• 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.

behringer equipment

#21
Originally posted by Mark Reccord
I've actually got a rather large problem with Behringer's M.O. Getting your hands on other people's products, then reverse engineering them and building them with cheap parts and cheaper labour is reprehensible in my book. This is what they do, just look at how closely the consoles mirror Mackie, or the bass amps Hartke, or the compressors Drawmer and DBX. The PCBs and circuit layouts in the eurodesk are almost exactly the same as the Mackie SR-2404, except Behringer uses worse components and the construction is pretty poor. I've used several Eurodesks and the noise floor was high enough that compressors I had on the main outputs showed signal. They were noisy enough to be almost unuseable even for live sound in a bar. Just my experience, though.
Click to expand...

Don't all mixers have the same routing more or less? And if I'm correct, the mackies got solo and mute knobs, which the behringers haven't got, and I think the mackies have more routing possibilities. And it was also behringers idea to get the really, really small mixers, which I feel was a need for.
How would you design a compressor that doesn't look like a dbx or drawmer?

Don't really get the 'reverse engineering', what do they mean by that?


As answer on the original question, the way I see it: behringer is semi-pro and stuff like mackie is pro-gear.
You can hear why they're cheaper.
 
#24
I've used quite a bit of Behringer stuff. I have a 24 channel board that I use alot. One word of advice. Buy older Behringer stuff. THe older equipment is by far better than the newer equipment. This had a lot to do with the fact that they were blatantly ripping off Mackie with their design. If you can get one of those boards they are, in my opinion, just as good as the Mackie ones, yes I have quite a few Mackie boards to compare it to also.
 
#25
I'd use them for home recording stuff, yes. For some products, perhaps even live. As far as I have understood, they are a German company - does anyone know better? - and that for they are popular in Europe. Not to mention the fact that most US-made or Mexico-made, even some Asia-made stuff costs way more in Europe than in the US, so they don't have as stiff competition here.

Behringer works on the principle of reverse engineering, that's true. The idea of "Reverse engineering" is, essentialy, that you have a bunch of engineers who examine the machine thoroughout and make notes like "signal is passed via such and such kind of transistors", after which another team of engineers reads the guide list and based on that but without seeing the original machine, they design another machine that does exactly the same, but that is constructed differently, and so they don't get sued for copyright matters.

It's nothing new, in the 80's some computer manufacturers did so, and I'd guess that nowadays most consumer electronics companys have their own people to dismantle their competitiors products and look what's inside them.
 
#26
Behrigners MO can be looked at 2 ways.

1) We copy other designs and make cheap nasty versions that sound crap and break down,

or

2) We think that musical equipment is overpriced and can prove it. We can make products very similar quality of the big-boys for a fraction of the cost. Not just a couple of dollars cheaper, but often a third the price.

Anyone that actually owns any Behringer gear will tell you it's way better than the price tag.

But here's the moral dilema - what happens when Behringer put the others out of business - who's gonna design, research, and develop new products? Who are they gonna copy?

In reality it will probably never come to that but it's a valid point all the same.
 
#27
I'm just curious if those of you who are bashing Behringer because of their alleged reverse engineering of others' products feel the same about Sadowsky, Mike Lull, MTD, etc. . . All of these well respected luthiers make dead-on copies of the Fender Jazz bass. In fact, how many companies out there make P/Bass copies?
 
#28
I got the cheapest Behringer mixer available :p - UB502... it's very sensitive in that you have to adjust the knobs pretty well so as not to overload the channels with the incoming signal... as for the noise I don't think there is any such thing.

Here is what I did the first day I got it, as you can tell it's a little distorted on high frequences:

Invalid Link Removed

Overall, I love it, it's cheap, simple and does what it suppose -- mixes the channels.
 
#29
The music shop, OB Fawley's in Morgantown, where I buy most of my stuff has had just about every major brand of equipment in it at one time or another. Now they've got Behringer and it is blowing everything else out of the store. He showed me a 4x12 guitar cab the other day. 4x12" Jensens in a closed back solid cab for under $200. It sounded great. You can't fake that kind of quality! I don't know how Behringer is doing it and I don't care. If I were Mackie,QSC,etc.etc I'd care though.
 
#31
Guys, why do we bash something that we have never used?? How many people here say they suck , and then admit they have only HEARD this news??

Let's get down to facts. Behringer gear is German engineered, and produced in Asia. That's how it is cheap. I work for a tool manufacturer who builds in the U.S., and we know very well how hard it is to compete, unless you use cheap labor.

The gear is absolutely fantastic. As Behringer claims, it is PERFECT audio. They don't call it bragging.

I have many pieces of Behringer gear, including an MX2642A mixer. They are all excellent quality, and sound as good as any other product I have used, and better.

If you are to think that you get what you pay for, then you have fallen into the trap of thinking that higher price means higher quality. If this was the case, the the new GM Hummer would not be on the worst initial quality list, now would it ??

Be brave, be smart, and be thrifty. You can get great gear for much less, if you are willing to part with your price=quality mentality.

I would run my MX2642 next to a Mackie any day. I may not get all the ooh's and ahh's from all the gear heads, but I will get the sound. And that's what matters, right ? Right ??

If you think Behringer has not come up with anything original, then you are not informed. look at their website. They are one of the most prolific gear companies in action.

Not that I give all my dough to Behringer, but I am sure not going to shun it, because it looks and breaths like a Mackie. They all should!! I know my Behringer does.

And if you haven't used it, don't bash it. Try it, then come to the table with an opinion.

Good luck.
 
#32
Very wise said, man! I'm looking at these catalogs recently and I'm amazed that Behringer has prices twice as low as any other brand out there. What happens, however, is that unlike Squier, for example, it's not crap, it's some useful sh*t that one can incorporate in their setup. I have Behringer's BX300, a practice combo, and I love it! It costs 99$ but man is that little thing nice or what. For some reason the same Crate that's MORE expensive than Behringer and is probably too made in China sounds like sh*t, excuse my French. What's up with that? Another thing to remember is that a lot of manufacturers out there were starting out with copies of Jazz or Precision basses. Even Sadowsky is copying it! But you can either come up with an imitation or something nice insipired by the original.
 
#33
It's funny, how many bashers are solely based on 'hear-says.'

I have a Behringer BX300 bass amp, a GI-100 DI box, and a $12. 'studio' headphone (do a fine job for monitoring use. Quiet, smooth, full range FR,even with keyboards, or classical music listening; and damn comfortable, even wearing it for hours.)

No problem with any of the Behringers. In fact, the BX300 is a killer amp, with just about all the different I/O you need, for both ease of use, and good sound in recording. And it only costed me $125. shipped.

I also have an old tube Vox bass amp (the tubes along costs a lot more than my Behringer amp), and 2 other guitar amps.

More and more products will be made in Asia, S. America, etc. It's reality talking. Live with it.
 
#34
Watch out for these mixers. They are noisy, and I am talking from experience, I have a 6 channel, an 8 channel and a 16 channel. I also have a 24 channel EV and a 24 channel Yamaha. The Yamaha is about the same cost as the Big B but not made in China and is far better for mixing, both for recording and reinforcement. The EV is by far the best, but it was about 4 times the cost ( even used). The Beheringer controls lasted about one week before they got real messy and crackled, especially the sliders. I have heard ( yea hearsay) that the older mixers were better, and not all China parts. Could you live with used? My college kids do.
 
#35
Originally posted by Mark Reccord
I've actually got a rather large problem with Behringer's M.O. Getting your hands on other people's products, then reverse engineering them and building them with cheap parts and cheaper labour is reprehensible in my book.
Click to expand...

Ok, so what about all the Fender rip offs?

Anyway, I use a Behringer crossover in my rack. It is pretty good... it has some noise, but I got it used for very cheap and it does what I need it to.

BTW- my band recorded our studio CD through Behringer's digital mixer into a protools Mac. That console was great.
 
#36
Your best bet is going for a used Mackie. Even the older ones (pre-vlz pro)are better than the Behringers and if you shop wisely on eBay, you can get a used Mackie in good shape for the same price as a new Behringer.
 
#37
I bought a BX600 recently, and have had no problems with it. The EQ is pretty versatile, and the 'shape' control is also really useful for changing your tone on the fly. My Behringer does exactly what I need it to, and does it well. I also like the fact that the amp has all the inputs/outputs I need.

As for the price, I bought a Marshall B25 Mark2 as my first amp, and it was pretty good, £105 new. The Behringer was £185 new, and feels like a big upgrade from my tiny Marshall for minimal outlay.
 
#38
My church uses a behringer Eurodesk 32 channel mixer, and the multicomp compressor. I have zero complaints about the construction or performance or either. I personally own a UB502 mixer that I use as a headphone amp/mixer. I works fine for that, and was worth the $50 (now $40) that I paid for it. It's a little noisy, and it seemes to alter the sound of my bass if I play through it, so I just use it as the last link before the headphones, not in the chain that gets sent to the mixer.
 
#39
I have recently purchased a MX 1804 mixer and have been pleased with it. Price was a big consideration and I only paid $180 for it new. I have used it with a computer based recording system, Guitar Tracks Pro, and haven't noticed any hiss or excess noise. I'm thinking about buying one of their mikes after seeing one in a friend's home studio set-up. Behringer is not top of the line but it's affordable usable stuff, especially for home studios I think.
 
#40
I think one reason the Fender rip-offs is not a problem is because a majority of the luthiers that create copies, e.g. Sadowsky, Mike Lull, etc. are making MORE expensive versions, and not putting Fender in danger of going out of business. These luthiers aren't saying, "look, we can make the same gear and sell it for half the price." They're doing these like adding handmade design, and high-end preamps and pickups and things. There's a big difference.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back