Thoughts on Behringer

[Super 8]

My first question is simple. Is it pronounced 'Beh-RING-er' or 'Behr-INJ-er'? Secondly: I know what the general consensus is about their products -which seems to be that they model them off of other companies designs and produce cheap knock-offs. I tend to take what I read here fairly seriously (it's my fault. I don't blame anyone for that. :cry: ) Okay, enough of my banter! I covet your wisdom. Let's hear your thoughts!

[bearded yeti]

It's easy to knock Behringer, but the bottom line is they produce great stuff at an affordable price, and there sure as hell isn't anything wrong with that. :wave:

[Anderton]

Once again, it depends. Behringer may be a German company, but most of the gear is made in China...like Alesis, ART, Alto, etc. etc. They HAVE knocked off gear and in the case of Aphex, lost in a German court of law and had to pay considerable damages. They also knocked off Mackie's look and were sued (this was eventually settled out of court if I recall correctly). They were formerly distributed by Samson, but as one "samsonite" told me, they were dropped as a line because "they were too much trouble." Yet there are indications that Behringer is trying very hard to change their image. I must admit I was biased against liking the digital mixer, but it is inexpensive, reliable, and sounds really good. Even the onboard effects are cool, and I'm not a fan of onboard effects in mixers. I also have it from a reliable source that the mixer is NOT reverse-engineered. It is exceptional value for money, regardless of the name that's one it. I talked to another reviewer who is quite anti-Behringer but gave the mixer a highly favorable review. "I had to do it," he said, "it's a really good mixer." Their V-Amp lacks the sound quality of the Pod or Digitech units, but the price is about as low as you can go and still put a circuit board in a box, and it ain't bad. I used it on a gig recently because the band wanted me to bring a wa-wa, and the V-Amp was the only box I had with an autowah. I tend to give people and companies the benefit of the doubt. Behringer seems to be making an honest effort to improve their image. I think some of this is out of pride/ego, but hey, there's nothing wrong with that if it produces better products. The stories of labor conditions in China are troubling, yet one can't single out Behringer when so many companies take advantage of the same labor environment. I do think the Aphex thing was a turning point. That's when the turnaround seemed to start. They paid some dues for their mistakes, if they stay clean in the future, then more power to them.

[jpmiii]

What Craig said.

[Wow]

I'll give them a try, its real cheap and it cant be any worse than my mackie 1604.

[aliengroover]

What Craig said. I've voiced my opinion on this subject more than once. What's really crazy is that so many people take what Behringer did (years ago) personally! What's up with that?! Like Behringer stole THEIR design! That mindset, plus the "good 'ole" consumer concept that "cheaper ain't better" keeps B in the back of some consumer's minds. I just didn't like their older stuff (mixers) because it wasn't good, but I actually like much of the newer stuff (I don't like all of ANYBODY's gear). As I said before, the same people who crap on Behringer use Windows (Mac), eat Big N Tasty burgers (Whopper), meatless burgers, drive Jaguar XKs (Aston Martin DB), buy designer knock offs, etc., etc.. Damn near all companies have copied another's product or service in one instance or another. Unfortunately, a few like Behringer allegedly copied based on schematics "taken" from Mackie. That's foul. But because you stole out of your Mom's purse when you were a tyke, I shouldn't trust you with my wallet? Peace

[KenElevenShadows]

[quote]Originally posted by aliengroover: [b]But because you stole out of your Mom's purse when you were a tyke, I shouldn't trust you with my wallet? Peace[/b][/quote]I suppose one difference might be that they were all adults when they were committing patent infringement!

[where02190]

[quote]Originally posted by DM: [b]It's easy to knock Behringer, but the bottom line is they produce great stuff at an affordable price, and there sure as hell isn't anything wrong with that. :wave: [/b][/quote]More like total crap for el cheapo. Every piece of Behringer (which I think means this s*cks) that I ever used except the one active DI we have has failed miserably with minimal use. Cheap chinese knockoffs that are made like crap, and sound even worse. A Mackie is a caddilac compared to their stuff. Don't waste your money. Yes you'll see two of their stereo compressors in our inventory. We use them as blank panels, the are not even plugged in. Dumbest purchase I ever made. gimme $200 and both units are yours. Hope this is helpful.

[Alndln]

I stated this before,but when my Mackie was stolen I replaced it with a Behringer,but that was "before" they started having stuff mass produced in China.I guess that might account for why it sounds a lot better and quiter too.I also had a board made by a an English company called "Hill" 4 years before Mackie lifted that design and turned around and sued Behringer for doing the same.Anyway,I can't account for the most recent stuff by either company except I've been hearing great things about Behringers new digital board,and from some critical people over at the Nuendo forum.

[aliengroover]

Oh, one more thing. I've owned, and not merely "used", both the Mackie 1202 and Behringer MX2004A. Both were used to plug the keys and such into. I added the MX 'cause I wanted some more inputs, plus an extra board to rent out (and not leave me lacking). And since I always hear the Behringer and Mackie dribble, I decided to to a taste test using the exact same source material (naturally). So here I am with my little CD in the boom box, in the car, in the home theater setup checking out the results. The Mackie sounded a bit "cleaner", or thinner if you may. The MX was clean, but not as thin. Each also received some EQ dusting. The Mackie's 12k was smooth, but it seemed like you had to fight to get desirable results. The MX's highs were more on the crisp side and required only minor adjustments to get the same results as on the Mackie, but not as "smooth". The low EQ on the MX added much more "umph" than the Mackie, though again the Mackie was smoother. I mean, it's a SSL versus Neve situation (minus unscrupulous business practices). Some people really like the sound of one and hate the other. I really like the sound of Mackie mixers and have used from the 1202 to the 24-8 for years. But for what I'm doing with the MX, it serves my purposes better in terms of sound and features at half the cost of a comparable Mackie. It may not work for you, but that's true for ALL gear. Again Ken (hey I rapped), name me one major company who's business practices are ALL on the up and up. Peace

[KenElevenShadows]

[quote]Originally posted by aliengroover: [b]Again Ken (hey I rapped), name me one major company who's business practices are ALL on the up and up. Peace[/b][/quote]Oh, I have no idea. I'm sure there are some companies on the up-and-up, but of course I see your point -- there's a LOT of companies that do things that would be considered "fishy"! I was more just pokin' a little fun at the kid stealin' outta mom's purse, that was all, but yes, I definitely agree with your point. I was more having fun with the example, so I hope you don't mind!!! I tried to put the little "grin" thing there, too. I think I'm with some of the others here. I think it actually looks like they are trying to turn themselves around. They got nailed a couple of times with pretty blatant ripping off, making them the scourge of the industry and making themselves an easy target. However, it looks like they are really trying to make a go at making a decent product that they came up with themselves, and they should be applauded for this effort. It's really difficult to try and make your dollar voice your opinion, so to speak. I mean, I'd like to try and purchase products from companies that are really great, innovative, original, and have some scruples. I would like to buy products that aren't manufactured in sweat shops. I think that in general, I do okay (not great, but okay), but let's face it -- it's almost impossible. There's probably parts in a whole bunch of things that I own that are manufactured in sweat shops in China or Indonesia or wherever. There's probably stuff that I own that had its designed ripped off from somewhere. I just try without being too preachy or too over-the-top. In another area, I do really enjoy spending my money at independently owned record shops and book stores and other independently owned shops (everything from vacuum cleaner shops to restaurants). I think it does make a difference. But I also don't try to be "holier-than-thou" or hung up on it, and respect other people's right to make decisions (purchasing things at Best Buy or Borders, eating at McDonalds, buying from Rode, Behringer, ADK, etc.).

[Ultravibe]

Years ago, before I knew better, I bought a Behringer Eurodesk... [img]http://www.meatweaselstudios.com/images/cbg.gif[/img] ...worst... mixer ...ever

[aliengroover]

Yeah Ken, I took your response as a funny (because of the exclamation point!) and I don't mind poking at it at all. And Ultra, I once used that board...once. A guy I know has it and, yes, it does stink. Peace

[Dylan]

I started [url=http://www.musicgearnetwork.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=004902]this[/url] thread a while back about yet another design that these fuckers stole from another American company. I have no problem with people who make affordable products, but these guys don't even try to make their products unique. I'm sure their digital mixer is cool, but why did they have to rip off the 01V's look and layout?

[Synthguy]

I spend money on a quality product that does a good job. I have a Behringer MX-3242, purchased before the "cheaper" production runs, and it sounds dry but very clean and spacious. Personally I think the ones who jump on those "these people suck" bandwagons are just trying to be cool, like some big name which comes down hard on someone or something, and are mere lemmings. Outraged? Do give me some credit please. If you are, then you need a puppy, or therapy. ;)

[John Brown]

I think it's funny that alot of the people that bash Behrringer, have absolutely no problem downloading MP3's without paying the toll. The whole thing is rediculous. If B did steal a design, and were caught, then they have already paid for it with their out of court settlements. Leave the poor dudes alone.

[fantasticsound]

[quote]Originally posted by John Brown: [b]I think it's funny that alot of the people that bash Behrringer, have absolutely no problem downloading MP3's without paying the toll. The whole thing is rediculous. If B did steal a design, and were caught, then they have already paid for it with their out of court settlements. Leave the poor dudes alone.[/b][/quote]First, I don't download MP3's. Second, they most certainly have NOT paid for their major indescretions with out of court settlements. Behringer has taken aim at large and small companies, ripped off designs, and built products with inferior parts. The problem, as discussed in the other thread, is that the the small companies they've preyed on would litigate right into their own bankruptcy if they attempted to prove their patents. The settlement with Mackie, I've read, came after European courts claimed they had NO jurisdiction to hear Mackie's case! I can only assume Behringer did a risk analysis, decided Mackie wasn't going to stop seeking restitution, and decided to settle rather than spend years fighting. Ebtech isn't in a position to do the same, and to my knowledge they still refuse to sue Behringer and have received no compensation for the blatant patent and design infringement Behringer committed in copying Ebtech's Swizz Army Cable Tester. The Ebtech sells for about $150 and the Behringer goes for approx. $50. The circuit has a unique intermittantcy detector, so don't think this is just another common tester that can be easily built at home. I toured the Persian Gulf with a Behringer 2442. (Rented by the band.) It performed adequately, although it only seemed happy when the meters were nearly pegged. I'd take the Mackie any day (I own a 1402VLZ), but neither is a fantastic board. They're like my Ford Escort. It gets me from point A to point B, but without the creature comforts of a luxury car or the performance of a sports car.

[Anderton]

<> As far as I recall, the Aphex settlement was cash, as decided by a court. Not sure of the exact amount, but I think it was in excess of a quarter million bucks and maybe more. And it was a German court that found them guilty, but that was before the whole European Union thing happened. Who knows what the legalities are these days regarding jurisdiction. If Behringer continues to rip off designs, that's a problem. But then there's the question of how original something has to be not to be a ripoff. Was the J-Station a POD ripoff? You could make that case, except that DigiTech had been making guitar processors since before there was a Line6. They repackaged their stuff into something that was more conceptually like a POD. I don't have a problem with that. But with the Aphex thing, Behringer actually had the nerve to photocopy the Aphex manual. Then again, I remember seeing a Biamp circuit board that looked almost exactly like one from Peavey...copying is common. But most companies have the pride to try to improve upon what they're ripping off. It's when a company just steals a design and sells it cheaper because they didn't have to do R&D that things start to really smell.

[Alndln]

[quote]Originally posted by Deadly Dillweed: [b]but why did they have to rip off the 01V's look and layout?[/b][/quote]Are you confusing this with Tascam? ;)

[Mats Olsson.]

I use some of their stuff, but I try to avoid their rip-off products. Some relatively fresh & rather obvious examples: Tech 21 Trademark 10 amp: [img]http://www.tech21nyc.com/Images/Amps/TM10/TM10-Fpt.gif[/img] Behringer Vintager GM110 amp: [img]http://www.behringer.com/GM110/GM110_panel.jpg[/img] EbTech Swizz Army cable tester: [img]http://www.swizzarmy.com/swizz.jpg[/img] Behringer CT100 cable tester: [img]http://www.behringer.com/CT100/CT100_big.jpg[/img] /Mats

[sign]

I (sometimes) prefer a B. Composer because it can sound really "fat", although IMHO a DBX 266 XL is a much better compr/lim. for the same price.

[Griffinator]

Yepper. Behringer has not changed - they just changed their [i]modus operandi[/i]. They got nailed ripping one big company (Aphex), slid through a loophole on another (Mackie), so they decided to change who they rip - companies with insufficient funds to defend themselves in court.

[fantasticsound]

[quote]Originally posted by Anderton: [b]<> As far as I recall, the Aphex settlement was cash, as decided by a court. Not sure of the exact amount, but I think it was in excess of a quarter million bucks and maybe more. And it was a German court that found them guilty, but that was before the whole European Union thing happened. Who knows what the legalities are these days regarding jurisdiction. If Behringer continues to rip off designs, that's a problem. But then there's the question of how original something has to be not to be a ripoff. Was the J-Station a POD ripoff? You could make that case, except that DigiTech had been making guitar processors since before there was a Line6. They repackaged their stuff into something that was more conceptually like a POD. I don't have a problem with that. But with the Aphex thing, Behringer actually had the nerve to photocopy the Aphex manual. Then again, I remember seeing a Biamp circuit board that looked almost exactly like one from Peavey...copying is common. But most companies have the pride to try to improve upon what they're ripping off. It's when a company just steals a design and sells it cheaper because they didn't have to do R&D that things start to really smell.[/b][/quote]For the first time I have to take issue with one of your comments, Craig. The truth of my statement you quoted lies in the fact that Behringer will never BE prosecuted for the infringement they've perpetrated on Ebtech and other companies' products. The small businesses simply can't come up with the capitol to defend themselves. Griffinator summed it up well. Just a look at the two examples Mats pictured says it all. In Ebtech's case, it may be patent infringement. For some legal reason I'm not quite clear on, the patents registered or applied for aren't evidence in EU courts for pirating. I'm still researching why this is the case. It appears Mackie's case would have been thrown out on these grounds. But with Mackie's financial resources, Behringer, I assume, realized it was time to deal with the situation rather than risk Mackie's continued attempts to recoup in court. I'll post anything I can find on the subject, but a good resource is the [url=http://www.musicgearnetwork.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=004902]previous thread.[/url] .

[Dylan]

Another example: Samson S-Phone Headphone Amp: [img]http://www.samsontech.com/products/relatedDocs/S-phone.jpg[/img] Behringer Powerplay HA4600: [img]http://www.behringer.com/HA4600/ha4600_big.jpg[/img]

[Anderton]

<> Well, after seeing the pix, I have to take issue with one of my comments, as well . Those really are blatant. I wonder if the similarity extends to the circuitry... If those are recent examples, then it appears nothing really has changed. But now I REALLY wonder what's going on, because I can't deny that the DDX is a solid digital mixer. Would anybody associated with Behringer care to comment on the examples presented in this forum? We should at least find out their side of the story. For example, it's not beyond the realm of possibility that the Samson and Behringer units are made by the same Chinese company, maybe using the same designers. The Ebtech thing is definitely far more suspicious. So Behringer people, you are cordially invited to participate in this discussion.

[aliengroover]

Funny thing is Samson used to be the US distributor for Behringer, and was named in Mackie's Lawsuit along with Sam Ash (another point for the Behringer debate: many of those who have a "grudge" against B are likely frequent shoppers at the Asher...so go figure). Who knows if Samson and Behringer are still in cahoots? I would not doubt if they were made on the same factory line, akin to how the auto industry works. 'Cause you can't have blatant theft and nobody from that company even raises a pinky against it unless they're in on it. I'd bet that the Samson/Hartke/Zoom trio makes in the same neighborhood as B, so a lawsuit wouldn't be a financial impossibility. Peace

[Alndln]

[quote]Originally posted by aliengroover: [b]Who knows if Samson and Behringer are still in cahoots? [/b][/quote]I'm pretty sure EV either bought or merged with Samson.A naughty trio?

[fantasticsound]

[quote]Originally posted by Anderton: [b]<> Well, after seeing the pix, I have to take issue with one of my comments, as well . Those really are blatant. I wonder if the similarity extends to the circuitry... ...The Ebtech thing is definitely far more suspicious... So Behringer people, you are cordially invited to participate in this discussion.[/b][/quote]If you have a chance to see the previous thread, someone made contact with Ebtech and they were very careful to not point fingers. I should mention my Swizz Army Tester was made in the U.S.A. That has to add $$$ to the cost, even before you consider better quality parts. The intermittant conductor circuit made this tester unique... well, until Behringer ripped it off. ;)

[aliengroover]

Not to add to this thread, but that is EXACTLY what I don't like about Behringer. They bring NOTHING to the table. Alesis has made affordable gear for years, and has done so by bringing good, quality new products (ADATs, the keyboards, monitors) to the public. Other companies have done the same (Mackie). Knock off all you want, it's nothing new (everything's been pretty much done already). But you'd get a LOT more respect if you bought just ONE brand spankin' new "original" product to the table. Peace

[strat0124]

Those pesky Germans! :) I hope the "copy" thang doesn't spill to guitar amps, cause you'd be hard pressed in that argument, specially having to diss so many amps for copying the original Fenders.....including and not limited to Marshall.