The Behringer era


#516

Let me bring in some other perspectives here, as someone from India who’s been living in Finland for the last three years, I might have some first hand experience in talking about this.

First of all, yes Chinese factories are exploitive - but you also need to take into account the population density in a country like that. Everyone needs to survive and is thus willing to work an hour more/work for lesser pay just to get some work. And because of the population, everyone knows they’re replaceable, and usually replaceable by someone who’s willing to work for cheaper and work longer hours. And that’s exactly how this culture starts in the first place. In european countries/Americas the lack of people makes labour more valuable. It’s the same thing in India in various markets. It doesn’t matter how good you are at your job, if you aren’t willing to work on the weekends, the clients are going to find someone cheaper and willing to put in more hours to replace you - irrespective of work quality (I’m talking from personal experience here).

Prices of gear? Well, while we do live in a global economy, the cost of living in each country is different and the salaries are scaled to that and that countries economy. Some of my freelance projects in Finland have paid me more per hour than an entire project of similar scale back home. And that again boils down to cost of labour and competition but is compounded by cost of living.

Now you might feel 1000€ a month is not enough - but in a lot of countries it is enough to live comfortably. But then, back to the question about global economies - if you’re earning 1000€ a month and you want to buy the latest MacBook Pro or an Octatrack, that’s more than your months salary. So what do you do then? And that’s where companies like Xiaomi, OnePlus etc come in - Behringer is no exception.

The eurorack that I’ve built up over the last few years, and the digitakt that I’m considering now, I would never be able to even think about that if I was living and working in India. I have talented musician friends who’ve been saving for months to buy a drum machine and the Arturia Drumbrute Impact is what most people are eyeing because it’s probably the cheapest. Heck, a Behringer 808 at that price? No one is going to think of ethical reasons when considering that coming from that sort of a background. Exploitive? Well, they themselves are being exploited day in day out, they’re not gonna think of Chinese factory workers because they can finally afford their first drum machine.

These are troubled times. Even if we live in a global economy, we don’t live in a global economy which implies equality in cost of living and local economies. So it’s a very complicated conversation.

On another note, I wonder if anyone read the article on how the lack of screws in USA was the reason why Apple couldn’t manufacture Mac Pros there?


#517

One is thru hole with parts made just for this project with keyboard and much more quality overall. A more fair comparison would be with something like mother32 plus the cost to actually design the thing and not just steal it.


#518

Everyone knows the moog is better quality. But there’s a lot of people that aren’t able or don’t want to pay the price for that. Like some people aren’t able to or don’t won’t want to pay the price for the behringer and will just be content with the moog iOS model d app. Each one has its place and everyone can use whichever they choose to make music. That’s a good thing imho…


#519

:joy::gem:


#520

Sad circle


#521

I’m not disputing the care that goes into a Minimoog. I’m disputing that there’s a tangible difference in sound or functionality. An smd capacitor does the same job as a thruhole capacitor.

As to ‘stealing’, Moog as a company lost Bob Moog in 1977, went bankrupt in 1986 and was liquidated in 1993. Bob Moog created Big Briar in 1977 which rebranded as Moog in 2002. He died in 2005 and the reissue minimoog wasn’t released until 2016. So the ‘reissue’ Moog Minimoog is just as ‘stolen’ as the Boog - both being made by companies unrelated to the ‘original’ Moog using long expired IP. If anything the Boog has more innovation due to the built in MIDI, USB connectivity and eurorack compatible patch points.

Finally, IMO Moog should never have gotten into the reissue game. Bob Moog was about innovation. The closest he got to reissuing synths was the Voyager, a massive update to the original Minimoog. If Moog had ignored the reissues and focused on innovative new ideas like the Sub 37, Mother 32 and One I doubt people would get as fired up as they do about the Boog.


#522

I doesn’t make sense to compare price between Minimoog Reissue and Boog that was my point. Behringer didn’t clone the vintage Minimoog they cloned the Reissue then they cloned the Moog eurorack case to put the Boog in it. But I was talking about Mother32 and the Crave.
But I guess some people will defend anything as long as they get things for cheap.


#523

People are defending the law. If it’s legal then all good. If not then behringer will get busted. In the meantime…cheap gear!


#524

I am not shure i follow… so minimoog reissu is stolen becouse… it is made by companny BobMoog left behind?


#525

Granted, the Crave has the same patch points and filter as the Mother 32. But they’ve got different oscillators (Crave has a 3340, not sure about the M32), and a completely different UI. IMO that’s enough to get it over the ‘stolen’ hurdle being bandied about - it’s not trying to copy the ‘look and feel’ of the M32 and for me a synth is all about the interface. Though I can certainly see why folks see otherwise.


#526

The company Bob Moog left behind (Moog) owned all the IP. Then he set up another company, which after he died went on to use that long expired IP to build clones.


#527

So the new companny Moog music founded by Bob Moog is not the same Moog companny also foundet by Bob Moog, and only thing this to companny have in common is the founder , Bob Moog?


#528

Yep. The companies are completely different in all but name.


#529

You mean but the name of the founder of the both companies?


#530

Yep. Should also add that I really like (new) Moog when it innovates. I love my Sub 37, Amos Gaynes is awesome and their ownership model is refreshing in this era of big corporates. I just hope they leave the cloning market to others.


#531

And “expired IP” is only a short list of circuits because not everything Moog did, did he patent. The transistor ladder filter was the only thing patented from the original Moog design, and then some other stuff came after. With through hole components, specially of that era, it’s not really hard to reverse engineer.

http://www.till.com/articles/moog/patents.html

Edit: The Minimoog was patented, though.


#532

Thanks, interesting link, schematics and everithing, and thats a LOT of patents ! Huge amount of work and creativity.


#533

But if you look at ALL the circuits he designed, he actually didn’t patent all of it - specially his earlier stuff. So I actually consider the list on the shorter side - none of the founding principles of subtractive/east coast synthesis as we know it today (minus the ladder filter) was ever patented.


#534

Yep. No denying how important his work was.

But patents expire or aren’t seen as worthwhile to even apply for. That’s the world. Not sure why synth manufacturers should be exempt from that? Behringer’s bringing that past innovation in to the hands to people that otherwise wouldn’t have been able to use it. And they’ll be making music with it and be creative…it’s not cheap TVs or cheap guns or cheap drugs. The end product is pretty positive…

I dont really need/want any of the releases so far but I have no problem with them existing in terms of realistic contemporary ethics/law… If behringer has gone too far then lawyers will give them a slap…


#536

:thinking:

:joy: