ML Production moving

[Rich]

They would come up against the laws of physics. I'm sure they attempted that with the CLX and could not do it even with that panel size.

All great speaker innovations have come from pushing up against the theoretical limits of the laws of physics. O.k., maybe that's exaggerating a little, but you get my point. Are they going to take what they learned from the CLX and continue to push the envelope? Or will that be the last great Flagship speaker that ML makes?

BTW a number of people here claim that the legacy products with the larger panels sound better than the newer, smaller stuff.

I am mixed on this. I love my Summits for their neutrality and great blending of panel and woofer. But I think the Prodigy, Odyssey and Ascent had a big sound and depth of tone in the lower midrange that was incredible and is sorely lacking on the newer models. I still love to listen to my Ascents.

 

[cyclone]

All great speaker innovations have come from pushing up against the theoretical limits of the laws of physics. O.k., maybe that's exaggerating a little, but you get my point. Are they going to take what they learned from the CLX and continue to push the envelope? Or will that be the last great Flagship speaker that ML makes?



I am mixed on this. I love my Summits for their neutrality and great blending of panel and woofer. But I think the Prodigy, Odyssey and Ascent had a big sound and depth of tone in the lower midrange that was incredible and is sorely lacking on the newer models. I still love to listen to my Ascents.

I am no expert on the newer Logans for sure but I always thought if you have a megabuck amplifier isn't it kind a waste to have a speaker like the Summit that has a built in powered woofer to take care of the bass. I'm sure the built in amplifier is great but I doubt it can come close to a lot of the amps pushing the stats.

 

[spectral]

I am mixed on this. I love my Summits for their neutrality and great blending of panel and woofer. But I think the Prodigy, Odyssey and Ascent had a big sound and depth of tone in the lower midrange that was incredible and is sorely lacking on the newer models. I still love to listen to my Ascents.

Hi Rich... I never participate in long threads because of lack of time, but this thread got my attention, and I feel your posts ripping ML's strategy and their Marketing Director apart - plus the comment on the previous lines quoted above - are dead on IMHO. Although normally I would not worry about production of any expensive product moving to another reputable country - and we have lots of examples, say, with German cars, oh and even Louis Vuitton now makes some stuff in Spain - the MD's post and the company's vision statement were a big turn off for me.

Funny thing though - I blasted ML some time ago in this forum for partnering with Best Buy years ago, and I was told (I can't recall by whom) I should be happy rather than see them risk going out of business. Hmm...

I would kindly urge you to put your thoughts in a letter to ML and ask for co-signers on this forum.

 

[adanny]

I would kindly urge you to put your thoughts in a letter to ML and ask for co-signers on this forum.

agree with the idea of a note, even if we believe it will have minimal impact on ML management. I had suggested exactly this early in the thread. At a minimum, it could be a more effective channeling of our fury than just forum posts. At best, it might have a 2-3% chance that it will ignite some light-bulbs in Shoreview management.

If we get a quorum of folks who are interested in doing this, I would be happy to contribute, help with the synthesis etc...

 

[churchill]

Move the mass market stuff to Canada and keep the ESL production in Kansas along with warranty repair. Not rocket science!

 

[Rich]

Funny thing though - I blasted ML some time ago in this forum for partnering with Best Buy years ago, and I was told (I can't recall by whom) I should be happy rather than see them risk going out of business. Hmm...

I think you were very prescient in your concerns back then. Funny how that has been the response by so many on this forum. Just chalking it up to "well, that's the way business is" or "if that's what they have to do to survive in this economy." What a load of horsecrap! The four points listed above is the modus operandi of this investment company. It was instituted long before the economy tanked. It is there for the sole purpose of maximizing their investment. They know nothing about high end audio and could care less about it. They simply want to take an existing business and cut costs/increase market share so they can reap quick profits that they can then show to their investors. They have done the exact same thing with Paradigm. Here is their growth strategy for Paradigm:

- Expand product offering through continued investment in product development
- Grow international revenue through increased selling efforts
- Pursue additional low-cost sourcing and manufacturing opportunities in Asia

Any of that sound familiar? I'm not saying that Martin Logan can't continue their tradition of great high end ESL speakers under this company's management. I am just saying that it doesn't look promising. And this race to the bottom, as it were, is very telling.

I would kindly urge you to put your thoughts in a letter to ML and ask for co-signers on this forum.

I would do so if I thought it would make a hill of beans of difference. But I wouldn't really have anything to say that I haven't already said on this forum (which we all know they have read). And honestly, I think they take what is written on this forum much more seriously than any letter. Because this forum is read by every Joe on the internet who wants to learn more about Martin Logan speakers. The letter, on the other hand, would just end up in the corporate wastebasket.

 

[spectral]

Actually, what I was proposing (and neglected to clarify) was an OPEN letter to ML on this forum, under its own thread with no follow ups allowed by anyone, so that it's easy for all others on the internet to see (and it will be indexed properly by search engines). Right now, everyone's points are lost in the sea of 14+ pages and growing... That's all. I think it's really worth the effort.

 

[Rich]

Well, that makes a lot more sense to me and I would certainly be willing to be involved in drafting such a thing. But the problem I see with it is that it would appear to represent the feelings of the forum as a whole and, as evidenced by this thread, there are plenty of people on this forum who don't hold the same opinions as we do or who apparently couldn't care less about this subject. Either way, the idea would have to meet with Tom's approval before I would want to put too much effort into it. It is his forum, after all.

 

[JonFo]

My take is that this is just part of a normal process of optimization of manufacturing resources which luckily is going to a great facility with what I expect to be great workers.

I do feel bad about the folks in KS losing their jobs, that’s what really sucks.

I also feel there is a risk to quality on ESL products during the transition period. QA should catch most issues, but I’d be wary of a kazoo or two developing over time in panels that were not assembled with the expertise of the current crew.

Two years down the road, this will all be water under the bridge, and I fully expect the usual high ML standards will be upheld.

The bigger picture benefit is that ML continues to thrive and can afford to invest in new R&D.
Now, some of the R&D will be on lower-priced lines like the Motion series, but that’s fine. Even I need non-ESL speakers for certain rooms in the house
The more people know the brand, and can move up the product-line, the better for everyone.

Looking to the future, I don’t see any negatives to this move as long as there is a commitment to continue investing in ESL R&D and maintaining their leadership position at the high-end.

The biggest concern and critique I’d express is: I’ve not seen or heard a clear commitment to legacy owners with ongoing replacement panel production as well as support.

This is vital to maintain the value of the high-end product and the fierce loyalty of owners (as evidenced by all the great content on this forum).

If I lost the trust that ML would support my speaker over its expected 20 year lifespan, then why would I pay big bucks up front?

Therefore I encourage ML to publicly and clearly state their intentions towards legacy product owners.

And let’s remember: in 10 years a Summit will be a legacy product :think:

 

[David Matz]

Funny thing though - I blasted ML some time ago in this forum for partnering with Best Buy years ago, and I was told (I can't recall by whom) I should be happy rather than see them risk going out of business. Hmm...

Hi Spectral,

My first exposure to ML was at Best Buy. I did not have a car for some reason, and took a long on a very cold day. I stopped into Best Buy to warm up, for what I thought would be 10-15 minutes. Walking around the store, I noticed a strange looking speaker. While I was curiously looking at it, the Salesperson offered to play it for me. It was an Aeon. I spent 2.5 hours at the store that day. The rest is history. My system now is world class.

If the high end audio industry does not expose those not aware of this hobby, it will remain an elite, little, slow dying hobby. I am sure I am not the only one who got a taste of high end this way. I wish there were more avenues to expose people to this hobby.

 

[robertawillisjr]

Firstly, we don't know if the new owners (is it still appropriate to still say new?) are clueless about high-end audio and speakers. Many of them may have systems the we would drool over. So lets not indulge in conjecture.

Secondly, I do agree that this is more of a bean counter's move to secure the bottom line. Although, there are a few examples where the integrity of the product has been maintained. Madrigal, is a good instance and I think that Saul Marantz would be proud of the high-end products that now bare his name.

I think it is time to relax a bit. Over and over again, the rhetoric on this site becomes quite heated to no avail. I am as worried about the intentions of the "owners" as most. I am not worried about the move to Paradigm's facilities and if I were a Canadian I would be insulted by way some of us have characterized them.

My suggestion is to cool down and keep the discussion at civilized level.

Cheers

 

[spectral]

Well, that makes a lot more sense to me and I would certainly be willing to be involved in drafting such a thing. But the problem I see with it is that it would appear to represent the feelings of the forum as a whole and, as evidenced by this thread, there are plenty of people on this forum who don't hold the same opinions as we do or who apparently couldn't care less about this subject. Either way, the idea would have to meet with Tom's approval before I would want to put too much effort into it. It is his forum, after all.

We can perhaps split this up into three new sticky threads: one articulating your position, one for the "opposition", and give ML also a chance to respond as well - and no follow-ups by anyone.

I am calling on Tom to consider something like this, as it would appear there are a lot of us who continue to be concerned.

Peter

 

[David Matz]

Firstly, we don't know if the new owners (is it still appropriate to still say new?) are clueless about high-end audio and speakers. Many of them may have systems the we would drool over. So lets not indulge in conjecture.

Secondly, I do agree that this is more of a bean counter's move to secure the bottom line. Although, there are a few examples where the integrity of the product has been maintained. Madrigal, is a good instance and I think that Saul Marantz would be proud of the high-end products that now bare his name.

I think it is time to relax a bit. Over and over again, the rhetoric on this site becomes quite heated to no avail. I am as worried about the intentions of the "owners" as most. I am not worried about the move to Paradigm's facilities and if I were a Canadian I would be insulted by way some of us have characterized them.

My suggestion is to cool down and keep the discussion at civilized level.

Cheers

Good point. The #1 criteria that VC's/ Private Equity should use in evaluating a company are not it's market size or growth potential. It is the people. If you can't have an industry expert with a proven record at your helm, your investment is in jeopardy. I am sure most people in the industry running these audio firms are amateur business people at best, so I wonder who they brought in.

Reading their high level objectives is, of course, a lot of speculation. It's like the politician talking about love, hope, peace, truth, beauty, and goodness. How do you get there is the key. No one really knows the players, their goals, their capabilities, the financials of ML, the financials of their other investments - which could create different risk assessments for the individual firms vs. the portfolio of firms, etc.

I propose an ML Board led buyout!

 

[babydoc]

"If you can keep your head when all about you ..."

Firstly, we don't know if the new owners (is it still appropriate to still say new?) are clueless about high-end audio and speakers. Many of them may have systems the we would drool over. So lets not indulge in conjecture.

Secondly, I do agree that this is more of a bean counter's move to secure the bottom line. Although, there are a few examples where the integrity of the product has been maintained. Madrigal, is a good instance and I think that Saul Marantz would be proud of the high-end products that now bare his name.

I think it is time to relax a bit. Over and over again, the rhetoric on this site becomes quite heated to no avail. I am as worried about the intentions of the "owners" as most. I am not worried about the move to Paradigm's facilities and if I were a Canadian I would be insulted by way some of us have characterized them.

My suggestion is to cool down and keep the discussion at civilized level.

Cheers

With apologies to Kipling, I appreciate hearing a voice of reason emerging from the polemic exchanges that have occurred during this thread. Implicit and explicit concerns about Canadian manufacture of ML speakers would appear largely baseless, given the reputation and established quality of the Canadian high end industry in the US and rest of the world. Not to iterate the greater concerns expressed about customer support, I cannot foresee a scenario where the company would walk away from its establish customer base nor ditch the R&D needed to stimulate its future. If the goal was to tank ML, the corporate owners could have let it die on the vine in Kansas by simply pulling the plug on the products, closing shop, and selling off the assets. While I would be in favor of a temperate letter to ML ownership expressing concerns that were not assuaged by a marketing representative, I would be in greater favor of an electronic poll of members to gauge how many are upset about this development. There is internet software like SurveyMonkey that can accomplish this task very simply as the Web site has all of our addresses. Just a thought.

 

[asindc]

With apologies to Kipling, I appreciate hearing a voice of reason emerging from the polemic exchanges that have occurred during this thread. Implicit and explicit concerns about Canadian manufacture of ML speakers would appear largely baseless, given the reputation and established quality of the Canadian high end industry in the US and rest of the world. Not to iterate the greater concerns expressed about customer support, I cannot foresee a scenario where the company would walk away from its establish customer base nor ditch the R&D needed to stimulate its future. If the goal was to tank ML, the corporate owners could have let it die on the vine in Kansas by simply pulling the plug on the products, closing shop, and selling off the assets. While I would be in favor of a temperate letter to ML ownership expressing concerns that were not assuaged by a marketing representative, I would be in greater favor of an electronic poll of members to gauge how many are upset about this development. There is internet software like SurveyMonkey that can accomplish this task very simply as the Web site has all of our addresses. Just a thought.

I appreciate this perspective and though I am not as alarmed/concerned as some seem to be, I do wonder if this move represents a shift in emphasis from tightly controlled R&D and engineering to increasing production as the primary goal. I look at Toyota's recently-published problems as an example of why some of us receive this news with some trepidation.

I am not suggesting that moving to Canada alone signals a shift in focus that will result in ML following that same path, but just noting that such a shift has had unfortunate (but foreseeable) consequences among even highly-regarded companies. For the record, I would have the same concern even if ML was moving production to another U.S. location for the same reason.

 

[Rich]

I am not suggesting that moving to Canada alone signals a shift in focus that will result in ML following that same path, but just noting that such a shift has had unfortunate (but foreseeable) consequences among even highly-regarded companies. For the record, I would have the same concern even if ML was moving production to another U.S. location for the same reason.

Exactly. I have never said the Canadians cannot produce a good speaker. My concern is due to the abruptness of the move (no smooth transition here -- just fire the people that have been making the speakers and shift production to a totally different factory) and the fact that the Canadian's at this factory most likely don't have any experience making these types of speakers. An ESL is a different beast than a cone speaker as far as manufacturing and design. Also, these speakers have been mostly hand-made in Lawrence, while the Paradigm facility is much more automated. This may be better, or it may be worse. I honestly don't know. But I definitely have concerns about the transition.

My larger concern is that this company now appears to be focused on diversifying at the low end, and I just haven't necessarily seen from them a sign that they are also still committed to the high end of the line.

Honestly, I am a little surprised at Robertawillisjr's insinuation that the discussion in this thread hasn't been held at a civilized level. Considering the subject matter (the firing of the people that actually made the speakers we all love and the moving of that production to another country), I would say this thread has been extremely civil in its tone. Much more so than a lot of the other threads on this forum.

 

[Jungle Jack]

Hello,
I do not think there has even been the slightest perception of anything negative towards Canada. China? Arguably yes.

It really comes down to this story really not being publicized in the slightest (source article from local Kansas Newspaper) and the whole perception of Martin Logan representing the Heartland.

So much of their prior literature would show Workers building the Speakers and constantly alluding to Kansas and USA. It is just, regardless of where outsourced, the idea of Martin Logans not being built in America is a definite shock. How could it not when they dubbed themselves "The Great American Speaker Company" in Marketing often.

All of that being said, since the introduction of the Design Series which coincided with the sale to ShoreView, many and probably the majority of Martin Logan Speakers built and sold have been made in China. So really, I suppose this should not come as a shock that eventually even the Speakers which gave them their name and reputation would eventually leave the Country. However, at least with the ESL Series continuing manufacture in Kansas, they could better hold claim to what they try to promote themselves as.

However you want to look at it, since Martin Logan changed Ownership, Replacement Panels have almost doubled and soon all production of Martin Logan Speakers has now left the United States. Moreover, resale value of ESL Series has not been as good as earlier generation
Cheers,
ML

 

[BobF]

I tend to agree with Rich.

One only knows what direction this will lead but I guess we will have to wait and see.Being in the construction business for over 30+ years the Canadians are very good at their craft and proud of it but more U.S. jobs lost seems typical now.
Hopefully there will be some very good training involved in Canada for the new builders.

I just don't feel there will be a long future for ML in Kansas in the end. Just look around and see what is shipping out of the U.S.. Pratt & Whitney had to go to court to stop a plant closing in CT.
They want to ship over seas and they get their contracts from our government and tax dollars, sorry about the side step but just an example.

My friend had a Levinson amp problem when Harmon took over and he had a real blast getting that taken care of 6 months later.

Just my 2 cents.

Bob

 

[dphitmen]

ML "the brand" may live on....But, GOD BLESS, all of my friends at MartinLogan past and present!

 

[robertawillisjr]

I tend to agree with Rich.

<<snip>>

My friend had a Levinson amp problem when Harmon took over and he had a real blast getting that taken care of 6 months later.

Just my 2 cents.

Bob

I had a problem with my amp which was 5 years old at the time, they fixed it and extended the warranty by 5 years. Didn't pay a cent and it all took one week. This was after the merger.

Rich,
I guess I am thinned skin but IMHO some of the remarks were intemperate. This is one instance where we disagree.