Confessions of a Behringer Apologist . . .

  • Thread starter Thread starter chessrock
  • Start date Start date
C

chessrock

Banned
Behringer is doing no harm to anyone. Zip. Zero. Zilch.

If anything, the Pro Audio Industry should be thanking their lucky stars that a company like Behringer exists. Just like pot dealers should be thanking the Cigarette industry . . . and just as the crack dealers should be thanking the cocain producers. You see, Behringer is merely the "gateway drug" to the pro Audio Industry.

How can this be, you ask? Shamelessly ripping off the designs and R&D of other manufacturers in the name of profit is HELPING the audio industry? You need to take your medication, Chessrock!

No I don't. You need to look at the big picture in order to understand. It's called abstract thinking, and it requires imagination -- something musicians should be good at, but where engineers often fall short. Let's take a few of their examples: How about the ecm 8000 microphone (?) Does anyone seriously think they are taking money away from earthworks or Audix on that one?

Well, let's try looking at the big picture: Johnny is a struggling audio engineer trying to get enough work to make ends meet. Johnny wants to improve the sound of the drum tracks he produces. Part of his problem is poor room accoustics, and partly his limited microphone options. Johnny debates how he should divide his $5,000 between accoustic treatment and microphones. Wisely, Johnny decides the room accoustics should come first, so all $5,000 are wisely sunk in to constructing bass traps, etc.

Still in need of improving his mic collection, Johnny opts for two of the ecm8000's on Harvey's recommendation. His drum tracks start improving drastically, as the new mics really flatter his nice room accoustics. "Wow, that's nice" his clients say to Johnny. Some of his clients comment on how nice his room is for drum tracking . . . word gets out, and now Johnny is starting to get some referal business just for the kick-ass sound of his drum room. :)

Due the added business, Johnny now has even more money to spend in order to upgrade his microphone collection. One of his priorities now is to get several channels of good, clean preamplification. Ideally, he would like a step-up in the quality of mic preamplification from his SoundCraft Board. He'd like 4 channels worth of clean gain, and has $4,000 he just made from some of his latest drum-tracking projects.

Armed with his ever-growing pocketbook, Johnny decides to pull out the debit card and buy that shiny, new earthworks 1024 to even further compliment his nice accoustics and chep microphones. :) Eventually, it all came around for earthworks, right?

You could follow the same path of logic for just about every other rip-off Behringer produces. The ecm 8000's probably weren't even a good example, but it is still the same principle. For those who can't afford the gear Behringer is ripping off anyway, there is no money lost on anyone's part. The pro Audio Industry benefits as one more "recruit" is added to the list of gear sluts and addicts. Think of Behringer as the "Gateway Drug" of the Pro Audio Industry. Once someone is introduced, they will soon be hooked. Once they are hooked, they will want better and better gear. Soon, they will realize how cheap their Behringer gear really is, and they will move on to more hardcore stuff, as the Pro Audio Industry salivates over the prospects of sinking their teeth in to the next "Johnny."

Don't look now, but I think that was just Johnny over there in the mixing forum wanting to know if he should step up from his Soundcraft to an Allen & Heath.
 
Last edited:
That's a very well thought out, well articulated position. I'll do my best to reply in kind.

Bet you were a Napsterhead when they were around, too. :D

Seriously...

I don't have a bit of a problem with Behringer's business model. Sell cheap knock-offs of other people's gear. Do our best to simulate their stuff with cheap parts that may or may not hold up, and are probably inferior in quality and design. Radio Shlock used to do the same thing. Kraco, Pyramid, Symphonic, Fisher, the list goes on and on - all companies doing the same thing. You're right - it is good for the quality manufacturers - the ones who never move on wouldn't have bought their high-dollar stuff to begin with, and the people who get serious about their taste in electronics eventually recognize these companies for the junk that they are. Everybody wins.

Here's the problem.

Behringer decided to take it one step farther. Instead of just doing a quick, inexpensive design in their own shops, they decide they're going to buy their competitor's product, dismantle it, and copy it. They did it with Mackie. They did it with Aphex. I allege that they did it with Ebtech as well. Sometimes they repackage it, sometimes they don't. This is not good for the industry. This costs small companies like Ebtech a lot of business for a relatively (as pro audio goes) inexpensive product even at Ebtech's price, because Ebtech doesn't get the chance to really establish their brand in the market - Behringer co-opts it. Mackie can take care of themselves - they're extremely well known. So can Aphex. But who's next now that Ebtech has gotten the stick? Who's gonna be the next micro-shop to be targeted (and potentially run out of business) by Behringer?

There's nothing good for the industry in that kind of predatory activity.

Radio Shack has adopted a business model that doesn't diverge from their original that much, but still fills this role - Pioneer and RCA make the majority of their home electronics. They're still cheap, because Radio Shack says "make them cheap" - and they're Pioneer and RCA designs, but there's a partnership happening between the low-grade company and the more reputable one, rather than a parasitic relationship.

If Behringer would at least have the common decency to license this gear, I'd go away and never bother them again. Don't you think a small company like Ebtech would LOVE to get the infusion of cash that a Behringer license deal would bring? It may end up adding $10 to Behringer's price tag on the final product. It would end up being a great deal for both parties, however - because then your part of the methodology would kick in. People would buy the Behringer version, and Ebtech would still be in business when Behringer's version broke and people said "hey - here's the real McCoy - sure it's more expensive, but it's built like a brick shithouse! Then everyone's happy.
 
I can see that.
Very few serious guitar players keep thier DOD pedals. How many proffesional guitarist still play thier strat knockoffs? And yeah, even worse, how many strat knockoffs are there out there? Cheap product is usually exactly that, cheap product, and as a stepping stone, this stuff works great to get you to buy more expensive/quality gear. I myself have behringer board, but I am saving up for a sprit board, so the theory proves right in my case.
todd
 
Unless of course the company that makes the board that you plan to buy goes out of business.

(yes I know it's a Soundcraft and that isn't going to happen)
 
The Griffinator makes some very good points. I think Behringer looks at it as a calculated risk . . . and to them, the amount of $$ they spend on legal bills will probably be less than what it would cost to licence the technology.

But I fear that they fail to see the big picture in this as well. People like us on these forums will talk, and we'll spread word to other potential buyers, and Behringer may wind up losing business for not licencing the technology like they should.

Unfortunately, this really isn't a new debate or phenomenon. It's been going on for quite some time now. The business world is really a hostile environment where only the strong survive. The costs of entry in to a particular industry are always going to be high, and you need to foresee these possibilities before you take the risk of going in to business in the first place. You need to think out ahead of time "How am I going to hedge my bets should a Behringer come along and copy my design?" "How will my model X1 distinguish itself from their "Ultra- X2?" :)

One way is to offer superior customer service. First-time users may not understand the value in it, but after a couple of problems, you really grow to appreciate just how important it is to have someone on the other end to pick up the phone and walk you through any difficulties . . . someone to honor the warranty, or at the very least answer your emails! I think Alan Hyatt could tell you it's been a crucial part of his survival, and one of the reasons his company thrives to this day. Meanwhile companies like SE go around copying his models.

It's going to happen. It has from the beginning of time in most every industry. Engineering can be copied. Customer service, good marketing, and a trusted name are far more valuable and difficult to copy. And if you can't offer that, then you should think twice about going in to business in the first place.
 
Griffinator said:
That's a very well thought out, well articulated position. I'll do my best to reply in kind.

Bet you were a Napsterhead when they were around, too. :D

Seriously...

I don't have a bit of a problem with Behringer's business model. Sell cheap knock-offs of other people's gear. Do our best to simulate their stuff with cheap parts that may or may not hold up, and are probably inferior in quality and design. Radio Shlock used to do the same thing. Kraco, Pyramid, Symphonic, Fisher, the list goes on and on - all companies doing the same thing. You're right - it is good for the quality manufacturers - the ones who never move on wouldn't have bought their high-dollar stuff to begin with, and the people who get serious about their taste in electronics eventually recognize these companies for the junk that they are. Everybody wins.

Here's the problem.

Behringer decided to take it one step farther. Instead of just doing a quick, inexpensive design in their own shops, they decide they're going to buy their competitor's product, dismantle it, and copy it. They did it with Mackie. They did it with Aphex. I allege that they did it with Ebtech as well. Sometimes they repackage it, sometimes they don't. This is not good for the industry. This costs small companies like Ebtech a lot of business for a relatively (as pro audio goes) inexpensive product even at Ebtech's price, because Ebtech doesn't get the chance to really establish their brand in the market - Behringer co-opts it. Mackie can take care of themselves - they're extremely well known. So can Aphex. But who's next now that Ebtech has gotten the stick? Who's gonna be the next micro-shop to be targeted (and potentially run out of business) by Behringer?

There's nothing good for the industry in that kind of predatory activity.

Radio Shack has adopted a business model that doesn't diverge from their original that much, but still fills this role - Pioneer and RCA make the majority of their home electronics. They're still cheap, because Radio Shack says "make them cheap" - and they're Pioneer and RCA designs, but there's a partnership happening between the low-grade company and the more reputable one, rather than a parasitic relationship.

If Behringer would at least have the common decency to license this gear, I'd go away and never bother them again. Don't you think a small company like Ebtech would LOVE to get the infusion of cash that a Behringer license deal would bring? It may end up adding $10 to Behringer's price tag on the final product. It would end up being a great deal for both parties, however - because then your part of the methodology would kick in. People would buy the Behringer version, and Ebtech would still be in business when Behringer's version broke and people said "hey - here's the real McCoy - sure it's more expensive, but it's built like a brick shithouse! Then everyone's happy.
Click to expand...

In your above post, you accuse Behringer of stealing EbTech's design
for their cable tester.
PLEASE be carefull what you say.
Here's Behringer's opinion on the matter....

Dear Sir,
We refer to your email alleging our copying of Ebtech's Swiss Army 6 in 1
cable tester.
BEHRINGER takes strong objection to your baseless accusation of us stealing
Ebtech's designs. The
layout of the top of the device is simple and functional. There can hardly
be any trademark or trade dress protection which can subsist on this design.
The hardware and software in the product are designed by our own R&D
department independently. We bring to you the analogy of the simple
functional design of an electrical adaptor. We are of the view that this
product is similar and houses no intellectual property rights that is
registrable nor attributable to Ebtech.
If you are aware of any intellectual property protection that subsists in
Ebtech's product, we would appreciate if you can furnish us with the
information for further investigation.
If not, we strongly object to your act of sending such baseless emails which
damage the reputation of BEHRINGER and is defamatory of us and demand that
such actions be stopped immediately. We will pursue all legal action(s)
necessary against such conduct.
Best Regards,
Counsel, Legal & Corporate Affairs
----------------------------------
IMHO, you are jepordizing yourself and possibly this BBS legally.
So far, all you have offered for proof of theft is two pictures and your opinion.
If you think that is enough proof to go to court with, carry on.
I hope what's so obvious to you is equally obvious to a judge.
It's not to me, unless you can specifically name the patent or copyright that Behringer violated that protects EbTech's product.
You are entitled to your opinion.
If your opinion accuses a company of a crime on a public BB, that company is entitled to sue you and this BB to defend their defamed reputation.
You have made some very serious accusations against a
large corporation in public.
"Thou shalt not bear false witness"
Please be carefull.
Please be responsible.
Peace.
Carmen
 
chessrock said:
But I fear that they fail to see the big picture in this as well. People like us on these forums will talk, and we'll spread word to other potential buyers, and Behringer may wind up losing business for not licencing the technology like they should.
Click to expand...

And, ultimately, despite the flaming and apologism, that's what I'm trying to do. Spread the word to other potential buyers, and anyone else who'll lend an ear for a moment, that Behringer is a shitty company that should be avoided.

For all this effort, I've actually been able to steer at least $5700 worth of business away from Behringer - people actually asking "well, I was going to buy a Behringer XYZ, but not now - what do you suggest I buy instead" - so I think I've accomplished at least some of what I set out to do.
 
CarmenC said:
IMHO, you are jepordizing yourself and possibly this BBS legally.
So far, all you have offered for proof of theft is two pictures and your opinion.
Click to expand...

Did you read earlier in the "Behringer's at it again" post?

Let me refresh your memory:

Just spoke with Bll Wenzloff at Ebtech: 847-639-4646.

He confirmed that there is no licensing agreement in place, and that the Behinger product is an unauthorized, completely identical, reverse-engineered duplication of their product, right down to the dimensions of the sheet metal and the circuitry inside. A knockoff. In short, this *is* an outright theft of a product that had been in the marketplace for many years.
Click to expand...

I'll take my opinion and Bill Wenzloff's testimony to court, and let them dismantle both boxes in front of the judge. Then we'll see who's libeling who and who's damaging who.
 
How many proffesional guitarist still play thier strat knockoffs? And yeah, even worse, how many strat knockoffs are there out there? Cheap product is usually exactly that, cheap product, and as a stepping stone, this stuff works great to get you to buy more expensive/quality gear
Click to expand...

I for one own a knock of strat A fernandes revival very early model and i know this plays just as good as any Fender i owned or played

I Have also owned vintage stratocasters over the years and still remain to have one still in my collection

Yes the likes of Fernandes,tokai, Ibanez etc were all reproducing guitars they seem to have got into trouble for will it stop me owning one or playing one hell no are they value for money hell yes

the dakota red strat copy i own is a great guitar has a birdeye maple neck and super lightweight body it can be faulted on one minor detail which would only be detected if you knew anything about vintage guitars anyway enough of this as i realise your all debating another product but dont believe these strat rip offs are inferior as many of them are darkhorses

Go find out why Fender i think stopped production of their japanese stratocasters

From what i heard someone cried when they saw how dam good the japanese product was hmmmmmmmmmmmm go figure
 
Please Stop the Fear-Mongering

Unfortunately, Carmen is doing Behringer's work for them by repeatedly publicizing a response he received privately from the company. I'll have to remember to cc Carmen on the next "cease and desist" letter I draft. You can't buy service like that!

A public forum such as this is not a legal entity and has no standing as such. Attempting to bring legal action against a BBS would be laughable and would harm the plaintiff's reputation. Likewise, freedom of speech tends to be very broadly interpreted, and stating one's opinion publicly is generally not actionable, except under very specific conditions.

There *is* a real danger, however. That danger is described by the advertising industry quite bluntly: "There is no such thing as bad publicity." By turning the legitimate complaints of a few companies and the opinions of private individuals into an inflated "legal controversy," you are increasing awareness of the company and its products, promoting their point of view, and possibly increasing their sales.

I ask those who "fear repercussions" to examine their motives and the consequences of their postings carefully, and to consult with their attorneys before making any further dire and ill-informed claims about the potential liability of other forum members (or the forum itself).

Such fear is generally based on ignorance and inexperience, and lawyers depend on a fearful reaction to get their job done with as little time and effort as possible. Feel free to state your opinion on whether Behringer has or has not done something unethical, but please reserve your opinion on matters of law until after you've discussed it with competent legal counsel.

I mean no disrespect to Carmen or anyone else by asking for this fear-mongering to stop. I am simply concerned that some of you are playing into the hands of those whose actions you deplore.

Sincerely,

Mark H.
 
Last edited:
I remember when the first Mackie mixers came out. I'd never seen anything like the 1604 or the 1202. At the time it was such a unique and fresh concept--the "studio grade" pre-amps and the designs were unlike anything around. In less than ten years, seems like every mixer company has made some kind of Mackie knock off--Tascam, Peavey, Carvin, Behringer, Spirit, etc. Same layouts, features, and even the same colored tiny knobs. I'm sure there are circuit differences or else Mackie might have taken them all to court, but if you look at the ideas that were copied and the basic construction, it was all ripped from Mackie, IMHO. Since they changed (I assume) the circuits to some degree, all these companies are probably off the hook legally.

So, did these companies steal the innovations of Mackie? When does theft start? Did they sort of steal, not at all, or blatantly? Or is it like Behringer states, that you can't copyright a simple layout? If you make an exact duplicate of a circuit and then change a couple minor things, is that OK?

I'm a Mac guy, and to this day, I think Microsoft stole the look and feel of Apple's OS--but the courts didn't think so. I would imagine that there are thousands of simple electrical circuits that are common to many different audio products. As for a cable tester, I would imagine thats the level of stuff you'd find in those little Radio Shack fun with electronics books. Can you patent that stuff? I don't know because I'm not a lawyer.

Back in the 50's and 60's, the Japanese were known for their ability to copy US technology. Then, companies like Sony took it steps beyond and created a whole new universe of electronic products which we take for granted today. It is interesting to think how history might have been different if the Japanese were stopped from copying everything.

So, what is theft? What is intellectual property and where does the public domain begin? Should we boycott all the mixer companies that made Mackie clones, or did they not steal enough to be damned? Maybe its a legal question. Yet, if one talks about "ethics" and justice, then I would have to conclude that theft of any kind is theft, even if its just parroting others ideas. In short, I'm still on the fence on this whole issue because if I apply one set of standards to company A, then I believe I should apply the same standards to company B, C and D. More grist for the mill.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top