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

[costaxl]

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

[costaxl]

 

---

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

 

[JV90]

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

[agedhorse]

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

[RoadRanger]

---

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 .

[agedhorse]

Mains protection is not the reason for this foldback, there is no way this would be an issue at 4 ohms. It is also not an issue in any amp of similar size. It has to do with limiting stress on the amplifier itself which reduces the cost of managing such stress, a design choice which is not bad IMO but defies direct comparison to other products that might choose to do something differently. This is similar to the choices made in the similar Crest amp, which has more substantial design margins.

 

This has nothing to do with amnesia, though I suspect it might have something to do with you wishing to poke the bear.

[RoadRanger]

---

agedhorse wrote:

Mains protection is not the reason for this foldback, there is no way this would be an issue at 4 ohms.

---

Good point - I'd not buy this amp over an IPR3000 for operation at 4 ohms. In fact I use an IPR3000 on my big outdoor 800wrms 4 ohm horn subs, 840wrms per channel . In any case a 15a circuit can supply 15x110 = 1650w so it is quite possible that the 1200w total output of the NU3000 @ 4 ohms wouldn't pop the mains breaker if it is the only amp on that circuit. When running the IPR3000 on my big subs outdoors I try to run it on it's own circuit. The NU3000 I'm not so concerned about as I know it will never draw that much. I mostly use it indoors and I like to keep the actual RMS on my 700w drivers down to half that anyways. Most folks (not you ) forget that the efficiency of their drivers generally goes to hell with more than that heating up the voice coil and raising it's resistance.

I've mentioned before that I have a very specific application for the NU3000, 99% of folks would be better off getting the IPR3000 or even the IPR1600. I would have bought NU1000's for monitors if they had independant crossovers on each channel  - I've used RMX850's before and Crown XLS1000's in a different rig I help assemble for a band (their cheap monitors would pop on IPR1600's ), plenty of power for any band I'm willing to work with (AKA not stoopid loud).

[agedhorse]

The move up-market must go hand in hand with reliability, support, and features targeted to and wanted by the up market folks.

[madjack]

 

---

tlbonehead wrote:

 

 

 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.

---

 

Just reposting this, as some appear to not know what the original question was, and I, too, would like the information.

[JV90]

I really don't think that is advertising at all, Joe is answering the question with arguments regarding what the Nuke Amps have against the peavey model that's all,

[ChiroVette]

---

JV90 wrote:

I really don't think that is advertising at all, Joe is answering the question with arguments regarding what the Nuke Amps have against the peavey model that's all,

---

I'm not sure either. I was bringing it up looking for clarification of HC's advertising policies.

[JV90]

Btw? How you guys can handle what is advertising over recommendation? Everyone over here speaks good regarding jbl, qsc, yamaha, and some times what is recommended seems to be advertising it too, the only thing is that no product specialist is telling it, so? What can be consider advertising? What can't not consider to be advertising?

[JV90]

If we go a little bit further, since I joined the hc forums there has and still being around just 4 to 5 brands that everyone over here speaks good and (my thoughts) are allowed to talk, and this are: Yorkville, qsc, yamaha, jbl, and one more;and I said allow to talk regarding cause everyone over here have different points of view, criteria and so on; but, my questions regarding my post has been answered and I gathered great info which I've been able to use them towards my gear;but if you really go deep there are some other brands that are not allowed to be in, behringer is an example, I've never up until this moment ever read over here someone to pronounce brands like nady, kustom, phonic, alto, and more; I've understand that some over here would consider it junk of the worst of the mi gear, but as I always said, is not the gear, is the person who operates it to see if it can work or not,

 

So I'm not trying to change anything at all, but I think that is a very rare and interesting point to put over here and to think about it

[guitarman3001]

As a neutral observer who has had good and bad experiences with Behringer, I have to say that this whole advertising/spam/violation of rules thing is getting ridiclous.  What I've seen from my own neutral unbiased point of view is that every time a criticism is leveled against Behringer and one of their reps replies and attempts to either defend themselves or simply correct what they believe is misinformation, they are accused of spamming, propaganda, and violating the rules.  Or when someone asks a Behringer rep why they should use a Behringer product over another brand and the Behringer rep replies, they are accused of advertising.  Give me a break already!!!  I don't think it's very fair to criticize someone and then accuse them of violating the rules every time they try to reply.

It was mentioned that pros don't take Behringer seriously and don't use Behringer products.  They reply by pointing out the names of several pros who are using Behringer products including Vernon Reid.  The response by forum moderators is to accuse them of spamming.  Seriously?

Now someone asks why they should use an inuke over a peavey, they get a reply, and the rep is accused of advertising.  Come on now.  

Personally, I've found these threads to be very informative but it does get a little old having to wade through the accusations of spamming and violating rules every time one of the Behringer reps tries to answer a question or respond to a criticism.  

Seriously......it's getting old already. 

 

 

[JV90]

Btw, my English is getting better isn't it?

 

"English without barriers" it really works,

 

De verdad que funciona ese plan para aprender ha mejorar el ingl

[ChiroVette]

lol I hear ya, Reson8tor.

 

@JV90, I could be wrong here, but I think the rule ONLY applies to reps who work for a company not to us. So, for instance, I just recently bought a beautiful PA system and lighting thanks, in no small part, to people in this forum and their sage advice.

 

Now if I were to waltz into one of the JBL threads raving and ranting in fanboy bliss about how amazing I think the JBL PRX612m's sound and how incredibly the bottom is with my 618XLF subs, and then start extolling all the virtues of Chauvet, that would not be advertising because I am an end user. BUT if a rep from JBL came into the thread and started posting the same thing, that would be, because there is an intrinsic conflict of interest there.

So what Joe Sanborn posted, for instance: If you or I had posted that, I think it would be fine. But when someone who works for Behringer does, that is when the rules change a little.

Again, I could be off here. This is why I asked for clarification.

[agedhorse]

 

---

JV90 wrote:

 

Btw? How you guys can handle what is advertising over recommendation? Everyone over here speaks good regarding jbl, qsc, yamaha, and some times what is recommended seems to be advertising it too, the only thing is that no product specialist is telling it, so? What can be consider advertising? What can't not consider to be advertising?

---

 

None of us work for or represent these companies. When representing the companies we work for, we do have to excercise extra caution to avoid the appearance of such.

Most of us also participate in more general discussions, and help other forum members with their troubles regardless of the product brand in the spirit of community. It's community first, our products are a very distant second IME.

[Gregidon]

 

---

JV90 wrote:

 

Btw? How you guys can handle what is advertising over recommendation? Everyone over here speaks good regarding jbl, qsc, yamaha, and some times what is recommended seems to be advertising it too, the only thing is that no product specialist is telling it, so? What can be consider advertising? What can't not consider to be advertising?

---

 

To me, it is considered advertising when a representative of a company recommends their own product without someone specifically asking for the recommendation. You will please note that a variety of other representatives from other companies frequent these forums and do not in any way push their products. This is the behavior that most users want to see continue.

[tlbonehead]

 

---

madjack wrote:

 

---

tlbonehead wrote:

 

 

 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.

---

 

 

Just reposting this, as some appear to not know what the original question was, and I, too, would like the information.

---

thank you!

[RoadRanger]

---

tlbonehead wrote:

And the 6000 is basically 2 3000s bridged together, as I understand it, which only puts is maybe slightly more powerful than an IPR3000,

---

IPR3000 = 440wrms/ch @ 8 ohms

NU6000 = 1200wrms/ch @ 8 ohms

Interesting definition of "slight" there TB 

[tlbonehead]

---

RoadRanger wrote:

---

tlbonehead wrote:

And the 6000 is basically 2 3000s bridged together, as I understand it, which only puts is maybe slightly more powerful than an IPR3000,

---

IPR3000 = 440wrms/ch @ 8 ohms

NU6000 = 1200wrms/ch @ 8 ohms

Interesting definition of "slight" there TB 

---

which one puts out more stereo power at 2 ohms?

[agedhorse]

---

RoadRanger wrote:

---

tlbonehead wrote:

And the 6000 is basically 2 3000s bridged together, as I understand it, which only puts is maybe slightly more powerful than an IPR3000,

---

IPR3000 = 440wrms/ch @ 8 ohms

NU6000 = 1200wrms/ch @ 8 ohms

Interesting definition of "slight" there TB 

---

It is slight... when you need 2 ohm operation. What does the NU6000 do at 2 ohms, and how long can it sustain 4 ohm operation... a second or two? Let's be accurate here please.

IPR-3000:

• - 1490W RMS x 2 at 2 ohms
• - 840W RMS x 2 at 4 ohms
• - 440W RMS x 2 at 8 ohms

[JV90]

Well as Costa mentioned before that the problem would be some latency regarding the audio, I've managed to sent him a pm telling if it would be possible to use the Asio(audio streaming in out) founded on the cards that almost every major brand handle with latency problem, for example my audio manage to get over asio a latency on my pc and extendamos sound card that goes around 5 to 7 millisecond which is nothing, so no latency at all; I totally forgot about wifi and instead thought about blue tooth cause over here on my place there are some Chinese importers that imports(sorry about the redundancy) Chinese powered speakers with bluetooth capabilities, so you can send from your cell over the bluetooth a song and the speaker would get it and play over it, it's the same principle just backwards, and over the cell phones they can make a software which would allow the user to stablushed the latency of the audio that is receiving from the transmitter that is connected over an aux in the mixer, even the transmitter can use the asio already in use by a lot of people in the recording industry, then hook up some headphones over your cell and you've got your iem over wifi ; is sounds very easy, and I think that Uli really have to dig on to this one, if he managed to do something like this then it could be another game changer, and a hit on sales that would make them tons of sales

 

They have the technology to do that, I think it is worth to try it, pls Uli think about it. After that? We can talk about my royalties on the sales for the idea, just think the number of Android and apple users that they have around the world, and more other applications that it would provide this system add well, even non musicians

 

Hope to hear more of this

[JV90]

Also asio would make a good synch like the daw software for multitrack recording and keep in synch with midi and audio,

[costaxl]

 

---

JV90 wrote:

 

Well as Costa mentioned before that the problem would be some latency regarding the audio, I've managed to sent him a pm telling if it would be possible to use the Asio(audio streaming in out) founded on the cards that almost every major brand handle with latency problem, for example my audio manage to get over asio a latency on my pc and extendamos sound card that goes around 5 to 7 millisecond which is nothing, so no latency at all; I totally forgot about wifi and instead thought about blue tooth cause over here on my place there are some Chinese importers that imports(sorry about the redundancy) Chinese powered speakers with bluetooth capabilities, so you can send from your cell over the bluetooth a song and the speaker would get it and play over it, it's the same principle just backwards, and over the cell phones they can make a software which would allow the user to stablushed the latency of the audio that is receiving from the transmitter that is connected over an aux in the mixer, even the transmitter can use the asio already in use by a lot of people in the recording industry, then hook up some headphones over your cell and you've got your iem over wifi ; is sounds very easy, and I think that Uli really have to dig on to this one, if he managed to do something like this then it could be another game changer, and a hit on sales that would make them tons of sales

 

 

 

They have the technology to do that, I think it is worth to try it, pls Uli think about it. After that? We can talk about my royalties on the sales for the idea, just think the number of Android and apple users that they have around the world, and more other applications that it would provide this system add well, even non musicians

 

 

 

Hope to hear more of this

---

 

JV90,

I should clarify that the latency in a wireless transmission system is very different from that found in your computer recording system and hence the two aren't really comparable; or at least the management techniques are different. In the computer scenario latency is introduced through the analog to digital conversion process, the application of signal processing, routing and digital to analog conversion. (I am summarizing here.)

In wireless transmission you add a couple of important variables such as the stability/reliability of the radio signal and the means of data transmission. Of course if you use analog transmission such as FM radio, there is imperceptible latency; as is the case with most wireless mics. But mobile phones and Bluetooth use digital transmission, which requires the analog audio to be digitized and then transmitted.

Because both BT and Wi-Fi were designed for transmission of data, there is no Quality of Service (QoS) guarantee inherent in the protocols. The best they can do to mitigate disruptions in signal flow is to buffer the signal at the receiver, ensuring that even if data needs to be retransmitted, the listener will not notice any difference. This retransmission (aka error-correction) is responsible for the bulk of the latency. Worse still, the latency is not constant and car vary considerably.

Having said that, both Bluetooth and Wi-Fi are used extensively for music playback in consumer audio as well as semi-pro applications. Of course you can use BT in your car for telephone calls and with the latest version of the protocol to stream music as well. Lots of home audio systems and portable speakers use kind of setup quite successfully. The same goes for Wi-Fi, where companies like Sonos and Apple support local transmission of synchronous signals to multiple speakers at the same time.

The only drawback for pro users is that the latency is generally well over the 4-5 msec that most deem acceptable for live use. In fact 15-45 msec is more the norm.

Costa