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 clone of SH-101? MS-101
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> General Gear Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next [all]
Author Behringer clone of SH-101? MS-101
MrTurboparrot
Behringer have set the cat amongst the pigeons with this:

http://www.musicradar.com/news/is-behringer-about-to-steal-rolands-thu nder-with-this-sh-101-clone#

Seems like serious competition for the Roland SH-01. Full size keys and everything!

If it has multiple CV ins/outs then it would be a dream synth for me.
Numanoid92
Until i see the real thing i'll make no judgment.. but to me it's just the usual Behringer propaganda.. and if i remember right that picture is old and probably photoshopped... anyway.. good for them, i've already preordered the Roland stuff and i'm happy
PISS.EXE
Gimme 4 voices and im in just for the bigger size of it. Any less than 4 and i'll get the sh01 when it comes out.
MrTurboparrot
PISS.EXE wrote:
Gimme 4 voices and im in just for the bigger size of it. Any less than 4 and i'll get the sh01 when it comes out.


ah... yes...the whole '4 voice' thing might be the game changer... eek!
Xmit
am I the only person that thinks Behringer need to wind their neck in a bit here ?

I mean, if Roland want to rehash their gear, fine. Likewise it's great that Dave Smith can badge things with 'Prophet'.

but this just feels wrong - I'm surprised if Roland don't sue.

I guess everyone just hates on Roland now, so it's fine ?
PISS.EXE
I see it as keeping Roland on their toes if anything. who knows what the state of boutiques would be today if Behringer had never brought their aggressive cloning tactics to vintage synths?
darenager
Xmit wrote:
am I the only person that thinks Behringer need to wind their neck in a bit here ?

I mean, if Roland want to rehash their gear, fine. Likewise it's great that Dave Smith can badge things with 'Prophet'.

but this just feels wrong - I'm surprised if Roland don't sue.

I guess everyone just hates on Roland now, so it's fine ?


No you are not, I hope Roland and Moog sue them. Behringer have been copying other manufacturers products for years, they have no shame.

Rolhringer, Moohringer, Adibas. Same.


estin
There is nothing to sue over if the patent has expired. Roland had plenty of chances to rehash old gear in a faithful way and chose not to. The designs and circuit are fair game at this point.
estin
Maybe this will light a fire under Korg's ass to finally re-hash the ARP 2600 before Behringer does. hihi
SteeVtheRipper
I don't understand why so many people (not pointing fingers specifically) feel like companies have some obligation to rehash any of their old designs. And if they do why they need to make them "affordable." Sometimes you just don't get what you want all the time. A minimoog is a hand built instrument by a premium company, like a bosendorfer, and it's priced accordingly. 2600's are rare and special instruments. Vintage icons. You pay for the legend and the mystique, the history, the pedigree and the dream. If Korg made a reissue of the 2600 for $1000 or Behringer for $500, wouldn't it feel a little cheap? There's something about working hard and saving your money for that dream synth, or guitar, amp, or car you've always wanted. You finally get it in your hands, it's got some bumps and bruises from the life it's had, possibly one that's been longer than yours. It has that old gear smell. The buttons and switches feel just right. Sure it's got some quirks and may need some repairs but that's part of the experience. It's not like if you wanted to you couldn't save up $3500 or even $9000 for a Minimoog or 2600. It's not an astronomical amount of money, it's not like paying for a house in cash. But everyone needs it now and cheap. Now now now as cheap as possible, who cares who's making it? As long as we get it.

Sure the Behringer D sounds great and they were within their legal rights to take the design and I'm sure a Behringer 101 would sound great too. But wouldn't you really rather have the real deal at the end of the day? The despmind is different because it was inspired by something and became another thing so far removed from the initial inspiration. I can get behind that, and I did. Building on great design is one way design can move forward.
SteeVtheRipper
I don't understand why so many people (not pointing fingers specifically) feel like companies have some obligation to rehash any of their old designs. And if they do why they need to make them "affordable." Sometimes you just don't get what you want all the time. A minimoog is a hand built instrument by a premium company, like a bosendorfer, and it's priced accordingly. 2600's are rare and special instruments. Vintage icons. You pay for the legend and the mystique, the history, the pedigree and the dream. If Korg made a reissue of the 2600 for $1000 or Behringer for $500, wouldn't it feel a little cheap? There's something about working hard and saving your money for that dream synth, or guitar, amp, or car you've always wanted. You finally get it in your hands, it's got some bumps and bruises from the life it's had, possibly one that's been longer than yours. It has that old gear smell. The buttons and switches feel just right. Sure it's got some quirks and may need some repairs but that's part of the experience. It's not like if you wanted to you couldn't save up $3500 or even $9000 for a Minimoog or 2600. It's not an astronomical amount of money, it's not like paying for a house in cash. But everyone needs it now and cheap. Now now now as cheap as possible, who cares who's making it? As long as we get it.

Sure the Behringer D sounds great and they were within their legal rights to take the design and I'm sure a Behringer 101 would sound great too. But wouldn't you really rather have the real deal at the end of the day? The despmind is different because it was inspired by something and became another thing so far removed from the initial inspiration. I can get behind that, and I did. Building on great design is one way design can move forward.
Numanoid92
SteeVtheRipper wrote:
I don't understand why so many people (not pointing fingers specifically) feel like companies have some obligation to rehash any of their old designs. And if they do why they need to make them "affordable." Sometimes you just don't get what you want all the time. A minimoog is a hand built instrument by a premium company, like a bosendorfer, and it's priced accordingly. 2600's are rare and special instruments. Vintage icons. You pay for the legend and the mystique, the history, the pedigree and the dream. If Korg made a reissue of the 2600 for $1000 or Behringer for $500, wouldn't it feel a little cheap? There's something about working hard and saving your money for that dream synth, or guitar, amp, or car you've always wanted. You finally get it in your hands, it's got some bumps and bruises from the life it's had, possibly one that's been longer than yours. It has that old gear smell. The buttons and switches feel just right. Sure it's got some quirks and may need some repairs but that's part of the experience. It's not like if you wanted to you couldn't save up $3500 or even $9000 for a Minimoog or 2600. It's not an astronomical amount of money, it's not like paying for a house in cash. But everyone needs it now and cheap. Now now now as cheap as possible, who cares who's making it? As long as we get it.

Sure the Behringer D sounds great and they were within their legal rights to take the design and I'm sure a Behringer 101 would sound great too. But wouldn't you really rather have the real deal at the end of the day? The despmind is different because it was inspired by something and became another thing so far removed from the initial inspiration. I can get behind that, and I did. Building on great design is one way design can move forward.



Agree 100%
darenager
estin wrote:
There is nothing to sue over if the patent has expired. Roland had plenty of chances to rehash old gear in a faithful way and chose not to. The designs and circuit are fair game at this point.


Sure the minimoog patent has expired, but take a look at the Behringer case, it looks almost exactly like the moog m32 case. That Roland had not chosen not to re-issue their older designs does not give Behringer the right to do so.

I find it very strange that so many people do not seem to have a problem with Behringer, I can only assume they are not familiar with their past form, or that they just value cheapness over all else. seriously, i just don't get it
estin
^ Personally i'd rather pay a lot less for a recently produced instrument that doesn't come with bumps and bruises and in need of repair. None of those are part of any experience I am looking for. Companies certainly do not owe us a "re-hash" of anything they once made and if they choose not to that is their call. Just don't complain when another company comes along and fill that demand.

On a side note modern components and surface mount assembly are a lot better quality and vastly more consistent than old gear. No worries of hoping you found " a good sounding one"
kcd06
Quote:
If Korg made a reissue of the 2600 for $1000 or Behringer for $500, wouldn't it feel a little cheap?


No, not remotely. Time and technology changes, what was a complex hand assembled monster 40-odd years ago is (likely) a simple thing to make with current manufacturing. Complaining that something expensive and unattainable is now inexpensive and available and therefor Bad is at best blind romanticism and at worst exclusionary elitism; its like people that use the phrase "hard honest labor", they're deluded or selling you something.

Consider: a Rolls Royce of 50 years ago has less power, reliability, efficiency or comfort than a modern Toyota Camry. A 1984 Ferrari 308 has lesser performance than a base model ford Mustang. A Cray XMP doesnt stack up well against a $30 Raspberry Pi. You might like the look of the Rolls, or Ferrari more than the toyota or Mustang, but objectively, you cannot say they are better. You might appreciate the engineering and historic value of the Cray, but the damm thing eats more power than some office buildings and it still cant get email or let you see google news. Suggesting that the usefulness of a tool like an ARP 2600 or Synclavier is lessened by the virtue of there being a new and cheaper version is missing the purpose of it as a tool, and reducing it to a religious icon or whathaveyou.
estin
darenager wrote:
estin wrote:
There is nothing to sue over if the patent has expired. Roland had plenty of chances to rehash old gear in a faithful way and chose not to. The designs and circuit are fair game at this point.


Sure the minimoog patent has expired, but take a look at the Behringer case, it looks almost exactly like the moog m32 case.

Which is based on a eurorack rail system, so not really proprietary.

That Roland had not chosen not to re-issue their older designs does not give Behringer the right to do so.

It does if the patent has expired, at least in the USA.

I find it very strange that so many people do not seem to have a problem with Behringer, I can only assume they are not familiar with their past form, or that they just value cheapness over all else. seriously, i just don't get it

Its actually neither of those things for me. I support the concept of a free market. Having said that will I be buying Behringer? Nope.
mateo
estin wrote:
There is nothing to sue over if the patent has expired. Roland had plenty of chances to rehash old gear in a faithful way and chose not to. The designs and circuit are fair game at this point.


They can certainly sue over the design. They sued Behringer in 2005 for copying the appearance of their guitar pedals; they settled out of court but Behringer changed the design.
darenager
estin wrote:
darenager wrote:
estin wrote:
There is nothing to sue over if the patent has expired. Roland had plenty of chances to rehash old gear in a faithful way and chose not to. The designs and circuit are fair game at this point.


Sure the minimoog patent has expired, but take a look at the Behringer case, it looks almost exactly like the moog m32 case.

Which is based on a eurorack rail system, so not really proprietary.

Sure Eurorack is not proprietary but look at the actual design, do they have so little imagination that they literally had to copy the m32 profile? Even the wood looks identical.

It does if the patent has expired, at least in the USA.

Well Roland do not seem to happy with plagiarism, based on their previous behaviour, they have gone after other companies for less, and they have gone after Behringer at least once before.


Its actually neither of those things for me. I support the concept of a free market. Having said that will I be buying Behringer? Nope.


I support a free market too, and neither will I buy Behringer, mainly because of their dubious tactics, but also because no matter what it looks like or sounds like, it will always be a Behringer - like a badge of shame hihi
Knights Who Say Neve
SteeVtheRipper wrote:
It's not like if you wanted to you couldn't save up $3500 or even $9000 for a Minimoog or 2600. It's not an astronomical amount of money, it's not like paying for a house in cash.


Wow, that's some upper middle class privilege talking there.

kcd06 wrote:
Suggesting that the usefulness of a tool like an ARP 2600 or Synclavier is lessened by the virtue of there being a new and cheaper version is missing the purpose of it as a tool, and reducing it to a religious icon or whathaveyou.


Exactly right.
estin
darenager wrote:
because no matter what it looks like or sounds like, it will always be a Behringer - like a badge of shame hihi [/color]


yep lol
biftek
darenager wrote:

I find it very strange that so many people do not seem to have a problem with Behringer, I can only assume they are not familiar with their past form, or that they just value cheapness over all else. seriously, i just don't get it


I have zero qualms about one massive corporation "stealing" from another massive corporation. I find it strange that anyone would. seriously, i just don't get it

Roland will be ok.
darenager
biftek wrote:
darenager wrote:

I find it very strange that so many people do not seem to have a problem with Behringer, I can only assume they are not familiar with their past form, or that they just value cheapness over all else. seriously, i just don't get it


I have zero qualms about one massive corporation "stealing" from another massive corporation. I find it strange that anyone would. seriously, i just don't get it

Roland will be ok.


Well my thought is that it does not matter the size of the corporation.

Do you have zero qualms about one ordinary person stealing from another ordinary person?
Do have zero qualms about a massive corparation stealing from a boutique manufacturer?
Do you have zero qualms about a musician stealing from another musician?
Do you have zero qualms about a record label stealing from a struggling artist?

Rhetorical questions, but the point is the size of the companies is irrelevant, taking without permission is essentially stealing, it is not like Behringer do not have the money to try to get a proper licensing deal, regardless, there are plenty of other reasons not to buy Behringer's cheap crap, all the information is out there, but whatever.
ngarjuna
Ah the selective outrage of the synthesizer consumer. So let me see if I have this correctly:
When AJH or Aion clone old Moog circuits they are revered and celebrated; but when Behringer clones old Moog circuits they are stealing.

Studio Electronics built their whole reputation re-racking and spinning off Model Ds and have and are universally lauded for it around here. Or Macbeth. Or .Com. Or Mos-Labs. Or plenty of others.

Your collective outrage rings hollow.
darenager
^ Not really, Behringer have made a career out of ripping off multiple companies almost since they began. Taking Studio Electronics as an example, they were making the minimoog available at a time when it was no longer available to buy new, not cynically cloning just to sell at the lowest possible price in order to dominate the market.

Edit: I get that people do not have a problem with it. I also think that some people are unaware what type of company Behringer is, I am not trying to take some moral high ground, but glossing over the points just because 'cheap synths' is not the whole story here.
BugBrand
One of the stupid things is that Behringer have bought up a slew of decent companies, so have some decent engineers - witness the Deepmind which, while I haven't played one, appears to be pretty interesting and not a direct copy. Saying that, that's the only thing that has given me pause in considering Behringer to be sharks of crap quality.
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> General Gear Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next [all]
Page 1 of 4
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group