Harmony Central Forums
Announcement Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Question which pertains to Behringer, and also Peavey, Crest, etc.

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse







X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Question which pertains to Behringer, and also Peavey, Crest, etc.

     What is and has been the holdup on all the high horsepower featherweight power amps that keep NOT showing up in the stores. Have any of the Peaveys above the IPR3000 made it to any stores, including the older models? I believe there was supposed to be a 4500? which is now a 5000. And Crest has not had any of the ProLite 3.0 models in the real world, have they. That would probably be my 1st choice if it were available. And the Inuke 3000 is really some where in the same output area as the IPR1600 and ProLite 2.0. And the 6000 is basically 2 3000s bridged together, as I understand it, which only puts is maybe slightly more powerful than an IPR3000, and w/o the 2 ohm capability. Is it a design issue, problem getting proper parts/components, or what? It must be something generic or universal since it seems to be holding up more than a single company.

    <div class="signaturecontainer"><a href="mailto:tlbonehead@yahoo.com">tlbonehead@yaho o.com</a><br />
    <a href="http://www.myspace.com/tbone_tommy" target="_blank">www.myspace.com/tbone_tommy</a><br />
    -For Sale: <br />
    -set of GFS Dream 90s- gold and black pearl- $40 shipped in the cont. US<br />
    -(2) Celestion G12M-70 16 ohm guitar speakers in good condition $40 ea. + shipping.<br />
    - Vox VT15 Valvetronix very clean - $85 + shipping<br />
    - Hughes Kettner Edition Tube 20 (the early Voxy sounding one) Sounds &amp; looks good. $250 + shipping. <b>SOLD</b><br />
    - Crate Palomino V8 - 10&quot; Celestion - Very clean - on Ebay (sold)</div>

  • #2

    It's a lot more difficult that it seems. Not only the engineering and reliability but the EMC/EMI (CE and FCC) certification as well as safety certificatons. There are also some new rules regarding power factor correction that are making things more difficult in the EU, and China is advancing their requirements (on paper anyway, just like their building safety codes for the textile industry) too. There have also been some shortages of the high powered FETs as the solar inverter and electric auto industries have exploded.

    Comment


    • #3

      Dear Tlbonehead,

      Since Behringer is mentioned here, allow me to respond.

      The Behringer iNuke amps are some of our most successful products and based on highly efficient Class-D and SMPS (Switch Mode Power Supply) technology. Efficiency is so high (close to 90% AC to AC), that large and heavy heat sinks can be omitted, which leads to the incredibly lightweight design.

      In fact for the smaller models we use 4-layer FR4 PCB

      Uli Behringer<br>CEO, MUSIC Group<br>MIDAS / KLARK TEKNIK / TURBOSOUND / BEHRINGER / BUGERA

      Comment


      • agedhorse
        agedhorse commented
        Editing a comment

        Note that the power ratings appear to be based on a 20msec burst, using RMS output voltage under load.

        While this may be appropriate for mids and highs, 20mSec represents 1 cycle at 50Hz or 2 cycles at 100Hz which IMO is not a suitable or comparable metric for subs or really anything under 500Hz.

        Most amps in this catagory use a much longer time period for their power measurements.

        While class D amps have made things possible that we as engineers have always dreamed of, it's really important to understand how the measurements of the various products compare on a "like terms" basis. This does not apply only to the amp in the review but others as well AND the applications that they are intended for.

        The differences between higher priced and lower priced options by other manufacturers are typically rooted in the intended applications, the degree of design margin offered and the overall reliability under heavier duty applications such as the touring markets. There is an added cost to the heavy duty, high reliability touring market products, not all users need this but if it's important to your needs then it's a good idea to understand the differences and why they exist. (IMO)


      • Craig Vecchione
        Craig Vecchione commented
        Editing a comment

        Uli Behringer wrote:

        Dear Tlbonehead,


        Since Behringer is mentioned here, allow me to respond.


        The Behringer iNuke amps are some of our most successful products and based on highly efficient Class-D and SMPS (Switch Mode Power Supply) technology. Efficiency is so high (close to 90% AC to AC), that large and heavy heat sinks can be omitted, which leads to the incredibly lightweight design.


        In fact for the smaller models we use 4-layer FR4 PCB


      • Craig Vecchione
        Craig Vecchione commented
        Editing a comment

        Uli Behringer wrote:

        Dear Tlbonehead,


        Since Behringer is mentioned here, allow me to respond.


        ...


        As for the actual power ratings, we like to refer to an independent review by the German magazine Gear4Music, who confirmed that the measured output power actually exceeds our specs.


        NU3000DSP Review.


        I hope this helps.


        Warm regards


        Uli




        Hi Uli,



        Does reviewer gear4music accept advertising? If so, I would have to question anything it publishes. Testing by an independent laboratory to a known testing standard would be more impartial, don't you think? This is the problem in this as well as most other consumer electronics areas, namely that no single testing standards exist for audio power output or handling (in the case of speakers), there is no voluntary universal acceptance of a testing standard, and as a result the consumer is left to deal with what is essentially chaos.


        The topic has been discussed in this forum quite extensively. No consensus has ever been reached as far as I recall.


    • #4

      So what is different in the way QSC

      Comment


      • dboomer
        dboomer commented
        Editing a comment

        Two of Seven wrote:

         take the GX7. A quick look at the specs shows 1000 watts per channel into 4 ohms. I have never read or heard anyone challenge or question this rating. The amp has been out there for a while and I can't find reports of angry mobs yelling that they've been cheated.



        So what do you think this power rating means?  What does "being cheated" mean?

         

         


      • dboomer
        dboomer commented
        Editing a comment

        Two of Seven wrote:


    • #5
      More than reputation is track record of performance and reliability.

      Comment


      • Craig Vecchione
        Craig Vecchione commented
        Editing a comment

        agedhorse wrote:
        More than reputation is track record of performance and reliability.

        Good point, but I would give all of these attributes equal weight, because we really only have the mfg's word about performance (via specs) and we certainly have zero factual stats about reliability. So all if this kinda goes back to reputation for these attributes.


    • #6
      I have heard most EAW sound pretty good but the same can not be said (at least in general) for low end brands. It may not be the brand as much as the operator but the association appears to be pretty close.

      I can't say that I have ever heard a bad sounding Meyer or v-dosc system though and there is an association in the higher end manufacturers too.

      Comment


      • #7
        I always knew that yamaha was the distributor for nexo in the us territory, but I didn't knew that they owned them.... That is news for me; and actually I always thought and still think that is not the brand that would make sound worst of not an event, is the operators that handles that job, with money you can buy whatever you want, even ask Meyer to do a system exclusive for you, but then it depends if the operators have the skills up for it, over here I've seen a lot of those cases, big nexo system that sounds like #&**-+ and they still are nexo, so the people who operated them they don't know and get that results

        Comment


        • #8
          Generally, folks who invest serious money in a system will take the investment more seriously. Not always, but the odds and my experience see this as an accurate statement.
          I do agree that the skill of the system engineer and/or operator does have a major influence, but when there are catastrophic failures it doesn't much matter how good the operator is.

          Comment


          • #9

            AH has a good point about Behringer's inevitable association with bottom feeders and clueless newbies, but I think there's at least one other reason why they'll always have trouble with product reputation. There is a general perception -- across all types of products, from cars, to cameras, to household appliances -- that "you get what you pay for." Anything built to sell at the lowest possible price point has to include minimum spec components, with all the follow-on consequences of compromised performance and service life. 

            When you need good performance and zero problems over time, it's always been safer to buy something a step or two above the cheapest thing available. You don't change a consumer idea like that overnight, especially among people using the gear in a professioinal context.

            To be far, Behringer may have some advantages in scale (i.e. lowered price through volume sales), and being in a position now to manufacture more of their parts in-house (theoretically better QC). But I think most people understand that this only gets you so far, in building truly high-quality gear, when you're still selling it at a rock-bottom price. Something's gotta give. Quality components aren't cheap.

            When QSC entered the MI / "prosumer" powered speaker market, they did it with a mid-range product for that market -- the K series. They didn't try to build something with compromised components and build quality, just to sell at the lowest possible price.

             

            Comment


            • wesg
              wesg commented
              Editing a comment
              I think another interesting point that AH almost touched in w.r.t. low-end product lines is that it's also much less likely that folks buying this equipment are simply not getting any kind of pre-sales engineering whatsoever.

              There is a local place -- which is NOT a music store -- that sells Behringer and Mackie Thump speakers. The sales staff knows absolutely nothing about them (but they'll be glad to read you the spec sheet), you can't try before you buy, and you can't return them if you don't like them.

              The local JBL place, on the other hand...knows the equipment inside out and backwards, can tell you what you need for just about any venue in town, and also rents it out. It might be expensive to shop there, but you are pretty much guaranteed a good result on your first try.

              Given that engineering spec sheets are useless to consumers, how could any consumer possibly buy the right equipment for their needs when the price point doesn't include any kind of pre-sales engineering?

              It would actually be kind of cool if there was a phone number you could call for $50/hr where the guy on the other end knows all of this equipment like the back of his hand. But, of course, the target clientelle would not bother consulting the knowledge hotline anyhow.

            • costaxl
              costaxl commented
              Editing a comment

              Reson8tor, you make a good point that there is a general perception among consumers that higher price somehow equates to better quality. I think that it would also be correct to state that this axiom has been proven true over time because of some glaring examples, as you point out across all types of products. I can


          • #10

            My first guitar was a Montgomery Ward. Had the matching amp as well. The amp took flight one night at college.Rumor has it that a case of beer took its place. I still have the guitar and the cardboard box it came in. Still plays and it will never leave. Ahh band camp.........

            DookietwoFirst Guitar..JPG

            Attached Files

            Comment


            • modulusman
              modulusman commented
              Editing a comment

              Dookietwo wrote:

              My first guitar was a Montgomery Ward. Had the matching amp as well. The amp took flight one night at college.Rumor has it that a case of beer took its place. I still have the guitar and the cardboard box it came in. Still plays and it will never leave. Ahh band camp.........

              DookietwoFirst Guitar..JPG


               My brother and I recieved Montgomery Wards guitar and bass with an amp that we had to share for Christmas back in 1976. I wanted the bass, he took the guitar. I remember the bass had a huge bow in the neck and the strings were about a mile from the fretboard. I played it for a year before aI bought a 73 Fender Precision that I still have. I remember we peeled the montgomery ward sticker off the amp and it was a Marlboro.

              Attached Files

          • #11
            Hi Costa - to clarify, the products you produce are marketed at the lower level of the market (intentionally of otherwise) for the following reasons (IMO):

            1. They are sold primarily (at least in N. America) through mass market MI retailers. Looking at their offerings, they specialize in selling to the lower dnd of the marketplace because that's where the overwhelming majority of the business is.

            2. The sales people at these establishments are generally not long time experienced pro audio folks. More often than not, they know just enough to be dangerous but have to sell whatever product they can to survive.

            3. The commitment by the above retailers (and box houses) to technical support, and in-house service departments is generally poor to nonexistent. This reflects poorly on the brands they sell.

            4. Promises made about suitability of a product as a good solution to a customer's problem are often based on poor understanding of the problem, compounded by the pesky need to move boxes.

            5. Selling product cheap takes away both the ability and the incentive to provide a high level of customer service and support, in the amount of time that can be taken to understand the customer needs and to properly educate the customer in how the solution works.

            6. All of the above contribute to how the higher end of the industry sees the lower end of the industry. This is apart from actual defects that may or may not exist.

            7. The results that the above users achieve with the above conditions is often appalling. IMO this reflects poorly on the manufacturers of the equipment they tend to use (because of the above reasons) .

            The vast majority of your product appears to fit into the above situations, my suggestion is that this might be as much the cause for the image that the professional community sees as anything with the equipment itself. Hope this helps clarify.

            Comment


            • costaxl
              costaxl commented
              Editing a comment

              agedhorse, many years ago when I ran my own business I told my sales guys that I never wanted to hear them ask a customer for their budget before asking about their application first. A customer would come in asking for an SM58 and we would spend the time figuring out if that


          • #12
            All 3 of those "review" sites are operated by retailers with vested interests. They are also typically more targeted at "mi" buyers buying low tier products. When somebody brags about his good a product is after 2 days, that is not a good indicator of how any product might last of work in a more professional application. There are 2 distinct markets, you are still focused almost exclusively on the lower end one, which has been at the root of this discussion. Learn what the differences are between the markets and it will become much clearer.

            Comment


            • abzurd
              abzurd commented
              Editing a comment

              I have a theory too that a fair bit of the product sold at the lower end of the price scale goes essentially unused.The lower the price point the better the chance the purchaser is a "hobbiest". I'm also guessing generally the less stable the situation of the buyer (ie: the band breaks up 2 weeks later). It's easy to last the warranty length sitting unused in a basement. Put the gear in use multiple times a month, or week to see how something really holds up. Then there's also the theory of buying something cheap to use as a backup.

              I'm not saying any brand is more or less reliable with this statement. Really I'm saying it's just one other attribute to consider when trying to really figure out long term reliability. You buy a $30,000 Midas board and chances are that thing is getting used to death and is expected to be a work horse for 10+ years. It has to be or it's a waste of money.

              As for the reviews on music sites, you really do have to sift through the garbage to pull any value from them. Frankly most reviewers have no flipppin' clue what they are talking about. They are just excited about the knobs and lights and want to tell the world. Those with an ax to grind often bought the wrong piece, or just don't know how to use it.


            • costaxl
              costaxl commented
              Editing a comment

              agedhorse,

              I have come to respect your industry knowledge from your posts on this forum but cannot support your assertion that reviews posted on sites owned by these retailers are somehow biased. Of course they have a vested interest in selling product; but they are generally brand-agnostic and certainly hold impartiality high on their list of objectives. To follow your logic would be to accept that Harmony Central, owned by Guitar Center, is also biased toward manufacturers.

              I pass no qualitative judgment on the reviews posted by end-users. In fact it has been my experience that the less sophisticated the user, the more likely the negative review. Often users get in over their heads and misunderstand features, operating modes and interconnection with other devices. The raw feed of reviews, both positive and negative is always open for interpretation by prospective buyers.

              I appreciate your comment about there being two different markets; pro and MI. Obviously with MIDAS and TURBOSOUND under our management we also understand the differences between the applications and the customers. I would argue that our success with the X32, selling over 30,000 units of this $3,000 console in under a year speaks to our sensitivity to the differences as well.

              Costa

              Thanks also for the advice on the differences between the markets, but with all respect, it sounds a tad condescending. I oversee all of our brands and not just the MI offering, so I believe that more than qualifies me to speak to the differences across markets. I would also argue that our launch of the $3,000 X32 to over 30,000 units sold in under a year, proves that we are addressing a professional


          • #13

            ChiroVette wrote:

            I am so used to thinking about Behringer PA gear as being crap, bottom of the food chain, and yet many of Uli's counterpoints also make sense, particularly the ones about selling SO MANY pieces that it stands to reason that more of their products would "seem" to have higher failure rates.

            I don't think everyone here is saying that "Behringer gear is crap," but I do think it's accurate to say that their entire product line (outside the new Midas-related stuff), is marketed to the bottom of the food chain. It's designed to be sold at the lowest possible price, to people who care more about price than anything else. 

            Uli says he wants to get more pros looking at Behringer products, but it's impossible to sell to the top and the bottom of a market at the same time, with the same product line. Not unless you're a monopoly in that market. 

            For example: This week I'm going to pick up another active DI. I'll probably get another Radial J48 because the one I have sounds great and it's built like a tank with a heavy steel case. The scuffed-off paint shows how heavily I've used it over the last several years. Behringer makes an active DI too. It's in an aluminum case, with (what look like) plastic corners, and it sells for 1/5 the cost of the Radial DI ($40 vs. $200). Tell me why I should buy the Behringer DI, if I can afford the Radial and I'm looking for pro-level gear? 

            If price pressure was the main factor -- say I'm having to buy a bunch of active DI's for a school or church stage, then I might think about it. But I'm not under that kind of price pressure. I want pro gear, and I'm willing to pay for it. Behringer isn't going to get my attention with gear that sells for so little, and has to be made in such a way that it can sell at that price. I won't say it's "crap," but it's simply not what I'm looking for. I don't think any amount of marketing or flagship-leading with the X32 is going to change the perspective of people like me.

            What might change things would be a secondary product line, specifically aimed at competing directly against companies like Radial, QSC, etc. But they're not doing that. They want us to buy into the marketing that it's all pro-level gear, and they're just magically able to undercut the price of everyone else. 

            Comment


            • sibyrnes
              sibyrnes commented
              Editing a comment

              I think many buyers of the low budget stuff are often more impressed with "bells and whistles" than quality.  For example, following through with Resonators's example, if I was restricted by budget I would rather buy a quality passive direct box like a Whirlwind than a cheap active one for the same price.


            • costaxl
              costaxl commented
              Editing a comment

              Reson8tor wrote:

              ChiroVette wrote:

              I am so used to thinking about Behringer PA gear as being crap, bottom of the food chain, and yet many of Uli's counterpoints also make sense, particularly the ones about selling SO MANY pieces that it stands to reason that more of their products would "seem" to have higher failure rates.

              I don't think everyone here is saying that "Behringer gear is crap," but I do think it's accurate to say that their entire product line (outside the new Midas-related stuff), is marketed to the bottom of the food chain. It's designed to be sold at the lowest possible price, to people who care more about price than anything else. 

              Uli says he wants to get more pros looking at Behringer products, but it's impossible to sell to the top and the bottom of a market at the same time, with the same product line. Not unless you're a monopoly in that market. 

              For example: This week I'm going to pick up another active DI. I'll probably get another Radial J48 because the one I have sounds great and it's built like a tank with a heavy steel case. The scuffed-off paint shows how heavily I've used it over the last several years. Behringer makes an active DI too. It's in an aluminum case, with (what look like) plastic corners, and it sells for 1/5 the cost of the Radial DI ($40 vs. $200). Tell me why I should buy the Behringer DI, if I can afford the Radial and I'm looking for pro-level gear? 

              If price pressure was the main factor -- say I'm having to buy a bunch of active DI's for a school or church stage, then I might think about it. But I'm not under that kind of price pressure. I want pro gear, and I'm willing to pay for it. Behringer isn't going to get my attention with gear that sells for so little, and has to be made in such a way that it can sell at that price. I won't say it's "crap," but it's simply not what I'm looking for. I don't think any amount of marketing or flagship-leading with the X32 is going to change the perspective of people like me.

              What might change things would be a secondary product line, specifically aimed at competing directly against companies like Radial, QSC, etc. But they're not doing that. They want us to buy into the marketing that it's all pro-level gear, and they're just magically able to undercut the price of everyone else. 


              Reson8tor,

              You raise some interesting issues here. While it might seem counter-intuitive, I would argue that you can sell to multiple levels of a market under the same brand. This was a lesson learned very clearly in my time at Mackie when the company released the d8b digital console. Here was a brand that came from selling "affordable" compact analog mixers to a nearly $10k digital board. Pretty much everybody aside from Greg Mackie and a couple of key engineers also thought it was pure folly. The rest is history.

              Now we're doing the same thing with BEHRINGER, and particularly the X32. But it's important to note the very significant difference between what's happening today and what happened a decade ago. We own the factory and run it with one eye on quality and one on cost. There is no magic in offering low prices; it requires absolute discipline and focus.

              There is definitely a place for great product like the Radial DI you use. There is also a place for the DI-100 that we make. Which one you choose depends on your application and budget. I can't speak (or speculate) for Radial but it would appear that they build and market a product that addresses the needs of what they see as their core customer. All I ask from buyers is that they give our products a fair look.

              Costa

               


          • #14
            What would happen if behringer raise their prices for the products that they offer? Maybe that is something that some guys over here would like to see? So everyone would not think that are for beginners, hobbiest and whatever they get called and if the prices are so high many would think that are better than the expensive ones and they would be glad to buy them, even if you guys at behringer can make it in small costs to produce them, and sell them at exorbitant prices so someone over here would be glad, happy and think in another way

            Comment


            • #15
              Can not compare power ratings as peavey does not provide 20mSec burst rating. RR, your assumption here is flawed.

              Comment


              • RoadRanger
                RoadRanger commented
                Editing a comment

                agedhorse wrote:
                Can not compare power ratings as peavey does not provide 20mSec burst rating. RR, your assumption here is flawed.

                Assumption? The NU3000 has been measured by a German magazine as:

                RMS (sine wave)
                8 Ohm 2x312
                4 Ohm 2x600 (2x375 after 3 seconds)
                2 Ohm 2x1176 (2x750 after 1 second, protect after 5 seconds)

                I've posted this before, dunno why yous guys seem to develop selective amnesia when discussing Behringer products?

                Behringer has chosen not to chance blowing the mains breaker by folding back the power. This also nicely protects my 700wrms rated sub drivers from being cooked . I'd rather the amp folded back and/or shut down as needed rather than blow the mains breaker or cook my subs, YMMV .

            Working...
            X