• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Any relation...Behringer/Ashdown???

Status
Not open for further replies.
#21
Rockbox: First of all, welcome to TalkBass - it's good to have you here.

Second, don't worry about some of the harshness you may see on the board. There have been plenty of contentious subjects that have been posted and re-posted ad nauseum and, unbeknownst to someone who is new, creating new threads for them can result in catching some hell.

There are a lot of threads concerning Behringer and the controversy that surrounds the brand, so you will actually find a lot of great info (as well as a lot of pretty ridiculous infighting and arguing) on the subject when you search.

Again, welcome to TalkBass, man!
 
#23
Lackey said:
Warmoth/Valenti
Click to expand...

Nino has NOTHING to answer on plagiarism charges FYI. His basses are NOT Fender clones and it was unfair to raise his name in this situation.

Im sorry if i sound harsh, but he is just starting out his little company and he doesnt need to be worrying about answering charges like this.
 
#24
Toasted said:
Nino has NOTHING to answer on plagiarism charges FYI. His basses are NOT Fender clones and it was unfair to raise his name in this situation.

Im sorry if i sound harsh, but he is just starting out his little company and he doesnt need to be worrying about answering charges like this.
Click to expand...
In additions, the company he buys parts from is Fender liscenced to make those parts.

That means Fender is getting money for the use of their likeness.
 
#25
Toasted said:
Nino has NOTHING to answer on plagiarism charges FYI. His basses are NOT Fender clones and it was unfair to raise his name in this situation.

Im sorry if i sound harsh, but he is just starting out his little company and he doesnt need to be worrying about answering charges like this.
Click to expand...

In the interest of "context", the full quote (emphasis mine)....

Lackey said:
Now, I'm not picking on Warmoth/Valenti here, as they pay Fender for the shapes/names.
Click to expand...

This changes things considerably.
 
#26
BillyB_from_LZ said:
Please don't do that!!!! I can only hope that Nick man was kidding... Bob Lee is a great guy and a huge asset to TalkBass and certainly doesn't deserve that...
Click to expand...
I agree that Bob is. He's helped me with my old QSC amp I bought used that they dont even make anymore and quite a few other times, but thats why I think he should be contacted.

He's a great guy who has something at stake here and has personal connections with the issue. I think he is the best person to contact for an explanation of what Behringer is doing. I hope that after hearing what Bob has to say, this guy wont buy a Behringer product. I know I wont.
 
#29
johnvice said:
It all comes down to money. I would guess that to save money on the external design, Behringer copied the the Ashdown.

To save money internally, the BX3000 is a very poor amplifier.
You get what you pay for and there is a reason their so cheap!
Click to expand...

Do you know this from expierence? Because I've had a totally different expierence with mine.
 
#30
Lackey said:
You play several Fender "clones", correct? KSD, Lakland, Sadowsky, Lull, Pensa, Celinder ....
Click to expand...

that argument is a straw man. a particular body shape does not guarantee that neck specs, pickups and electronics, or hardware are equivalent to one or any of the originals variations through the years.

in those cases, while the designs may well be obviously "fender-inspired", it is not a pure theft of design and development. in all cases, these manufacturers are building a better mousetrap -- better parts, significant independent research and development, improved labor quality. behringer, instead, builds the exact same mousetrap, but with cheaper parts and little to no development or intellectual investment on their part.

there is no room for shady debate practices here. google "straw man" and educate yourself on your error.

robb.
 
#34
rcz said:
that argument is a straw man. a particular body shape does not guarantee that neck specs, pickups and electronics, or hardware are equivalent to one or any of the originals variations through the years.

in those cases, while the designs may well be obviously "fender-inspired", it is not a pure theft of design and development. in all cases, these manufacturers are building a better mousetrap -- better parts, significant independent research and development, improved labor quality. behringer, instead, builds the exact same mousetrap, but with cheaper parts and little to no development or intellectual investment on their part.

there is no room for shady debate practices here. google "straw man" and educate yourself on your error.

robb.
Click to expand...

Wow, thanks for your illuminating reply. I must have forgotten this was English 104. :rolleyes:

So, you are implying that "boutique" jazz clone builders are in fact not copying Fender, because "better parts, significant independent research and development, improved labor quality" are implemented? I beg to differ.

I have not personally seen proof of "significant independent research" on the majority of jazz clones out there. I.E., why is the Sadowsky often described as "nailing that 60's/70's jazz tone" ? Why are ash and alder bodies, combined with maple necks the standard? Are they using single coil exposed magnet "jazz" pickups? 34" scale? Bolt on neck? 3/4" string spacing? Almost all of them are.

I have yet to play a jazz clone that didn't feel like a Fender jazz bass. The schematics IME have not been noticably altered. Any of the clones out there could be visually identified as a Fender jazz design.

"Better" quality materials and "better" construction do not an original make. A mousetrap hand-built of flame koa and stainless steel wire made to the specs of a name-brand mousetrap is still a copy.

How can we justify one copy merely because it's "better", and lambaste another because it's "cheaper" ? Both jazz cloners and Behringer are copying another successful product in an attempt to steal their "share" of the market. And if we consider it extremely unethical for one company, we should probably examine the operating policies of many other companies as well.
 
#36
I hate to see a good thread die.

Back on Aug 21, in a similar thread, ‘Munjibunga’, posted…..

” Apparently, you're unaware that Behringer bought Ashdown almost two years ago. It probably was overshadowed by the drama surrounding the U.S. Music/Eden acquisition.”.

At first, in the context that it was given, I thought it was meant as a joke. I have yet to be able to find any proof that this statement is true. Munjibunga, if you’re following this, is this true? Can you provide any further information?

I’ve been following these threads closely. Recently, I purchased an Ashdown MAG250-210. Thankfully, it’s a UK made model that had been sitting unsold in my local shop (because of the higher price tag), and as they were expecting new Ashdown stock in, let it go for a price I couldn’t pass up.

I’m very happy with my MAG250, especially knowing that it’s an older English made model. I would be very unsettled now if I had purchased a newer China model, if Munjibunga’s statement is true. I’d love to know the truth.

Jeff
 
#39
Eric Moesle said:
Nah, Bob Lee likes to educate. He'll explain in detail how Behringer not only ripped off QSC's design, but also plagiarized portions of QSC's owners manual that Bob Lee himself wrote.

Behringer = The Devil . . . just like Foosball . . . :spit:
Click to expand...

I know you're upset, but lets not bring foosball into this... ;)

On topic: If you are ok with knowing that you have bought a product where all the development and research has been stolen, then a Behringer is the amp for you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back