When does an emulation become a clone? 
2 Likes
I think it’s somewhat different because Arturia isn’t making a Minilogue XD VST, for example. The DFAM is a pretty unique offering, and obviously a lot of thought went into designing it. Copying the design 1:1 feels a bit wrong to me.
That said this might be the first thing since the Neutron that actually looks pretty fun. Might pick one up once used prices hit 100 bucks.
1 Like
Yes
Well, at least they keep the names of the inovator and the maker and the product naming the same, they do not rename it or rebrand it, making it blue, red, green… and I am sure they do have the blessing and some for of licencing agreed from them too……its called etic, respect and innovation … none of these Behringer has. Thanks to China we are in doomed days and the price is the only point for decision making…no respect to the inovators, those who make a history. Behringer will not ever be on that list…should be on OliExpress sites onky.
3 Likes
I don’t mind Behringer existing as a company, stuff like the Deep Mind show they can offer stuff that is uniquely compelling, affordable, and innovative. what upsets me is how people champion them as some synth Robin Hood of sorts for outright stealing and undercutting the innovations of companies like Moog.
Moog is not large, at least compared to Behringer they’re not. They are a niche company operating out of a country that is very expensive to manufacture in, and are constantly developing new and unique products by continually investing in R&D. Estimated at about $30 Million per year in revenue. Music Tribe (Behringer) on the other hand, make an estimated $400 Million a year.
This is not some David and Goliath situation, Behringer is a much larger company than Moog and obviously have no issues with taking a competitors’ idea and manufacturing it for peanuts in a country without environmental regulations or proper compensation for the workers who make these products. The ethics ARE dubious.
I don’t want to go into a huge tangent about the environmental strain and human exploitation overseas electronics manufacturing has been built off of, it’s place in our daily lives is unavoidable and even a place like Moog benefits no doubt as I’m sure the electronics inside their synths are still sourced overseas so they reap the benefits there as well.
TL;DR:
I feel that some of Behringer’s more unique offerings like the Deep Mind or their recreations of old discontinued classics are cool, but copying and undercutting unique designs from employee-owned boutique manufacturers by leveraging overseas worker exploitation rubs me the wrong way.
7 Likes
So i fact checked.
Talking about the Arturia VST products :
How sure ?
Then why do they call them ? :
- Jun-6 V
- Jup-8 V 4
- OB-Xa V
- Stage-73 V 2 ( after Rhodes Stage 73 )
- Mellotron V
- ARP2600 V
- Prophet V
- Vox Continental V
- Wurli V
- Farfisa V
- Solina V
- Synclavier V
- B-3 V
- Chorus DIMENSION-D ( after Roland Dimension D etc)
- Etc …
Notice the “V” at the end and morphing Jupiter to Jup, etc. Isn’t that a way around copyright protection ? I searched their website for the standard, “XYZ is copyrighted by Roland Corporation and is used by permission” sort of thing and did not find it. Perhaps someone else can find the list of all the “used with permissions”.
I suggest these names were all vetted to not be copyright infringements, rather than them acquiring rights and then disguising things.
Behringer is working with Vladimir Kuzmin to create a new version of Polivoks. So that is an example of both respect to the creator, and innovation together, albeit a pragmatic one.
That can be compared to how Korg got the rights to “ARP” and were founding contributors to the Alan R. Pearlman Foundation.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Behringer has done plenty of things i would not defend, i’m just fact checking.
1 Like
You DO realize V = virtual…right?
Prophet looks like Prophet. 
It’s not written as Prawfet 
And aren’t they doing some kind of licensing unless otherwise and open source situation like Mutable Instruments?
1 Like
Of course, and that gets added to make the name different enough.
Maybe ? I’m saying i found nothing to indicate they are as would be required.
1 Like
All trademarks are the property of the respective owners.
Page two of the Behringer 2600 manual.
This is standard boiler plate, that gets applied. It doesn’t mean we got permission to use the name for our product. Those are two different things.
Respect please no personal attacks.
That’s just a quick poke in the manual. In the Arturia vids for their products they talk about werking with “said company” to develop the “most try to life sounding blah blah blah” market schpiel. I don’t think B werks with anyone to try to pay tribute to said product.
And again re: vst, I’m certain there is a licensing fee to be able to use the image of said gear.
I know just from games I’ve werked on and the big to do with Gran Turismo, you gotta pay to use the image. We, on our game could not call an M16 and M16. And we had to make it look different, unless we paid to use it’s image. [no idea who that was paid to]. And GT was getting hit for having buildings i their game. So, how do you do a race thru a given city without iconic buildings. It’s crazy.
I’m trying to find out the reqs for vst dev, but I don’t know the right question or where to look. I could write a synth co and see what they say. 
Maybe I’ll write Roland and see what they say
One thing you will note: they dont clone any synths that weren’t hits right 
Oh that’s not the part I was talking about.
It was the “thank you” to Yamaha. 
And then Yamaha probably says thank you for every $1 they get on each seat sold
Another person Behringer is working with is Hiroaki Nishijima.
Is that the sort of thing you mean ?
I’m not justifying much of what Behringer does. I would have had them do many things very differently. For instance i’d get them out of the overt, but legal, copying of currently in production products. They don’t need to do that.
3 Likes
Every time Behringer releases a new product, most of the commentary about it gets moved to another thread or delete it. I see also that on synth related websites, the coverage is generally very negative and focused on the clone aspect, sometimes even if that’s not really pertinent. I wonder, why cover these products at all? I know that they are a major company and a player in the market so at first glance it might seem silly to not cover them, but in some ways it makes sense. The Behringer topics always devolve into the typical Behringer argument, because that’s really all there is to talk about. The products themselves are copies of other products most of the time, so there’s really nothing new to discuss regarding the products. The cloning discussion is really the only topic at hand. It’s as if the emperor has no clothes, and nobody is allowed to talk about it.
1 Like
The Isla s2400 would be another product that has been inspired by a vintage instrument yet has been widely praised.
Pretty sure Black Corporation are emulating a Jupiter as we speak as well.
Can’t help but wonder whether their sky high prices have allowed them to fly above the radar of the purists.
Also, it’s pretty daft talking about Chinese manufacturing, especially if you are using an apple device 
5 Likes
Behringer apple clone when?
Apple is its own clone.
Also responding to a very good and now deleted post by @obscurerobot.
Music Tribe’s engineering is very good in cost reduction, in design and especially in manufacture. They have also cut down stream costs, like with the way they have aligned their retail distribution.
Cost reduction engineering strangely adds to the upfront expenses, but again can decrease total expenses with volume.
They also have a cost calculation model, that places a lower emphasis on profit, and more on growth which makes there prices lower.
A wider product base helps spread risk. Smaller makers have more risk if one of their two big products is a flop this year.
Also being across product lines helps with risk. If guitar products are off this year, but drum machines do well you’re covered. Commercial electronics can cover for personal buying being off.
Risk also is part of their product decisions. Predicting the sales for an RD-9 probably has less risk than a completely new but unknown by the consumer sort of product.
3 Likes
This is an unexpected update!
9 Likes