Photo (CC) sleepydisco aka David Wood.

In pointing out Behringer’s clone of Apple’s homepage, I may have left some things unclear. I was honestly surprised to find a number of people rushing to Behringer’s defense. I wasn’t trying to score cheap and easy points against the brand, but while venting frustration, I may have underestimated the response of people who own Behringer gear. If you do, and it’s working for you, as always – that’s a good thing.

The conversation got me excited, and I stepped into the comment fray. I shouldn’t have in this case, and unless asked to, I’ll stay out of this conversation. I enjoy being involved in those threads, but there are times when I should keep my writing to this space and let you have at it in the space below – the one labeled “comments.”

I think the reason Behringer inflames some people boils down to two things. Those people may have been burned by gear that proved not to be a bargain, or offended by a history of gear designs copied from recognizable models, or both. The former, of course, can happen with any vendor, but it does illustrate that saving money doesn’t always save time or money. Caveat Emptor is therefore true with any vendor. The latter is really the sticking point. Here’s a loose timeline of the cases in question:

Behringer and Mackie: In 1997, Mackie sued not only Behringer but distributor Samson and retailer Sam Ash. Mackie claimed that Behringer mixers were intended as exact copies of Mackie mixers – not only of external look and feel, but circuit design and individual components. In 1999, Behringer and Samson claimed a decision by the US Copyright Office “vindicated” the company. That supposed vindication is fairly empty, however. The US Copyright Office didn’t say that Behringer’s circuit designs were original. Instead, they said that the circuit board designs weren’t covered by the US Copyright Office. That has more to do with peculiarities of US intellectual property law than it does a vindication of Behringer.

pedals

Behringer and Roland/BOSS: In 2005, Roland sued Behringer for duplicating the look and feel of its guitar pedals. The blog Music Thing had a nice visual of just what this looked like. In this case, there was no claim about underlying circuit design, but the look and feel or “trade dress” is covered legally. Again, Behringer was not exactly vindicated. The two companies reached a settlement. The terms remained confidential, but Behringer did modify the look of its pedals.

Behringer and Line 6: What’s more disturbing to me is that, after reaching a legal settlement with Roland, Behringer simply moved on to a different vendor. In 2007, Behringer introduced a new line of pedals copying Line 6 instead of BOSS. Again, Music Thing’s Tom Whitwell did a visual comparison. Less extreme, but demonstrating Behringer continues to try to steal Line 6 market share by looking like Line 6, even the prize for the web design competition (the V-AMP) is intended to clone Line 6′s POD.

These are not the only cases of Behringer products that are designed to look like someone else’s products. As noted in comments, even the screenshot of the Behringer website is of monitors intended to look like those from KRK. Part of why I’m taking up the Behringer stories is that Music Thing isn’t around to do it any more, but here are some of Tom’s best hits:

In 2006, Behringer again copied Mackie, answering Mackie’s ONYX with mixers-plus-digital-I/O called the XENYX. (They copied the look and feel of older Mackie mixers rather than newer ones, but this was also clearly intended to look like Mackie’s product.)

Some amount of cloning, of course, should be forgiven – it’s expected practice for software emulations to mimic the look and feel of classic analog gear, so I can’t really fault Behringer for that. (That said, of course, I still think there’s far too much of that, and far too little original thinking about how to lay out controls and design interfaces.) The difference between cloning a classic product and a currently-shipping product is that making something look like something else that you can buy new suggests you want to create confusion. There are laws around that – “trade dress” – but more importantly to me is the question of whether it’s ethical.

Please, if, in comments, you want to fill out this timeline or offer more details of each case, on either side, I’m happy to hear it.

Apple and Behringer: In the case of the Apple site, while I wish websites in general would stop cloning Apple’s design – good as it may be – Behringer crossed a line by copying product pages, the color weight, gradient values, pixel weights, and radius of the Apple site. My small images in the story didn’t do that justice. This is not about the “cult of Apple.” Let me make myself plain: please, stop making sites look like the Apple site. Behringer’s case I think was worse than most, but I’d be happy if other sites flirted less with some of the particulars of Apple’s designs. Apple’s solution is not always the “best” design solution. There are others.

(Side note: the basics of Apple’s current website design really have been tremendously influential – so much so that it’s easy to overlook how much of this is derived from Apple. The earliest version of the current look dates from around 1997. But you can be influenced by a design and make it your own, rather than copying every detail or copying every detail poorly. To pretend otherwise would be to say design doesn’t matter, and I can’t do that.)

Let’s consider the larger issues:

Cheap can be great. One thing I won’t do is discriminate against musicians because what they’re using is cheap. “Ghetto fabulous” I believe is the proper term. Far from that, I hope on CDM we can find every opportunity to champion finding ways of doing cool stuff with cheap things. However…

Cheaper doesn’t always save you money. Because value is important, because you’re on a budget, you don’t want to throw your money away. Assume for a moment the allegations that Behringer cloned Mackie’s mixers down to individual circuits and components were true. That still doesn’t cover issues like manufacturing quality assurance or support. Larger than any one vendor – Behringer or otherwise – we urgently need to consider value. We can’t afford disposable gear. Our musical electronics are made out of toxic materials, and they impact the environment as they’re made, shipped, and disposed. And we need them to last for our music, too. I’m certainly guilty of having made this mistake, but it’s something that – as a community – we can all do better. Again, perhaps you have a good relationship with Behringer gear, which is great.

Copying is good; plagiarism, not so much. There’s a huge benefit to making copies and improving on them. A certain amount of copying is part of design. There is a difference, however, if the copy is intended to create confusion, to substitute for something else dishonestly. It’s the difference between Kia competing with the Honda Accord, as mentioned in comments, and someone making a car that looks exactly like an Accord called the Monda Schmaccord, and steals the design of its drivetrain. Likewise, in music, sampling can be a beautiful thing. Taking someone else’s work and trying to pass it off as your own is something different.

I believe it’s essential to draw these lines. It’s only going to get tougher from here. If you think these isolated Behringer cases were bad, brace yourselves: an army of music technology cloning companies is waiting in the wings.

My plea to Behringer: kick your copying habit, if you can. I could forgive you if you didn’t keep doing it over and over again. That suggests to me, and many others, that it’s malicious, that you hope consumers won’t notice and will buy your cheaper version because, cosmetically, it looks the same as something else. If it really is different, and if it really is better, then that only makes this more of a tragedy.

I’m going to leave the Behringer discussion at this point, having provided some of the historical background. But I certainly won’t let go of these other issues. And the uprising of Behringer support says to me that CDM and I do need to spend more time talking about affordable gear, affordable software, and — not necessarily because it’s “cheap” or “free” — free and open source hardware and software. I welcome your suggestions.

  • continuous

    Fake it til' you make it?

    Seriously though, I think Behringer's offering up of cheap mixers and pedals helps keep the balance (anyone actually tried the Digital Delay yet?). BTW the FCB1010 is a great f'ing pedal board. As far as cloning the Apple site, I think that's relatively meaningless and that many sites, especially those selling iProducts cop Apple's look and feel.

  • http://www.retrothing.com James

    Back in 2006, The FCC proposed a $1m fine against Behringer for marketing more than 50 models in the US without obtaining FCC certification.

    The most disturbing finding was that Behringer apparently continued to market the unapproved devices even after receiving queries from the FCC: "…we find that Behringer continued to import and market substantial numbers of these unauthorized devices for more than a year after the Enforcement Bureau initiated an inquiry into Behringer’s compliance with the Commission’s equipment authorization requirements."

    Full text of the FCC notice: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch

    The company has a history of cloning designs from other companies and ignoring government certification requirements. I'm going to avoid them like the plague.

  • kbooms1w

    Yeah, I have the FCB1010, and got it basically because it was half the price of Roland's, but I sometimes I wonder whether the extra money might have been worth it. Thankfully, my uses for it are very basic so it's ok, but….

  • http://covops.org Andreas Wetterberg

    I'm conflicted here. Yes, their plagiarism is douchy at best, but the products are – now – SOLID. And in the case of the Boss pedals it's only the "trade dress" that is cloned – the rest is just wanna-be in terms of which effects they do.

    Now the Line6 units, like the delay pedal Behringer did are SUCH rip-offs… but on the other hand they're like a fourth of the price of the Line-6 – bringing the pedal into the world of those of us who simply haven't given Line-6 a second thought because of the pricing…

    I guess what I'm saying is that I just would wish that Behringer brought in some… you know, circuit DESIGNERS who could help INNOVATe – they'd clean up even more, I think, instead of trying to be Boss's bitch.

  • glitch

    Well, I think we all agree that Behringer's product line is hit-&-miss. Some (like the aforementioned FCB-1010 or the Truth B2031 monitors) are actually good products, with original thought and engineering put behind them. Others are cheap rip-off clones that fall apart 10 minutes after unboxing them. Bottom line, IMNSHO, is caveat emptor.

    However, silver lining department: there is one other middle ground (which is admittedly small for the moment) but has some value.

    There are some of the Behringer stompboxes, for instance, that are clones of *out-of-production* vintage pedals. Good examples of these are the classic Boss Vibrato and Dimension-C Chorus pedals. Evidently, Roland has stated outright that they have no further interest in producing those pedals in their original form. So, because of their scarcity, the Dimension-C's are regularly (over)priced at several hundred dollars on Ebay, for example.

    Now along comes Behringer, who starts cranking out new clones of these designs for a fifth (or less) what the vintage used pedals are being traded for. And, these pedals are good quality and sound within a hair's breadth of the original's mojo.

    So, resurrecting lost vintage designs and bringing them back into the marketplace, this is a bad thing?

    And who can't think of a piece of gear from yesteryear that we wish were still in production. If only Behringer would concentrate on this sort of product a bit more, I think it'd help their image somewhat. I'm just thankful for the few vintage products they've brought back….

    – glitch.@#$%!

  • http://twitter.com/blcktrsh bLcKtRsH

    i can't help but imagine the meetings where the big guy sits down with the talent and say 'make it do what Apple did'…

    reminds me of guided sex, the look over a micromanaged shoulder, or barry white auto tuned.

    guess i understand why even mAudio's products have made it into my cypher and not behringer's.

    btw my man, i love that you tell the sh!t like it is. i've gotten my best advice on my current set up from your site: both the ohm64 (livid i fucking love you!) and the maschine were decided upon in this forum.

    keep up the great work man. i really appreciate your time and efforts to make this a site that reps good sh!t being produced and fake sh!t getting called out.

    it's the way innovation works.

  • ico

    OTOH, they do say that copying is sincerest form of flattery… ;-)

  • Will Copps

    BCF2000= Awesome.

  • brian

    Cloning apples site, has anyone been to gibson guitars recently? its looking very apple

  • low resolution sunse

    I think the real reason for Behringer's 'homage' or whatever is so they can piggyback on proven branding campaigns without having to spend as much money. Also; similar/identical products will hopefully make the consumer feel more comfortable purchasing the less expensive products, and through similar appearance, also feel like they are tapping into some of the "intangibles" that the brand identity of, say Boss or Line 6 provide.

    I understand the psychology, because it's not unique to Behringer. I buy a store-brand shaving gel that does exactly the same. The can shape, color scheme, and visual presentation are designed to mimic a more expensive brand.

    I think the real problem with Behringer is one of marketing. They haven't really been able to re-invent their brand identity as a supplier of 'cheap + cheerful' gear and have it stand on it's own. They still need to rely on the consumer establishing a visual relationship with other brands, much as store-brand groceries do.

  • jon
  • DJ_BrettG

    Ever step back and think why they are blatantly copying the Apple site? Because of blogs like this!

    Free Behringer advertisement!

    Only a certain amount of their products are copies. From what I've heard (not an expert) everything that is a copy is reverse engineered. But a lot of their stuff is just made to look like a copy! The V-amps aren't even close to Line 6 Pods, they just look similar and have a similar function. Sounds are completely different…

    I'm not completely defending Behringer because this wouldn't be the business practice I would use, but it works for them.

    Also, a lot of people who tend to bash Behringer's ethics usually have downloaded plenty of mp3s (not legally). I find that to be hypocritical.

    Personally, I like behringer because it gets me decent quality for a great price. I own the bcf, two mixers, like 10 stompboxes (used only in studio for making sounds), usb interface, DIs, rack fx.. etc. None of them have broke YET, but I wouldn't be disappointed if something did considering all the use I've gotten out of them.

    Most people that attack Behringer products probably haven't had much experience with them. Maybe they have though. But they probably didn't do their research to make sure they were getting a good one. Just because Behringer makes a cheap product shouldn't mean you should put a higher standard on their gear that you would on another companies gear! There's duds made by every gear company!!!

    Rant over :)

  • http://www.alone-music.co.uk james

    I have a few behringer stomp boxes that I picked up on the cheap, though they are tacky, for a guitarist on a budget, they are great for trying effects before upgrading to more expensive pedals. The Vintage delay is nice and was a pleasant surprise. From my point of view its nice to have entry level equipment, even if it is cheap, available, not everyone has unlimited budgets or needs the most reliable gear all the time. You get what you pay for at the end of the day.

  • Rotten Core

    Purposely trying to fool people into buying a product that they believe to be a different company`s product, by dressing it up in almost identical garb, is definitely an underhanded sales tactic.

    But, on the other hand,if you`re looking for the Apple site and somehow end up on the Behringer site then you`re an idiot.

  • http://images.google.com/images?q=uli+behringer&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:offic Former Insider

    Uli Behringer copies things and then sells them cheap because there is no need for R&D. That is how his company works. If we think this should stop, we shouldn't buy Behringer products. I never have, I never will and to me Behringer doesn't exist.

  • http://ruinwesen.com RuinMusic

    Behringer isn't fooling anyone. If you've seen a Boss pedal before, you know its a boss, and unless you are really stupid, you wouldn't think the behringer is the boss. sure they look very similar, but they look differnt enough. Plus IT SAYS BEHRINGER. There is no laws against reverse engineering a product. Alot of behringer products are originals for them; such as their micro series. Sure its not a new concept. but how many companies are truly innovating. And they bring their micro series to a rediculously affordable price. I have a fairly hard time percieving the differnce in audio gear, from low level to expensive pro stuff. It's not that I can't hear it, its that its not that much of a differnce from low to pro; especially for the price difference.

    If I were to ever buy gear and behringer had an alternative, I would buy behringer. i've not had any problems with my existing behringer gear.

  • Chewwy

    heard of Macromedia, apple plagiarized that site bad… almost like cut and paste then add grey !

    but no-one said squat. !

    Nothing is original these days.

  • http://www.createdigitalmusic.com Peter Kirn

    @RuinMusic: I promised to stay out of this, but now that it's Ruin… out of curiosity, as I try to understand which products specifically from Behringer lack alternatives? (I believe you; I'm just unclear on which ones people are talking about it, as this point has come up a number of times.)

    Also, there are laws governing trade of goods and reverse-engineering. Some of those laws are muddled and outdated. The "trade dress" issue is actually pretty clear. It isn't something I'm making up; it is the law, certainly in the US, which is a sizable market for Behringer. If you believe the law is unjust, that's a separate (and much longer) discussion. The reason I pointed to the circuit board Copyright issue is that pretty much all sides currently agree some of those laws need reform. They're more complex than trade dress, and right now they're not serving anyone's interests, both in the open source and commercial realms. (Maybe they're serving the patent lawyers' interests, though even some of them want to change the laws.)

    @Rotten Core: I agree; I never meant to imply that people would confuse Apple's site and Behringer's.

  • Damon

    Way to step up to the plate. kudos!

  • http://www.myspace.com/nevendayvid Neven Dayvid

    After having been Behringer-sceptic for oh so long, I finally bought a couple of their pedals (second hand, on eBay).

    And, honestly, after comparing them to vintage Ibanez / Maxon pedals (which always were – to my ears – superior to the somewhat overrated Boss pedals), I have to concede that Behringer pedals DO NOT as a rule SUCK.

    I kept the Ultra Vibrato, and the Chorus Dimension C. Both are effects I don´t use very often, and they are totally respectable quality.

    I am not advocating replacing your gear, mixer and all, with Behringer products, but even as an analogue gearhead, it´s worth staying open-minded, and give Behringer a listen.

  • Simon Lacelle
  • http://www.createdigitalmusic.com Peter Kirn

    I had not seen the Gibson site; thanks. Again, not as bad, but certainly unimaginative – and puzzling, as Access, Behringer, and Gibson are all trying to project different things about their brand and very different things than Apple. It's a disease.

  • Glass

    @Peter Kirn: Since I sort of started the whole thing it on the other post, I'll rectify myself here…

    I agree with you on the website, I'm an artist too (soundtracks) and made a living on design when I was younger. I believe there's a fine line between inspiration and plagiarism, but Behringer CLEARILY missed that line by a mile, period.

    What I was venting is that Behringer was a company breaking into a marked dominated by inertia and elitism trying to change it while keeping an *ok* quality. Yeah, they're capitalists and some of their stuff suck, but what I see is a brand helping countless kids making better bedroom music… that's all…

    And that's also how I feel about the Korg Nanos, and even Apple (Snow Leopard was almost free). It's a nice trend that's going on… now, let's hope they shut off their photocopiers and start making innovative stuff…

    Btw, you NEVER came across as elitist or anything like that, I'm always reading here about cheap/free/open (but good) stuff… it's my favourite blog… sorry about that comment :/

  • http://ruinwesen.com RuinMusic

    I meant, orriginaly, that if i was searching for a product, and I discovered behringer did what i needed, i would buy it from behringer. i dont know if you misunderstood?

    but, i havent researched it. but, like i said, the micro series, although not orriginal, doesnt have many competition. alot of companies do put out a single unit that could rival behringer; but behringer undercuts them by about half the price. the micro series has just basic studio stuff, like a 4 way headphone distro amp, or a phantom power supply. it's simple, effective and cheap.

    the bcr2000 seems like a crowd favorite, a midi controller with lots of knobs with led rings, fairly compact and at a nice price.

    but yeah, there isnt many products that behringer makes that someone else doesnt as well. but its the fact that behringer is bringing gear that is useful in a studio enviroment down to the people who would like to have that stuff. it's just like the whole software music evolution i suppose; except that i dont think people can buy a peice of behringer gear and instantly make a shitty techno song… although they do package their gear with software alot of the time if its meant to interface with a computer.

    i got distracted. this is all i wrote.

  • http://www.createdigitalmusic.com Peter Kirn

    I will say to Glass, Ruin et al – there are definitely some fair comments. And I take seriously the fact that people are getting Behringer gear to work seriously for them, and that they're a brand people now consider against some much bigger brands. That says to me two things — makers like Roland and Mackie should be considering how to stay ahead, perhaps not just beating Behringer on price but restoring some of their brand loyalty. And if some of Behringer's products should be considered more seriously, maybe it's long past time to start behaving seriously and dialing down this cloning habit.

    Oh, side note – for simple stuff, it's definitely well past time for a new book on DIY musician electronics. And for people in parts of the world who can't always afford a new piece of gear, this is huge. (Parts of the world including like… well, my apartment, some of the time!) Maybe a second edition of Anderton's terrific book, badly in need of new parts recommendations?

  • Birds Use Stars

    They don't innovate because innovation is expensive. Same with R&D and web design. They if they did those things the stuff wouldn't be cheap anymore, and then we wouldn't want it.

    I'd like to point out that no one is giving Ibanez shit for getting their start as a Fender clone company. Or boss as an ibanez copy. Or every Japanese electronics company ever doing this forever. IIRC even Makie started as a copy brand, they are all just upset for getting a taste of their own medicine.

  • B.C. Thunderthud

    I don't own any Behringer stuff but I'm glad they exist. If, as you say, the circuit designs aren't protected by copyright then this niche will exist, it's real basic capitalism. In the guitar effect world for every $15 Behringer knockoff of a Tube Screamer or a Small Stone there are dozens of boutique clones that sell for hundreds of dollars, now point to point wiring and germanium transistors may be worth hundreds of dollars to some folks but certainly not to everyone; I think Behringer's look and price accurately communicate the type of value that they deliver and for some folks it's a good deal.

    As to the website; it's tacky, shameless and kind of embarrassing, and completely appropriate for Behringer (although, IMO, it's also old and tired, I've been sick of that look for many years). Perhaps there's a legal issue here, in which case Apple is more than capable of handling it, but to me it's more at the level of every commercial illustrator in the last ten years ripping off Chris Ware and/or eBoy, or going back further the fact that 90% of the fiction paperbacks on the market look like the work of Chip Kidd. People who care about these things know where they come from, but blatant imitation without attribution has always been the norm in graphic design.

  • http://conservatoriumofaudio.com Ben

    I would just like to point out that during a recent tour of Trackdown studio in Syndey, Australia (one of Syndey's biggest and most successful studio's) I was happy to see a Behringer rack mount reverb unit sitting in their rack. While they don't say it's the best reverb they have ever heard, they definaly swear by the quality of sound that it produces, especially for the price.

    It was nice to hear them say that, seeing as my small studio relies on multiple Behringer items to get the work done, including rack mount compressor, effects units and headphone amp. I am also quite happy with my UMX61 keyboard that has seen a few years worth of solid production abuse and still works like a treat.

    Yes, they do produce some crappy stuff, like the V-Amp pedal that failed about 9 months after purchase, but for the price I don't really mind.

  • Genjutsushi

    Well, heres my ten pence worth (about 8 cents to you guys).

    I have bought two behringer products, both times with an open mind to the quality cost ratio – they were cheap and required to do a simple job.

    The first was a stereo compressor, ended up in a box in my basement as the grounding on the unit rendered it unuseable in a studio context. ( tired everything to improve the grounding but to no avail – the UNIT was poorly designed and made).

    Second was one of their stomp boxes – a compressor. Now how wrong could a COMPRESSOR pedal go? Answer – very!!! The pots were mounted straight onto the circuit board with no support on the case, so the first time i stomped with vigour, i cracked the board and killed the pedal. In the bin…

    Dont buy Behringer, buy something quality once, rather than lots of crap over and over again!!!

  • lematt

    i own only one Behringer product: one Eurorack mixer that i bought 10 years ago… still working, and although it's not (obviously) a Mackie, i've taken it in dusty spots and dirty music bars quite a lot, and it has always done its job !

    you have to take behringer products for what they are: cheap stuff that you don't have to be careful with…

  • http://www.derrick-s.com Derrick S

    hm…when it comes to behringer there are lots of opinions, positive & negative

    to my opinion they have some gear which is quite good and you get exactly what your are paying

    for example i bought an iaxe e-guitar 2 years ago i think, it still works great, had also a small eurorack mixer which still is good and recently bought a SX3040 sonic maximizer which does exactly what it sould do for a small price.

    but of course you cannot compare the built quality with higher priced stuff

    about their Website:

    that gibson website brings me to an idea, maybe its just a template also behringer uses? looks very similar like it could be for a Content Management System

    not the best choice but it looks clean

    btw. look at the new access website: http://www.acceess-music.de

    also pretty much a clone

  • shubs

    I am a little surprised at how much attention the Behringer Boss pedal copies are getting.

    Think of how many times the Tubescreamer has been copied and imitated but for ridiculously high prices.

    Really, how can Maxon get away with doing this http://www.maxonfx.com/Nine_OD9.php in comparison this http://www.ibanez.com/product.aspx and charge a much higher price for it, for a build and sound quality which isn't much different to the original.

    If there are no legal ramifications with copyright, then I quite simply cannot see anything wrong with designs being borrowed/stolen etc etc. It should be the job of the law to protect innovation. If someone comes along and takes their ideas, yes there are moral implication but unless the law punishes them it could just be seen to be good business practise.

    I think the potential risk of Behringer's products failing (something which a good proportion of their consumers know) in response to the price of their products in many ways is a fair trade. Of their pedal range, one of the more documented failings is the pedals being made of plastic don't last as well as the Boss equivalents, which I believe to be a fair trade in terms of their price.

    For the record, the only Behringer products I own are a couple of Mic100 preamps. I have owned them for a few years, and the build quality is actually pretty good! I have been more than just pleased with my purchases.

  • http://kief.net/ Valis

    On behringer products failing due to the corners cut in design:

    (evidentiary) ADA8000 potential failure issues:
    http://www.prodigy-pro.com/diy/index.php?topic=20

    (anecdotal) My wife's church has a mackie board with a rack of behringer gear which is never usable due to unending grounding issues. I've suggested RNC 1173 compressors & other quality budget gear like that but they keep trying to 'fix the wiring'. I've seen Club PA's have the same problems, and the culprits were the 30 band EQ's and Compressors, as shubs stated above.

    (anecdotal) BCF2000, the one bit of Behringer gear I own. It has held up to moderate usage just fine, horrible software support & not so great editing software. So far the unit works on most 32bit OS's but not working under Win7/Vista 64bit or confirmed not working under Snow Leopard when you enable 64bit kernel on boot. At least it has midi i/o to keep it usable in the future…as I have no real expectation that they'll release decent drivers for it or a new OS for 64bit device complaint drivers built in.

    (anecdotal) I've known several people with XENYX mixers that they thought were incredible for the price. One was used for open-air live use and would have channel failures if it was under direct sunlight for too long. He had to buy a gazebo popup to keep it stable, and eventually dumped it for an A&H.

    As for ripping off website design, you might consider getting a site like smashing magazine to take up issue and further the cause.

  • http://www.chokingsun.com dj mosquito

    i will say that in the last couple of years mackie's move to manufacture equipment boards to china seems to has increased the number of failures i'm hearing. its anecdotal as i don't have any numbers showing it. though the same can be said of behringer. we own 2 behringer mx3282a's and both have now suffered some type of failure: on one the pre is dead on one of the channels (about 4 years after purchase), and the other has one of the sub outs dead (i think this was the one we got used and it went about a year after purchase). so far those are the only failures we've had but we won't pick up another of their mixers.

    @Valis : i do love the bcf2000 due to the amount of flexibility and reprogramming i can get from it. though as you mention, the future isn't looking too bright for it.

    in some ways i think the copying of the apple website is fitting: they both make disposable consumer electronics. that's not to say there aren't some good products made, but rather its not equipment that you get repaired (even the good stuff). that could be more of a reflection on consumers, but you can't blame companies for pandering to the masses to make a profit. we like behringer and have a lot of their stuff, but none of their stuff is going to last.

    with that being said, does ANYONE know of ANY hardware that is made today that will go the distance? all i see is a dying hardware industry except for the very expensive top of the line items (and most of that stuff hasn't been around long enough to know if its going to last).

  • Favomodo

    I also love the BCF2000 (works like a charm with Propellerhead Record BTW – on Snow Leopard). And there isn't anything like it, especially for that price (I paid about 150 euro's). And the quality is better than what one might expect, considering the price.

  • Beh

    They've been at this for a long time. I think i read somewhere that one of their first products was a pretty much component-for-component reconstruction of a dbx compressor (can't find the link now so take with a pinch of salt). Their cable tester looks identical to the ebtech one. It's pretty much their entire business model.

    I'm all for a bargain but in this case the reason it's cheap is because another company paid for all the R+D. By buying this stuff you're providing less incentive for manufacturers to innovate, and for this reason I keep a wide birth even around the products which are genuinely good value.

  • http://www.johnpazdan.com jp

    First, my sincere apology for coming off as a troll yesterday. Not intended (though is that what a troll would say?).

    Thanks for posting the Behringer factory tour. A lot to consider there, beyond the mere cloning of other companies products…labor issues, quality of life in the real world, the real cost of "stuff".

    And yes Peter, it really is time for a new DIY book..from the people who populate this and other sites..and not just hardware, but open source software/hardware combos.

  • Vehical Driver

    If Behringer knocks off your product, it is your own fault!

    You see, Mackie decided they would cash in on their name, hire a Chinese sweatshop to crank out cheap Chinese mixers, they would paint a Mackie label on them, and charge suckers in the first world premium prices. Behringer simply paid the very same sweat shop to produce the very same cheap-ass Chinese mixers, and to paint a Behringer label on it instead!

    If Mackie continued to sell high-quality made in the USA products, there would be no way Behringer could possibly make a circuit for circuit exact copy of a Mackie mixer. Behringer was able to do that, because they simply hired the same Chinese manufacturer to make the exact same product.

    Same thing for Boss pedals. Boss pedals used to be made in Japan and last forever. Then, Roland decided they would go cheap and make them to lower standards in a Chinese sweatshop. Surprise, surprise, Behringer comes up with an exact knockoff. Same thing with Line 6!

    The reason Behringer is knocking off products, is because those products have already been lowered to Behringer standards. When Boss, or Mackie, or whoever, decide to manufacture cheap Behringer-style made in China crap and cash in on their reputation, they are shocked to find that there are people who refuse to pay premium prices so that their cheap gear will have a brand name.

    Behringer isn't knocking off Moog pedals. Behringer isn't knocking off Allen & Heath mixing boards. Behringer couldn't possibly knock off those products no matter how hard they tried, because those are quality products.

    Your low-end Mackie mixer, your Boss pedal, are essentially the budget product line of those companies, and manufactured as cheaply and as shoddily as Behringer gear. If brand name companies didn't produce cheap crap, then they wouldn't get ripped off by Behringer. If a product you own gets ripped off by Behringer, it is a sign that you paid too much for some made in China crap.

  • gwenhwyfaer

    VD (great choice of name there), are you being racist, bemoaning globalisation, critiquing corporatism, or using one as a beard for another? It's so hard to tell these days…

  • automatique

    Basically, Behringer just sucks and that's it. Hobby tools for hobby people.

  • http://www.chokingsun.com dj mosquito

    @gwenhwyfaer: i don't think Vertical Driver is being racist, rather they are being passionate about a difference in manufacturing. for instance, take a resistor. they have a band for tolerance/deviance from the norm. while i have no evidence to back myself up, i would bet that its in that area that you are looking at differences in manufacturing quality between domestic and foreign soil. one could also argue QC on soldered connections, but again i'm guessing from having work domestically soldering circuit boards. anyways, in this case china is "foreign soil" for both Behringer and Mackie. i don't think anyone would debate the difference in quality between a mackie manufactured today in china vs one manufactured in the us yesterday.

    @Beh: i have to disagree that buying behringer products provides "less incentive for manufacturers to innovate." while the hardware market is pathetic these days compared to years ago, its also a direct reflection between the offloading of "cpu power" from many devices to one; most often times a laptop. for instance, akai doesn't make a sampler like the s6000 anymore as its either the mpc people want. today people seem to prefer some brand of software and there are lots of great programs out there for doing the same thing. but in terms of the overall reliability, i'll take the s6000 over ANY software and laptop operating system combination. especially if all i'm doing is plugging a midi trigger device into it. additionally behringer DOES make items that do not have any competition in the market for me. for instance the bcf2000 is one of the most versatile control surfaces i've found with the easiest programming interface to date, especially for someone that will read the lexicon mpx1 midi implementation docs for fun and future implementation of a "glass interface." additionally, the mdx4600 is a VERY versatile compressor packing a lot into a 1U unit. i prefer to support good gear over "good brand." for instance, we own 5 line 6 units and won't touch the behringer knock-offs. hopefully that makes sense.

    has behringer copied others? absolutely. have they created some things that are unique? yes. at the end of the day its how YOU work and what piece of equipment gets the job done. for some its behringer and for others its someone else. i don't think there is a single person that only uses one company for everything. i don't even think its possible.

    @Peter Kim: i'm assuming that for the DIY individual that "buying new" means one is purchasing things, but they don't have to be new. i say that because i buy so little gear new from the manufacturer/distributor its comical. there is enough free (slash open source, or free as in beer) software out there these days to cover everything. you still have to supply your own creativity, but even that can be nothing more that editing. if you want some input to a DIY book from some guys doing it for close to two decades, let me know.

  • DJ_BrettG

    behringer has bunch of clones of boss pedals that have been out of production for a while.. feedbacker, trem/pan, the analog chorus, the old digital chorus, oc-2 clone, vb-2 clone (analog vibrato), vd400 not actually a clone but an original analog delay with similar controllers to the old boss, fx100/600 are original, rev/delay is a clone of that rv that got discontinued

    a few of the distortions/fuzz are also cloned of discontinued boss pedals but i don't remember which

    so are you anti-behringer people ok with behringer making a cheap original product and/or cloning products that aren't in production anymore that people still want?

  • Solderiron

    I work for a service center in LA and I can tell you that the Behringer stuff is well made and much better than many high-end brands. Just open it up and check it out.

    Heardd from folks at Guitar Center that their gear has one of the lowest failure rate given the massive amount of products sold.

  • Jonathan Mirburg

    Apple?

    Look at the Korg, Gibson, Acceess website
    http://www.korg.com http://www2.gibson.com/Gibson.aspx http://www.acceess-music.de
    Why do you only scream now that Behringer followed a proven a good concept? Why has no one screamed when the other companies came up with their "Apple" sites?

  • Mager

    Long live Behringer. They offered me great equipment at reasonable prices and I have built my audio career on their equipment. The products never failed on me and I have lots of 19 inch stuff that is more than 10 years old. If you don't like the stuff buy something else but the rambling here is rediculous.

  • My2Cents

    I think this thread is great advertising for Behringer:-). Look at all the attention they get. I am perfectly happy with their gear and had a Mackie mixer fail on me as the power supply went up in smoke.

  • http://pierrefontaine.bandcamp.com/ Pierre

    Sorry for double posting (I just left the same comment on the other Behringer comments area) but…

    I’ve recently purchased two pieces of Behringer gear. The first was the UMA25s Audio/Midi controller (about $130), purchased because of its positive reviews and the value/cost over similar controllers. I’ve been extremely happy with this purchase so with my new-found confidence in Behringer, I purchased a Xenyx 8 input-2 bus mixer next (about $70).

    Why purchase such inexpensive gear? Because I can’t really afford anything else. With a wife, a kid and a mortgage, I have to buy things very carefully. Also, I only use a debit card rather than buying on credit.

    My “studio” consists of an EEEpc 901 HA (about $350) for my computer, as well as an external monitor ($100). I use Cakewalk Music Creator 4 (about $35) for my DAW. The Cakewalk software came with a couple of very nice VST instruments and I’ve found tons of free instruments on-line or through Computer Music magazine, though the bulk of the stuff on their DVDs does not really work that well on my computer.

    I also have one of those inexpensive M-Audio 49 key controllers you can get at Best Buy on sale for about $79. Finally, I monitor my mixes using a pair of headphones that came with the Behringer UMA25s.

    With this setup, I’ve been able to create music that keeps me happy and that my friends and family have enjoyed. And this music making fun cost me about $750.

    I wish I had unlimited funds to purchase the kind of stuff the big boys use but I just don’t. So I shop wisely and frugally. I love music and I love writing my silly instrumental pieces and my reasonably cheap gear has worked really well for me!

    Pierre

  • DJpm

    Look at the 32-bit digital DJ mixer DDM4000 from Behringer. What an awesome mixer and there is nothing close to what this thing does. Not a clone at all – feature set and performance even exceends the most expensive Pioneer products. All for a rediculously low price.

    What is this stupid discussion about the website??? Who cares???

  • Tom Leder

    Why do people talk about behringer? because it sells. Why do people buy it? Because it works and offers great value.

    behringer is now one of the largest companies in the industry and if the products would not sell, they would have gone long ago. Fact is they're growing, the gear gets good reviews and I see them in all music stores.

    There is a place for everyone.

  • billy bob

    I think it is funny and sad. I know some really talented people at behringer who want to do better, but aren't allowed. The biggest liability of that company is Uli who micromanages everything. If you want to see their next copy, just look closely at the images used on design #2 of their web design contest. The B205D looks just like my Mackie SRM150. Try to find the B205D on behringer's website.

  • http://www.jonathanleonard.com jonathan adams leona

    I know of at least one former developer of Behringer that said his ideas were patented without permission. If this became a habit then maybe good ideas just don't go there unless they will be given away. That would put a damper on innovating and might shape the culture there to find existing models in the market alot more comfortable a target.

    Rather than complain about Behringer though, because what they do and succeed at is humorous and necessary in a way….I think the scowling glance is more deserved to the dealers who sell total ripoffs at high levels to new money. Its the dealers actually who on the floor and on the phone are making the case, making the swap. On their side its very much a $20 for sure or $40 maybe question because they ain't allowed to let money walk out the door or hang up the phone. And I think mostly B-ringer is like M$ in that they probably imply to the dealer that they must stock it or else. And its that backstream whiplash that eventually causes a court case because it can't get resolved in the dealer space. In fact the dealer can use the clone as leverage to the source: give us more margin or we will sell THAT instead. So support for the clone and protection is part of a price efficiency scheme in a way. Is the efficiency passed on to the user?…no. I think its mostly spent on gold chains, strippers, SUV and blow; in the middle.

    Now the real killer is the spreadsheet that goes from the dealer outbox to the B-ringer inbox that lists sales percentages of competitors products. Or maybe its not a spreadsheet. Maybe its a fax. But without the dealer for example if all dealers disappeared and only there is one big BBS with one phone number where you can order products then there is no way for B-ringer to get the info that plans are based on (unless they own the BBS). They would be forced to use public and indirect means of information. Or maybe they will invest fabrication funds on a NAMM report. Heh…I wouldn't. If there was only one big BBS there wouldn't be a NAMM.

    I have owned the things that B-ringer imitated and I have also used the foot pedal. I think by the time B-ringer notices something out there is making money and that the stats on that money say oh yes this is quite some tit, that the source has often moved toward a cheaper way of providing the value. In product design of lifecycle you often see the quality change where initially its a great deal, the eyeballs slowly converge and then it starts getting more expensive in some way either by physically changing the price up, or simply making it a cheaper way. The dealer can't really know what is made inside has been swapped out. The market can know the difference eventually case in point the stratocaster. Where its made is a loud indicator of quality. Electronics are not open to this kind of inspection and musicians out of technology consumers, vulnerable in this kind of product to some manipulation.

    B-ringer methods of copying are crude at best so mostly it strikes me that if something is hard to copy they probably will not. These products are assembled mostly with parts made by a large industry that supplies chipsets, rubber knobs, switches, LED display, power supplies. Out of the whole product made by a manufacturer maybe 10% of the product is original. They have a housing, some paint etc…this style of product being fairly high up the evolutionary tree is vulnerable to copy because its basically like grandmas cake recipe. Anyone can buy the flour, eggs and sugar, but there is a difference between a zinger and a nice cake. Its the effort and care and maybe some flair. Oh labor thats so expensive. We have the recipe lets change the cook and open another kitchen…you know how long that lasts.

    Hopefully Peter continues to be involved in this space. Otherwise I will have say something outrageous. ;)

    jonathan adams leonard

  • http://myspace.com/fosforo edwin

    i have a Behringer active DI that serves as a backup…i had a sound guy in Germany laugh at me when i pulled it out as a back up to his cheap backup.

  • Alex

    Apple's site copy is probably an issue between Apple and Behringer. Has nothing to do with us here and i still can't see the reason we discuss this subject with so much detail.

    Behringer has made some failed products, but they have made some very successful ones too.

    All the small Behringer mixers are actually cheaper than similar Mackie mixers and have the same results/features…(i have used tens of them in sound laboratories, home studios and pro-studios and all were very durable with lots of features for their price…of course some of them had failures after a long time of use, but i can assure you that they don't break easier than other more "high end" mixers). My Mackie mixer has the same amount of noise compared to its "Behringer copy" and costs almost twice the money.

    BCF and BCR controllers are phenomenal beasts in the industry. I don't care about future support..there are not so many people who use Vista for audio anyway (Win7 is not even out yet) and currently, they cost like a small mobile phone, they are built like tanks and work perfectly with almost all the professional environments..

    I had the first series of Truths B2031(monitors) for 5-6 years and, for their money, were more than great! OK! they din't have proper magnetic shielding, but i never regret buying them because i had no other choice for the same features/price ratio and they worked quite well with my tasks ad for those years i didn't even think of getting another "high end" pair.

    Sometimes copying a design might not be a good choice, but Behringer somehow "forced" other manufacturers to lower their "stupid" prices and that was good.

    There are many times you need "that" type of equipment but you can't afford it. For this reason you buying a cheap alternative and Behringer is the only manufacturer who makes "proper" cheap alternatives. Some series fail, but some others are just great value for money. Nothing wrong with that. Let the legal issues to the companies and think as a USER/consumer.

  • Greg

    How about the environment and the people who make these products? Is anyone concerned about the technology these products are made and the damage the dumped/disposed gears cause to the environment? Also, does it bother anyone that these products are made in a country which is the biggest polluter in the world and does not respect human rights? For fuck sake, people, wake up! Behringer is the Primark of music tech industry…

  • Alex

    @Peter:

    I don't think that there is any kind of "plagiarism" from Behringer's side. Someone must be very stupid to "confuse a Kia with a Honda"…I have many friends who didn't know anything about music technology but they never confused Behringer products for other…they simply did RESEARCH before buying. Its common logic! People who just don't care in doing a small research before buying something, are probably stupid or naive beginners who don't need a higher end product, so why bother with all the other companies if they don't offer the same features/price ratio?

    You took it so personal! You wrote about forgiveness and other drama…why you bother so much? If you don't like their strategy don't buy their stuff..simple. I never liked Apple's sneaky marketing so i don't buy their stuff. You can do the same..otherwise you spend so much energy without a great reason IMO.

  • Greg

    Also, don't tell me that Behringer is the friend of poor kids who have no money… Just checked Boss pedals on Ebay. None of them costs more then a ticket to a gig and a gramm of amfetamin. "Poor" uni students in the UK spend the price of a Boss pedal during an average outing. It's not wrong to buy cheap things – just don't moralize, please…

  • Alex

    @Greg…sorry but i have to inform you that almost everything you touch is made in China nowadays..Its very nice that you care for the people and the environment, but you should start blame the "bigger bosses" about these choices and not Behringer because it happened to be under fire in this topic…

  • georg

    @Alex…i agree. almost all of big companies in the world have their share in making china the biggest polluter. i have several product from behringer, they are CRAP, but still so much fun to abuse. good music is not necessarily depends on the instrument.

    value..i make the value out of this crap.

    ethic..well i still download mp3s, so i guess i better save my comment :)

    and about the environmental issue, we better stop buying all kind of instruments from whatever company (BOSS, Mackie or whatever), and just be happy with singing acapella.

  • robin parry

    i use their equipment, took me a long time to, as, their first product(successful) was the mackie 8 bus console, which they still sell, and made the company, as it also made mackie's fortune,as he did design it!!!!!

    greg mackie tried to sue twice, they just kept moving offices, now they'r in china, wonder why???

    i'm sure both boss and EH have thought about it but stopped due to international legal costs!!! and the vageries of the chinese 'justice' system

  • http://nickkent.net nick kent

    It's worth noting that Roland US hit them with a cease and desist when they rolled out their first line. It's was a little before the blog boom but someone probably has them archived. The pedals that actually made it to the street are their altered enough to be legal adaptations. While it is in their favor that no longer reprint the other company's manual or clone circuits (which is hard to challenge) and that in their large line they do have some quite okay items.

    I think the stuff made in China angle is played out but the so called plagerism angle is a very valid point. Developing a new product costs money and that is reflected in the price. It's quite obvious letting someone else develop and then reproduce it more or less is a different game.

    In some respects like the Soviet Space Shuttle Buran
    http://www.schneiderism.com/lost-opportunities-of

  • http://www.createdigitalmusic.com Peter Kirn

    I have to weight in on the environmental comment.

    China is the world's largest polluter, if you're measuring CO2, but only *just* ahead of the United States. And Americans are much larger polluters per capita, landing me and my fellow citizens in the top 10.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_byhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by

    CO2 is also only one measure. Generally speaking, the US has reduced other forms of pollution with tougher regulations; that much is true. But in terms of consumption, that's a worry for the US, too.

    I encourage people to buy locally-produced, sustainable products; I think there are tremendous opportunities there. There are things you can manufacture locally with a flexibility that you don't get from overseas imports, cheap as they may be under some circumstances. Rather than seeing this as saying no to foreign production, it's really about a *positive* opportunity in your backyard.

    But clearly, you can't avoid "made in China" or similar labels – not when China not only beats other manufacturing markets on price, but often on technical sophistication, as well (look at what's happened in electronics, computing).

    So the question really is, how do you address consumption, energy efficiency, and environmental impact worldwide? How do you keep global markets from reducing human and labor rights to a lowest common denominator? It's certainly easy to say here in the US, this isn't China's problem, it's our problem. The US economy is one that established unsustainable patterns of consumption. The answer to that question is going to be pretty profound, it certainly changes how we relate to technology, and yeah, it's bigger than Behringer.

  • Mike

    Have you looked at the Gibson website? Why has no one cried foul when they lauched it? Because it's an American company? Double standards.

    And yeah much of Gibson is made in China, too?!?!!

  • TroubledMind

    Jonathan Adams Lenohard said:

    "I know of at least one former developer of Behringer that said his ideas were patented without permission"

    What nonsense is that? If it's an employee then his ideas belong to the company. You don't need the permission as this is part of any employment contract.

    But at least it shows that Behringer innovates. Take a DDM4000, DEQ2496, DDX3216, etc which are absolutely unique products.

  • Apple

    I remember Behirnger recently had a contest and posted 12 different web designs for people to vote for their prefered design. Obviously the majority wanted the clean white "apple" design. So they just implemented what the people wanted.

    I can't fault them as I also prefer white functional sites. Many companies have now followed that path.

  • Pingback: Plagiarism Kicks Into Gear

  • billy bob

    Apple,

    I have it on good authority that the results of that contest did not support the Apple design. Instead, Uli just decided he wanted to rip off Apple. FYI.

  • http://www.createdigitalmusic.com Peter Kirn

    The Gibson site has been pointed out several times in comments. It's not quite as extreme as Behringer's, but it's still ridiculous. Gibson has an older brand than Apple, a brand more associated with rock stars. Appropriating Apple's brand doesn't actually even make any sense.

    Why didn't I call it out? Because it's American? No, because I'm not in the habit of surfing the Gibson website, so I hadn't seen it before a commenter pointed it out. ;)

  • Dumeril Seven

    I never owned a Behringer product and probably never will. Not only are they shameless rip-offs, but their gear is mostly crap in terms of quality. Unreliable and under-performing compared to the stuff they're copping. I don't begrudge somebody having to buy their stuff due to financial reasons, but I personally would rather save my money and get something better and original.

  • http://www.myspace.com/k1ru the six fingered Chy

    i'm okay with behringer…their v-verb and virtualizer effects processors have opened unimaginable doors to me …

    if you need to pay more money to treat your equipment like shit to prove to yourself that you gave your money's worth..that's fine too…:D

    some of us don't have mommy and daddy buying us hardkore gear..and that's just our alternative..

  • jasonmd2020

    I have a DDM4000 DJ mixer/midi controller from them for about a year now and have had no problems with it live or at home. It also seems that this is the one thing they didn’t copy from something else as far as I can tell. As far as reverse engineering? All this stuff is based on earlier circuits anyway. That’s how things improve, by building upon earlier work. The plagarism? Yeah that’s the part that sucks. Putting out an effects pedal that looks identical to an existing one, is really just a ploy to confuse customers into buying it. But somehow I don’t think anyones gonna be fooled by the website. Considering you have to type in the damn address to get there! :)

  • ezelkow1

    If you look on the behringer site apparently they had a contest with 11 different design mockups for a new site. Customers voted and could also win some stuff by voting. Looks like behringer went with the contest winner, they didnt just decide out of the blue to use someone elses design.

  • jackson

    Behringer's cool. Just not original. Big deal- Even if you don't buy their gear it keeps the Boss/etc from excessive retail pricing.

    Had 3 pedals and an interface. All beyond the expectations. Though the acoustic pedal did "become" a fuzz box (real cool buzz sound actually) after a few months of use (common problem with that pedal).

  • mike ferrell

    As an engineer (many years experience, big name company, computers, not pedals) I'd like to point out that most good engineers (not the brilliant ones, but the good ones) are primarily good at functional desing, which often includes re-engineering of existing components and using pre-existing standard components. Behringer engineering is not brilliant (although they do often add some useful features to the stuff they copy), but anyone that thinks that re-engineering something and putting it on the market for a far lower price is not good engineering and difficult to do has never done it.

  • Downpressor

    Had a BCR2000 that I bought used. Was never happy with it due to software issues and the knobs not "responding right" (IMO). Worked in studios with Behringer gear and never been happy with it. YMMV. My money goes elsewhere.

  • Justin

    BCF2000 FTW! I got one for $100 and use it to control in-the-box mixing in Logic and Pro Tools with much more precision and 'feel' than a mouse offers. Much better choice than dropping an extra grand to get a combo control surface/audio interface! And that's all I have to say about that.

  • wi_ngo

    Akai Professional recently changed their site as well. Didn't go with the Apple color scheme, but did do the same type of layout:

    http://www.akaipro.com/en/index.php

  • Howard Ikulous

    If a company like Behringer had existed when I was a teen, I would have been able to afford music gear much sooner and wouldn't have turned to a life of crime. But seriously, there are many respected companies like Akai and Korg who crank out cheaply made products, and Behringer's "clones" aren't really clones. they may look like the pedals they are imitating, but what's inside is very different, more so that many of the very sought after boutique clones of vintage stomp boxes, so you could say they came up with an affordable new take on someone else's idea.

  • http://www.cfs4.com adam wolters

    Hmmm. on the subject of intellectual copyright and apple….. Really there was a company called apple before apple decided to steal that clever name for a corporation (apple corps geddit?) and it was owned by the beatles. Who sued apple for the name, but guess what; an american court found in favour of an american company.

    Leaving the poor beatles down to their last 100 million, and having to use candles to light their mansions.

    Basically everyone steals website designs. And Behringer retro engineer loads of stuff that perhaps they shouldn't. But even though its a stone rip off . I LOVE the ECM8000 omni microphone.

  • Jules Malone

    There's been a lot of talk elsewhere on the web, but no one here has mentioned Behringer's latest rip: Bugera amps are Peavey clones.

    Here's the breakdown.

    Bugera 333 = Peavey 3120

    Bugera 333XL = Peavey JSX

    Bugera 6260 = Peavey 6505

    Bugera 6262 = Peavey 6505+

  • Chris Downing

    This 'arguement' seems to go on and on. With one group of people who later will be saying copying CDs is OK, copying software is OK, copying DVDs is OK because the companies are all fat cats. Funny though, to half the rest of the World, we all look like fat cats, so when your job, your function, is given to someone who'll do it for 1/10th the price, you'll think that's fair game as well? No? So what's the difference. If your employers products and services are done by someone else who uses a website like yours, logos like yours, the same paint and colours as you the same core message as you – but never did the learning and R&D you've been through, never looks after clients like you do – if you business starts to fail because someone does that to you – you still think that's just fair game, just fair competition?

    Personally I think people come up with all sorts of weak ideas and justifications for why they don't want to pay the market rate and keep their neighbours employed. 1. They are just mean people. 2. They don't understand how the market works and don't want to. 3. When they lose their job they'll be the first to complain. But at least they will be able to complain without being put in prison for doing so – we have free choice, freedom, and democracy.

  • red button

    The bottom line is Behringer is an unethical company. When you buy their gear (especially when you buy it new) you, by default, support their activity. Think how cheaply other companies could produce these products if Uli and his thugs weren't stealing their market share via copying ALL of their R&D.