Members '63-Strat Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 I played one of the pre-Brad CCVs and CCMs at winter namm 2008. I didn't jive with mark's superstrat he had in the test booth so didn't get to test the way I normally would. THey sounded good for sure, but it wasn't anything that made me want to sell my bogner either, honestly. As said there are A LOT of takes on the modded marshall thing on the market these days, if you can't find something that suits your needs it's you. . At some point they really are just different, not necessarily better. And what's best for one guy isn't going to be for another etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mamberg Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 You know - for once I agree with RB 100% Ok - maybe it's not the FIRST time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hardvalve Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 Not surprised, what a mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members cavemanic Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 OLOLOLOLOLOLOLSeriously, how many people are going to have to get burned by these assumed epic "small builders" who require deposits and crazy wait times before they just realize NOBODY IS REINVENTING THE WHEEL. BUY FROM A COMPANY THAT ACTUALLY HAS SOME KIND OF HISTORY.How big is the list now?DARCameronTattooSurreal(to some extent) DiezelI mean {censored}, man. people are just stupid.....same as the cab companies as well ...I forget the name of one of them...I know vader shut doors....half of this gear never even needed to be made and then you get guys doing the STAND UP MAN BS and they run for the hills when the {censored} hits the fan...i often wonder if they are in on it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members cavemanic Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 I'm just wondering how exactly Brad thought this was going to go down. Did anyone really think Mark was going to accept the "your salary will be going towards back orders" proposition? When has this guy ever shown himself to be someone that does the right thing at his own expense? Hell, he didn't even do the right thing when it would have been GOOD for him. don't be so hard on the guy...apparently some say he is a 'stand up man' and 'its only money' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members duncan Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 Wow. I'll stick with my Bogner. That said, I'd take a CCV if one was offered to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ~Abstract~ Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 OLOLOLOLOLOLOLSeriously, how many people are going to have to get burned by these assumed epic "small builders" who require deposits and crazy wait times before they just realize NOBODY IS REINVENTING THE WHEEL. BUY FROM A COMPANY THAT ACTUALLY HAS SOME KIND OF HISTORY.How big is the list now?DARCameronTattooSurreal(to some extent) DiezelI mean {censored}, man. Huh? Diezel? Splain plox. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dolf Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 Huh? Diezel?Splain plox. Diezel USA They had a couple US distributors that were just {censored}ing people out of money. I don't remember the particulars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ~Abstract~ Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 Diezel USA They had a couple US distributors that were just {censored}ing people out of money. I don't remember the particulars. Gotcha. Yeah...but in Peter Diezels defense, he cut that {censored}er loose and still stands behind all of the product he's got out there. The rest of the builders mentioned (except Tattoo, don't know them) are truly {censored}ty businessmen/scammers and borderline thieves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members guitarbilly74 Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 I have a great idea: Brad could change his brand name to Scameron. That way we would know who we're dealing with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dolf Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 Gotcha. Yeah...but in Peter Diezels defense, he cut that {censored}er loose and still stands behind all of the product he's got out there. The rest of the builders mentioned (except Tattoo, don't know them) are truly {censored}ty businessmen/scammers and borderline thieves. What was the one you had? Twister? Those guys too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ~Abstract~ Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 What was the one you had? Twister? Those guys too. OMG! You remembered!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mhenson42 Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 I'm not cheerleader for Brad and really wasn't gonna comment... why bother rehashing what has been said a million times. The OP has hardcore butt Hz over Brad for some reason. I've sold an amp to and bought (a CCV) from Brad. I wouldn't worry a bout dealing with him again, but to each their own. Based on my understanding of the facts, I personally don't feel Brad owns anyone who paid MC anything. It's unfortunate that he can't get people who were scammed amps as he stated he wanted to do. But he said all along what it would take for that to happen and as per usual, Mark Cameron flaked. If you were stupid enough to send MC your $ (especially in 2010/early 2011 timeframe)...you know what they say about fools and their money. My only quesiton is...... who exactly was scammed by Brad? EDIT: I will say, the first run CCV sounded exactly like the real CCV I had. I wouldn't want the redesigned CCV if I originally paid for and expected to get one that MC at least signed off on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jlb32 Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 He's got the Cameron name, he's got the design, components and ability to build the amps exactly the way Mark did or would. Why does Mark walking out really have anything to do with him getting these guys the amps they ordered and paid for if that was his intent? Mark not being around anymore should actually save money in the long run and they have everything they need to make the CCV and CCM without Mark at this point. What other role did they really need from Mark other than how to make the amps, which they already have? Maybe the amps aren't selling as well as they had hoped? Maybe the money is just not coming in? Either way I don't see Mark leaving after they already have the amp designs and ability to produce them without him much of a excuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members cavemanic Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 He's got the Cameron name, he's got the design, components and ability to build the amps exactly the way Mark did or would. Why does Mark walking out really have anything to do with him getting these guys the amps they ordered and paid for if that was his intent? Mark not being around anymore should actually save money in the long run and they have everything they need to make the CCV and CCM without Mark at this point. What other role did they really need from Mark other than how to make the amps, which they already have? Maybe the amps aren't selling as well as they had hoped? Maybe the money is just not coming in? Either way I don't see Mark leaving after they already have the amp designs and ability to produce them without him much of a excuse. I'm refering to mark in that post not brad ...I'm kinda neutral on brad and the whole deal and those quotes were from forumites from here when mark was ripping people off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jlb32 Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 EDIT: I will say, the first run CCV sounded exactly like the real CCV I had. I wouldn't want the redesigned CCV if I originally paid for and expected to get one that MC at least signed off on. Why would it have to be redesigned at all unless they just wanted to? They've already been making and selling CCV's. Can they not reproduce amps they've already been making without Mark? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mhenson42 Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 He's got the Cameron name, he's got the design, components and ability to build the amps exactly the way Mark did or would. Why does Mark walking out really have anything to do with him getting these guys the amps they ordered and paid for if that was his intent? Because the Cameron Amps Brad owns is not the same company (legal entity) that Mark Cameron owned (still owns). Brad bought the right to sell amps under the Cameron name using the Cameron design. He did not buy the legal entity (if there was one) that Mark operated under. No different than Randall buying Mark Fortins designs for the Natas and Meathead. Word is that Mark still has orders outstanding that he is obligated to fullfill. If he doesn't, would you exect that Randall would have to give those people a Randall built Natas/Meathead? I didn't think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jlb32 Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 I'm refering to mark in that post not brad ...I'm kinda neutral on brad and the whole dealand those quotes were from forumites from here when mark was ripping people off I understand that. I'm just trying to understand why Mark leaving really has anything to do with Brads intentions to get older customers that were ripped off by Mark their amps. Why would Mark disappearing at this point in time really matter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mhenson42 Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 Why would it have to be redesigned at all unless they just wanted to? They've already been making and selling CCV's. Can they not reproduce amps they've already been making without Mark? those questions have been answered on RT. Basically because it was difficult build/service in an efficient manner the way Mark designed it. Metro amps redesigned the lay-out to streamline production. Supposedly supposed to sound the same, but I don't think it's what people had in mind when they put $ down for a CCV thinking MC would be involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members guitarbilly74 Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 I'm not cheerleader for Brad and really wasn't gonna comment... why bother rehashing what has been said a million times. The OP has hardcore butt Hz over Brad for some reason. I've sold an amp to and bought (a CCV) from Brad. I wouldn't worry a bout dealing with him again, but to each their own. Based on my understanding of the facts, I personally don't feel Brad owns anyone who paid MC anything. It's unfortunate that he can't get people who were scammed amps as he stated he wanted to do. But he said all along what it would take for that to happen and as per usual, Mark Cameron flaked. If you were stupid enough to send MC your $ (especially in 2010/early 2011 timeframe)...you know what they say about fools and their money.My only quesiton is...... who exactly was scammed by Brad?EDIT: I will say, the first run CCV sounded exactly like the real CCV I had. I wouldn't want the redesigned CCV if I originally paid for and expected to get one that MC at least signed off on. it's very simple: a cut of the profit from the amp would go to Mark and that money was going to be used to build the amps he promised until everyone had their amp. Now Mark is gone so that SAME cut still could go directly to building the amps. Brad decided it is going to his pocket instead and neither Mark nor the customers Mark scammed will get {censored}. Remember, the amps did not get cheaper after Mark left. The same percentage of the profit that was allegedly allocated to fix the mess is still there. The only difference is: Brad will pocket the whole thing now. If that's not douchebaggery, I don't know what is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ~Abstract~ Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 Because the Cameron Amps Brad owns is not the same company (legal entity) that Mark Cameron owned (still owns). Brad bought the right to sell amps under the Cameron name using the Cameron design. He did not buy the legal entity (if there was one) that Mark operated under. No different than Randall buying Mark Fortins designs for the Natas and Meathead. Word is that Mark still has orders outstanding that he is obligated to fullfill. If he doesn't, would you exect that Randall would have to give those people a Randall built Natas/Meathead? I didn't think so. I agree with everything you said... except... It's Mike Fortin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Miter Gauge Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 I don't know anything about Mark or Brad but I have purchased businesses before. Whether Brad assumed the former owner's liabilities (back ordered amps) can only be known by looking at the purchase agreement. It could be that he only purchased the name and some intellectual property and left the hard assets and liabilities with Mark. Without knowing the terms of the agreement we can only speculate. It may be that the nice-guy thing to do is to build amps for people who didn't pay HIM but that isn't how it works usually. For example, when GM restructured the former stock holders were not made whole buy the new owners. Those who'd payed the former GM for stock (that turned out to be worthless) were not given equal shares of the new company. It's shameful and it sucks dirty monkey dicks but that's business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ovid9 Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 those questions have been answered on RT. Basically because it was difficult build/service in an efficient manner the way Mark designed it. Metro amps redesigned the lay-out to streamline production. Supposedly supposed to sound the same, but I don't think it's what people had in mind when they put $ down for a CCV thinking MC would be involved. I never understood why Mark was involved at all. Ok, that's not true, I do, the name & association! "Hey, that genius flake is on board with us now!" But if you already had the name & designs kick the flake to the curb and don't say you'll do your best to fulfill old orders out of his share of the money. It would've pissed people off initially, but the hub-bub would've died down instead of dragging on and lingering. Bad situation all around really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mhenson42 Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 I agree with everything you said... except... It's Mike Fortin. lol. you are right. I have a friend named Mark Fortin - so no wonder I screwed that up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members LP Freak Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 The amp is being redesigned to make it easier to service of ever needed to be. Mark designed the amp with the board upside down to try to guard his design. There was also an issue with the FX loop where there was some tone loss when turned on. The new design is simply moving around components to make them more accessable while keeping the same signal path. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.