Service Notice for Discontinued Products

[Peter_Klim]

NO - not at all! Most speakers don't contain consumable items like the panels. Add to that, most other speakers contain generic parts and can be serviced and/or supported by any old Jack.

NOT WITH ML. Their speakers contain parts that are:

* Consumable
* Proprietary

IE. The panels.

Personally, I don't care if I can't purchase a resistor or an IEC inlet or binding post or WHATEVER from ML.

So if support ends in that regard, I don't care. I can get that stuff anywhere.

But panels !!! You've got to be fu99ing kidding me!

This is EXACTLY what really ticks me off!!! And it seems like ML doesn't give a cr*p. They can say all they want, but actions speak louder than words.

Where today you are able to replace panels for your MLs, even if they are ~30 years old, in 3 weeks you won't be able to replace them on speakers that were manufactured 15 years ago! (Sequel 2, Quest Z) I look at my crappy JBLs from 1996 and think: "These will outlive my Martin Logan's AND me!! I'm 41...

Last year I replaced the panels on my Sequel 2. Everytime I go to bed, my last thoughts are: "I guess I won't be seeing you guys in 15 years!" (they are in my bedroom). When I look at my ReQuests in my living room I feel disgusted and sick thinking: "I know they're not on the list, but happens when they get put on the list, and since I don't always visit this forum, I miss it and it's too late??!??" Even the current list that is in this thread has a speaker who's panel cannot be replaced - no notice was given!!

What REALLy got me ticked off more recently is reading about Sander's Sound System speakers. LIFE TIME FREAKING WARRANTY!! If he can do it, why can't Martin Logan????

I read on another thread that the ML and Sander's panels are made using different techniques with different materials. Sanders are made to last longer - the do NOT FAIL! Why can't Martin Logan improve them so they do not fail??? Then ML would also be making us customers happy by giving us a LIFE TIME WARRANTY!!

I don't make a lot of money (I read the poll on "household income level") so I can't afford to be replacing all 7 of ML speakers every 15 years.

What about resale value??? No one will want to buy my old speakers once they go bad, so I won't get ANY money from them to purchase new ones! And you better believe with the way things are now, I will NEVER buy Martin Logan's again!

I work in QA, so yeah, I get annoyed when things break. I buy things expecting them to last a reasonable period of time, or at least be able to repair them if they go bad. We got cars from the 40's and beyone still rolling! But we can't get speakers costing the price of a car to last 20 years??? Oh, we do, MANY of them, but not ML anymore.

I don't need to know how a company operates, its struggles and its need to make a profit to help me decide if I should purchase their product when there is another legitimate company that offers just as good of a product for about the same price, but MUCH better service! ML should, no, they NEED to provide the same service if they plan to keep selling their high end line. Over the years there have been signs indicating ML going away from being a company that "PRIDES" in customer support AND in creating the best speakers for the money. They still make great speakers at a good price, but that "PRIDE" is s l o w l y changing to "PROFIT".

Again, I don't care about all the boo hoo we're loosing money, blah blah. Make your product more reliable like your competition. If they can do it, no reason you can't. End results is what I care about.

For Justin and Peter @ ML, don't take my post personally. I just want to be honest with you so that you know how I and and others might feel. I want you to be able to report back on exactly how customers feel by getting right into their minds. Your company is not going to grow as fast if all you hear about are the "good" things you guys do. When I have my yearly reviews at work, I am mostly concerned with what i am doing wrong so that I can improve. And knowing where I need to improve helps me in getting a better raise (I'm happier, my company I work for is happier). Think of our concerns here as a way in helping ML make a higher profit.

Here's a thought:

Instead of stopping production of panels of older products, why not charge us a higher price? I'd rather pay $800 for panels that you sold me last year for $650, than to pay $5000 on comparible current model speakers. Customers will be happier that their speakers will still work, and ML will be happier not to loose custmer. How much of an increase in price would make it worth it for ML to keep making these older pannels? Please consider this!

 

[Rich]

However, it would be nice to see you post at least something that comes across as positive. I know damn well you don’t feel like it – but perhaps suggesting how things could be improved in a positive manner many actually initiate positive action within ML itself. Some good ideas might even make it to the “fat cats” running the show and controlling ML at present.

Actually, I already did that above. I made some positive comments regarding the way Roger Sanders runs his business, and suggested Martin Logan might want to take a lesson from him with regard to warranty and customer service . . . at least on their high-end models. But I don't think they really want to hear that.

I guess it is the frequency and intensity of your posts on MLs “fall from grace” that ultimately made me think at the spur of the moment “for god’s sake Rich, chill out!!!”.

Ultimately, you are right on target here. I post a lot, I have strong opinions, and I don't hold back when expressing them. I am quick to praise something I see as good, and just as quick to lambast something I see as bad. Some people agree with me, some disagree, and others could care less. Such is life in any social group. But enough people have expressed dissatisfaction with the negativity that I guess it is time to move on. I have said everything I need to say regarding Martin Logan's current management and how I feel about them.

 

[User211]

Well, Rich, I've just done something positive. I've posted a link to this thread to Graz. Not sure he'll be interested, but he just may be.

Move on Rich? Maybe get some new non-ML speakers. Can't think what I'd recommend(wink - on a phone).

 

[BobF]

Yup - I am the original me. That Justin imposter came along much later...

Thanks for the laugh :ROFL:
I see what is going on and quite frankly I have bought 3 different ML's over the years and have listened to the newer Wilsons lately and will probably go that route unless I am more comfortable with what ML comes up with.

Best,
Bob

 

[amey01]

Agree fully - except this bit:

Here's a thought:

Instead of stopping production of panels of older products, why not charge us a higher price? I'd rather pay $800 for panels that you sold me last year for $650, than to pay $5000 on comparible current model speakers. Customers will be happier that their speakers will still work, and ML will be happier not to loose custmer. How much of an increase in price would make it worth it for ML to keep making these older pannels? Please consider this!

How about NOT doing that. We're not stupid. We know that it costs nothing to punch holes in metal and stick a bit of plastic between.

The true cost is more likely to come from having to do this so many different ways as a lot of the panels are different in terms of size/shape/performance/construction.

Most companies consider this when they produce. Re-use of parts and machinery is a big consideration.

So how about ML learn from past mistakes (of too much variance) and start using common parts and methods between the line. That way, it will be much easier to provide continued support. And cheaper. Everyone will be happy.

But past mistakes shouldn't be the customer's problem. After all, the owners of these early models are the ones that took the gamble with ML (a new company, an unknown quantity) and made the company what it is today.

 

[projectormovielover]

This is just plain wrong

MARTIN LOGAN ...THE GREAT AMERICAN SPEAKER....... CORPORATION !!!!!!

The funny thing is that the costumers that bought these now discontinued speakers made the company keep its head above water

 

[cyclone]

Does anybody have an idea of how many replacement panels they sell in a year? Are they patented could they be produced by someone else? If the numbers are up there you would think someone at $600.00 to $900.00 a pop would want to produce them.

 

[JonFo]

Wow, way too much negativity here.

I’m personally not surprised that older models would eventually see support discontinued. And I understand the business economics as well as the logic in trying to move people on.

I love my Monoliths, and I’ve replaced panels once on them, but will not likely want to do it again. I will eventually get CLX or some other model to replace them.

My Sequel II’s, even though they are 17 years old now, still have perfectly serviceable panels. And even though that model is ‘unsupported’ I’m not upset. I can get a set of SL3 panels (they are exact fit) and DIY the electronics (which I usually do) and those speakers will last me another 15+ years if I decide to keep them.

Repairing panels oneself is *not* possible, trust me, I’ve taken apart several sets. They are a total b1tch to disassemble and one bends the stators without even trying. Especially big panels like Monoliths. Putting them back together without the tensioning jigs and such that the factory uses is also impossible.

So what we need is for either the factory to find it economic to continue to create these on demand or to make ‘spares’ runs and store them for a decade or more, or for them to license some retired ex-employee to use the jigs and processes to provide that ‘aftermarket’ part supply for discontinued models. If everyone is so set on running their units for 20+ years, then there should be enough business for a part-time business there.

Personally, I think the ‘licensing’ model is what makes the most sense, as that gives people what they are looking for: Parts availability along with a high-touch service from a small outfit that loves these products.

 

[twich54]

Jonathan, good post ! I have actually been laughing at the amount of intrest this thread has gotten. Truthfully as much as I enjoy my Logans if they went belly up tomorrow I wouldn't loose one minutes sleep over it, I'd use my Spires till I desired something else, they gave up the ghost, whatever.....then move on. IMO to 'expect' replacement panels beyond some of the years mentioned is crazy. yes I know M/L 'sold their soul to the devil' , hell I got over that a long time ago !

As for Mr Sanders........God forbid but what would happen if he were to become disabled / incapacitated ?? Does he have a production team behind him ??

 

[David Matz]

As for Mr Sanders........God forbid but what would happen if he were to become disabled / incapacitated ?? Does he have a production team behind him ??

Amen! I wish the guy lives forever. But he looks like he is between 60 and 70. It also looks like he runs a garage operation. Life time warranty? Whose lifetime?

You don't see a talented apprentice who knows how he thinks. Or thinks even better than he does. Same goes for Conrad Johnson. But this goes for at least 80% of the manufacturers. If you dont' accept this, this hobby may not be for you.

Martin Logan, ARC, and Soundlab seem to have overcome this, at least in the short run.

Bottom line, I agree with Jonathan. If you can't do this stuff yourself, better find a talented DIY person near you.

 

[Rich]

Jonathan, Dave, and David,

All good points you make. None of what transpires at Martin Logan today affects the sound of the products I have now. And it won't kill me if panels are no longer available when I need to service my Ascents or Summits.

The bottom line for me is . . . who do I want to give my money to when I am ready to upgrade? I prefer to spend my dollars with companies that show more attention to their customers than they do to the bottom line. Companies that have a certain ethic in the way they are run. Companies that show true dedication to the quality level of their products and the highest standard of customer service. That's why I don't shop at Walmart.

So ultimately, I would rather give my money to someone like Roger and take the risk that he won't be around in five years, than to give my money to the private investors of Shoreview Industries, who bought a fine company and, in my opinion, are slowly running it into the ground. Ok, now I really am moving on . . .

 

[zaphod]

To be honest Jon i really don't care that they are discontinuing the support on older products, and that is speaking as someone who has many of those older models. But then I also have Quad ESL-57 and there is not a lot of support from Quad on those either!

So I am not shooting the messenger for the message because I can understand - not completely agree with - but understand the message from a business point of view.

However.

Marketing is the face of a company. The adverts, the product announcements, and so on. When we think of GM, or Sanders, or ML, we should be think of what marketing has presented to us. That can be the from a whole marketing team, or one person but at the end of the day the amount we trust the marketing, and the marketing team/person reflects directly on how much we trust the company.

So message aside, what is just as bothering to as many people who are bothered by EOA of the products is the ability to trust what is being said by the face of Martin Logan. And as a number of people have pointed out, what was promised is not what was said.

Fair enough, none of us can predict the future, and it is entirely reasonable to understand that marketing got insufficient/short warning of panel availability and passed that insufficient/short warning on to us.

However, what causes the damage to that face of Martin Logan is the sidestepping of the issue of warning and the claim that warning was given months back when in reality what was given months back was the prediction that a warning would be forthcoming.

Communication is tanemount to a trusted marketing department, I've worked closely with marketing and my wife still works in marketing, so I have seen how good communication works and how bad communication damages.

I've also seen how this damage [from bad communication] can be turned around for the better or alternatively dug deeper by how the damage is handled.

So.

When ML (ie: the face of ML) says one thing and claims it to be another which better fits the current situation that digs things further.

When ML (ie: the face of ML) doesn't return phone calls after numerous posts suggesting that people pick up the phone and call sales/service/whatever that digs things deeper.

When ML (ie: the face of ML) carefully trims posts to reply to part while ignoring where a post points out the discrepancy between past history and present spin, that digs things further.

As I've said before, I'm not angry, I'm not out to shoot the messenger, heck I even understand and to some degree agree with the decision to retire support for old panels.

But i do hold accountable to his words a person whose business is to communicate.

 

[twich54]

The bottom line for me is . . . who do I want to give my money to when I am ready to upgrade? I prefer to spend my dollars with companies that show more attention to their customers than they do to the bottom line. .

I understand Rich and I tend to agree, keeping in mind that it's 'the bottom line' that allows any company to soldier on and serve it's customers in a fair and reasonable manner.

 

[amey01]

I love my Monoliths, and I’ve replaced panels once on them, but will not likely want to do it again. I will eventually get CLX or some other model to replace them.

But (especially given what they cost), you'd want something more than scrap for them, right?

Or would you just happily load them into the rubbish?

To me - that's sort of like loading a 1957 Mercedes-Benz 300SL or a 1951 Jaguar XK120 into the rubbish just because it broke down one day.

Are these classic, expensive speakers or are they commodity items? I know for the amount I friggin' paid, that question is answered for me.

Get a grip people!

 

[Hocky]

To me - that's sort of like loading a 1957 Mercedes-Benz 300SL or a 1951 Jaguar XK120 into the rubbish just because it broke down one day.

Mercedes and Jaguar won't support those, either. ;-)

 

[Rich]

Mercedes and Jaguar won't support those, either. ;-)

Wrong!

Mercedes Benz Classic Car Center

The Classic Center is your source for nearly 40,000 spare parts for classic Mercedes-Benz vehicles - from major assemblies like transmissions to small individual parts for virtually any need. Each product is made to Mercedes-Benz specifications and backed by the same factory limited warranty (12 months, unlimited mileage) that covers parts for brand-new Mercedes-Benz vehicles.
We can even access your vehicle's original build sheet and other archival data, free of charge. It's all part of the exceptional customer service you've come to expect from Mercedes-Benz.

Jaguar also has Jaguar Classic Parts, which carries parts for many classic models although, unfortunately, not for the XK series. But there are many aftermarket parts available for the XK series.

 

[amey01]

Mercedes and Jaguar won't support those, either. ;-)

Wrong!

Mercedes Benz Classic Car Center

You're missing my point Hocky - the point is - you wouldn't just throw a classic 300SL in the rubbish because it breaks down one day.

I don't see why MLs would be any different.

I don't care if support per se ends - but panel availability is a must to keep these speakers running.

 

[Hocky]

You're missing my point Hocky - the point is - you wouldn't just throw a classic 300SL in the rubbish because it breaks down one day.

I don't see why MLs would be any different.

I don't care if support per se ends - but panel availability is a must to keep these speakers running.

Most classic cars DO! get thrown away. The ones that don't are restored via their aftermarket. If there is demand, someone will make the parts. My bet is, though, that there isn't a whole lot of demand because the speakers end up in a trash bin despite their original cost. Lots of stuff was expensive 20 years ago and is worthless now. I didn't miss your point at all.

As far as Mercedes - well, you got me there. But I would bet that there are many models/parts that they still do not support even despite having a classics department. If you want something from them for something that is less mainstream, you are going to pay 1 off prices. No one in their right mind would pay 1 off prices for replacement panels.

 

[Rich]

As far as Mercedes - well, you got me there.

And the point I would make about that is it shows Mercedes real underlying commitment to customer service and to upholding the brand. I'm not saying they don't make it profitable by charging out the you-know-what for it. I'm sure that they do. But this kind of commitment to their legacy models is what turns a brand into a legend. It creates the kind of goodwill that leads to life-long customer loyalty.

By the way, if you look at their inventory of restored cars for sale, you see that these guys are restoring (and supporting) cars that were manufactured over fifty years ago! That is a serious commitment to the brand.

 

[Hocky]

By the way, if you look at their inventory of restored cars for sale, you see that these guys are restoring (and supporting) cars that were manufactured over fifty years ago! That is a serious commitment to the brand.

That is no different than any other brand with absolutely zero OEM support, though, it just comes from a shop with a different name.