Behringer Swing

Want to talk about music hardware or software that doesn't include Reason?
User avatar
joeyluck
Moderator
Posts: 8283
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 24 Nov 2020

Koshdukai wrote:
24 Nov 2020
joeyluck wrote:
24 Nov 2020
Meanwhile Korg and Moog are having entire synths with hundreds of parameters copied, and they seem to be less vocal...or I've missed it. Maybe they have sought legal action, but stayed quiet publicly? Again not saying Arturia is wrong for speaking out, it's just interesting the different approaches and when people decide to take a stand.

Also Behringer has been doing it for years and Arturia seemed to have no problem with it when Behringer is copying their competitors. So seeing the post of "Seriously?" Is like, "Yes.. have you been living under a rock?" Lol. Seeing the shock and awe of one of Behringer's easiest and simplest copies for them after copying much more complex synths, is interesting. Again, not saying anybody is wrong for feeling any kind of way about it.
I think the "Seriously?" was more like "Seriously? Is this the best you can do?" :P

At least the Borg/Boog modules have a different take on the physical format and the price difference justifies their
"We're making it more affordable for you all, starving musicians"
Yeah, but then that's targeting a smaller company who builds their synths by hand. But not arguing against it.

Arturia might not be the biggest innovators either. I mean, you can say they've certainly gone about things ethically by officially partnering with companies to make branded soft synth emulations, but for the longest time, that's been their primary focus—emulating and copying.

Legally speaking however, there isn't as much wrong as people think with copying. Like others here have mentioned, it's like seeing the off-brand versions of everything in the store.

Arturia isn't necessarily partnering with the companies for their emulations to be ethical, they want the brand names to help sell their emulations. Behringer says, we'll copy it and call it something slightly different and sell it with our name on it...

User avatar
Koshdukai
Posts: 348
Joined: 02 Jun 2015

Post 24 Nov 2020

guitfnky wrote:
24 Nov 2020
Koshdukai wrote:
24 Nov 2020
It's just sad and disappointing. It's as if they couldn't do better. That's (to me) the issue.

They're showing to the world, a brand new product that... already existed. What a waste of opportunity to make something better, from a company with enough resources to do so.
did you read Behringer’s response? they say they did add functionality that just won’t be apparent until they put out their DAW. if that’s the case (yes, IF, since we can’t know for sure until that happens), then they will have taken that opportunity and made something better.
Only for their own DAW users.
«The competition law was designed to avoid companies creating a market monopoly and stifle innovation» ...here, I think Behringer "stifled" themselves, with this 1:1 copy of the hardware. That's what's sad. Not as much that they copied it because that's been happening for a while, from companies like Worlde. Behringer has everything to be better than that, but they decided not to. That's sad. That's the exact opposite of innovating.

So, I'm not talking about reverse-engineering (copying)+tweaking ("evolving"?) the firmware (if that happened, that's going even lower that they went already). I'm talking about the hardware. When they say "we followed an established concept" one would expect to see something inspired by but improved. Apparently, Behringer is just saying "yup, there's nothing to improve here. This is the ultimate possible best, so we're forced to do a 1:1 copy". That says a lot about their technical capabilities (and I'm using sarcasm here).

...and yes, I read it 5hrs ago.
Last edited by Koshdukai on 24 Nov 2020, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Koshdukai
Posts: 348
Joined: 02 Jun 2015

Post 24 Nov 2020

joeyluck wrote:
24 Nov 2020
Arturia might not be the biggest innovators either. I mean, you can say they've certainly gone about things ethically by officially partnering with companies to make branded soft synth emulations, but for the longest time, that's been their primary focus—emulating and copying.

Legally speaking however, there isn't as much wrong as people think with copying. Like others here have mentioned, it's like seeing the off-brand versions of everything in the store.

Arturia isn't necessarily partnering with the companies for their emulations to be ethical, they want the brand names to help sell their emulations. Behringer says, we'll copy it and call it something slightly different and sell it with our name on it...
I never complained about Behringer vintage clones. The new physical formats, the new prices, the revival of discontinued products, the small tweaks/fixes on those products, that's fine (by me).
I also never complained about Arturia virtualizing hardware. They jumped on the trend of hardware virtualization by trying to bring to the masses vintage UX (and sound) with added functionality the way they knew best.
Same as Behringer through hardware clones.

But 1:1 copies? heck, that's usually left to .cn companies trying to grab a piece of local or bottom range markets.
Behringer just put themselves in that hole now too.

User avatar
Koshdukai
Posts: 348
Joined: 02 Jun 2015

Post 24 Nov 2020

btw, for those not understanding my position here: I'm just sad Behringer lost the opportunity to use their bright engineers to come up with something new/better. Behringer disapointed me both technically and morally (more than they usually do).
They're just saying "sorry, our R&D is weak". That's just it.~

On the other hand, they just validated how good Arturia's R&D is :)

User avatar
joeyluck
Moderator
Posts: 8283
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 24 Nov 2020

I'm curious to see what they copy for their DAW...lol

But as far as the Swing vs. the Keystep, there really isn't much there to copy, is there? I suppose they could've done like everyone else and said, "Let's instead put our knobs here and our buttons there..."

The synth world definitely seems to be different and less forgiving about these things. I can't imagine anybody pointing out the reuse of guitar shapes, location of knobs on a guitar, the design and function of guitar pedals... Maybe they did years ago?

Behringer does have pretty close to the same layout, but it does use different colors and different knobs etc., so it really isn't 1:1

User avatar
guitfnky
Posts: 3224
Joined: 19 Jan 2015

Post 24 Nov 2020

joeyluck wrote:
24 Nov 2020
I'm curious to see what they copy for their DAW...lol

But as far as the Swing vs. the Keystep, there really isn't much there to copy, is there? I suppose they could've done like everyone else and said, "Let's instead put our knobs here and our buttons there..."

The synth world definitely seems to be different and less forgiving about these things. I can't imagine anybody pointing out the reuse of guitar shapes, location of knobs on a guitar, the design and function of guitar pedals... Maybe they did years ago?

Behringer does have pretty close to the same layout, but it does use different colors and different knobs etc., so it really isn't 1:1
this is what I don’t understand. why single out Behringer? because they make a lot of money? lots of other companies make a lot of money doing the same damn thing.

if we’re looking out for the little guy, well, Arturia isn’t a little guy by a long shot.

it could be argued Behringer is looking out for the little guy from the consumer side—democratizing otherwise expensive hardware.

User avatar
eusti
Moderator
Posts: 2660
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 24 Nov 2020

Response from Axel Hartmann, designer wirking with Arturia (via Analogue Heaven Mailing list):

https://www.facebook.com/10000073461926 ... 49161/?d=n

For those who can't stand Facebook:

"I do feel the need to comment on the many postings I can find here @ Facebook in several places regarding my thoughts, feelings, but also the truth about the blunt Behringer copy of the Arturia key step.
Arturia and myself, aka my company design box are designing instruments, synthesizers, controllers, interfaces since many years. As industrial designer, I contribute mostly my services on the asthetical side of a product. This is true for almost all hardware products that you know from Arturia. In all cases, Arturia is buying my services - I never licensed any of the designs. Arturia always pays, and naturally owns the output of my work, that - by the way - is alway the result of an in-depth cooperation with their internal team of specialists.
Arturia and myself are working together since many years, and we share the deep desire of designing innovative products. I could never share any of the designs, that came out of that cooperation with any body else, legally not, and not from my personal high attitude in that regards. So anything, pointing in that direction is simply fake information. Neither the company Behringer, nor Uli himself have ever approached me with a request like that. And I would also never ever do something like that - I can not license anything that is not in my possession.
Personally, I feel sad, and am also upset about that sheer copy of a design, that I once created for, and together with Arturia, the team around Frederic Brun. These people have spent lots of efforts and great energy in building a brand and all that belongs to a brands assets. It is simply not right, somebody else is taking advantage of that hard work (which is not only true for Arturia, but for all great brands, that must see their most successful products being copied)
I do not understand (Uli) Behringer - with his huge company and the power of many great R&D teams - some of the best and most respected and innovative companies we know in our business, that Uli was able to simply buy in the past with his money. A product like that copy simply can not represent the core values of the people, he could convince to be part of his company. It is simply sad, and I can not understand that move (like many, it seems)."

D.

User avatar
joeyluck
Moderator
Posts: 8283
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 24 Nov 2020

If there is a Sonic Talk tomorrow, I'm sure this may take up a good amount of the time.

User avatar
Boombastix
Posts: 1930
Joined: 18 May 2018
Location: Bay Area, CA

Post 24 Nov 2020

If Arturia wanted to protect their design they could have filed a Design Patent in the EU and one in the US. Cost is less than $1000 USD each. I know how this works because I have done this myself.
In the EU you are granted a Design Patent automatically for 3yr by law. It was put in place to protect the EU fashion industry.

No patent lasts forever because capitalism will need competition, but patents exists to protect innovation as well. It is s balance.

This is especially true in the pharmacutical market. Brand drugs can cost 100 times more than the generic drugs. Once patents expire the market mainly moves to generic drugs.
10% off at Waves with link: https://www.waves.com/r/6gh2b0
Disclaimer - I get 10% as well.

User avatar
O1B
Posts: 2021
Joined: 26 Jan 2015

Post 25 Nov 2020

NOVEMBER 24, 2020

Ten Ways
Image
Behringer Could Have Improved on the KeyStep
An illustrated guide

9. (of 10) Add some pots
Image
A complement of knobs could output CV or MIDI CCs for
more hands-on performance of modular or other synthesizers.

https://interuserface.net/2020/11/ten-w ... e-keystep/

User avatar
Faastwalker
Posts: 1823
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 26 Nov 2020

A clone to far for me. Ridiculous really. All very well re-creating old, long since out of production devices that a lot of people would love to have access to now. That's cool. But blatantly cloning an existing device almost identically just seem cheap and lazy to me. Why copy it so completely? Why not make a device inspired by the Key Step that improves on it or adds something different? Completely wrong to me.

danc
Posts: 664
Joined: 14 Oct 2016

Post 27 Nov 2020

So... there are these 2 guys, Frédéric and Gilles. They come up with this idea in 2003 of respectfully "stealing" other companies products, without permission, and selling their exact copies to make money. At first it was the Modula V. They realised it was a great idea.. so they became really busy copying and copying and copying... until they had a whole catalogue of "stolen" ideas: OB-Xa, CZ V, Synthi V, Mellotron V, DX 7, CMI, Buchla Easel V, Clavinet V, ARP 2600 V, CS-80 V, Jup-8 V, Mini V, Modular V, SEM V, PROPHET V, VOX Continental, Farfisa V, Wurlitzer V, Solina V, Matrix12 V, Stage-73 V, Synclavier V, B-3 V, Piano V.

To ensure they didn't get caught they decide to rename some of their "stolen" products (just slightly) so that the likes of Yamaha/Roland/Sequential/Moog/Oberheim don't sue them. The Roland Jupiter 8 is now called JUP-8.

Why not stop there... why not respectfully "steal" other people's ideas... with a whole range of compressors, delays, reverbs, flangers, phasers, and chorus units: DIMENSION-D, BI-TRON, BL-20, PLATE-140, SPRING-636, INTENSITY, TAPE-201, MEMORY BRIGADE, ETERNITY, Comp VCA-65, FET-76, FET-76, TUBE-STA, MINI, M12, SEM, Pre 1973, TridA, V76

They justify their actions on their website...

"From 2003, Arturia started working on recreating legendary analogue synthesizers in digital format. Their first software synth, the Modular V, was critically acclaimed and became a great success. Several other software instruments were released in the years following, giving to many musicians access to legendary sounds and creative possibilities they could only dream of."

Did you read that last bit - "...giving to many musicians access to legendary sounds and creative possibilities they could only dream of." They are acting like Robin Hood - with a heartfelt plea for why they do it.

They aren't the only company doing this - we have Behringer who respectfully "steal" other people's ideas and make it accessible to the masses at a lower cost. Just like Arturia they make clones and they also make original products.

Behringer and Arturia are very similar companies in that regard.

But... Arturia are calling "foul play" on Behringer. Because??? Is it because the product in question is still in production? Is there some kind of unspoken rule here... where it must be old and out of production to copy it? Ok... Arturia, please delete JUP-8 from your catalogue as Roland are still selling that product - it's called JP-08. And Roland also do a plugin version - so you can't argue around that point. Just in case you need help Frédéric and Gilles, the "official" Roland plugin is called JUPITER-8. Whilst we are at it, Sequential have announced the re-release of their Prophet 5. Again... please remove the Prophet respectfully "stolen" clone from your catalogue Arturia.

I know copyright and patents are a complete minefield and often are just down to an opinion of a judge on the day... but it does seem like the world has gone mad.

Disclaimer:
I don't have anything against Arturia. I have V-collection and love it. I have Keystep Pro - love it. I had a Minibrute - kind of liked it. Would like a PolyBrute. etc.
I don't have anything against Behringer. I have their Neutron and love it.
300+ original grooving Techno, Tech-House, House, Drum-and-Bass tracks on SoundCloud.
Produced in Reason 11 and Studio One 5 (WIndows).


EdGrip
Posts: 2107
Joined: 03 Jun 2016

Post 27 Nov 2020

Aside from the fact that a piece of VST software is an entirely different category of thing to a hardware synthesiser, most of those hardware synthesisers are long out of production anyway. It's not analogous at all.

While Roland (eventually) brought VST emulations of some of their hardware to market, they did it long after Arturia. And they did it subscription-only.

User avatar
Koshdukai
Posts: 348
Joined: 02 Jun 2015

Post 05 Dec 2020

danc wrote:
27 Nov 2020
They come up with this idea in 2003 of respectfully "stealing" other companies products, without permission, and selling their exact copies to make money.
Propellerhead ReBirth comes to mind ;)

Making (or trying to make) a digital emulation of an hardware product shows more talent than duplicating the same hardware product in hardware with no improvements added. And that's what Behringer did this time (same with guitar pedals, mics and mixer desks).

Digital emulation is one thing. Another is disassembling an hardware product, taking photos of the board, making a component list and build an exact copy of it with different buttons and knobs. What talent is there in this? We're not even sure if they made the firmware from scratch. Let's see if Swing inherited the current bugs of the KeyStep ;)

Arturia's "Seriously?" post was actually a "Seriously? Is this the best you can do, when given a 2nd chance to make a KeyStep?"
Arturia hardware is being copied for a while by less known companies and not even Arturia said anything about it since it's expected, like Brun said in their post about clarifying that this isn't a collaboration. But Behringer is well known in the West and even a bigger company than Arturia, so this whole thing felt weird and really unnecessary.
Even Korg came up with the SQ-64 which is mildly inspired by the BeatStep PRO but with enough differences and improvements or different ways to achieve the same or different things that nobody pointed the finger at it, since that's natural to see in the industry, where someone improves (the keyword here) upon what's already available.

The issue is less about companies using/improving others ideas, but more about how lazy Behringer was. They've shown, to the world, how unimaginative they can get, as a Company, not because they lack talented people inside (they have plenty) but because that's how Uli's mind works... and that's extremely sad to everyone interested in innovation, like they mentioned.

If Arturia (or Propellerhead/Reason Studios or any other software company doing digital emulations of expensive/lost/hard to get hardware/non-existent virtually) is doing something wrong, at least most are adding something new to their emulations when doing hardware virtualization (which in itself is already something "new").

btw, when Roland did their own emulation of the Jupiter 8 (years after Arturia did theirs) they asked them to change the name and "likeness" like the color pallete used, and that's what they did with V3.

What's there to ask to Behringer about the KeyStep copy? "Please add something new to it?" ...for +$10, I think Behringer could add something and sell for the same price :)

I think Behringer got tired of seeing all the YouTube videos reviews/demoing their new clones being played by Arturia KeySteps, something that even their own staff did initially on YouTube.
Last edited by Koshdukai on 08 Dec 2020, edited 1 time in total.

danc
Posts: 664
Joined: 14 Oct 2016

Post 07 Dec 2020

Your thoughts totally resonated with me. However.. I think your final thoughts are probably the real reason for Behringer's Swing.
Koshdukai wrote:
05 Dec 2020
I think Behringer got tired of seeing all the YouTube videos reviews/demoing their new clones being played by Arturia KeySteps, something that even their own staff did initially on YouTube.
I can imagine the boardroom discussion... CEO "why is it that every time our product is talked about on YouTube, we have Arturia bang right in the middle of the picture."... product manager reply "Because we don't have our own CV output keyboard controller." CEO reply... "Well, make one immediately. And don't spend anytime on it... there is no money to be made on them - as those key beds are so expensive to manufacture. Just get rid of that Arturia advert".
300+ original grooving Techno, Tech-House, House, Drum-and-Bass tracks on SoundCloud.
Produced in Reason 11 and Studio One 5 (WIndows).


DaveyG
Posts: 746
Joined: 03 May 2020

Post 07 Dec 2020

danc wrote:
07 Dec 2020
Your thoughts totally resonated with me. However.. I think your final thoughts are probably the real reason for Behringer's Swing.
Koshdukai wrote:
05 Dec 2020
I think Behringer got tired of seeing all the YouTube videos reviews/demoing their new clones being played by Arturia KeySteps, something that even their own staff did initially on YouTube.
I can imagine the boardroom discussion... CEO "why is it that every time our product is talked about on YouTube, we have Arturia bang right in the middle of the picture."... product manager reply "Because we don't have our own CV output keyboard controller." CEO reply... "Well, make one immediately. And don't spend anytime on it... there is no money to be made on them - as those key beds are so expensive to manufacture. Just get rid of that Arturia advert".
Oh, a bit like all those Reason 11 videos where Ableton Live is front and centre. Yeah, I can see how that could grate a little.... :twisted:

User avatar
joeyluck
Moderator
Posts: 8283
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 06 Apr 2021

This popped up my feed, posted last week, and I got a kick out of it. Is the Swing ever going to be released?

Behringer Cat + Arturia Keystep.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
integerpoet
Posts: 98
Joined: 30 Dec 2020
Location: East Bay, California

Post 06 Apr 2021

joeyluck wrote:
23 Nov 2020
…figure out how to compete with Behringer's prices.
Yes, but…
Make it so they have no wiggle room on making things cheaper.
Competing on price isn't merely a matter of coming to emotional terms with a lower profit margin. Eventually, a race to the bottom does affect the product.

My question is how Behringer products compete on such things as build quality and feel and other such properties. Aping a feature list is one thing, but getting a decent feel is quite another, and to me anyway that's worth money. If Behringer clones feel inferior — and I'm not saying they do, but it seems like a possibility — the manufacturers of the originals can market their superior feel.

User avatar
guitfnky
Posts: 3224
Joined: 19 Jan 2015

Post 06 Apr 2021

integerpoet wrote:
06 Apr 2021
joeyluck wrote:
23 Nov 2020
…figure out how to compete with Behringer's prices.
Yes, but…
Make it so they have no wiggle room on making things cheaper.
Competing on price isn't merely a matter of coming to emotional terms with a lower profit margin. Eventually, a race to the bottom does affect the product.

My question is how Behringer products compete on such things as build quality and feel and other such properties. Aping a feature list is one thing, but getting a decent feel is quite another, and to me anyway that's worth money. If Behringer clones feel inferior — and I'm not saying they do, but it seems like a possibility — the manufacturers of the originals can market their superior feel.
I have a number of Behringer devices that are mostly really well-built. the build quality of the Deepmind 6 blew me away, and the mixer I have is solid. I have a couple of their SM57 clones, and those are built okay—not great, but just fine for $20 apiece. the grotbox speaker I have is really solidly built too.

I think the “Behringer is poorly-made garbage” thing is mostly a myth. I guess they did have some QC issues a long time ago (90s, I think), and I think they’ve never fully shaken that.

User avatar
joeyluck
Moderator
Posts: 8283
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 06 Apr 2021

integerpoet wrote:
06 Apr 2021
joeyluck wrote:
23 Nov 2020
…figure out how to compete with Behringer's prices.
Yes, but…
Make it so they have no wiggle room on making things cheaper.
Competing on price isn't merely a matter of coming to emotional terms with a lower profit margin. Eventually, a race to the bottom does affect the product.

My question is how Behringer products compete on such things as build quality and feel and other such properties. Aping a feature list is one thing, but getting a decent feel is quite another, and to me anyway that's worth money. If Behringer clones feel inferior — and I'm not saying they do, but it seems like a possibility — the manufacturers of the originals can market their superior feel.
That's exactly the point I made in the comment you quoted, you just didn't quote that part :-)
joeyluck wrote:
23 Nov 2020
They shouldn't be a threat if they are in fact crappy quality. But I think people realize that hasn't been the case in a very long time. If your company's quality is much better, then you display that and sell that.
So again point being, either match or beat them on price, or sell customers the fact that yours is better quality and prove it.

Every other industry and product out there has generic or knockoff versions that are much cheaper. Somehow synths/keyboards are regarded to be more sacred. And it seems to only pertain to hardware, because we celebrate it in software; whether it's a synth emulation or some DAW concept we want copied from another DAW.

All that said, I do wish Behringer spent more time making original stuff. They have a history of wanting to prove to the world that synths shouldn't cost what they cost. I think they've proven their point and can move on, unless their goal is to see prices drop from everybody making synths.

User avatar
integerpoet
Posts: 98
Joined: 30 Dec 2020
Location: East Bay, California

Post 06 Apr 2021

joeyluck wrote:
06 Apr 2021
integerpoet wrote:
06 Apr 2021
My question is how Behringer products compete on such things as build quality and feel and other such properties. Aping a feature list is one thing, but getting a decent feel is quite another, and to me anyway that's worth money. If Behringer clones feel inferior — and I'm not saying they do, but it seems like a possibility — the manufacturers of the originals can market their superior feel.
That's exactly the point I made in the comment you quoted, you just didn't quote that part :-)
After a re-read, I must agree. :-) I guess I was assuming there are three quality levels worth discussing: ① Behringer of decades ago, ② Behringer now, and ③ Arturia. If your claim is that ② and ③ are effectively indistinguishable, I'll take your word for it.

User avatar
joeyluck
Moderator
Posts: 8283
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 06 Apr 2021

integerpoet wrote:
06 Apr 2021
joeyluck wrote:
06 Apr 2021

That's exactly the point I made in the comment you quoted, you just didn't quote that part :-)
After a re-read, I must agree. :-) I guess I was assuming there are three quality levels worth discussing: ① Behringer of decades ago, ② Behringer now, and ③ Arturia. If your claim is that ② and ③ are effectively indistinguishable, I'll take your word for it.
I've had zero issues with Behringer stuff. I've used the X32 at many theatres mixing musicals. I use Behringer amps and interfaces with many of the escape rooms I design. The only Behringer stuff I used "back in the day" was the cheap Eurorack mixers, which I also never had an issue with... I don't doubt that maybe there was some poor quality stuff when they were initially starting out and trying to cut costs and keep prices low, but I haven't seen or heard many complaints for the past decade and longer from actual customers.

That doesn't mean that the Arturia keyboard isn't better quality...it doesn't mean that the Behringer software is as good. All of that is yet to be seen since it's not released.

User avatar
zoidkirb
Posts: 571
Joined: 18 Nov 2018
Location: Brisbane Australia

Post 06 Apr 2021

joeyluck wrote:
06 Apr 2021
integerpoet wrote:
06 Apr 2021

After a re-read, I must agree. :-) I guess I was assuming there are three quality levels worth discussing: ① Behringer of decades ago, ② Behringer now, and ③ Arturia. If your claim is that ② and ③ are effectively indistinguishable, I'll take your word for it.
I've had zero issues with Behringer stuff. I've used the X32 at many theatres mixing musicals. I use Behringer amps and interfaces with many of the escape rooms I design. The only Behringer stuff I used "back in the day" was the cheap Eurorack mixers, which I also never had an issue with... I don't doubt that maybe there was some poor quality stuff when they were initially starting out and trying to cut costs and keep prices low, but I haven't seen or heard many complaints for the past decade and longer from actual customers.

That doesn't mean that the Arturia keyboard isn't better quality...it doesn't mean that the Behringer software is as good. All of that is yet to be seen since it's not released.
X32 is pretty sweet, and is virtually identical to the more upmarket Midas 32.

Speaking of their old Euro mixers, I'm getting bad flashbacks to their lighting console, the Eurolight. That thing was a nightmare, from the cheap feeling hardware to the supremely complex and counter intuitive control/menu system. Technically it had a LOT of functionality, more than anything else in that price range but it was all really impractical.
The Eurolight remains a great argument against Behringer using their RnD to create completely original devices.

User avatar
O1B
Posts: 2021
Joined: 26 Jan 2015

Post 07 Apr 2021

Therein lies the problem. "cheap feeling hardware..."

Behringer D's Sound is Awesome. IMO. Using Moog-style buttons/switches meant no need to reinvent the wheel.
And, IMO, its easy to maneuver.... just BYOKeys...!

Now - Take Crave.... Its sound is (IMO) so Crisp and Deep and - Hated it!
It was a Performance Control nightmare - for me. Those chick-let keys and wonky controls.
Image
Arturia (MFreak, Impact) shows they have their PC systems wired tight!

I think I've had enough of Behringer for a while. (Still got my 'D, though!)
zoidkirb wrote:
06 Apr 2021

Speaking of their old Euro mixers, I'm getting bad flashbacks to their lighting console, the Eurolight. That thing was a nightmare, from the cheap feeling hardware to the supremely complex and counter intuitive control/menu system. Technically it had a LOT of functionality, more than anything else in that price range but it was all really impractical.
The Eurolight remains a great argument against Behringer using their RnD to create completely original devices.

  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: geronimo and 0 guests