Those b*****ds done it again! (about Behringer's BDI, not political)

[rumpelstiltskin.]

the problem, though, maury, is that there's no room in most people's reasoning for subtlety and distinction.

 

to wit:

originally posted by the usually sage Ace Cracker

but are they actually opening up a box and sending the schematics of someone elses product to china for mass production? what's wrong with a little reverse-engineering? i'm positive sansamp didn't come up with the very first and to-date only product of this kind.

actually, yes. they are opening up our boxes and having the chinese build them en masse. you should take a tour of our lab and see some of the guilty parties.

 

behringer specifically did so with the QSC RMX series of amplifiers (renamed EUROPOWER). they even copied the manual word-for-word.

 

so what's that about reverse-engineering? QSC's cost includes ROI (return on investment) for all the materials, tooling, and engineering and other salaries required to develop the product. this isn't to mention the light, A/C, janitorial staff and property taxes at the corporate office. no wonder behringer kills everyone on price. they don't have to worry about anything but keeping the lights on.

 

but, hey, i don't have to worry about all of that, even if it is my job. i get a BDDI clone for 20% of the BDDI price. i'm not at all concerned that behringer's practices, when maximized, put all of the innovators out of business. by then i'll be working hard for Uli making original behringer products. thousands of miles from home.

 

robb.

[Gruuve]

Originally posted by PanicYou:

yes i know economics is a potential major, actually i was joking but sitting in a forum and complaining how one company rips off another isnt going to change a thing now is it.

 

You tell me, if there are two items one is 300 and the copy is 30 yet they do the same thing which are you going to buy? We all have jobs and work very hard and I'm sure the people who made that little gizmo worked very hard to do so (** See Fred the bass players post**) but its just the sad truth.

 

At least thats my opinion, feel free to voice your own.

You'd feel quite differently about this topic if you were one of the founders of Tech21NYC, wouldn't you? I wouldn't say that discussing or complaining about Behringer's ethics on this board isn't going to do any good. For instance, I recently found myself deciding on studio monitors...I decided to go with the M-Audio BX8's rather than the Behringer Truth monitor's even though they are about the same price and both have good reviews. I eliminated the Behringer's from my consideration because of their questionable ethics. I won't say that I'll never buy anything from Behringer, but after being involved in music for 20 years off and on, I still don't own anything that has Behringer's name on it.

 

Dave

[rumpelstiltskin.]

as a side note, personally, i take behringer as a challenge. the entire company and the entire industry do, too. the reality is we are forced to improve our process to the degree that our products are also less expensive. this is good for everyone. there is some good in this situation.

 

everyone makes their own choices and should never do anything simply because i said they should. but i'd rather hear someone say, "i don't care if it's immoral," rather than, "so it's immoral, but i don't see how that can possibly affect me. and because i really want to save money, i want everyone to agree with me that my actions have no consequences."

 

but there i go with subtlety and distinction.

 

robb.

[zeronyne]

I can't believe this is again being rehashed.

 

And as much as I tend to agree with most of your statements, I still wonder why NO OTHER company gets this kind of criticism from Lowdowners. Is it because Behringer is toally overt in their corporate larceny, or do Lowdowners actually think this doesn't happen in other MI companies?

[Prague]

Originally posted by butcherNburn:

Originally posted by getz76:

Pillar of salt and all, Prague nailed it.

I agree.

But just for argument's sake, should the SansAmp have an SVT setting?

Quote from Tech21:

 

"The sample settings for our SansAmp models and guitar and bass amplifiers include such classics as Marshall®, Fender®, Mesa/Boogie®, SVT®, ..."

 

They get permission to use the names.

 

Pillar of salt?

[rumpelstiltskin.]

Originally posted by zeronyne:

Is it because Behringer is toally overt in their corporate larceny, or do Lowdowners actually think this doesn't happen in other MI companies?

it's not that they're the only one, but they're the only one who's so overt about it, and who does it in the US.

 

remember that there's a huge difference between "me-too" and "the-same-thing". also fender's intellectual property from the past -- P and J bass designs, the famed passive tone circuit -- wasn't actually protected, but would be expired by now if it had been. at least legally speaking, there is a huge difference between that and what behringer does.

 

and you'll notice people are flailing wildly about behringer cabinets. partly because they imitate hartke, true. but also partly because they're building their take on hartke's mousetrap -- "me too" instead of "the same thing".

 

robb.

[butcherNburn]

Behringer gets the criticizm because of the number of products they "rip off". They are becoming the gereric or store-brand of the industry.

[getz out]

Originally posted by zeronyne:

Is it because Behringer is totally overt in their corporate larceny

Bingo.

[getz out]

0-9,

 

I am not so naive to believe there is not theft of intellectual property by most if not all companies involving electronics, but there is a difference between reverse engineering to research versus reverse engineering to copy (like robb said).

 

Being so blatantly overt is what kills me; the fact that the cable tester from Behringer has the same screening as the Swizz Army tester:

 

http://www.8thstreet.com/images/swizzarmy.jpg

 

http://www.americanmusical.com/images/d/p17133d.jpg

 

The fact that they reprinted the QSC RMX manual with new titles kills me, too...

[groover]

Getz76, those pics say it all for me. I've been trying to keep an open mind about Behringer while maintaining the "I'm going to buy what works best me" argument. I own a Behringer V-Amp and have been pretty happy with it, but after seeing those pics, the QSC ripoff and the attempted Boss/Roland ripoff, it make me glad that I've already decided to spend the money to replace the V-Amp with a real, honest to goodness, US made SABDDI.

 

Maybe Behringer is part of a secret communist/socialist plot to put American manufacturers out of business, damage our economy and become the new superpower.

[zeronyne]

Originally posted by robb.:

remember that there's a huge difference between "me-too" and "the-same-thing". also fender's intellectual property from the past -- P and J bass designs, the famed passive tone circuit -- wasn't actually protected, but would be expired by now if it had been. at least legally speaking, there is a huge difference between that and what behringer does.

I am not disagreeing with your statement, but is that actually part of the reason that people just out and out dismiss them? The legal ramifications? Apart from talk about lawsuits among corporations, I've seen no posts here or anywhere that imply that people are "outraged" at the legal aspect independent of the moral aspect.

 

Again, if there's a personal moral issue here for people (and what moral issues are anything but personal), then I think all of these post may be warranted. Everything direction from Prague's to Ace's is valid in my book, excepting factual errors.

 

But if we're talking legalities again, I am still confused as to why Behringer is singled out.

[zeronyne]

Originally posted by getz76:

Originally posted by zeronyne:

Is it because Behringer is totally overt in their corporate larceny

Bingo.

OK, I can accept that.

 

Let me say, though that I am not just playing devil's advocate here. While I do own a bunch of Behringer patchbays and a half dozen of their mixers, I own them because there was nothing else that met the particular niche I needed. The patchbays have a slider switch on top that changes each stack from normal to half and non-normal. I didn't see anything else that did that in any store I was in. The tiny mixers have a footprint that even a 1202 couldn't match, and I doubt they are a ripoff of some little Yamaha mixer, since they are about 100 times quieter (s/n) in real world use.

 

I doubt that railing against a company like Behringer is going to start the engine of social change within the company, nor am I saying that that was the intent. The only way to do that is not buy their products. Or, if you don't want to be that hard line, only buy Behringer products that are not direct copies.

 

Personally, I am still confused by the Behringer methodology. I think there's more than simple greed there...there's some weird agenda. Maybe Uli couldn't afford this stuff when he was a kid and he feels like the big companies are charging too much for their R & D. It suggests a mental imbalance in my eyes, but if you were REALLY in it just for the money, wouldn't it be prudent in the long run to slightly modify the cases and literature, even if you keep the cloned circuitry? I'm not saying that it's legally or morally right...but if you can filter out the judgement calls, you can see that there's something weird going on outside of moneygrubbing.

[zeronyne]

Maury those pictures reminded me of something.

 

RedSound CLoop:

http://www.redsound.com/images/cloops.gif

 

Peavey Grabber:

http://peaveydj.com/images/processors/grabber_side.jpg

 

 

Does anyone know if this is a licensed copy? Or do they both license it from another manufacturer?

 

Or has one of them Behringered the other?

[lug]

Originally posted by Prague:

Enabling the economy in general does not include rewarding theft and plagarism.

Then I guess I shouldn't ever charge anyone to hear me play.

[PanicYou]

lets not play bash the panic was simply playing devils advocate. But as a young musician i am forced to go with the cheaper product. Whether its behringer or some other company. Is it wrong? sure it is but people have been stealing business ideas since the beggining of time i really dont think it can be changed?

[PanicYou]

If all this is true though how come no one has even attempted to bring behringer down, or have they ?

[PanicYou]

beginning ***

[Prague]

Behringer has been sued a few times. It may be that they enjoy some legal isolation being based in Germany.

 

They are counting on you to buy by price only. When I started playing, everyone started with Sears and Montgomery Wards guitars and such. The next step was a Fender/Gibson/etc.

 

Only the serious players ever got beyond Sears because parents wouldn't fork over the cash for half-hearted musicians. Any band I ever played in after the Sears level, the players had Fenders, Gibsons, Marshalls, Hammonds, etc. You didn't see less than pro gear on the local bar circuit.

 

There was a prevalence of Shure Vocalmaster PA's (yuck), but the PA industry was newer. In a short period of time, this changed. Local bands ALL owned their own PA's and lights.

 

It sure did weed out the wannabes.

[getz out]

Originally posted by Prague:

Behringer has been sued a few times. It may be that they enjoy some legal isolation being based in Germany.

If I recall correctly, wasn't Behringer manufacturing mixers branded Samson (which I believe is owned by Sam Ash) being sold through Sam Ash; the mixers were reverse-engineered Mackies. I forget how it was settled, but there was a period of time that Mackies were not being sold at Sam Ash.

 

Not every company has the resources to fight a legal battle, especially one with a questionable venue. International copyright and patent law? Get real. If you can't sue them here (US), you're screwed.

 

Sam, nice find on the Peavey clone. I see a lot of products branded with various company logos. Most of the time there is a common manufacturer and different distribution. Take a look at the latest offering of in-ear monitors from Carvin and Nady. The difference is the two items are usually about the same price. The reason you know something is fishy with Behringer is that all of their gear is 1/2 the price.

[getz out]

Originally posted by PanicYou:

But as a young musician i am forced to go with the cheaper product.

Nice justification.

[wraub]

I have a Behringer amp, which I bought used from a neighbor. I got it because: I needed an amp for rehearsals with a (then) new band, and for practice at home, as I had only a POS guitar practice amp. And I had gigs looming... and almost no cash.

 

I know, shallow justifications, but I got the amp, and was surprised. It sounds pretty good, is reasonably powerful, and has enough useful features and tones that it actually worked well for me in a variety of situations. The price was right, and I never looked back. At least my money didn't go straight to Behringer.

 

That said, I still wonder when it will crap out on me at the wrong time, and be unrepairable.

This is because of the reputation Behringer has as a maker of cheap stuff, whom reportedly also has almost no customer service follow-up skills.

 

But I knew all of that when I bought the amp.

I got it as a stop-gap measure, and for that it has sufficed. I am still using it as a power amp.

 

As I build my "real" rig, I may keep it as a living-room amp, or I may see what I can get for it, just for fun. But I will probably not rush to but more Behringer gear.

 

I liken it to the transistor radio: The first models were (size issues aside) well built, well designed, made by caring craftsmen new to an exciting technology. But eventually, we got the cheap versions-poorly built, sketchily designed, and eminently disposable. Your $5 radio dies? Chuck it, get another.

Sure, you can still buy hand-made radio equipment, lovingly assembled and designed by iconoclastic freaks who live for what they do, and you will pay dearly for it.

But most people will buy the $5 radio.

 

I see Behringer doing much the same thing, robots making equipment on the shoulders of previous thinkers, for the music-loving masses to enjoy music more freely with, but dispose of readily as the product dies/is improved. Just part of the modern creative process.

Maybe Behringer consider all this "sampling".

 

Peace,

 

wraub

[butcherNburn]

website-:

* Products mentioned herein are exclusively BEHRINGER products and are not in any way associated with and have not been approved, licensed, sponsored, endorsed, designed or manufactured (or anything else for that matter!) by anyone other than BEHRINGER. All Trademarks mentioned belong to their respective owners and are not affiliated with BEHRINGER.

Was that there before?

[jeremy c]

No, that appeared after a threat of a lawsuit by Boss. The pedals also changed color after this threat.

[rumpelstiltskin.]

Originally posted by wraub:

I know, shallow justifications, but I got the amp, and was surprised. It sounds pretty good, is reasonably powerful, and has enough useful features and tones that it actually worked well for me in a variety of situations. The price was right, and I never looked back. At least my money didn't go straight to Behringer.

wraub, your justifications are your own. if you're comfortable with them, the get on with your bad self. but i'm hoping acknowleging that isn't some attempt at eliciting agreement and approval from me or anyone else. i'm not buying. and that's my choice. we're all people, and we should all be doing what we individually think is right.

 

and don't be surprised that you like your behringer. it's an ashdown in behringer clothes. only the name has changed, but a rose is still a rose. any other metaphors? no. but while they probably use incrementally less quality parts than the chinese ashdowns, i wouldn't lose sleep over reliability. even american made products with the best components fail sometimes.

 

Sure, you can still buy hand-made radio equipment, lovingly assembled and designed by iconoclastic freaks who live for what they do, and you will pay dearly for it.

But most people will buy the $5 radio.

 

I see Behringer doing much the same thing, robots making equipment on the shoulders of previous thinkers, for the music-loving masses to enjoy music more freely with, but dispose of readily as the product dies/is improved. Just part of the modern creative process.

Maybe Behringer consider all this "sampling".

i think the chief difference is in the details. most radio circuits of that vintage were developed by the transistor companies so that people would buy transistors instead of tubes. the designs were always in the public domain and intended to be used by as many people as possible.

 

or even from another viewpoint, a notable difference is the time delay between the innovation and the imitation. why wait when the competition has a good seller and all you have to do to undercut them is buy one and have china build a replica. oops, change the screen printing and ship it. $$$

 

some counterpoint.

 

robb.

[fr22]

Just playing Devil's advocate ...

 

I've just bought the Behringer stuff (36 euro here).

Why ? Because it's cheap, because SA products costs an arm and a leg here in EU, because as I wasn't able to try and buy a "real" Sansamp, I prefer to trash 36 euro instead of 255 euro if product doesn't suit my modest non professional needs.

More, don't forget guys that the "superior US designed products" cost from 30 to 200% more when imported in Europe.

Anyway, if the Behringer toy is good, I will probably replace it sooner or later by something more serious, build like a Buick (or tank)

 

About production : my first Fender amp (entry level) was build in ... China, my Strat .. in Mexico, my J-Bass ... in Korea. All of them selled under FENDER name.

 

About ethics, I agree on many arguments. Nothing new : Les Paul claimed 50 years ago that his PU design was copied by a certain ... Clarence Leo F.

 

Now, fire at me .....

[tucker71]

I'm genuinely suprised that so many people (here) actually CARE about who made what first and who's ripping who off.

In my opinion....it's all just part of normal everyday marketing.

 

Coke. Pepsi. Diet Coke. Diet Pepsi. Vanilla Coke. Vanilla Pepsi. Pepsi w/ Lemon. Coke w/ Lemon....on and on and on. I don't really CARE who invented what first. Do you? All I know is..."I'm in the mood for a diet soda and this little store sells it".

 

Panasonic has "Bass Max" on their portable stuff.

Sony has "Bass Boost" on theirs.

It never EVER occured to me that one is a rip off of the other. To me...it just all boils down to simple competition.

 

 

I actually have one of those little Behringer cable tester thingies. I honestly had no friggin' idea that it was a ripoff of that Swiss Army model. If I bought the Behringer version, it was because THAT is what was available and affordable on that particular day.

 

I'm not judging anyone for caring aboot stuff like this. I just find it intersting that people actually give this stuff any thought.

[Bobby LowTones]

Originally posted by Matt C:

Behringer can make products so cleaply because it

a)eliminates R&D

b)uses less-than-top-of-the-line components

c)produces its products with minaturized components (much like computer motherboards)

d)uses external power supplies which cut down on case size and the amount of metal used (smaller case)

e)builds products that are almost impossible, or at least not worth while, to repair

Just re-read quickly the whole thread (I admit I skipped a few posts)

but I have to add to this one.

 

Using an external power supply also helps the manufacturer to save a lot

on various gov's approvals, like CSA in Canada, and UL in the States. The

main product doesn't require electrical approval and stay the same for all

countries it is going to be shipped to.

 

Only the Power supply falls under the inspectors' scrutiny. They also usually

save a bundle by making sure the SAME type of external power supply will

fit MOST of their products of the same category...

[Stackimo]

Imagine if only one car company was allowed to make a vehicle with 4 wheels, leather interior, and a trunk in the back.

[Bobby LowTones]

Originally posted by Stackimo:

Imagine if only one car company was allowed to make a vehicle with 4 wheels, leather interior, and a trunk in the back.

My point was just technical, not ethical.

 

But since you opened the door, if you start a car

manufacturing plan, putting 4 wheels, leather interior

and a trunk on your pet project is just fine. However,

if what you're selling looks like a Corvette, drives

like a Corvette, feel like a Corvette etc... I'm not

sure you won't have some GM's black suited guys trying

to bite your head off. Even car colors are copyrighted...

 

Sooo, to "clone" a product from another manufacturer

is at least questionable, isn't it?

 

Bob

[rumpelstiltskin.]

Originally posted by zeronyne:

Maury those pictures reminded me of something.

 

RedSound CLoop:

http://www.redsound.com/images/cloops.gif

 

Peavey Grabber:

http://peaveydj.com/images/processors/grabber_side.jpg

 

 

Does anyone know if this is a licensed copy? Or do they both license it from another manufacturer?

 

Or has one of them Behringered the other?

i just realized that i never responded to this.

 

yes. we purchased the rights to make the pvdj grabber. essentially, there is no longer a red sound cloops, but now there is a pvdj grabber. they get paid for their work and we get the product to a much wider market and make money for ourselves, too. it's what many people call a win-win.

 

see how easy and ethical this sort of thing can be?

 

robb.