How Long Have Your ML Panels Actually Lasted?

[Hocky]

Or maybe few have actually needed panel replacement. I had a pair of Aerius from '96 with original panels, worked perfectly. I also have a pair of Ascent from 02 that had original panels working perfectly as well. I replaced the Ascent panels ebcause I came across a great deal and wanted the clearspar panels. I have a pair of Summits that are from 06, panels work perfectly.

 

[Rich]

I respectfully disagree with you here... The reason is that the result set as I said in my previous post is skewed to find 'problems' and ignores anyone that has had 'no problems' - which gives you no real indication of the failure rate.

The purpose of this poll, as Justin said in his first post, is to try to get an idea of how long panels last before they go bad. In other words, life expectancy. You are trying to get at something else entirely, and that is failure rate. These are totally different statistics and would probably require separate polls asking different questions.

 

[Hocky]

The purpose of this poll, as Justin said in his first post, is to try to get an idea of how long panels last before they go bad. In other words, life expectancy. You are trying to get at something else entirely, and that is failure rate. These are totally different statistics and would probably require separate polls asking different questions.

Life expectancy cannot be determined based on a few people having early failures, either.

 

[Rich]

Life expectancy cannot be determined based on a few people having early failures, either.

Nothing can be determined with a "few" responses. But over time, if enough people respond to this poll, a picture of average life expectancy and minimum and maximum life expectancies can easily be determined.

Already, I find it fascinating that almost half the respondents thus far are reporting panel life spans of under ten years! If that percentage holds up with greater numbers of replies (enough to make it a statistically significant number), then it is a huge condemnation of ML's manufacturing process.

Think about it. If you are considering buying Summit X or CLX (spending 10 to 20 grand for a pair of speakers) and you have a fifty percent chance of the panels going bad and needing replacement in less than ten years, how is that going to make you feel about your purchase? Especially when other Stat manufacturers don't seem to be having this problem?

 

[robertawillisjr]

Nothing can be determined with a "few" responses. But over time, if enough people respond to this poll, a picture of average life expectancy and minimum and maximum life expectancies can easily be determined.

Already, I find it fascinating that almost half the respondents thus far are reporting panel life spans of under ten years! If that percentage holds up with greater numbers of replies (enough to make it a statistically significant number), then it is a huge condemnation of ML's manufacturing process.

Think about it. If you are considering buying Summit X or CLX (spending 10 to 20 grand for a pair of speakers) and you have a fifty percent chance of the panels going bad and needing replacement in less than ten years, how is that going to make you feel about your purchase? Especially when other Stat manufacturers don't seem to be having this problem?

I would like to know which other stat manufacturers have sold as many ESL speakers as ML. I would also like to know if they have any long term weaknesses. I have heard that Quad ESL's suffer from some maladies over time.

 

[timm]

The purpose of this poll, as Justin said in his first post, is to try to get an idea of how long panels last before they go bad. In other words, life expectancy. You are trying to get at something else entirely, and that is failure rate. These are totally different statistics and would probably require separate polls asking different questions.

Again Rich -- in order to see how long panels last - you have to look at the ENTIRE data set - you can't just include the failures.... If you just look at the failures - and only 1% of all panels fail -- then this tells you nothing. Yes - you are going to have some bad quality in any product made -- so lets see what that quality is all about... if 100 panels NEVER go bad - and 2 go bad with 6 years -- then the inaccurate conclusion is - 'panels only last 6 years before they go bad'.... However, if you have 94 panels have never failed - but 6 fail with a certain timeframe -- or whatever that number might be - that tells you the LIFE EXPECTENCY... and the ODDS you are going to have a bad panel that fails within a given timeframe They are not seperate - and are not different. In fact, by including both - you get real solid information in 1 poll - but I digress... we only want to look at the failures here.... so continue.

 

[Rich]

If you just look at the failures - and only 1% of all panels fail -- then this tells you nothing.

I see your point, timm.

 

[repman]

I see your point, timm.

I wish you would see mine:ROFL:

 

[MPS]

Given the last option "19+" years covers everything from 19-infinity years, everyone running panels aged over 19 years can choose this option even if no replacement is done or scheduled. Those of us having still operating panels but less than 19 years can not vote but it's not relevant in this poll.

 

[timm]

Given the last option "19+" years covers everything from 19-infinity years, everyone running panels aged over 19 years can choose this option even if no replacement is done or scheduled. Those of us having still operating panels but less than 19 years can not vote but it's not relevant in this poll.

So - if someone has a 20 year panel with no problems - they are supposed to vote that after 19+ years - they have had a failure of some sort?. And since everyone that votes here had a failure at some point your conclusions based off your data is......... Let me ask you this question -- when all the data is in - what question are you trying to answer with this poll? That ML panels last X long? What you are getting is - 'of the ML panels that fail... they usually fail in X amount of years'. As I stated above - since you don't know the percentage of failure - this does not give someone that might be considering a CLX or Summit X purchase a very good view does it? I believe this was one of the key points of Justin's original synopsis of this poll - and its purpose. I can't explain this anymore - it is just statistics.

 

[User211]

I thought this would happen - a critique on the limitations of the poll.

Well - the poll has limitations. Live with it. We can't practically gather data from all ML users - we'll never know true accurate overall percentage failure figures. Interpret the results as only you can do.

Being realistic, I know full well that there are no panels out there that are 20 years old that have been subjected to "normal use" (and have not been "restored" in any way) that will compare with new ones. I know "normal use" is ambiguous, but at least I know what I mean by that - and so do you if you are a reasonable person.

So the point made by timm's last post is somewhat moot, IMHO. In other words, all panels fail within 20 years, at least to within the personal criteria I described for panel replacement in an earlier post on this thread. By this reasoning, rough (and I mean rough) percentage failure stats can be deduced.

 

[timm]

I thought this would happen - a critique on the limitations of the poll.

Well - the poll has limitations. Live with it. We can't practically gather data from all ML users - we'll never know true accurate overall percentage failure figures. Interpret the results as only you can do.

Being realistic, I know full well that there are no panels out there that are 20 years old that have been subjected to "normal use" (and have not been "restored" in any way) that will compare with new ones. I know "normal use" is ambiguous, but at least I know what I mean by that - and so do you if you are a reasonable person.

So the point made by timm's last post is somewhat moot, IMHO. In other words, all panels fail within 20 years, at least to within the personal criteria I described for panel replacement in an earlier post on this thread. By this reasoning, rough (and I mean rough) percentage failure stats can be deduced.

Justin - its not that important to me - so I can live with it... Just trying to be helpful so that the data that you get from this poll is something that is useful. Go at it... Thank you for taking the time and effort to put it together. I have no more opinions etc....

 

[BadaBing11]

Given the last option "19+" years covers everything from 19-infinity years, everyone running panels aged over 19 years can choose this option even if no replacement is done or scheduled. Those of us having still operating panels but less than 19 years can not vote but it's not relevant in this poll.

Ok, I've had my panels for 8 years. So according to this poll the only box I can mark is 8 years. But I see Timm's point, this would imply that my speakers failed at 8 years when in fact they are still going strong. This data is inconsequential, irrelevant, inconclusive and could give the implication that panels have failed when in fact they are still immaculate, incredible and spectacular, capable of delivering the finest audiotopia in the confinement of Alpha Centauri .

This is outrageous, blasphemous, misleading, catastophic, egregious, ridiculous. Timm is right. Part of the data may suggest ramifications that may or may not be true.A misrepresentation of the truth for certain.

Bing:afro:

 

[User211]

Ok, I've had my panels for 8 years. So according to this poll the only box I can mark is 8 years. But I see Timm's point, this would imply that my speakers failed at 8 years when in fact they are still going strong. This data is inconsequential, irrelevant, inconclusive and could give the implication that panels have failed when in fact they are still immaculate, incredible and spectacular, capable of delivering the finest audiotopia in the confinement of Alpha Centauri .

This is outrageous, blasphemous, misleading, catastophic, egregious, ridiculous. Timm is right. Part of the data may suggest ramifications that may or may not be true.A misrepresentation of the truth for certain.

Bing:afro:

You haven't read the thread, have you? Or at least, absorbed the points made. In the light of that fact, your post is just plain idiotic.

 

[MPS]

Huh people, let's just calm down a bit. This poll is _not_ about expected lifetime of ML panels. It's not even about failure rate. The only information asked and that can be read out of this is the time period of at which failure did occur. Now then what did cause the failure is yet an other thing.

Things don't last forever, how unfortunate. It's just the way it is..

IMHO this is interesting information as it is. It would be great if we could find out exact statistics of expected lifetime of a panel. I do think ML has relatively good idea of it but it would be highly unlikely that they were to share it with anybody. Exact statistics can't exist as it would require data of each and every panel out there and if they are still being used or not.

Sometime ago I was in a situation to make an important and expensive decision. I asked the company offering their services of average success rate and the average cost of successful results. I was given absolutely no information of such things although they must have kept very good statistics of such things among others. Well I drew my conclusions..

Which ever way I look at this issue, all I see is one more interesting piece of information to be had.

 

[BadaBing11]

You haven't read the thread, have you? Or at least, absorbed the points made. In the light of that fact, your post is just plain idiotic.

At least I understand statistics:bowdown:

 

[Bernard]

You haven't read the thread, have you? Or at least, absorbed the points made. In the light of that fact, your post is just plain idiotic.

Justin, considering some of the responses in this thread, I'll bet that you regret starting this poll. I thought that the first response (mine) said it all, i.e. If you have not had any failures you are not eligible to vote. But then, if you don't bother to read the thread and shoot from the hip ......

 

[User211]

I'm in two minds about it, Bernard.

On the one hand, I do like threads with a bit of controversy. I really liked the magic dots thread, for instance. A true MLOC classic... (runs for cover).

Whilst the response to this thread hasn't been great, I believe it does show that panel life is, to some extent, a game of "Russian Roulette". Whilst we don't know the causes of the poll indicated failures in all cases, all credit to those who qualified their vote with substantiating prose. It really helped to gain some extra insight into a limited set of stats.

On the other hand, if I raise the sister thread "how long have your panels lasted without failure?", I'm sure it will be equally lambasted for it's obvious limitations. I'm not sure I care too much about that - because I already know it. Maybe we should have a poll on whether it should be raised or not.

My Apogee panels will fail, just like my ML ones did. If there is one thing this poll will have done, it will make people aware that stat panels are more fickle than your average dynamic drive uint, which simply aren't as sensitive to environmental conditions. To my mind, that must be of paramount importance in making a buying decision for a lot of people looking to spend large sums on loudspeakers. Of course, that's assuming early failures were due to environmental conditions, which I quite plainly am doing and could well be wrong about.

I choose to use ESLs/planars etc knowing full well they won't live as long as conventional speakers. That's my choice because I love them, I guess.

The main reason I raised the thread was out of curiousity, though. I just wanted to know whether my panels had done better or worse than the mean figure. I'm not sure that question has been answered with any degree of certainty, unfortunately.

So, sister thread or not, people?

After all, what, in life, can you really be certain about? Yeah, death and taxes, I know

 

[JMAUSGP]

If your panels haven't failed yet, you are not playing them loud enough.

Or said another way, play your panels until your hearing goes, then it doesn't matter any more.

You know if you aren't livin' on the edge Justin, you are taking up too much space.

Sorry, I just had a Flashback, from another thread!

 

[Bernard]

Sorry, I had a just had a Flashback, from another thread!

Is this akin to a hot flash?