M
mithra6
New member
So why does homerecording.com's board seem to be a Behringer bashing board? Seems like there is more to talk about.
I mean I hate McDonalds, but I moved on.
I mean I hate McDonalds, but I moved on.
MISTERQCUE
Not Just Anutha Brutha
mithra6 said:
Because there are those who foolishly GLORIFY it!!
Not so much the ones who are on an extreme budget and are FORCED to use it's crappy products, but the ones who claim that their gear is the end-all to the be-all!
BTW, this GLORIOUS thread has also bought out of retirement some old-time members bringing back fond memories of HR's early days!!!
"Misty Waters Full of MEM-OR-RIES.............!!"
stetto
Left Unattended
mithra6 said:
And if you look around you'll see that there is a LOT more being talked about.
I come here when looking for a new piece of gear, sometimes I'll post a question about that gear, a few times it's been Behringer stuff I'm looking at. Though I take most responses seriously, I know that there is bias against certain companies by certain people, Behringer being one of them. I always go to several sources when considering a new piece of equipment, including the compay's website. I get great input from forums like this, though some of it has to be taken in a certain "context"...There are some here who are not exactly home recordists, and though I respect and regard their input, they are on a totally different level when discussing gear. Most of us are not doing this for a living , and the consumer grade stuff is what we have to work with. We can't write a $100,000 digital soundboard off our taxes....So we thank the powers that be for "797 Audio" and the ability to afford something better than a 4-track cassette recorder and an SM57...
BTW, I was at a studio in Paradise Valley AZ once, they had a Neve or Soundcraft digital board with a million channels, flying faders, the works...They couldn't use a bunch of the channels because they didn't work---OUT OF THE BOX...It may happen less often, but it happens...
Behringer hit the streets running, and that pricks up the hair on some...I was warned by those who sold me the stuff--Some of their gear is junk out of the box--But if it does work, then yay for you, because you saved some do-re-mi and have a piece of equipment that you must have needed...
Oh, then there's the "Assembled by Slave Labor in China" argument...Well, even if that was true, look at Neuman's history...At least the Chinese aren't baking them afterwards...
I remember Furman having an "invincible" reputation...Now I see bashing going on quite a bit...
Eric
scrubs
Not of sound mind
mithra6 said:
I don't think we're bashing behringer. Most folks here own and use behri gear of some sort. The problem is, imo, people just getting into recording are often given the false impression (from MF catalogs, GC employees, Behringer's own marketing hype, etc.) that Behringer makes high quality, professional audio gear. When I bought my behri mixer, I thought, "wow, this is great! it's all silver and pretty. the musician's friend catalog review says it's good. the preamps feature 'ultra low noise design,' so they must be good." But, the recordings I made through that mixer were noisy and lifeless. Sure, operator skill has a lot to do with it, and in the right hands (like Ford Van's), very decent recordings can be made with behringer gear, but that's not who it is marketed towards. Behringer is what it is -- inexpensive gear. Some of it is good, some of it is bad. There is a fair amount of quality variation from piece to piece and reliability is questionable. Behri has been accused of a lot of reverse engineering of other companies' products. Take all that for what it's worth. If it's all you can (or want to) afford, then buy it and use it. Just know the reality, not the hype.
Ford Van
Banned
It is funny watching everybody trying to explain theirselves in light of the fact that I have PROVED that Behringer gear is QUITE capable gear, and isn't as "cheap" as originally described.
Ford Van
Banned
I always hear the copout "Ed's capable hands", or "in the right hands", etc. What a bunch of hogwash! I turn the same damn knobs you guys do on this gear! I plug it into a signal path just like you guys do! I just adjust knobs until I get something that sounds decent, just like you guys do.
DavidK
New member
Ford Van said:It is funny watching everybody trying to explain theirselves in light of the fact that I have PROVED that Behringer gear is QUITE capable gear, and isn't as "cheap" as originally described.
You have proven: you are good at what you do, you are a pro, and a quality one at that
I GUARANTEE you:
I can get a violin from a pawn shop and blow everyone away ( except a knowledgable violinist/musician.) I am a PRO: if I CANT do this, I wouldnt be a pro.
Why dont I use a cheap fiddle instead of my mega-bucks fiddle? Because my fiddle is BETTER
Yes, a pro can probably make a good sound on a cigar box. It doesnt explain why somebody should buy a Behringer mixer if the Yamaha mixer is better at the same price.
I sez:
It's a myth that Behringer is so cheap. Look around the stores, you can find similiar stuff that works better for a comparable price.
Ford Van
Banned
"works better" is a VERY relative statement.
MISTERQCUE
Not Just Anutha Brutha
Ford Van said:
Happy New Year Ed!
scrubs
Not of sound mind
Ford Van said:It is funny watching everybody trying to explain theirselves in light of the fact that I have PROVED that Behringer gear is QUITE capable gear, and isn't as "cheap" as originally described.
You have proven nothing. You have provided examples of behringer gear in action which did not completely suck. Good for you. Just to humor you, I'll provide some samples of what I was talking about with regard to the GI100 DI box. Both samples are the same bass line, split - one through the behri and the other through the GT Brick DI. There is no eq applied to either signal. Granted, they both sound fine and are usable, but the behringer signal shaves off the low frequencies, which is what I meant by it not having a "full, rich sound." Also, the Brick costs about 10x as much, so it's not an apples-to-apples comparison. Like I said in my first post, the behri is usable and, for $35, it's a decent DI box.
The Behringer: http://www.lightningmp3.com/live/file.php?fid=2293
The Brick: http://www.lightningmp3.com/live/file.php?fid=2294
Ford Van
Banned
See, that just bugs me. "works better". What does that mean?
I just showed you how well my Behringer stuff works. Most people don't have much complaint about my audio. Whether it is x cheap gear used, or y cheap gear used. It is ALL cheap ass gear. The designs are all about the same. The components used in the devices are all about the same.
It is all the same shit, repackaged to look different is all. Yeah, x gear has a slightly different taper on the ratio knob, y gear provides 18dB of boost instead of 12dB like z gear does. Whatever. I doubt that ANY of you would hear any difference between a track with a Behringer compressor on it in a dense mix and a Samson compressor on the same settings.
Here is a good one.
There is a cheap ass Behringer Composer on a track, and a cheap ass Alesis 3630 on another. What are they inserted on?
I just showed you how well my Behringer stuff works. Most people don't have much complaint about my audio. Whether it is x cheap gear used, or y cheap gear used. It is ALL cheap ass gear. The designs are all about the same. The components used in the devices are all about the same.
It is all the same shit, repackaged to look different is all. Yeah, x gear has a slightly different taper on the ratio knob, y gear provides 18dB of boost instead of 12dB like z gear does. Whatever. I doubt that ANY of you would hear any difference between a track with a Behringer compressor on it in a dense mix and a Samson compressor on the same settings.
Here is a good one.
There is a cheap ass Behringer Composer on a track, and a cheap ass Alesis 3630 on another. What are they inserted on?
Ford Van
Banned
scrubs said:
Sorry, I ain't gonna install quicktime to listen to your audio scrubs.
scrubs
Not of sound mind
Ford Van said:
They are mp3's. If you save them to disk, they'll play in anything.
DavidK
New member
Ford Van said:
A. Works better- sounds better.
B. You showed your skills.
The only way to compare is doing an A/B. I know nothing about compressors. Actually I know nothing about audio
I know this:I A/B 'ed a Behringer mixer and a Yamaha mixer. Same price. The Behringer was noisy. Real world talk.
Nobody is doubting your skills. I KNOW for a fact that you could/would have heard the difference between a Yamaha MG and its Behringer equal ( dont know the model). Hands down. No contest. I stake my musical ears on it: the Yamaha made less noise.
Will the behri work? Of course it will. Why would anybody buy a noisy mixer when a quiet one is the same price???
Ford Van
Banned
God, this isn't even comparing apples to oranges. This is comparing apples to red meat man!
1 - The Brick is a MIC PREAMPLIFIER, NOT just a DI box. At some point with the Behringer, you would have still had to run it through a preamp to boost some more signal. Which did you use?
2 - There IS that approximately $400 difference in price. It BETTER sound better!
I am betting that the preamp you ran the Behringer thru possibly had a low cut filter engaged.
1 - The Brick is a MIC PREAMPLIFIER, NOT just a DI box. At some point with the Behringer, you would have still had to run it through a preamp to boost some more signal. Which did you use?
2 - There IS that approximately $400 difference in price. It BETTER sound better!
I am betting that the preamp you ran the Behringer thru possibly had a low cut filter engaged.
Ford Van
Banned
David, I have this Behringer in my signal path ALL THE TIME! It is what it between my soundcard and monitor amp. This thing is quiet as hell!
scrubs
Not of sound mind
Ford Van said:
Both were run into a Tascam US-122. The Brick went into the line-input, with the Tascam preamp gain at 0. The Behri track went into the XLR input, with the preamp trim up. The Tascam does not have a low-cut filter. Here are the plots, if you were unable to download the tracks. Again, I'm not saying they are equivalent pieces of gear, just that the behri didn't give me as much bass.
Attachments
Ford Van
Banned
Dewd, the two signal went through VERY different gain staging. You will have to remove other gain staging elements first to have it be a fair comparison.
Really.
Really.
Ford Van
Banned
Until you remove the preamp element, you will never know.
Also, how did you split the signal to the two devices?
Also, how did you split the signal to the two devices?
scrubs
Not of sound mind
Ford Van said:
That's right, you will never know. This is merely one example (the one I could find on my computer this morning). My opinion of the behri di in other setups is similar. You can argue all you want. It won't change my opinion (& offered evidence) that the behri di has less bass response.
The signal went bass-->brick instrument input-->direct/amp out to behri di-->Tascam mic input; & the signal from the brick, after amplification, went to the line-in on the Tascam.