Behringer vs Oberheim

[chk071]

You never know... Oberheim is soon to be releasing their 2-voice reboot, so... if Behringer decided to make a SEM, they would have already copied a synth which is in active production again.

The thing is, as long as they are playing the game correctly, and don't anything which is against copyright/patent/whatever laws, I don't see much that speaks against what they are doing. Copying the competition is a pretty normal thing. If a car manufacturer develops a very advanced engine, you can be sure that any competitior will dismantle the thing, and take a look inside to see how they did it. Or, in software development, reverse engineer it, and see how things work. That's why I don't quite get your resentment, but, of course, that's your good right.

The thing is, it's a bit off a chicken <-> egg situation. If people wouldn't be so fixed on brands, Behringer, or other companies wouldn't be doing what they do. If Behringer would just release the MiniBehringer, or stuff like that, people would be like "Mmh... piece of Chinese crap then?...". Regardless of how the thing sounds, and what the build quality is.

The only solution, which would be suitable for your thinking would be to create a whole new brand, and hope for the best. With emphasis on "hope for the best", because it'll be a total gamble. That's not what Behringer does, so...

[vurt]

i think it's fairly obvious, the difference is in qc. if you're producing a few hundred units compared to thousands, you have more time for such things at both ends. component matching and then final build.

whether you can afford either will factor in to the choice you make too. sadly, we don't live in a world, where people can all afford such things, should they be kept from owning a nice sounding instrument because they don't have a great paying job?

people have a go at gibson, but they like fender, were smart enough to be their own behringers many years ago, copying their own products in a budget range.

maybe synth companies could look at a similar idea

[pixel85]

imo the fact that Behringer showed us that it is possible to recreate classic (and great sounding) synths for an affordable price making it possible for poorer people to buy them is winning over copying and ethics argument. It's not that Behringer is the first to copy someone else. Yes, trying to take the original name is too much (I really don't get why they didn't want to call it Uberheim from the beginning ). But besides this, there's a long history of synth developers stealing from others. Ethics and big business are not going in pairs. Behringer is not special in that matter.

other companies had so much time to create synth replicas at a reasonable price but they didn't want to because their financial departments didn't saw good enough income out of it. Greedy ba******. Behringer did it and now they're offended. Poooor them... not.

I'm totally up for developers making high-quality tools at affordable prices. More chances for those who are less lucky because they were born in poor families, poor countries etc.
Seeing those rich snobs being angry because somebody else can get the same synth for a percentage of the price they paid for is a bonus

[AdvancedFollower]

i think it's fairly obvious, the difference is in qc. if you're producing a few hundred units compared to thousands, you have more time for such things at both ends. component matching and then final build.

True, but that mostly applies if you're comparing Behringer to some niche boutique/hobbyist synth manufacturer. Though it's obviously hard to come by sales numbers, it's clear that synths from Korg, Roland, Novation, even DSI/Sequential, are selling extremely well, right up there with Behringer. They all use automation during manufacturing, and it's rare that defective components make it all the way into final assembly unless there was something wrong at the assembly line. Even so, it would be silly for any company to skip QC and deliberately ship out faulty products, since that's just a warranty claim to deal with later resulting in additional cost for the company.

If Behringer would just release the MiniBehringer, or stuff like that, people would be like "Mmh... piece of Chinese crap then?...". Regardless of how the thing sounds, and what the build quality is.

You mean like the DeepMind and Neutron?

[chk071]

Do you think those will have a cult status like a minimoog in 30 years?

[_leras]

I'm sure you wouldn't call something like u-he Diva theft. Even though it of course also takes advantage of the popularity of the emulated synths.

It very carefully does not try to use the names or images of any of the things it is replicating. Also, I think when released - none of the hardware synths it emulates were on sale. (... maybe ms20 mini?)

So, the opposite of Behringer's shady practices copying both the look and the name.

[pixel85]

"Shady"? From when following the law, rules and going the legal route to acquire a name for a product is shady?
Shady would be when Behringer would use loopholes in law to get this name.

Btw guys from Arp were happy to see Korg "labs" where they were stripping down their synths to learn and replicate its components. It was in 70s.
Mr. Pearl was happy that someone is making Odyssey plugin replica even that he got nothing out of it.
It seems that they were more easy going than random people on internet today.

[pepelogu]

I'm sure you wouldn't call something like u-he Diva theft. Even though it of course also takes advantage of the popularity of the emulated synths.

It very carefully does not try to use the names or images of any of the things it is replicating. Also, I think when released - none of the hardware synths it emulates were on sale. (... maybe ms20 mini?)

So, the opposite of Behringer's shady practices copying both the look and the name.

What about Repro5? Is that theft then?

[Double Tap]

That cork sniffer art looked like something from one of the darker chans. Shocking co. Fk B.

Yeah I started reading CDM after that. Good site.

Never buying anything by this mob.

[chk071]

"Shady"? From when following the law, rules and going the legal route to acquire a name for a product is shady?
Shady would be when Behringer would use loopholes in law to get this name.

Exactly my point.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdFl__NlOpA

[canadian_moose]

That cork sniffer art looked like something from one of the darker chans. Shocking co. Fk B.

Yeah I started reading CDM after that. Good site.

Never buying anything by this mob.

I doubt Behringer care. They are selling these clones by the boatload regardless of anyone's opinion on here.

[ghettosynth]

They applied for a patent, the patent was declined. They'll end up selling it called something else, and they might even have to make it look just a tiny bit different. Seems like perfectly normal business to me. At least they went through the proper channels. I won't personally buy one - I never got hooked by the OB sound. Why are the fanboys so enrgised about this - or is anyone really?

I agree. Although, I do wish that I hadn't sold my OBXa when I did. It wasn't like I needed the money at the time. I don't really buy into the "Oberheim Sound." It's largely the CEM sound. Ok, I think that the SEM and n-voice stuff are interesting enough, but the OBXa was meh.

I really hate these pure clones TBH. What I would spend 2k-3k on is something that combined what was best about the Memorymoog and the M12, gave it a modern interface, attached 61 or even 76 keys with aftertouch, and a modern DSP effects engine. They seemed to be going in that kind of direction when they fell into this "let's clone all the vintage stuff." I suppose they know how to make money, but other than the Roland/Arp module clones, I don't care much. I'm not even sure how much I care bout those.

[gentleclockdivider]

imo the fact that Behringer showed us that it is possible to recreate classic (and great sounding) synths for an affordable price making it possible for poorer people to buy them is winning over copying and ethics argument. It's not that Behringer is the first to copy someone else. Yes, trying to take the original name is too much (I really don't get why they didn't want to call it Uberheim from the beginning ). But besides this, there's a long history of synth developers stealing from others. Ethics and big business are not going in pairs. Behringer is not special in that matter.

other companies had so much time to create synth replicas at a reasonable price but they didn't want to because their financial departments didn't saw good enough income out of it. Greedy ba******. Behringer did it and now they're offended. Poooor them... not.

I'm totally up for developers making high-quality tools at affordable prices. More chances for those who are less lucky because they were born in poor families, poor countries etc.
Seeing those rich snobs being angry because somebody else can get the same synth for a percentage of the price they paid for is a bonus

Behringer is a company that copied existing designs right from the start , from the eearly 90's till now
Now that he has gotten big enough he is acting like a complete twad discrediting jounalists , accusing forum members of defamation ,etc..
It is still behringer , and it's name will never ever have the appeal of roland, moog , korg , Oberheim etc...
That 's why Mr.Uli is so settled on acquiring those trademark names , to give his brand more appeal and more importantly ..to attract new young users who probably never heard of the original Tom Oberheim
It's called 'branding ' , buying an established brand/logo
I personally will never invest in such a company and it's behaviour and will gladly pay double the price for better quality and ethics .

[chk071]

I'm always a bit touched, comedically, when I read about ethics on these forums, from musicians who buy Mac Pro's, and buy gear from companies where they pay at least 100 € for the brand name. But, apart from that, I'd really like to see you guys in place of the companies in this business, and see how "ethically correct" you are allowed to act, when there's the need to generate money, to keep the business running, employees and bills paid.

And, yes, Behringer is a whole different animal, when you compare them to a company like Moog Music. It's a completely different strategy that these 2 companies are following. They're both part of what I described though. And no charity organisations. If you're looking for "ethics", go look somewhere else. If you want to claim ethics for yourselves, think again as well. It's not very ethical from Moog or Oberheim to charge hundreds of € for their brand names. But then, I don't expect any ethics. Why would I? They sell me a product. And, obviously, to some, the illusion of "ethics"...

[pixel85]

I'm always a bit touched, comedically, when I read about ethics on these forums, from musicians who buy Mac Pro's, and buy gear from companies where they pay at least 100 € for the brand name. But, apart from that, I'd really like to see you guys in place of the companies in this business, and see how "ethically correct" you are allowed to act, when there's the need to generate money, to keep the business running, employees and bills paid.

And, yes, Behringer is a whole different animal, when you compare them to a company like Moog Music. It's a completely different strategy that these 2 companies are following. They're both part of what I described though. And no charity organisations. If you're looking for "ethics", go look somewhere else. If you want to claim ethics for yourselves, think again as well. It's not very ethical from Moog or Oberheim to charge hundreds of € for their brand names. But then, I don't expect any ethics. Why would I? They sell me a product. And, obviously, to some, the illusion of "ethics"...

Oh, here everyone is so ethical: buying (any type of) hardware and clothes made in Chinese factories by slaves and political prisoners - no problem. Buying food made by exploited farmers - no problem mate! But if its about Behringer? Oh my goth! "So uNeThIcAl!! 1!1!!"
It's like vegetarians / animal rights defenders who wear crocodile shoes and real fur coats