The Behringer era

The Lounge General Discussion
#230

I agree, the point I was making is more to do with the quantity/cost ratio though in the sense that a certain number will need to be sold to maintain profitability in the long term, if as I suspect a lot of people move them on after a little while then the market reaches saturation point. It’s a risky strategy and maybe Behringer accounted for that or maybe they didn’t, or maybe I’m completely wrong about it.

I paid £450 for my TR-808 in 2005, it was quite a good price and needed a little work, IIRC typical prices at that time were £1000-1200, I ended up selling it and getting a MDUWmkII which I preferred as it was vastly more flexible, I also sampled the hell out of the 808 before I sold it.

Yes each to their own, I’m genuinely happy for you if the RD-808 is going to be great for you, but I still don’t like Behringer so I won’t buy one myself.

1 Like
#231

(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically deleted in 24 hours unless flagged)

#232

Not me.
But I defend your right to say it. At least we’re not on the manufacturer’s site :wink:

#233

Let’s see… recently, they have released or are about to release, among others:

  • Juno on steroids
  • authentic sounding Minimoog
  • authentic sounding Pro-one
  • authentic sounding Odyssey
  • authentic sounding 101
  • authentic sounding 808
  • two original semimodular synths

And all for great prices. I take it you don’t like synths then?

3 Likes
#234

Behringer is awesome!

#235

Yeah nah.

I was conflicted about the Neutron despite the labor practices but I don’t want to give one red cent to this nonsense.

1 Like
#236

Tack on ‘ISH’ to all the authentics.

1 Like
#237

Are there issues with their manufacturing process? Do they employee people into sweat shops and exploit their labor?
I’m genuinely curious

But I guess if I cared enough I could scour the interwebs

#238

Doesn’t it come down to legal stuff in the end? I guess the companies they’ve taken from weren’t doing anything original enough themselves to have legal grounds for copyright? Or copyright expired and the companies themselves weren’t interested in making the design again themselves?

People are like ‘oh they’ve stolen the idea from mother 32’… what’s so original about mother 32? It’s basically just a bunch of standard, widely available features elsewhere in one box. Nice that moog made it but c’mon, it’s hardly the peak of originality… if it’s was then other companies surely wouldn’t be able to legally mimic it? It’s almost like saying elektron stole the idea of grooveboxes? I haven’t researched it but guessing you could build a mother 32 out of individual ‘moog clone’ modules in a rack. People going to hate on all those 3rd party moog clone module manufacturers? Who made the first osc? The first envelope? Is everything that has used them since worthless?

Agreed that behringer are far from original Overall as a company, but apparently that’s not a crime so it is what it is. Affordable synths for people that could never afford (or would never choose to pay the price for) the originals. It was inevitable at some point.

5 Likes
#239

I wholeheartedly support that statement.

1 Like
#240

You’re right though. But at least Moog had the vision to put together a package that inspired others to do similar but in their own way. Behringer hasn’t done that here. Just copied someone else’s package (no r&d costs) and repackged it in their own Foxconn, hence at a third of the price of the M32. Id rather support vision and principles.

But I admit the Neutron is def their own thing. But still made with unprincipled labor practices.

#241

I think the grand vision of ‘making all this stuff affordable’ has possibly required a lot more work and is more unique among manufacturers than the vision that went in to the mother 32 design?

People seem to treat behringer as if someone else has gotten them in the position to build huge factories, employ hundreds(?) of people, manufacture their own chips etc… they’ve done that themselves from the ground up and are now in this position where they can do things like the Crave at £150… it’s a different kind of ‘vision’ to that of whoever designed the mother 32, but I’d say (at least) equally as beneficial to facilitation global creativity for our odd little species :wink:

maybe some of the means by which they’ve reached this position weren’t as ‘stand up’ or ‘inspired genius’ as other companies, but some companies screw people with over-pricing and endless sideways evolution (Roland, some recent Elektron to a degree, inclined to almost add moog to that list to a degree also considering how long they’ve been in the game and looking at the prices/features of their current hardware…) and other companies like Behringer screw over other companies by taking their ideas (half of which are just unique collections of elements of other people’s ideas that went before them in any case?) and making them affordable.

There’s all kinds of exploitation going on out there between companies and companies or companies and customers. I’d have a nervous breakdown and sell half my gear and the phone I’m writing this on if I dwelled on it too hard :wink:

2 Likes
#242

I personally don’t think its necessary to make things with exploitive labor practices to facilitate our creativity. “It ain’t the gear” right? Its not necessary to have this particular synth to be creative imo.

The market prioritizes the best at the cheapest. If it instead prioritized decent conditions for all peoples it would not suddenly cause the world to be dull.

#243

I’ve been trying to find evidence of this claimed exploitation online, haven’t found anything substantial so far other than one I incident relating to air quality and policies which seems to have been resolved. It would be great if these claims that are being made can be backed up with some factual information. I am interested to learn more but am skeptical as often what we read about are opinions, rather than actual facts

6 Likes
#244

I think it’s good for us to know how the things we use are produced. I remember an offer I got once to print t-shirts for my band somewhere in Thailand instead of using a local business I usually work with, for 20% the price and, supposedly, the same quality.

When I raised my concern about worker’s conditions and all that stuff a friend immediately pointed out that I was using an iPhone, a device that’s been proven to be manufactured under what would be considered slave labour in any decent country. Well, I cannot decide where my iPhone is manufactured, but I can definitely decide where to print my band’s merch. And I’m thinking about switching to other mobile phone manufacturers that take care of that stuff, even though their phones are more expensive. I’m just trying to do things the best I can.

I truly think that it is our duty as consumers to try to buy stuff consciously, especially when buying stuff that we don’t really need to live, such as synthesizers. Yes, Crave is very cool, but if Behringer can sell it so cheap because, among other things, they are treating their employees poorly, I guess I’ll go for the expensive option whenever I can afford it and be at peace with myself at least :slight_smile:

2 Likes
#245

Labor is low cost in China, in terms of wages and regulations. I think given that coupled with how low the prices are on these synths shows where Behringer is cutting their costs.

In addition, plenty of reports of Uli treating his staff like mules.

#246

Exactly. If the market demanded from Apple humane working conditions as opposed to the best at the cheapest, it would concede. The phones would be extremely different (and imo probably better for us in general) but a product of decency as opposed to exploitation.

#247

It’s a broad brush to paint anything made in China as being done under slave labour, exploitation. Hearing on the grapevine what Uli does is also not factual, just heresay. Is there anything else to back up these claims or just a general axe to grind against anything manufactured in China, and forum whispers?

1 Like
#248

More or less the latter. People don’t move their production to China for the strict labor regulations and good wages. Again, seeing the prices at which their selling these things, I think its clear what’s going on.

I’ve no reason not to believe the reports. Its not like a Russian troll farm is out to destroy the guy. Considering Uli threatened to sue some people over what they said (and again the labor practices and product design) speaks a lot to his character.

But I readily admit those reports are not officially confirmed. So I guess it’s my choice what I believe and all things considered none of it paints a good picture.

2 Likes
#249

I can understand your point of view especially in relation companies like Foxconn where exploitation seems to be well documented and ongoing. Plenty of evidence on specific companies through organisations that watch and report on these things. There was a strike incident Dec 2017 at the new Eurotec factory this is true, but seemed to have been resolved in favour of the workers by the company and rapidly it seems. I just cannot find any other finger pointing that is evident at Eurotec that seems to happen for other firms. Seems, generally speaking Eurotec factory is a reasonable place to work. I’m just mindful not to stereotype based on a general opinion of manufacturing in a country where conditions can range from bad to great, depending on the situation. If anyone can find a strong and ongoing factual thread of exploitation at the Eurotec Factory would appreciate the links. I’m not necessarily referring to the isolated incident in December 2017 which was resolved.