MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index
 FAQ & Terms of UseFAQ & Terms Of Use   Wiggler RadioMW Radio   Muff Wiggler TwitterTwitter   Support the site @ PatreonPatreon 
 SearchSearch   RegisterSign up   Log inLog in 
WIGGLING 'LITE' IN GUEST MODE

Behringer MiniMoog Clone
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> General Gear Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 37, 38, 39  Next [all]
Author Behringer MiniMoog Clone
TheMM
It would be so nice to have a Minimoog in the rack, but it would be much more interesting if Moog builds such a thing. The 400$ Behringer thingy is interesting because of it's price tag, but I strongly doubt that it will be able to replace a real Minimoog. I think Moog would have done the port to eurorack by themselves, but the Mother32 might be the essence of what is possible in this format... Just my 2ct.
doombient.music
Yawn.

Yet another 'click' generated for Mr. B.

Stephen
Bodo1967
TheMM wrote:
The 400$ Behringer thingy is interesting because of it's price tag, but I strongly doubt that it will be able to replace a real Minimoog.


I guess it will be used as a standalone unit by many. Behringer Boutique cool . If they actually sell it for $400, they'll probably sell it by the truckload.
grillo
Bodo1967 wrote:


I guess it will be used as a standalone unit by many. Behringer Boutique cool . If they actually sell it for $400, they'll probably sell it by the truckload.


I agree with this.
The eurorack integration looks kinda gimmicky at this point, not enough patch points as many said.

The poly chaining feature is imo kinda gimmicky too, sure a poly model d would be an amazing synth, but when you factor in the practical nightmare of having 4 or 6 of these things powered up, routing and mixing the audio and then programming the patch on those mini knobs and switches on all the units... it doesn't sound fun at all.
Man-In-A-Suitcase
get over it, not everyone out there can afford a 4k Minimoog. a $400 Minimoog is just right for those who want the Moog sound without the hefty pricetag. Even AJH modules add up to over 1k and they don't even make a Midi to CV/Gate module.

I think Behringer should also get into making Moog Modular clones, why pay 50k when you could possibly get a similar system for 1.5k in euro format.

Moog is to expensive synths as to what what Gucci or Prada are to expensive handbags.
SynthBaron
It's The People's Moog, comrade.
Man-In-A-Suitcase
fixed that for you.
SynthBaron wrote:
It's The Rich People's Moog, comrade.
SynthBaron
Uli Modular 15's for $1299.
corpusjonsey
My Dad always said: "When you buy the best, you cry once."
Lsd911
I'm all for larger companies entering the Eurorack market, but to do it by ripping off another companies current model is tasteless. Is it really that hard for them to have an idea of their own.

Moog wouldn't dream of releasing a shitty behringer clone.

They should make original modules. People who buy Moog like the fact it's US production and excellent quality.
bemushroomed
Lsd911 wrote:

They should make original modules. People who buy Moog like the fact it's US production and excellent quality.


tell that to everyone who had to send back their Sub 37 with a crappy filter knob..
The Illuminaire
If Moog hadn't done a recent reissue of the Model D, this wouldn't feel nearly as invasive as it does to me.

As it stands, I have no interest in this bloke. It lacks a reasonable amount of CV options, lending the Euro aspect more of a gimmick vibe.

Admittedly, price per HP is superb and it costs much less than a genuine reissue, but I do not think that cost and pricing alone merit purchase. If anything, in most cases, especially when it comes to Behringer, it hints at the quality of the components used.
bemushroomed
The Illuminaire wrote:
If Moog hadn't done a recent reissue of the Model D, this wouldn't feel nearly as invasive as it does to me.


Don't see why people bitch about this so much. Roland has reissues of e.g TB303 and TR808, 909, you have at least 20+ companies doing their clones of TB303, many companies does clones of the 808 and 909.

Studio Electronics always have minimoog clones and clones of other iconic synts (Oberheim, TB303 etc), MacBeth does (did?) a clone.. there are several VST clones, there are eurorack clones as well.

Stop being such hypocrites razz It's one of the most iconic synths created, just like e.g TB303. It will get cloned again and again, get over it. I doubt even Moog minds it, might even up the interest for moog synts (look at the price for TB303.. has it gone down, no its going up). The guitar market is no different btw..
MATSmile
bemushroomed wrote:
The Illuminaire wrote:
If Moog hadn't done a recent reissue of the Model D, this wouldn't feel nearly as invasive as it does to me.


Don't see..

In Roland's or Korg's case, those designs/ideas are part of their intangible capital or were acquired through legal acquisition (ARP). Where Uli just stole other company's design and idea changed three letters and called it his own. For those of you who didn't go to university it's called plagiarism.
If this thing ever comes out my only wish would be for this guy to be legally prosecuted and exempted from the business world. Exxxcellent
bemushroomed
MATSmile wrote:

In Roland's or Korg's case, those designs/ideas are part of their intangible capital or were acquired through legal acquisition (ARP).


Roland are the original creators of TB303, TR808, 909.. Korg did not do a clone in this sense, they even used the original name and design. That's very different from doing something that is inspired by the original design, which is what e.g Studio Electronics, MacBeth, Behringer and many, many other companies does. It's also perfectly legal.

I would not say anything if you also bitched about AJH Synth, S.E and all other companies who does or did moog clones. But when you single out one company it gets pretty damn silly.
MATSmile
bemushroomed wrote:
MATSmile wrote:

In Roland's or Korg's case, those designs/ideas are part of their intangible capital or were acquired through legal acquisition (ARP).


Roland are the original creators of TB303, TR808, 909.. Korg did not do a clone in this sense, they even used the original name and design. That's very different from doing something that is inspired by the original design, which is what e.g Studio Electronics, MacBeth, Behringer and many, many other companies does. It's also perfectly legal.

I would not say anything if you also bitched about AJH Synth, S.E and all other companies who does or did moog clones. But when you single out one company it gets pretty damn silly.

When SE and MacBeth came out with their project, D's reissue wasn't even in Moog's pipeline. It's perfectly acceptable to produce equipment that is out of production long ago, but Uli'd decision is really unethical from business perspective because Model D is currently produced by Moog. Behringer is known for their shady business practices and production shortcuts.
pieter
MATSmile wrote:
bemushroomed wrote:
The Illuminaire wrote:
If Moog hadn't done a recent reissue of the Model D, this wouldn't feel nearly as invasive as it does to me.


Don't see..

In Roland's or Korg's case, those designs/ideas are part of their intangible capital or were acquired through legal acquisition (ARP). Where Uli just stole other company's design and idea changed three letters and called it his own. For those of you who didn't go to university it's called plagiarism.
If this thing ever comes out my only wish would be for this guy to be legally prosecuted and exempted from the business world. Exxxcellent


No need to go all hyperbolic. At worst it is IP infringement, if there is actually any IP there. I believe there isn't, which is why we're having this discussion in the first place. For the same reason it is unlikely that he will get sued for this.

To be clear, I am also a bit on the fence about this, morally speaking. In any case, we'll have to wait and see what the damn thing sounds like. Perhaps this whole discussion will be moot. razz
bkbirge
No matter how slimy, and make no mistake it is slimy, to undercut the Model D reissue with a reverse-engineered knockoff it isn't illegal to do so.

Any patents on the Minimoog have long since lapsed. It's basically public domain circuits at this point. Schematic copyrights are a different related issue. IIRC they don't prevent someone from building anything they just prevent them from using the exact layout/placement because copyright covers implementation not the ideas. So basically Behringer can use the Moog circuit designs as long as they do their own layouts which of course they would do because at that size it will undoubtedly be SMD components.

Patents only last for 20 years, all the relevant Moog patents would have long since expired. Copyrights last for 70 years after the owner's death so they would still be in force. I also have no doubt Behringer have done their legal due diligence on this, though that may not protect them in a practical sense if Moog decides to aggressively challenge and tie them up in court.

I'm no lawyer and I could totally be off base on everything there but that is my current understanding of IP as it relates to circuits and their schematics.
SynthBaron
Is anyone paying royalties to Doepfer for "stealing" their "Eurorack synth" format?
bemushroomed
MATSmile wrote:

When SE and MacBeth came out with their project, D's reissue wasn't even in Moog's pipeline. It's perfectly acceptable to produce equipment that is out of production long ago, but Uli'd decision is really unethical from business perspective because Model D is currently produced by Moog. Behringer is known for their shady business practices and production shortcuts.


Again, Roland have been doing the their new TB303's for a while, new clones pops up all the time, same with their drummachines. No one says anything about that, not even Roland..

If you mean moog would be losing money i very much doubt that. Uli thinks the minimoog is expensive for what it is (the electronics are $200 i believe he said). Remains to be seen if it can be done, i doubt it will sound the same and people will still buy the original, the interest for a real minimoog might even peak. Don't give out so much credits to Behringer, before you've even heard it wink It's still only on paper..
neuroportal
Fuck me. This thread is depressing.

What a load of bitterness and bile.

It is *just* a subtractive synth. There is nothing special about it other than it is cheap and uses certain principles that are not exactly rocket science any more. That and the fact that they have dared to hit on the 'holy grail' of all synthdom, the minimoog.

Think of it as an expensive sample.

Personally I hope it does well.

Man - and I thought guitarists were bad...
Bob Borries
There fixed it. As it stands now, it really wouldn't qualify as a euro module unless you add more outputs and CV control.



Added 3 one volt per octave CV inputs for each oscillator.
Added 3 outputs for each oscillator.
Added LFO CV in and LFO output.
Added Mixer out that includes saturation.
Added CV for Filter Resonance.
Added Gates and Outputs for Filter Contour and Loudness Contour Generators.
bemushroomed
Bob Borries wrote:
There fixed it.


Good, post it in the gearslutz thread that he participates in (link in first post).

At least he has the guts to talk to his customers, on the absolutely bitchiest audio hardware forum on the internet, nonetheless.

Doubt he'll include all that though, it would make it a lot more expensive.
SynthBaron
Bob Borries wrote:

Added 3 one volt per octave CV inputs for each oscillator.


And I just realized for the first time that the minimoog (and this clone) had exponential converters for each oscillator...
SynthBaron
bemushroomed wrote:

Doubt he'll include all that though, it would make it a lot more expensive.


Less than $1 per unit production cost for a few China made jacks?
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> General Gear Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 37, 38, 39  Next [all]
Page 3 of 39
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group