• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Behringer a SOLID name?

Status
Not open for further replies.
from my experience, their signal processing gear (studio rack stuff) is alright. my drummer uses some of their stuff in his studio, and it's always been fine.

as far as bass gear i wouldn't touch it again with a 10 foot pole. my first head/cab was a behringer ultrabass 300 and the 4x10 with aluminum cones. the aluminum detached a month after i had it, i brought it back to GC, they fixed it, then i the cab and head about a month after that. i dont know about what theyre making now, but ive moved on and never looked back.
 
I would not touch it with your ten foot pole.

Seriously, call me biased, or say that I am not giving them a chance, or whatever. Go ahead, because I am biased and won't be giving them a chance, and I would not want you to be a liar.
 
I use a BCF2000 in my studio to control Cubase. It's basically a midi control so it doesn't do anything to the sound. I've had it for about 6 months and it works perfectly. If they copied this design I don't know what the original was. I'm up to speed on my DAW controllers and I don't know of a unit like this.
 
I've got a 45-Watt 1x10" aluminum cone tiltback combo that is my second Behringer. My first was a Thunderbird 15-Watt 1x8" combo that i traded in with a guitar for the 45-watt. I definitley wish I'd gone with the 300-watt paper cone model... anyways, behringer is an excellent brand but when buying their gear new make sure you break it in properly, like all cabs!
 
These Behringer threads have been going on for years. At the end of the day chops imo are what count. I'd rather have all behringer gear and chops than a rack full of Foderas and crap chops.

I'm glad behringer exist, cheap gear to get you started or for those who simply can't spend the money on better gear. At least they can get a start and go from there.

One of the absolute most talented guitarists I've ever seen at the time played a squire strat and a 50w marshal.

+1

And I've seen it too many times that someone with expensive gear isn't that good of a player. Many have other jobs to supplement their music gear purchases, and could probably do better working harder on music and less on earning the money to buy gear.

Behringer is fine. It not just for starters. It doesn't really matter what you play - cheap or expensive, as long as you play well and have something to say with your music.
 
Some Behringer stuff is considered great: BDI21 for example.
Some of it is considered decent: Mixers.
Some of it is considered awful: Aluminum speakers.

I've owned a few Behringer products.

BX4210A - Cracked the aluminum cone
BDI21 - Amazing Sansamp copy
UB1204 - Decent small board, can feel cheap, but has performed flawlessly.
UT100 - Decent sounding tremolo.
BEQ-700 - Couldn't tell a difference between it and a GEB-7. The only issue is the sliders move too easily.
BTR2000 - Very nice tuner, works better on low notes if used with an amp's tuner out.
+1 Some of their stuff is as good as stuff 4 times the price. (rack gear) I've got one of their little boards that's great. I've read however, of a lot of folks having issues with their guitar and bass amps and speakers. So you just have to pick and choose. If I needed a piece of rack gear, I wouldn't hesitate to check Behringer. A bass effect pedal or a DI, I'd give them a look. If I needed a board for non professional use, I'd definately go with Behringer. If I needed a bass amp for something other than playing in my bed room, I'd look somewhere else.
 
I avoid Behringer on principle.

They do not perform their own R&D (they just rip off other designs) so basically they are taking money away from companies that do. Once you take money away from the "real" companies, they will have less R&D money, i.e less cool products coming to market.

Behringer is like a leach on the audio industry. I could care less whether their stuff is any good - I won't buy it :).

Later
Rob
 
I avoid Behringer on principle.

They do not perform their own R&D (they just rip off other designs) so basically they are taking money away from companies that do. Once you take money away from the "real" companies, they will have less R&D money, i.e less cool products coming to market.

Behringer is like a leach on the audio industry. I could care less whether their stuff is any good - I won't buy it :).

Later
Rob

+1
 
Anybody interested in Uli Behringer's response to copying, quality, etc. can view it here:
Link Removed

Audio Technology magazine, issue 54
"
YOUR WORD
Readers' letters

BEHRINGER SOUL
Re: Gotta Have Soul? (Issue 52) - Firstly, I have to say, love the
magazine a lot. We subscribe at work (Darwin Entertainment Centre)
where I'm the FOH engineer. Just wanted to write in and make a quick
point about your Behringer article.

I agree: with you for the most part, bur I couldn't help but think of
the old blue 16-channel Behringer I have at home. I do live dubs here
in Darwin and I've been using the old Eurorack mixer I bought when
they first came out. It cost a lot more than they do these days and I
admit that this is a vital part of the argument. But, a Mackie of the
same vintage and some current Spirit mixers we have here at the centre
don't have the sound I need for what we do. I firmly believe this
cheap little mixer has 'soul'. In fact, I've grown to really love this
thing to the point where I've gone to the trouble of servicing it
regularly and doing a few little mods. If I lost it, I'd be mortified
- if it means this much to me, then it must have character and soul.

Send onto Uli this information if you get time, maybe: he might revert
some of their current design ideas to days gone by (or stop cutting
the corners integral to the blue Eurorack sound)...

Justin Moon

--

Re: Gotta Have Soul? (Issue 52) - Watched your video diary. Enjoyed
it. Had a question, though. You mentioned how Behringer had some
quality issues in the beginning. What you didn't mention, is
Behringer's rotten reputation for stealing proprietary information and
manufacturing clones of other's R&D. It has lost large lawsuits with
both Mackie and Aphex for outright stealing and copying. Many in the
pro audio community won't have anything to do with them for these
reasons. This is not private information but has been published many
times over the years.

I've heard that Mr. Behringer has just told the litigants to sue and
has made money despite losing these lawsuits. He just makes more than
he loses. I cannot support that kind of organisation with that
attitude.

David Dansky
Performance Sound Designer & Mixer.
Hollywood, CA

-------------------------------

At the risk of seeming long-winded, explaining Behringer's side of
things requires me to go into some detail

1.) Legal Cases: The Aphex case is around 20 years old, so it's quite
understandable that the facts have become mixed with fiction. Back
then I had a little garage company and believed Aphex's patent was
invalid due to prior art and advise from a lawyer. At that time there
were several companies who produced those exciters, such Akai, SPL,
D&R, etc. Hence I did not stop production and rather filed for
invalidation, which triggered a court case that tasted several years.
Later, I also filed for my own patent application for circuitry that
made the harmonics processor level-independent (patent DE3904425), an
invention that was sponsored by the reputable Fraunhofer Institute,
which invented MP3. To cut a long story short, the court decided that
Aphex's patent was valid and unfortunately my own patent would also
infringe. I simply lost the case and paid for damages. Concurrent with
our case were allegations that the Aphex patent 'inventor' Kurt
Knoppel had stolen the patent from someone whom he worked for as a
treasurer. But I even heard that Aphex themselves were sued by Harvey
Rubens who claimed his VCA patent was infringed. Just Google 'Aphex
Harvey Rubens' for more details. Concerning Mackie, all I can tell you
is that it was a dispute over trade dress and IP. Behringer definitely
did not lose any case against Mackie, as can be confirmed from the
public record. However, our settlement agreement does not allow any
party to disclose details. After Aphex we never lost an IP case again,
a far cry from David's allegations.

2.) How Behringer designs products: Our R&D department, which I head,
is one of the largest in the MI/Pro Audio industry. With over 200
engineers operating in Germany, USA, Philippines and China, Behringer
R&D includes some of the finest DSP, analogue and digital system,
speaker, instrument amplification, mechanical, PCB, process and
quality engineers anywhere - truly a dedicated and sophisticated team
that I am really proud of. Our technology portfolio contains around 20
patents with many more applied for. We constantly release
revolutionary products such as the digital EQ DEQ2496, the modeling
amp V-AMP or the digital mixer DDX32l6, which took over five years to
develop. We spend more money on R&D than in any other Behringer
department... because R&D is truly the heart and soul of our
engineering-driven company. How else would we be able to release up to
200 new products per year? When you look at our product range, you
will find many product categories, such as mixers, processors,
speakers, etc. that are common with our competitors. While our look
might be similar to other's products, what's 'under the hood' is quite
different. For example, to design mixers is not rocket science since
analogue designs are relatively generic. But what makes the difference
in a Behringer mixer is the choice of components and the fact that we
make so many of these components ourselves; from prosaic parts like
switches to our outstanding V888 transistor used in our mic pre's.
Lower costs are merely a side benefit of vertical integration and high-
volume production. Because we produce millions of products a year,
quality must be Behringer's main focus. Designing and building
everything we can ourselves - right down to the pulp in our speaker
cones - is the best way to ensure quality and cost control. Do we look
at successful products in the market and then follow? Yes, of course,
as do our competitors. But it makes no commercial sense to release a
product with identical performance, features and price. Powered by
over 200 R&D engineers, the Behringer approach is to offer better
audio performance, feature set, plus design each product to be
produced at lower cost.

3.) Intellectual Property. It's important to understand that IP
(Intellectual Property) legal cases are very common in any industry.
Just look at recent cases with Gibson versus PRS, Microsoft,
Blackberry, etc. These guerilla tactics are especially common in the
US where legal fees are sky high and each party has to pay its own
legal fees regardless of the outcome of the case. Plus, IP is a grey
area, as it deals with patents, trade dress, copyrights, designs etc.
where not much is black and white. This, along with the fact that IP
litigation is often used as a tool to push a competitor out of
business, are reasons why there are so many cases in this area of law.
There is a common misunderstanding about copying and reverse
engineering. While 1:1 copies are clearly illegal, reverse engineering
is an ethical and legitimate way to design, one that is used by major
corporations every day. Remember that technology is generally public
domain (unless protected by patents or copyrights). This is the basis
for any industry to evolve, and you'll surely find the latest BMW on
Mercedes' workbench and vice versa. We definitely look at our
competitors' models - just as they learn from us. In fact, when you
walk around tradeshows, Behringer is among the most imitated
manufacturers. Where legal, we have no prob1em with this. Neither
should our competitors. The following article gives you some valuable
background information:

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

4.) Why are our products so affordable? We have tools that allow us to
efficiently design massive libraries of everything from analogue and
digital circuitry designs to DSP algorithms. This provides us with
economies of scale in our product designs, and reduces time-to-marker
tremendously as well as cost. We strive to use the same components in
as many designs as possible, cutting inventory, carrying costs and
providing more buying power. It has always Behringer's philosophy to
pass on those benefits to our customers and offer high-quality
products for musicians that don't have deep pockets. This has
undoubtedly made enemies among competitors who do not have the same
commitment to vertical integration, economy of scale or dedication to
their customers.

Uli Behringer
Chairman, Behringer

"
 
Sorry, I'm not buying it, Uli. The guy made a Big Muff clone pedal that looks almost identical to the Big Muff. He makes other pedals extremely similar to the Boss line. And we all know about how similar Behringer and Mackie mixers are. Not having worked there, I can't say that this is how it really operates, but I picture Behringer's R&D department as very large and active as he says it is. But I picture their R&D department operating like this:

The head of R&D comes in every Monday with a truckload of new gear he bought over the weekend, at which point the head guy tells the engineers to reverse engineer it all and figure out how to make it sound sort of similar and shave 50% off the manufacturing costs by using the warehouse full of cheap stuff they already have. Then he sends pictures of it to the art department and tells them to make it look identical but not quite. By Friday they have several new products ready to market!

As for their QC, I don't know, but I will say that I've seen Behringer gear in use by many pro musicians I work with, and that I've never seen a company as diversified as Behringer except Yamaha. But the real versions of the gear Behringer duplicates always sounds better, whereas Yamaha's stuff always works great and shows more R&D effort than mere cloning. At the very least, Yamaha doesn't skimp. I believe Behringer skimps at every opportunity. So if you're looking for quality, I believe it's always better to get the real versions.

Having said that, Behringer has done a lot to put gear into the hands of people who can't afford the real thing, and I'm all for poor kids being able to afford gear that helps them achieve their musical goals. And while the real versions are always better, Behringer does make some usable stuff. My only problem is they built an empire out of the hard work of others. Just like musicians steal from each other and use those stolen ideas to create their own unique sound, manufacturers steal ideas from each other to make their own unique equipment. But just like you can hear a musician who steals from another and doesn't do anything creative with it to make it his/her own, when I see a piece of Behringer equipment, I can tell immediately the original piece it copies, and the original always sounds better. They even clone the artwork, for crying out loud. So while I love that kids who can't afford a decent mixer or effects pedal have a low-cost alternative, when Behringer starts putting out quality gear based on their own somewhat innovative designs and not doing everything they can to look exactly like the cloned gear, then I'll have respect for Uli Behringer and will consider buying his products. Until then, I won't. Simple as that.
 
Anybody interested in Uli Behringer's response to copying, quality, etc. can view it here:
Link Removed

Audio Technology magazine, issue 54
"
YOUR WORD
Readers' letters

BEHRINGER SOUL
Re: Gotta Have Soul? (Issue 52) - Firstly, I have to say, love the
magazine a lot. We subscribe at work (Darwin Entertainment Centre)
where I'm the FOH engineer. Just wanted to write in and make a quick
point about your Behringer article.

I agree: with you for the most part, bur I couldn't help but think of
the old blue 16-channel Behringer I have at home. I do live dubs here
in Darwin and I've been using the old Eurorack mixer I bought when
they first came out. It cost a lot more than they do these days and I
admit that this is a vital part of the argument. But, a Mackie of the
same vintage and some current Spirit mixers we have here at the centre
don't have the sound I need for what we do. I firmly believe this
cheap little mixer has 'soul'. In fact, I've grown to really love this
thing to the point where I've gone to the trouble of servicing it
regularly and doing a few little mods. If I lost it, I'd be mortified
- if it means this much to me, then it must have character and soul.

Send onto Uli this information if you get time, maybe: he might revert
some of their current design ideas to days gone by (or stop cutting
the corners integral to the blue Eurorack sound)...

Justin Moon

--

Re: Gotta Have Soul? (Issue 52) - Watched your video diary. Enjoyed
it. Had a question, though. You mentioned how Behringer had some
quality issues in the beginning. What you didn't mention, is
Behringer's rotten reputation for stealing proprietary information and
manufacturing clones of other's R&D. It has lost large lawsuits with
both Mackie and Aphex for outright stealing and copying. Many in the
pro audio community won't have anything to do with them for these
reasons. This is not private information but has been published many
times over the years.

I've heard that Mr. Behringer has just told the litigants to sue and
has made money despite losing these lawsuits. He just makes more than
he loses. I cannot support that kind of organisation with that
attitude.

David Dansky
Performance Sound Designer & Mixer.
Hollywood, CA

-------------------------------

At the risk of seeming long-winded, explaining Behringer's side of
things requires me to go into some detail

1.) Legal Cases: The Aphex case is around 20 years old, so it's quite
understandable that the facts have become mixed with fiction. Back
then I had a little garage company and believed Aphex's patent was
invalid due to prior art and advise from a lawyer. At that time there
were several companies who produced those exciters, such Akai, SPL,
D&R, etc. Hence I did not stop production and rather filed for
invalidation, which triggered a court case that tasted several years.
Later, I also filed for my own patent application for circuitry that
made the harmonics processor level-independent (patent DE3904425), an
invention that was sponsored by the reputable Fraunhofer Institute,
which invented MP3. To cut a long story short, the court decided that
Aphex's patent was valid and unfortunately my own patent would also
infringe. I simply lost the case and paid for damages. Concurrent with
our case were allegations that the Aphex patent 'inventor' Kurt
Knoppel had stolen the patent from someone whom he worked for as a
treasurer. But I even heard that Aphex themselves were sued by Harvey
Rubens who claimed his VCA patent was infringed. Just Google 'Aphex
Harvey Rubens' for more details. Concerning Mackie, all I can tell you
is that it was a dispute over trade dress and IP. Behringer definitely
did not lose any case against Mackie, as can be confirmed from the
public record. However, our settlement agreement does not allow any
party to disclose details. After Aphex we never lost an IP case again,
a far cry from David's allegations.

2.) How Behringer designs products: Our R&D department, which I head,
is one of the largest in the MI/Pro Audio industry. With over 200
engineers operating in Germany, USA, Philippines and China, Behringer
R&D includes some of the finest DSP, analogue and digital system,
speaker, instrument amplification, mechanical, PCB, process and
quality engineers anywhere - truly a dedicated and sophisticated team
that I am really proud of. Our technology portfolio contains around 20
patents with many more applied for. We constantly release
revolutionary products such as the digital EQ DEQ2496, the modeling
amp V-AMP or the digital mixer DDX32l6, which took over five years to
develop. We spend more money on R&D than in any other Behringer
department... because R&D is truly the heart and soul of our
engineering-driven company. How else would we be able to release up to
200 new products per year? When you look at our product range, you
will find many product categories, such as mixers, processors,
speakers, etc. that are common with our competitors. While our look
might be similar to other's products, what's 'under the hood' is quite
different. For example, to design mixers is not rocket science since
analogue designs are relatively generic. But what makes the difference
in a Behringer mixer is the choice of components and the fact that we
make so many of these components ourselves; from prosaic parts like
switches to our outstanding V888 transistor used in our mic pre's.
Lower costs are merely a side benefit of vertical integration and high-
volume production. Because we produce millions of products a year,
quality must be Behringer's main focus. Designing and building
everything we can ourselves - right down to the pulp in our speaker
cones - is the best way to ensure quality and cost control. Do we look
at successful products in the market and then follow? Yes, of course,
as do our competitors. But it makes no commercial sense to release a
product with identical performance, features and price. Powered by
over 200 R&D engineers, the Behringer approach is to offer better
audio performance, feature set, plus design each product to be
produced at lower cost.

3.) Intellectual Property. It's important to understand that IP
(Intellectual Property) legal cases are very common in any industry.
Just look at recent cases with Gibson versus PRS, Microsoft,
Blackberry, etc. These guerilla tactics are especially common in the
US where legal fees are sky high and each party has to pay its own
legal fees regardless of the outcome of the case. Plus, IP is a grey
area, as it deals with patents, trade dress, copyrights, designs etc.
where not much is black and white. This, along with the fact that IP
litigation is often used as a tool to push a competitor out of
business, are reasons why there are so many cases in this area of law.
There is a common misunderstanding about copying and reverse
engineering. While 1:1 copies are clearly illegal, reverse engineering
is an ethical and legitimate way to design, one that is used by major
corporations every day. Remember that technology is generally public
domain (unless protected by patents or copyrights). This is the basis
for any industry to evolve, and you'll surely find the latest BMW on
Mercedes' workbench and vice versa. We definitely look at our
competitors' models - just as they learn from us. In fact, when you
walk around tradeshows, Behringer is among the most imitated
manufacturers. Where legal, we have no prob1em with this. Neither
should our competitors. The following article gives you some valuable
background information:

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

4.) Why are our products so affordable? We have tools that allow us to
efficiently design massive libraries of everything from analogue and
digital circuitry designs to DSP algorithms. This provides us with
economies of scale in our product designs, and reduces time-to-marker
tremendously as well as cost. We strive to use the same components in
as many designs as possible, cutting inventory, carrying costs and
providing more buying power. It has always Behringer's philosophy to
pass on those benefits to our customers and offer high-quality
products for musicians that don't have deep pockets. This has
undoubtedly made enemies among competitors who do not have the same
commitment to vertical integration, economy of scale or dedication to
their customers.

Uli Behringer
Chairman, Behringer

"

wow:eek:
 
Sorry, I'm not buying it ... He makes other pedals extremely similar to the Boss line. ...

Just a follow up on the Boss issue:
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
Dennis Houlihan, President of Roland Corporation U. S. commented: “We are satisfied that Behringer's current line of guitar pedals is now sufficiently different from the trade dress of the famous BOSS brand of pedals.”
 
Just a follow up on the Boss issue:
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
Dennis Houlihan, President of Roland Corporation U. S. commented: “We are satisfied that Behringer's current line of guitar pedals is now sufficiently different from the trade dress of the famous BOSS brand of pedals.”
That's legalese for, "We know he still copies us, but now we can't nail him for cloning our products."
 
I own an EP 1500 which I originally bought as a monitor amp, but after I sold my SVTII (because of it's weight) I went to an SVP-Pro, the EP 1500 and a Schroeder 1210 and I must say it sounds great. I usually play churches where they have P.A.'s but when I do use it out I ALWAYS take a backup because I don't trust it. But it doesn't really get pushed either.

Somthing that I believe is an issue is that the EP 1500 and 2500 are in the same modular chassis. Where the fan size is the same in both but the 2500's output being some 40% more it seems to me would run hotter. Anyone know the reliability of the EP1500 &
2500's?

Their active D.I.'s work okay but their life duration is suspect. We have had some that's lasted years and some just a couple months. I bought a boss D.I. after mine crapped out.
 
What a heaping load of garbage. R&D must stand for "Reverse the Design"

Innovative? Bleh.

Quality? Bleh.

Legitimate and moral? Bleh.

Well, hey, I'm still poor, so I guess he has found something out I missed along the way. Maybe I should start stealing things from my neighbors, then selling it back to them at half price. It really makes me sick, I look at Behringer as the OJ Simpson of audio. We all know what happened, just can't nail them. I'm not even reading this post anymore.

I would vote that a Mod close this thread, since it really is utterly pointless, and will not serve anyone on here any good besides stirring a pot.

I'm going to go vomit myself to sleep after reading ULI's quote.
 
I would vote that a Mod close this thread, since it really is utterly pointless, and will not serve anyone on here any good besides stirring a pot.
Well if you said it, then that's good enough for me. Close the thread!

Come on, the whole idea of a forum like this is the open exchange of ideas, some you'll like, some you won't, and some you'll find repulsive. You can't go closing and deleting threads just because they offend you. So I wish people would stop calling for threads to be closed and deleted. As someone who's had many threads closed and a couple threads entirely deleted, I find it to be much more offensive than putting up with their existence.
 
Alright. I have heard alot of bad so... Any way i need and amp bigger than my 15 Peavy or 70 watt (mostly broken 1986) gorilla amp. And i' dneed it for home practice and prase band gigging for a crowd of about 140 people. Also i cant spend alot So i was thinkin the 300$ Ampeg combo... r the Gallien- Krueger Brat Pack

There are lots of 300W used Peavey amps on Ebay for less than your budget - and those things are absolutely bulletproof. Consider going that way. I have a Behringer 4500 amp and it performs very well, but if you don't have to wonder about Peavey.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.