exact same specifications as a potato skin speaker? Now THAT I have no idea!


----------



## benny z (Mar 17, 2008)

Niick said:


> according to my QUITE POSSIBLY flawed logic, the seaweed speaker might sound different from the potato skin speaker because the seaweed speaker has a more (or less) come mass in relation to its motor force? IF the seaweed speaker and the potato skin speaker had exactly the same cone mass, stiffness, and exactly the same motor design, then I suppose they would then sound exactly the same. But is a seaweed speaker likely to have been built to the exact same specifications as a potato skin speaker? Now THAT I have no idea!


i love it! lol

idk, but i think you'd have a hard time convincing a lot of people that a metal tweeter sounds the same as a textile tweeter even if they have the same cone mass relative to force.


----------



## Niick (Jun 3, 2015)

Andy, tomorrow I am attending a training seminar by Audio Precision. The afternoon session will cover electro acoustic production testing. SWEET!!


----------



## Niick (Jun 3, 2015)

benny z said:


> i love it! lol
> 
> idk, but i think you'd have a hard time convincing a lot of people that a metal tweeter sounds the same as a textile tweeter even if they have the same cone mass relative to force.


Good point. "Convincing" being the key word. Floyd Toole's research suggests that if a person know ANYTHING about a speaker, it's price, it's appearance, it's construction, manufacture, anything, then their opinion of it is null and void. 

That ONLY thru bling testing can people give speakers a subjective score free of biases, preconceived notions, etc. 

I believe him.


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

Niick said:


> What I was thinking was, not that the MATERIAL itself was possibly responsible for the different "sound" of different speakers, but that the different mass in relation to the compliance of the suspension couples with the different motor forces, all of THESE differences MIGHT make the speaker react diffently to the input voltage.
> 
> Here is my dilemma, does a speaker, so long as you're operating it within its linear operating range, does a speaker's cone movement EXACTLY track the input signal voltage?
> 
> ...


A frequency response measurement is an indication of how the speaker responds to voltage at each frequency. An impulse response measurement is an indication of how the speaker responds to voltage over a given period. 

Of course things like motor strength, moving mass and all of the other things affect the sound. All of this is easily characterized through standard tests that have been documented. That documentation is available.

My objection to the ridiculous claims of many speaker manufacturers about cone material is that they often appeal to some mystical BS. What makes a cone good or bad is whether it's stiff and if it isn't, is the effect on frequency response audible. If it is, can it be eliminated and if it can't, is it pleasant?


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

I suggest the following books:

High Performance Loudspeakers by Martin Colloms. ISBN-13: 978-0470094303

The Loudspeaker and Headphone Handbook by John Borwick.ISBN-13: 978-0240515786

Reading these should clear up any misunderstandings about what is and isn't real in loudspeaker design and testing.


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

Niick said:


> Good point. "Convincing" being the key word. Floyd Toole's research suggests that if a person know ANYTHING about a speaker, it's price, it's appearance, it's construction, manufacture, anything, then their opinion of it is null and void.
> 
> That ONLY thru bling testing can people give speakers a subjective score free of biases, preconceived notions, etc.
> 
> I believe him.


From a scientific perspective and one in which only the frequency response and dispersion characteristics of the speaker are under consideration, yes. This is correct. Purchase decisions aren't made on the basis of performance alone. It's also worthwhile to note that those preference tests are conducted on speaker systems and attempt to eliminate the room as a variable. 

In car audio, we don't sell complete speaker systems. We sell speakers. The system part is implemented in the installation bay when the speakers are installed and the EQ is adjusted.


----------



## Niick (Jun 3, 2015)

What do you make of the so-called AQT test/correction system. According to this, steady-state frequency response does not correlate with subjective perception, so......

I'm sure you're familiar with the concept. What do you make of all that?


----------



## jtaudioacc (Apr 6, 2010)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> I have a lot of different home speakers that we swap out of the system depending on what we are going to listen to or watch.
> 
> For example, last night, we watched the little mermaid and we used a set of speakers with cones made of seaweed. Those seem designed specifically to reproduce the mermaid's voice and the underwater sounds of the fish.
> 
> ...



I thought I was the only one that did this.


----------



## benny z (Mar 17, 2008)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Well, yes and no. Obviously different materials sound different.



I think Andy answered it already.


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

Niick said:


> What do you make of the so-called AQT test/correction system. According to this, steady-state frequency response does not correlate with subjective perception, so......
> 
> I'm sure you're familiar with the concept. What do you make of all that?


Seems to me, after reading the paper, that a simple adjustment to the steady state target response to include more bass is a reasonable way to make the steady state response correlate well enough to preference to make using currently available tuning tools appropriate. Ive been doing that for 25 years.


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

So what does all this have to do with the Andy's 2450?
May I suggest starting another thread Niick.


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## mitchyz250f (May 14, 2005)

Gary some questions about the center channel. With the mids placed side by side does that create issues with beam width and is detrimental to off axis response which is critical to two seat listening? And in a paper published by Harman in 2010 said never to place the center closer than one speaker diameter to the dash?

Also is their a central place online where these types of Harman research paper are available?

https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/48264781/convention-paper-jjr-acoustics/10

and this


----------



## Niick (Jun 3, 2015)

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> So what does all this have to do with the Andy's 2450?
> May I suggest starting another thread Niick.
> 
> 
> ...


Very good point, I guess, that like when having a conversation in real life, one thought creates another and before ya know it you're talking bout something that might be quite loosely related to the original thing that started the conversation. 

My apologies, sometimes my eagerness to pick Andy's brain gets the best of me.


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

mitchyz250f said:


> Gary some questions about the center channel. With the mids placed side by side does that create issues with beam width and is detrimental to off axis response which is critical to two seat listening? And in a paper published by Harman in 2010 said never to place the center closer than one speaker diameter to the dash?
> 
> Also is their a central place online where these types of Harman research paper are available?
> 
> ...


Everything involves tradeoffs. I used two 4" speakers because I wanted a 100Hz cutoff. Does it narrow the horizontal dispersion compared to a single 4"? Sure. Do the windshield and the dashboard create a huge hump in the response? Of course. 

However, here's a spatially averaged post-EQ frequency response for the center channel. This is six measurements in each of the front seats made over a 7" circle.


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

...and I've NEVER heard a center channel in a Harman OE system that didn't SUCK.

The single midrange that I replaced was the worst one I've ever heard. Made the whole car sound bad except for the midbass.


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

Niick said:


> Very good point, I guess, that like when having a conversation in real life, one thought creates another and before ya know it you're talking bout something that might be quite loosely related to the original thing that started the conversation.
> 
> My apologies, sometimes my eagerness to pick Andy's brain gets the best of me.


:thumbsup:


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## mitchyz250f (May 14, 2005)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Everything involves tradeoffs. I used two 4" speakers because I wanted a 100Hz cutoff. Does it narrow the horizontal dispersion compared to a single 4"? Sure. Do the windshield and the dashboard create a huge hump in the response? Of course.
> 
> However, here's a spatially averaged post-EQ frequency response for the center channel. This is six measurements in each of the front seats made over a 7" circle.


Andy that curve looks perfect. Do you have the pre eq curves? This is with auto eq and the midranges & tweeters pushed as close to the glass as possible correct? 

What is the downside of this vs one larger speaker? Does it sound as good as it looks or are there artifacts of reflections?


----------



## SQLnovice (Jul 22, 2014)

Not sure if this was posted but here is a little preview of Andy's car.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hf5POoa_axI


----------



## oabeieo (Feb 22, 2015)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Well, yes and no. Obviously different materials sound different. If the differences are linear, they can be equalized. If one cone contributes some nonlinear distortion, then that can't be equalized.


I would guess this statement mostly holds true because of the super powerful processing on board. 

Wouldn't most with basic 1/3eqs have a hard time overcoming the diffrances in driver materials.


----------



## mitchyz250f (May 14, 2005)

I hope if this DSP does go into production that is can be without amps as well as with amps. That would keep the entry cost down.


----------



## schmiddr2 (Aug 10, 2009)

From el ****** it appears the lower cost models will have fewer channels.

Btw, Andy, I like your mission of improving all seats. But I'm curious: How many customers spend 5 figures on their CA and install, and how many of those are spending more than half of that on producing >60 hertz? My thinking is if the 2450 or similar is too expensive it may be a small section of a small section of the market who may buy it.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

mitchyz250f said:


> I hope if this DSP does go into production that is can be without amps as well as with amps. That would keep the entry cost down.


50W D class cheap as dirt to make, don`t get your hopes up. 
It will lower the cost somewhat but I wouldn`t expect by much. 
What it does prove that 50W is plenty of power for just about any speaker.


----------



## mitchyz250f (May 14, 2005)

Victor_inox said:


> 50W D class cheap as dirt to make, don`t get your hopes up. It will lower the cost somewhat but I wouldn't expect by much.


Can you convert 'dirt cheap' and 'not much' into $ for me. Saying dirt cheap is like saying Ill be over your house soon. It is meaningless when you are trying to make plans.



Victor_inox said:


> What it does prove that 50W is plenty of power for just about any speaker.


Not sure how it 'proves that 50W is plenty of power for just about any speaker'. No doubt 50w is plenty for a high efficiency speakers with the correct crossovers. But most door mounted speakers have low sensitivity at their high pass. Again not saying that 50w wont be sufficient, but not seeing the proof.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

mitchyz250f said:


> Can you convert 'dirt cheap' and 'not much' into $ for me. Saying dirt cheap is like saying Ill be over your house soon. It is meaningless when you are trying to make plans.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If you look at the video linked above you`d see what drivers Andy used in his Mercedes, none of them most efficient. exact parameters you`ll have to find yourself. 
Price of 50W class D is not set in stone, do your own research, 5 to 25 bucks in parts if you buy in bulk. Knowledge of how to use them cost much more. How each manufacturer calculate their price is proprietary information.
When you have 24 50W amplifiers that makes it a1200W worth of power, plenty for any SQ oriented vehicle, even RV. When you use 3 way system with each driver playing just a couple octaves of signal, 50W per driver is plenty. 
For bass heads there is always additional Subs available. 
If you use amps based on big embossed power numbers then your mileage may vary. 
BTW 88Db 1W 1M driver gets to 103db at just 32W.


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

I to think that 50 watts is pretty much what's needed for most speakers, especially in free air.


----------



## diy.phil (May 23, 2011)

I think his amp might be bridgeable too for more power to the mid-bass or use 4 channels into a dual-coil sub. It's special/interesting/good. (But not sure if I remember correctly or where I saw that, maybe it was on a demo board datasheet.)


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

In *Bold *


Andy Wehmeyer said:


> HI Guys. Sorry. Been really busy getting ready for CES. Amplifiers and DSP are in our product plan.
> 
> Yes, it's a 24 channel amp.
> Yes, it's 50 x 24 @ 4 and 50 x 75 @ 2. *Channel pairs can be bridged*, so it could be a 12-channel amp.
> ...





diy.phil said:


> I think his amp might be bridgeable too for more power to the mid-bass or use 4 channels into a dual-coil sub. It's special/interesting/good. (But not sure if I remember correctly or where I saw that, maybe it was on a demo board datasheet.)


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

Victor_inox said:


> If you look at the video linked above you`d see what drivers Andy used in his Mercedes, none of them most efficient. exact parameters you`ll have to find yourself.
> Price of 50W class D is not set in stone, do your own research, 5 to 25 bucks in parts if you buy in bulk. Knowledge of how to use them cost much more. How each manufacturer calculate their price is proprietary information.
> When you have 24 50W amplifiers that makes it a1200W worth of power, plenty for any SQ oriented vehicle, even RV. When you use 3 way system with each driver playing just a couple octaves of signal, 50W per driver is plenty.
> For bass heads there is always additional Subs available.
> ...


I was able to ask questions from multiple people at CES that managed an audition of the 2450 in Andy's Mercedes and they all said the same thing; as good as it sounded it wasn't dynamic so in this case 50w/channel apparently wasn't enough. There were some questions about the final tune as well but it just didn't have any volume. Maybe a 24100 would be a better solution.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

I can`t comment on device nobody seen guts of, perhaps one day. 
100W is better than 50, exactly twice better.


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

Victor_inox said:


> I can`t comment on device nobody seen guts of, perhaps one day.
> 100W is better than 50, exactly twice better.


Twice better in this case would be 500 watts not 100.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

AAAAAAA said:


> Twice better in this case would be 500 watts not 100.


From SPL point of view yes, from pure arithmetics not so.


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> I was able to ask questions from multiple people at CES that managed an audition of the 2450 in Andy's Mercedes and they all said the same thing; as good as it sounded it wasn't dynamic so in this case 50w/channel apparently wasn't enough. There were some questions about the final tune as well but it just didn't have any volume. Maybe a 24100 would be a better solution.


LOL My last car used 18 watt class AB chips and the SQ judges all claimed that it was "so dynamic". I don't even know what that means. There was a phase issue that affected the midbass in one seat more than the other. Maybe that was the objection.


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> LOL My last car used 18 watt class AB chips and the SQ judges all claimed that it was "so dynamic". I don't even know what that means. There was a phase issue that affected the midbass in one seat more than the other. Maybe that was the objection.


Maybe.
I didn't pursue it any further since your 2450 is not going into production.
A damn shame considering it's potential.


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> Maybe.
> I didn't pursue it any further since your 2450 is not going into production.
> A damn shame considering it's potential.












I had to.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> Maybe.
> I didn't pursue it any further since your 2450 is not going into production.
> A damn shame considering it's potential.


 Just imagine retail of it does. Andy said $250 worth of connectors.
I`d love to see those connectors up close.


----------



## Fyalinks (Mar 6, 2016)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> LOL My last car used 18 watt class AB chips and the SQ judges all claimed that it was "so dynamic". I don't even know what that means. There was a phase issue that affected the midbass in one seat more than the other. Maybe that was the objection.


@Andy - YOU REALLY NEED TO PUT THIS AMP INTO PRODUCTION.
I have provisions for 16 speakers in stock locations in my cayenne and there are probably BMW and Mercedes models that can beat that. My setup is simple to yours except its a single 3 inch driver for the center and in the rear D pillars, if I upgrade those to G25s or G40s and and G10s to them that would be 19 right there. I'm sure I can find uses for the remaining 6 channels. Is it a small market? Yes, but so are buyers for Ferrari, Bugatti, Lamborghini as the like. I've been waiting for years for someone to build a product like this and would be one of the first to get it. Before reading this thread I was contemplating how to link two of the current market 8 channel DSPs to get 16 active channels that were probably get links to 2 JL Audio XD800/8v2s. 

For those who are saying there are two many channels or not enough power per channel, this product is obviously not for you and you shouldn't be making comments in this thread. I mean, more car manufacturers are starting to put more speakers into there larger or more premium vehicle because they realize in this new "Digital Age" people like to have everything everywhere, and they also want more of it. 

Anyway, enough rambling, I support this product just as is, $2k to $6k, Ok.
What's the average price for an 8 channel DSP? Around $500? This thing has 3 times the potential so call it $1500 for the processor section. JLs current 8 channel amp costs around $700 for an authorized dealer but offers up a little more power per channel so call that another $1500 minimum. So as far as price go, I don't think that anyone who is seriously wants this product would mind paying north of $3k for an all in one solution that clears up a ton of space and consolidates have a dozen amps and wiring components. 

THIS THING NEEDS TO GO INTO PRODUCTION SOON SO I CAN START TEARING MY CAR APART - just bought my 4 GB60s for my doors today. Come on Andy, make this thing happen already.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

So put all eggs in one basket? One section goes out and you have few grand worth brick?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)




----------



## Fyalinks (Mar 6, 2016)

Victor_inox said:


> So put all eggs in one basket? One section goes out and you have few grand worth brick?
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk


This is not like investing all of your money in one stock Sir. Having one central device that controls all amplification and processing allows a single source for troubleshooting. Going by your logic, you should have multiple head units/radios in your car just in case one crashes. But there is nothing wrong with that, that's why there are multiple colors, cars brands, and general variety; its because everyone likes difference things and has their own preferences, thus, there is no wrong way to eat a reese's, car audio is not different; one amp, multiple amp, who cares? As long as we have the ability to choose the one prefer and are able to achieve our desired sound with that preference. Me, I prefer to live a life of simplicity and I like my music gear to be the same way.


----------



## Elgrosso (Jun 15, 2013)

I'd take a 1650 around 2k, or even any "8-00" daisy chain-able.
Something modular would be pretty cool, w/ or w/o amps, stackable to cover most use cases while staying accessible.
It also depends a lot of the soft, and UI, but I'm confident!


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

Fyalinks said:


> This is not like investing all of your money in one stock Sir. Having one central device that controls all amplification and processing allows a single source for troubleshooting. Going by your logic, you should have multiple head units/radios in your car just in case one crashes. But there is nothing wrong with that, that's why there are multiple colors, cars brands, and general variety; its because everyone likes difference things and has their own preferences, thus, there is no wrong way to eat a reese's, car audio is not different; one amp, multiple amp, who cares? As long as we have the ability to choose the one prefer and are able to achieve our desired sound with that preference. Me, I prefer to live a life of simplicity and I like my music gear to be the same way.


Your HU goes bad you install another one. amp burned down- same thing, DSP goes kaput- it`s just one component. One central piece worth 3K goes out and you done. Well maybe not you but most people are. Also I highly doubt you will use the same box that crapped on you once.
Stackable or modular design will make more sense IMHO.


----------



## Focused4door (Aug 15, 2015)

Victor_inox said:


> Your HU goes bad you install another one. amp burned down- same thing, DSP goes kaput- it`s just one component. One central piece worth 3K goes out and you done. Well maybe not you but most people are. Also I highly doubt you will use the same box that crapped on you once.
> Stackable or modular design will make more sense IMHO.


An 8 channel would be cheaper to manufacture and likely have higher manufacturing yield.

Just make the link between them digital and I would be happy.

For vehicles sticking the amps and dsp under the seats, a bunch of 8 channels makes more sense than a monster sized 24.


----------



## Fyalinks (Mar 6, 2016)

Victor_inox said:


> Your HU goes bad you install another one. amp burned down- same thing, DSP goes kaput- it`s just one component. One central piece worth 3K goes out and you done. Well maybe not you but most people are. Also I highly doubt you will use the same box that crapped on you once.
> Stackable or modular design will make more sense IMHO.


I had a PDX V9 in my last setup, it went out once in the first year I had it, I got it repaired for $50 by an authorized repair shop and it took a beating for the next 3 years until I sold it with the car. I get what you're saying though, and like I said we have some amount of options to accommodate our likings. 

Stackable and modular would be nice, or something a little more reasonable like a 12 channel all in one with 100 rms per channel. But we can fantasize all day, at the end of the day, companies are going to make whatever they can get the most profits from, which is why we don't see more dedicated 8 inch mid bass woofers, or all these tasty stackable and modular stuff we're wishing for. Same reason automatic transmission rule the car industry too, the many enthusiasts on these forums are still the few..by far.


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

There's a better chance of Bill Cosby becoming President than there is of this ever coming to market in any form.


----------



## Fyalinks (Mar 6, 2016)

LMAO. 

I'll find a way to combine two Helix DSP Pros.


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> There's a better chance of Bill Cosby becoming President than there is of this ever coming to market in any form.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

Fyalinks said:


> LMAO.
> 
> I'll find a way to combine two Helix DSP Pros.


 still short 4 chprocessing and 24ch of amplification., How about 3? But I see that as feasible idea.


----------



## Fyalinks (Mar 6, 2016)

Victor_inox said:


> still short 4 chprocessing and 24ch of amplification., How about 3? But I see that as feasible idea.


The idea of the A-2450 was an all-in-one solution that would be a drop-in upgrade to any of the to of the line OEM systems such a Porsche Burmester, Audio Bang & Olufsen, Lexus Mark Levinson, and others that come with tones of drivers, amp channels and processing capabilities. Therein lied its appeal to me because I happen to fit into that niche market. However, most of the people that have these systems are quite satisfied with what the factory gave them, and the few like me, who get bored of any and everything, are too small of a market to create a large enough demand to justify supply.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

Fyalinks said:


> The idea of the A-2450 was an all-in-one solution that would be a drop-in upgrade to any of the to of the line OEM systems such a Porsche Burmester, Audi Bang & Olufsen, Lexus Mark Levinson, and others that come with tones of drivers, amp channels and processing capabilities. Therein lied its appeal to me because I happen to fit into that niche market. However, most of the people that have these systems are quite satisfied with what the factory gave them, and the few like me, who get bored of any and everything, are too small of a market to create a large enough demand to justify supply.


 0.1% of such car buyers will be upgrading their factory systems.
Most of them lease anyway. Unless it`s offered as OEM factory upgrade there is no market for it. too bad B&O system installed in souped up Volkswagen, it`s remarkable.


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

Victor_inox said:


> 0.1% of such car buyers will be upgrading their factory systems.
> Most of them lease anyway. Unless it`s offered as OEM factory upgrade there is no market for it. too bad B&O system installed in souped up Volkswagen, it`s remarkable.


Based on some of my recent conversations with people "in the know," breaking into the OE market is nigh impossible. Even with unbelievably good credentials. And while the aftermarket audio demographic, such as ourselves, can quickly become accepting of a name like Audiofrog. I just don't ever see the typical Mercedes buyer being accepting of an upgraded "Audiofrog" system for his S Class.

Err... I mean...


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

Yup,that is correct Nearly impossible. Audio F*&k would be much better name.why not to hire PR company to develop brand?or at least start a poll here..... 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

Victor_inox said:


> Yup,that is correct Nearly impossible. Audio F&*k would be much better name.why not to hire PR company to develop brand?or at least start a poll here.....
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk


I don't take exception to the name for an aftermarket company. Sure it is odd, and was the butt of many jokes when it was announced. However, it is memorable and the product seems to be standing on its own merits. 

Translating that credibility and success over to the OE side was the only thing I was commenting on.


----------



## Fyalinks (Mar 6, 2016)

Victor_inox said:


> Yup,that is correct Nearly impossible. Audio **** would be much better name.why not to hire PR company to develop brand?or at least start a poll here.....
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk





rton20s said:


> I don't take exception to the name for an aftermarket company. Sure it is odd, and was the butt of many jokes when it was announced. However, it is memorable and the product seems to be standing on its own merits.
> 
> Translating that credibility and success over to the OE side was the only thing I was commenting on.


If you noticed all of the companies I mentioned had actual conceivable names of people, so maybe something like " Briggs & Wehmeyer" would have been a bit more marketable and respectable, like Mr. "Smith & Wesson" :laugh:

I like the funky name though...or maybe...I just like frogs...


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

rton20s said:


> I don't take exception to the name for an aftermarket company. Sure it is odd, and was the butt of many jokes when it was announced. However, it is memorable and the product seems to be standing on its own merits.
> 
> Translating that credibility and success over to the OE side was the only thing I was commenting on.


Perhaps I misunderstood yours:" I just don't ever see the typical Mercedes buyer being accepting of an upgraded "Audiofrog" system for his S Class."
Lets face it it`s terrible brand name for hi fi company.


----------



## oabeieo (Feb 22, 2015)

Fyalinks said:


> @Andy - YOU REALLY NEED TO PUT THIS AMP INTO PRODUCTION.
> I have provisions for 16 speakers in stock locations in my cayenne and there are probably BMW and Mercedes models that can beat that. My setup is simple to yours except its a single 3 inch driver for the center and in the rear D pillars, if I upgrade those to G25s or G40s and and G10s to them that would be 19 right there. I'm sure I can find uses for the remaining 6 channels. Is it a small market? Yes, but so are buyers for Ferrari, Bugatti, Lamborghini as the like. I've been waiting for years for someone to build a product like this and would be one of the first to get it. Before reading this thread I was contemplating how to link two of the current market 8 channel DSPs to get 16 active channels that were probably get links to 2 JL Audio XD800/8v2s.
> 
> For those who are saying there are two many channels or not enough power per channel, this product is obviously not for you and you shouldn't be making comments in this thread. I mean, more car manufacturers are starting to put more speakers into there larger or more premium vehicle because they realize in this new "Digital Age" people like to have everything everywhere, and they also want more of it.
> ...


And they say a 4way front w sub is too much. Lol gee whiz that is a lot of sound sources. Lol. 

I wonder if Andy could take it into a order based production model. Where when you order one online, the fab house makes it and ships it for you. 

All he would need is a few hundred PCBs fabbed , a solder screen for smt made, and a turn key manufacturer that handles the components, and kit supply in house . That way Andy wouldn't have to buy reels and reels of components. He would just have to get a screen made and some PCBs and housings. Oh and his 250$ connectors  . But for reals , if he could expect even 100 orders it might be worth the venture as long as the manufacturer has very low costs. (China) 

Be pretty cool to see come about. I know a guy that would buy one as well.

If he already made one he probably has the screen, and cad data, cam data, etc.


----------



## Onyx1136 (Mar 15, 2009)

oabeieo said:


> And they say a 4way front w sub is too much. Lol gee whiz that is a lot of sound sources. Lol.
> 
> I wonder if Andy could take it into a order based production model. Where when you order one online, the fab house makes it and ships it for you.
> 
> ...


If a production model like that were viable, we'd see lots of manufacturers using it. In a global retail environment where economies of scale are so incredibly powerful, an on demand manufacturing process is far too inefficient and costly to be considered for a product that a manufacturer wants to make a profit on. 

The only example I'm aware of is the few manufacturers that are making woofers to order. The difference being that woofers require very little manufacturing time. One person can glue a woofer together from a pile of soft parts in less than 20 minutes if they're well trained. But even that's not viable long term if one wants to turn their company into anything more than a boutique woofer brand.


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

Fyalinks said:


> If you noticed all of the companies I mentioned had actual conceivable names of people, so maybe something like " Briggs & Wehmeyer" would have been a bit more marketable and respectable, like Mr. "Smith & Wesson" :laugh:
> 
> I like the funky name though...or maybe...I just like frogs...


While I agree with you that name recognition or even the implied sophistication of a name play a key role, that really isn't enough. And from what I have heard, even the right credentials and capabilities isn't enough. 

Andy is here, so he can comment on the matter if he chooses to. I'd imagine though, given his background with Harman, he knows how tough it is to get in with OEMs. Given that fact, the negative impact of a name such as "Audiofrog" on the OEM market carries little weight.


----------



## oabeieo (Feb 22, 2015)

Onyx1136 said:


> If a production model like that were viable, we'd see lots of manufacturers using it. In a global retail environment where economies of scale are so incredibly powerful, an on demand manufacturing process is far too inefficient and costly to be considered for a product that a manufacturer wants to make a profit on.
> 
> The only example I'm aware of is the few manufacturers that are making woofers to order. The difference being that woofers require very little manufacturing time. One person can glue a woofer together from a pile of soft parts in less than 20 minutes if they're well trained. But even that's not viable long term if one wants to turn their company into anything more than a boutique woofer brand.


I worked for a electronics manufacturer as a smt programmer , there model was SCM ( supply chain management) there were some prouducts we made that were orders of 5 or or even 2 I can remember one time. We did tons of small orders. We also did the plastics, owned the comps, exactly what I described. However we built stuff that was 1000000$ boards more medical to 20$ boards for Palm Pilots, and some small stuff too. The plant I worked in manufacturer all of AMX (popular home audio and automation ) and some of there orders were like 5-10 units. In fact there motto was "no job too small" - http://www.westernelectronics.com/our-capabilities/full-service-product-manufacturing/ and we did right here in Denver . Immagine how cheap china would be. 

So the model exists , I know that much. But for this prouduct the be worth it for Andy as far as gross profit dollars, it would have to cost effective (China). 

I get your point tho, and it is very much a good point because there is so little profit in small builds.

On the contrary , I think he could pull it off with no loss of revenue, I just don't think he would be running to the bank on this one though. It would have to be something he would want to make just to keep guys like us happy And for personal accomplishment as well which is huge on a item like this.


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

Fyalinks said:


> " *Briggs & Wehmeyer*"


Sounds like that law firm who specializes in representing accident victims.
You know, the one with the commercial that comes on late at night right after the Adam & Eve ad.


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> Sounds like that law firm who specializes in representing accident victims.
> You know, the one with the commercial that comes on late at night right after the Adam & Eve ad.


I was picturing Andy in his El ****** mask pushing a lawn mower.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

speaking of commercials.  




Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk


----------



## Fyalinks (Mar 6, 2016)

Victor_inox said:


> https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jAY_OhFRxgA speaking of commercials.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk


:lol::laugh::laugh4:


----------



## Elgrosso (Jun 15, 2013)

Audiofrog is a perfect name I believe, perfect for serious people that don't take themselves too seriously.
I don't know, but would be cool if that name was first dropped over a well-lubricated meal of frog's legs


----------



## KillerBox (Jan 7, 2011)

Victor_inox said:


> Just imagine retail of it does. Andy said $250 worth of connectors.
> I`d love to see those connectors up close.


A lot of newer German made mobile construction cranes use these style of electrical connectors. Andy is truthful saying they are expensive.

I would spend up $2,000 for this DSP amp & up to $4,500 for this DSP amp with 24 x 100 watts. I wished that I had free time to tune my system, so I love all in one solutions and Auto tune.


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> Frog protection.
> 
> (edited)
> 
> Seriously, Brett?


----------



## BigAl205 (May 20, 2009)

Looks like I'm going the AF route 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/k6lul3nretl5tfi/20160401_122321.jpg?dl=0


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

A nice choice.

Look, many brands have odd names. If you remember it, or it makes you talk about it- the mission was accomplished. After checking out the performance data on Audiofrog's GB series drivers, I'd say they are extremely well engineered and the performance is top tier. So you have a brand with a memorable name and an outstanding product- what's not to like about that. Kudos to Andy. He's also got a pretty good handle on the market and trends in this segment so I think he's well aware of what is a solid product choice to bring to market.


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

BigAl205 said:


> Looks like I'm going the AF route
> 
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/k6lul3nretl5tfi/20160401_122321.jpg?dl=0


Hope it sounds stellar cuz you'll blame me if it don't. 
Actually.. Better yet, I hope you hate 'em so you can sell 'em to me.


----------



## dgage (Oct 1, 2013)

captainobvious said:


> A nice choice.
> 
> Look, many brands have odd names. If you remember it, or it makes you talk about it- the mission was accomplished. After checking out the performance data on Audiofrog's GB series drivers, I'd say they are extremely well engineered and the performance is top tier. So you have a brand with a memorable name and an outstanding product- what's not to like about that. Kudos to Andy. He's also got a pretty good handle on the market and trends in this segment so I think he's well aware of what is a solid product choice to bring to market.


I concur. I have the GB10 and GB25 to test against the Illusion C3 and C4 set. Build quality is very nice but attention to detail is off the charts. 

And regarding your comment about understanding the market, I concur. I really enjoyed Andy's interview and have confidence in the success of AudioFrog.

Q&A: Andy Wehmeyer of Audiofrog


----------



## BigAl205 (May 20, 2009)

Babs said:


> Hope it sounds stellar cuz you'll blame me if it don't.
> Actually.. Better yet, I hope you hate 'em so you can sell 'em to me.


I always blame you for my poor tuning skillz


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

BigAl205 said:


> I always blame you for my poor tuning skillz



I'll blame your drivers with a screwdriver and panel poppers at the ready. LOL


----------



## BigAl205 (May 20, 2009)

You'll have to wait until fall to get at 'em


----------



## mclaren1885 (Feb 15, 2012)

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> Frog protection.


Brett, that edited image IMO was way out of line, not to mention that editing a pic of a company like that could even get you into trouble legally? While I do understand that poking fun is good in a serious environment. There is a line that shouldn't be crossed! Given the amount of info Andy has shared on this forum, I think we can show him better respect than that


----------



## Darth SQ (Sep 17, 2010)

mclaren1885 said:


> Brett, that edited image IMO was way out of line, not to mention that editing a pic of a company like that could even get you into trouble legally? While I do understand that poking fun is good in a serious environment. There is a line that shouldn't be crossed! Given the amount of info Andy has shared on this forum, I think we can show him better respect than that


This was posted weeks ago and I had forgotten about it.
I've apologized to Andy.
He and I have been messaging since 5:30 pm tonight about it.
I ran with Victor's "frog protection" post and didn't mean anything by it other than a quick giggle for all.
Andy has a twisted and quirky sense of humor (spend any time on his personal fb page and you'll understand what I mean) and I thought he'd lol as well.
I'll go back and remove the pic here shortly.


----------

