or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › NEW MFW-15 amps (May 2010) *pics*
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

NEW MFW-15 amps (May 2010) *pics* - Page 4

post #91 of 2590
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo238 View Post

Yea, but you said it's a POS. Care to elaborate? What's the long term reliability of the amp? How is it a POS? Sounds like libel to me from your perspective. And the word libel is a bit over the top don't you think? Are you a lawyer?

With the exception of some comments by KH about it's output and missing options, I haven't heard anybody say (other than you) that it's a POS. I'm no fan of Schifty but care to elaborate. Tess, I wouldn't be throwing that libel term about so carelessly.

when you say something is a pos, that is an opinion. he did say "from what i am seeing". there are facts behind that, where other users posted.

saying someone took money to do something without proof is libel. where are the facts behind this, the proof.

also KH already mentioned that the power seemed to be lacking
post #92 of 2590
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo238 View Post

Yea, but you said it's a POS. Care to elaborate? What's the long term reliability of the amp? How is it a POS? Sounds like libel to me from your perspective. And the word libel is a bit over the top don't you think? Are you a lawyer?

With the exception of some comments by KH about it's output and missing options, I haven't heard anybody say (other than you) that it's a POS. I'm no fan of Schifty but care to elaborate. Tess, I wouldn't be throwing that libel term about so carelessly.

Are you a lawyer? Apparently not. Please, in between your defense of crOwcaine's post, define POS.

Then let's get back on topic. The v3 amplifier doesn't seem to perform as expected.
post #93 of 2590
Ok, so your saying that it's not a sorry POS. Carry on then.
post #94 of 2590
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo238 View Post

Ok, so your saying that it's not a sorry POS. Carry on then.

I am saying that one day, I may need a replacement amp for my MFW-15. Based on what others have experienced, the v3 isn't a suitable replacement. This concerns me.

I stand by the statement I made at Audioholics, until the matter is shown to be otherwise. Care to contribute to the collective view, one way or another?
post #95 of 2590
Ok, I think I got it then. It's a sorry POS-unsuitable replacement. You won't here any more from me on this unless your MFW needs a replacement amp.
post #96 of 2590
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tesseract67 View Post

Where did you get your info? Looks like libel to me.

I think this puts it into perspective.

You can't be serious!? You're saying that MLS's bed doesn't have an inprint of The Man Who Can't Be Spoken Of? Get real or do some research.
post #97 of 2590
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigsub View Post

The MFW-15's we have here were the original units as designed by Mark Seaton. Here is the response curve taken at the time:



The MFW-15 as it exists today appears to not have much in common with the unit designed by Mark. While I cannot speak for Mark Seaton, I don't think he would apply his name to the current MFW-15. The amp is different, and it's a good guess that the driver is also not the same as specified by Mark Seaton 3 years ago.

For over 14 months, this qualifier has been listed with the MFW-15:

(Note: As of 3-09, based on many reports of amp failures due to what has been called faulty parts being substituted into the MFW-15's amplifier, this rating is under question until the amp issue is resolved.)


From recent reports, it appears the MFW-15 now has added more than just failing amps to its detriment: It also looks as if the response curve is considerably weaker than the original.

What is being delivered today should really be called the MFW-15 Mark II, and any mention of Mark Seaton being the designer should be removed.

Please don't soil this thread. And please stop bringing up Mark Seaton. He is a professional and is well respected, you are not.
post #98 of 2590
No research needed, I know what is what.

I am still trying to figure this out...

Quote:
Originally Posted by KERMIE View Post

I also was wondering how Craigsub awarded so many points to a sub back in the day that does hardly anything below 30hz.
post #99 of 2590
Quote:
Originally Posted by crOwcaine View Post

Please don't soil this thread.

Didn't you throw the first stone? I think the reply you received was very even handed and informative.

Your reply is not very professional. Why not attempt instead to stay on the topic you created?
post #100 of 2590
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tesseract67 View Post

No research needed, I know what is what.

I am still trying to figure this out...

Let's just keep this on track, once Captain Padded Numbers name gets involved, everything turns to headache. I bought 3 MFW's for me and 2 for friends because of his list and have been through 7 amps and 2-3 drivers. I don't want to start anything with you, honestly.
post #101 of 2590
Quote:
Originally Posted by crOwcaine View Post

Let's just keep this on track, once Captain Padded Numbers name gets involved, everything turns to headache. I bought 3 MFW's for me and 2 for friends because of his list and have been through 7 amps and 2-3 drivers. I don't want to start anything with you, honestly.

I don't see how the comparison list is to blame for our sub problems. Especially with the caveat added.

My concern now is the fact that I may someday be headed down to the same merry-go-round ride as some of you guys, and I would like to see a decent replacement amp once and for all.
post #102 of 2590
Quote:
Originally Posted by crOwcaine View Post

Please don't soil this thread. And please stop bringing up Mark Seaton. He is a professional and is well respected, you are not.

Here are some tweezers, now pluck the bug out of your ass.

Mark Seaton IS a professional, if you had any reading comprehension, you would understand what Craig is trying to say.

Great job making yourself look like a clown.
post #103 of 2590
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigsub View Post

The MFW-15 as it exists today appears to not have much in common with the unit designed by Mark. While I cannot speak for Mark Seaton, I don't think he would apply his name to the current MFW-15. The amp is different, and it's a good guess that the driver is also not the same as specified by Mark Seaton 3 years ago.

Since the MFW-15 has been on your subwoofer list/ranking since the beginning(and still is), and is what drove many to buy it(and currently is a factor in purchasing decisions), maybe you should, in good due diligence, speak with your friend/associate, Mark Schifter, and/or at least try to find out when the subwoofer stopped resembling the units you tested, and perhaps add that or some sort caveat to your list.
post #104 of 2590
Might as well blame all the folks who have stated that they like their sub as well, it makes as much sense as piling onto Craigsub. The comparison is done and over, the caveat has been in place for a long while. I almost DID NOT buy the sub because of the caveat, but a couple of conversations with MLS persuaded me to give it a go.

The blame for the MFW-15 amplifier issues belongs with the people who sell and warranty it. And should I need another amplifier, those are the folks I will direct my concerns to.
post #105 of 2590
Jeez, the never-ending drama of the MFWs! As I see it, the original MFW as designed by Seaton was well reviewed by Craigsub, and by all accounts the first run was a relatively problem free and good performing product. After that things get murky, with finger pointing at parts suppliers and/or cost cutting measures resulting in amps that were plagued with problems. A second amp version was introduced, but this version also suffered from numerous problems, and wasn't the cure everyone hoped it to be. Finally a third amp version was released, but the initial reviews show a radically different design, with fewer features and reportedly diminished performance. Add to this the speculation that the driver itself has been downgraded and you've really got to wonder how they are able to sell any of these, especially in light of all the legal troubles the head honcho is now going through. Do I have this right?
post #106 of 2590
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by combos99 View Post

Here are some tweezers, now pluck the bug out of your ass.

Mark Seaton IS a professional, if you had any reading comprehension, you would understand what Craig is trying to say.

Great job making yourself look like a clown.

For Fu*k sake. OK fine, you win. Now kick rocks and keep moving, you hurt me more than you'll ever know.
post #107 of 2590
Quote:
Originally Posted by floridapoolboy View Post

Do I have this right?

You do.
post #108 of 2590
Wow, this went south real quick. I don't think Craigsub should be held responsible for what's going on with people deciding to buy anyway. Having a note on the review gives people enough info to know that something is up with the MFW. If people still buy after reading the note that's their problem. If people are looking for someone to blame, try Mark Shifter, I hold him 100% responsible for 100% of what's going on.

People can still decide to buy the subwoofer, for whatever reason, and Mark Shifter would be responsible for the status of the sub. I don't care if a vendor switched out parts, pissed on transformers or crapped on them. If they end up in the hands of a consumer the owner of AV123 bears 100% of the blame.

So, can we discuss the amplifier issues and leave libel talk and crap that has nothing to do with the discussion for a different thread, please.

I'll digress back to the topic. Amplifier v3 is down on output, I have no idea if the amplifier section is weaker or not than previous versions. Kyle states 500va vs 350va so if that is indeed the case something else is causing the lower output and that would be the preamp section.

I'm going to talk to kyle tomorrow and see what they recommend or can do because I do know this, I am NOT going to be using the v3 amplifier in any MFW that suffers a v2 amplifier failure.

How they absorb that and react to it will dictate where I go from there.
post #109 of 2590
WOW,

I didn't mean to cause all of this and this was far my intent. It is just completely frustrating to read this whole nightmare and it never seams to end.
post #110 of 2590
Quote:
Originally Posted by KERMIE View Post

WOW,

I didn't mean to cause all of this and this was far my intent. It is just completely frustrating to read this whole nightmare and it never seams to end.

True dat, it doesn't seem to end. Hopefully we start to get answers, it would have been nice if we were givin more information about this amp but it was released during a sale with only mention of it now being built in the USA.

Everything else we had to guess on until they made it to consumers, now that we have them we can discuss it with AV123. Perhaps all they had to do legally was put anything in the box, I don't know but I'm going to try and find out.
post #111 of 2590
All,

This was sent to me by our Engineer today. Please call or email if you have any questions.

Kyle,

I have noticed on avs forum that there is a concern regarding the latest generation of amplifiers now shipping for the MFW-15.

This new amplifier is a further evolution from the design put into place some months back. This design is a more integrated solution. We developed this product from scratch rather than having to adapt a replacement board to an existing design as was done with the previous amplifiers. This has allowed us to offer both a more powerful and a more reliable product.

This new generation of amplifier board is more powerful than the previous versions. The previous version, using the replacement amp board, produced approximately 400 watts at the rated distortion. This new amp produces approximately 500 watts at the same rated distortion (1%). The increased power can be attributed primarily to a larger mains transformer. The new transformer is a Toroid type which, besides being more efficient, produces less stray magnetic field than the older EI Core type.

The new pre-amp board is highly integrated and allows for flexibility in tailoring the equalization and features so it can be used in a family of products without redesign. The circuit boards do not look similar to the older design due to the exclusive use of surface mount components and sophisticated circuit layout. In addition to circuit design, consideration was also given to ease of manufacturing. This allows the design to be produced on an automated assembly process which produces higher quality, more reliable products.

I know that TADG has submitted this board for Agency Approvals that include CE, FCC and UL, but we will not screen the metal work to indicate this until all approvals are in house. Later units will reflect this, including the new av123 logotype.

The new amp is constructed in Colorado and will appear in many future products. We like the increase in power, but we also like the simple and very straightforward final execution of the design. Labor costs being what they are here, rather than The PRC, we feel that the design goals have been met or exceeded in every category.
post #112 of 2590
If the new amp has an increase in power, why do users report that it is not as loud at a given gain setting as the old version?
post #113 of 2590
Kyle, maybe I am not understanding, but can you find out and explain why there is a significant decrease in output compared to the other amps? The new one sounds good, and the back panel is a lot cooler than prev. models, but output is very low.
Thanks for any feedback on this
post #114 of 2590
Quote:
Originally Posted by tesseract67 View Post

Might as well blame all the folks who have stated that they like their sub as well, it makes as much sense as piling onto Craigsub. The comparison is done and over, the caveat has been in place for a long while. I almost DID NOT buy the sub because of the caveat, but a couple of conversations with MLS persuaded me to give it a go.

The blame for the MFW-15 amplifier issues belongs with the people who sell and warranty it. And should I need another amplifier, those are the folks I will direct my concerns to.

I absolutely agree, but there is no caveat about the sub not being the same as tested, just that the amp has problems. The sub being different than what was tested, and not designed by Mark Seaton is completely different caveat.

The comparison may be done and over, the list/ranking lives on.
post #115 of 2590
I would like to replace my amp, but I do not have confidence in the v3. I would encourage anyone that has run REW or taken any other measurements with the v1/v2 amps to measure the v3 for us, given the chance. It would be nice to see exactly how the new amp compares.
post #116 of 2590
This is the neverending saga. I really wonder how "good" a deal these sorts of fly-by-night audio components really are when you factor in the hassle and heartache. At this point buying a MFW subwoofer is just a very small step up from buying one out of the back of a white van parked in front of Best Buy.
post #117 of 2590
Fly by night? There is more to this saga than you seem to know.

As for buying a sub right now, that is not the main concern for most of us (although it is something to be concerned about). We just want support for our past purchase!
post #118 of 2590
Quote:
Originally Posted by tesseract67 View Post

Fly by night? There is more to this saga than you seem to know.

As for buying a sub right now, that is not the main concern for most of us (although it is something to be concerned about). We just want support for our past purchase!

Sorry to say, but I fear you are in the same situation as those who invested with Bernie Madoff... hope I'm wrong, for your sakes!
post #119 of 2590
Who is the engineer that designed the new amp?

And KH, I thought your earlier comment regarding the preamp section bore serious consideration.

With respect to the output power differences (400 vs 500), what were the input voltages for the two power ratings?
post #120 of 2590
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksteidle View Post

All,

I know that TADG has submitted this board for Agency Approvals that include CE, FCC and UL, but we will not screen the metal work to indicate this until all approvals are in house. Later units will reflect this...[/i]

I have no idea but is this standard procedure to release electronics to the public that has not yet been cleard for approval? We don't need the house to burn down at this point.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › NEW MFW-15 amps (May 2010) *pics*