I suggest you contact Mark Graham, the President, CEO, and Chairman of Loud Technologies Inc. Maybe send some links to this, or other threads about the problems his customers have had with their PF-500s, and see if he can take care of you.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Another Red Flag On The Ampeg PF-500.....
- Thread starter shoot-r
- Start date
I agree, but we do have our contriubtions -- I present the Peavey Bass 200 head.
Build date: 1978. After 35 years of abuse, it was recently sold and is now serving a young band with a loud bass player. Rock on Peavey!
Truth! My 1980-ish Peavey Mark IV was a tank. Dropped down stairs, countless drinks spilled inside, you name it. It now resides as my back-back-back-back-back-backup amp. I'm pretty sure it will outlive me.
Thanks for the info, (hopefully some of the other PF owners that are having problems can use it.)
Wish I'd had this info sooner, I've sold my burnt-out PF-500 for pennies on the dollar to a player that likes to tinker with electronics (lost my butt on the deal, but glad to be rid of it and the nonsense that has come along with it!!!)
I posted the contact information for the CEO of Loud Technology above for anyone who may want to get in touch with the CEO regarding their satisfaction with Loud Tech.. My PF-500, works great so far, but, I would love to know what Loud has found to cause the infant mortality on the early amps like mine so I could be prepared for a failure in the future. If mine failed shortly out of warranty, and I felt that Loud did not make an effort to help me, Mr. Graham would hear about it. I do think there have been enough early failures of the PF-500 that Loud Tech should acknowledge the issue, and make some effort to help owners who had failures just beyond the warranty period. Mr. Graham has an electrical engineering degree, so he is not merely a bean counter, ( who knows, maybe he's rocking a Fender P, and a PF-800 of his own, right now). I am sure he knows a lot more about how to do his job than some north woods yokel like me, so I won't try to predict how he would respond to a direct inquiry by an unhappy PF-500 buyer. I say, shoot him an email, and you may find that he understands the frustration of his customers, and might do something to keep them coming back for more Loud Tech. products. I'll have to admit, that most of my Ampeg gear was built long before he was involved, but I do own three Ampeg products built while he worked there, and I also own a really nice Mackie board, which is also a Loud Tech product. People can complain all they want on an internet forum, but none of us has the power to do anything about the problem. Mr. Graham has the ultimate responsibility at the company that designed, and built the PF-500. If I you want to know the real story, he is the guy to get it from.
More than likely, his secretary screens all his email and forwards messages to the appropriate manager. I doubt that he would see it. In some cases, this is done for legal reasons.
I have dealt with CEO's, with success, when I've made requests for assistance in resolving specific issues that I was having with their companies. The CEO directs someone to look into it or fix it but they don't usually get personally involved.
For liability reasons, nobody is going to officially admit that they have an issue with a design. It would leave them open to a costly class action suit. They might be willing to replace a product or even upgrade it on a case by case basis it but that's about it.
I would first follow up every recourse I could through proper channels. When all else fails, if you feel that you have a justified case, take it to the top. If all else fails, even the CEO has a boss at Sun Capital, who owns Loud.
I have dealt with CEO's, with success, when I've made requests for assistance in resolving specific issues that I was having with their companies. The CEO directs someone to look into it or fix it but they don't usually get personally involved.
For liability reasons, nobody is going to officially admit that they have an issue with a design. It would leave them open to a costly class action suit. They might be willing to replace a product or even upgrade it on a case by case basis it but that's about it.
I would first follow up every recourse I could through proper channels. When all else fails, if you feel that you have a justified case, take it to the top. If all else fails, even the CEO has a boss at Sun Capital, who owns Loud.
What I got from the substantial part of this thread that I have read is......
This model has had a lot of problems. Some involve re-designs, and need a new PWA to fix them.
If you are under warranty, you get it fixed free.
If you are NOT under warranty, you are dirt, and the amp is dirt, and dirt we sweep away..... We don't really want to have anyone fix a non-warranty unit, and we pretend it isn't there.
NOBODY ever made a law that says the manufacturer must act like: "once the unit is out from any warranty we decide to allow, however short it may be, we should not even acknowledge we made the unit, and you shouldn't get parts, we can't fix it, NOBODY can fix it, because we say so".
But many do that, and they have convinced many writing in this thread that such an attitude is "right and proper".... They have many of you convinced that it SHOULD be like that.
LOUD, in common with many companies, has made the "new normal" of product sales feature the idea that once out of warranty, a product is unrepairable, that the company basically won't support it in any way.
This is NOT how it used to be. It is not how it is with cars (yet). It may not be economical to fix some things, but basically telling the customer to throw it away is not how you make friends. It doesn't even make sense.
The basic issues involved that mess things up are:
Made in "chasia"..... (China or somewhere in Asia)
The run is made, and when done extra parts do not exist.... enough is ordered to make the number of units wanted, and that's it. That's how "contract manufacturing" works. If you as teh customer actually order any extra parts (and some do), any serious problem with the unit will burn through them fast, and you are back to "no parts available".
Design errors
Design errors often require a circuit change, and that usually means a new PWA. So no good way to just change a few part values.
Surface mount parts...
The vast majority of technicians have no clue what to do with an "SMT" board except replace it. And, if the SMT parts are small enough or made in certain ways ("402" size parts, some types of IC package), that's kinda reasonable.
BUT.... "804" and "603" size parts, and "SOIC" etc size ICs are replaceable by anyone who can hold a soldering iron steady, if they learn how. And those parts are the most common ones used.
Even if a design change is only a few resistor values, field technicians often cannot make that change on an SMT board... They simply don't know how, and it would be expensive, so the board may get replaced for 3 resistors.
lack of schematics....
Due to SMT boards, lazy manufacturers ASSUME nobody will troubleshoot the boards, so they don't provide schematics, and troubleshooting is extremely hard or impossible to do.
Expense
yes, customers don't really want to pay, and shop owners don't want to spend money attempting a repair that may not work out due to SMT PWAs, etc. Much easier to treat the PWA as a "part" and replace it if it doesn't work. Replacing the PWA or module is MUCH cheaper in labor..... WAY less than component level troubleshooting. but the parts typically are priced high enough to make up the difference....
Pricing
Repair parts, if actually available at all, are often charged for at up to 10 or even 20 times the price they are as-installed in the unit new. And then the shop adds their mark-up. This makes everything silly priced and convinces people to throw away the whole unit when only a small part is bad.
The result is that the user with a bad unit often gets totally reamed, because the unit is bad, and they cannot get it repaired even if they are willing to pay a stupid amount for it, presumably because they like the unit, and it isn't made anymore.
I guess all I can say is..... enjoy the new world..... you'll be in it longer than me.....
. No argument with what you posted.AFAIK, no one has made a law that says they must NOT act like that.
Many of the surface mount resistors we (Collins Radio) currently use look like grains of pepper. I am not kidding about this. The low-voltage caps are somewhat larger. I suppose it is possible a board using them could be repaired.
So. Who has the best warranty in a commercial MI amp? Is a hand wired tube amp the most repairable, or maybe just an old SS Peavey?
What else uses transistors? How long before all our regular scale stuff an orangutan could solder gets to be "vintage"?
Jerrold Tiers point I believe is when SLM owned Ampeg they did not treat customers or products this way and SLM surely didn't liquidate past product spares when they bought out Ampeg from MTI unlike the current owner.
A certain Ampeg fan is in a state of bewildered denial still? $200 plus shipping for a $50 and change board to cure a substandard design failure in the original isn't what American companies built reputations on.
Well they have to find the money to pay the kids in customer service, who aren't old enough to shave, somehow
Just for the record, my new in box $287.00 Ampeg PF500 'restock' Musicians friend stupid deal of the day amp is still going strong after about a month with no issues.
So in a nut-shell, Ampeg now does not have transferable 5 year warranty, you buy an amp and basically it is going to maybe last 5 years and then if it does go out after the warranty , Ampeg will not help in any way to get it fixed through and authorized Ampeg repair service center, so basically you have to buy another amp.....WOW!!!!
This really BLOWSSSSSSS!!!!
This really BLOWSSSSSSS!!!!
Mesa Boogie and Genz-Benz both come with fully transferrable warranties, with Mesa backing their amps for 5 years...
- georgestrings
Like the OP, I had a very similar experience with GK. I haven't had any repair experience with Ampeg because my old Ampeg gear is still functional, including my 1970 V2.
I had my 5.5 year old GK amp repaired by a local shop and it failed again in 5 months. I came to TB asking questions and received a contact at GK from a fellow TB member.
I contacted GK and they did this; called the repair shop that did my first repair and investigated what was done to repair the amp that didn't hold up. Then, they issued me an RA number, I sent the amp to them and they had it back to me in a week for about 1/2 the price the local shop charged.
What the OP has described with his comparison of GK & Ampeg is the difference between companies that have attempted to maintain oversight of their production for purposes of maintaining quality vs. companies that have fully outsourced production in an attempt to maximize profit.
As a believer in capitalism, the attempt to maximize profit is not a bad thing to me, but the other leg of capitalism is "quality product" in order to maximize profit over time and not just briefly.
I don't believe for a second that Ampeg was willing to give up quality for profit, and I don't believe for a second that Ampeg doesn't care about their customers.
I believe Ampeg have gotten themselves in an undesirable situation due to their business choices. I'm sure they would much prefer that not a single PF500 failed. I'm also sure they would like to be able to make things right for every failure, but they can't just throw in the towel and do a total recall. Besides, the fail rate isn't 100% or even 50%; it's just higher than average, but perhaps improving.
They are doing what almost any business would do; trying to balance failures, repairs, profits, & sales, while making revisions to "right the ship".
During this time, customers vote with their dollars on how well Ampeg is handling the situation. I voted on another company, but that doesn't mean I won't vote for Ampeg sometime in the future, however, the TB member that posted he or she had four PF500 failures in a couple months during 2012 may not ever vote for Ampeg again.
It's just how business works. Not all mistakes are fatal, but some cause serious injury.
I had my 5.5 year old GK amp repaired by a local shop and it failed again in 5 months. I came to TB asking questions and received a contact at GK from a fellow TB member.
I contacted GK and they did this; called the repair shop that did my first repair and investigated what was done to repair the amp that didn't hold up. Then, they issued me an RA number, I sent the amp to them and they had it back to me in a week for about 1/2 the price the local shop charged.
What the OP has described with his comparison of GK & Ampeg is the difference between companies that have attempted to maintain oversight of their production for purposes of maintaining quality vs. companies that have fully outsourced production in an attempt to maximize profit.
As a believer in capitalism, the attempt to maximize profit is not a bad thing to me, but the other leg of capitalism is "quality product" in order to maximize profit over time and not just briefly.
I don't believe for a second that Ampeg was willing to give up quality for profit, and I don't believe for a second that Ampeg doesn't care about their customers.
I believe Ampeg have gotten themselves in an undesirable situation due to their business choices. I'm sure they would much prefer that not a single PF500 failed. I'm also sure they would like to be able to make things right for every failure, but they can't just throw in the towel and do a total recall. Besides, the fail rate isn't 100% or even 50%; it's just higher than average, but perhaps improving.
They are doing what almost any business would do; trying to balance failures, repairs, profits, & sales, while making revisions to "right the ship".
During this time, customers vote with their dollars on how well Ampeg is handling the situation. I voted on another company, but that doesn't mean I won't vote for Ampeg sometime in the future, however, the TB member that posted he or she had four PF500 failures in a couple months during 2012 may not ever vote for Ampeg again.
It's just how business works. Not all mistakes are fatal, but some cause serious injury.
If a company knowingly has a product out regardless of revision number, that has numerous reported failures and reported issues, isn't it important they fix the bloody problem with existing customers ? Or do we actually need a death to occur for them to take notice ?
A company (not naming because some people get their hackles up) produced their first entry into the class D with SMPS. Most had no problems but many did. After two revisions from rev A to C the problems were solved. That American company felt that 10 to 20% was too high to represent who they are. Repaired many second owner units for the cost of shipping and issued a blanket exchange program for 24 months to exchange rev A and B units for a new rev C whether owner had a problem or not. That company is still doing very well and gained much respect for their handling of the situation.
