Members alby Posted January 26, 2007 Members Share Posted January 26, 2007 I subscribe to DDX3216@yahoogroups.com and this was posted today. I checked on the Behringer website and it is indeed still being sold in some places on our fair planet. I own a Behringer DDX3216 and would still be using it live if it had a more compact form factor. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The DDX is not dead, only in the USA apparently, and not by choice it seems. Most of you probably know this, but Behringer suffered a legal setback because they didn't keep up with their statements of UL compliance. They were importing goods labeled as UL compliant that were not. The DDX fell into this category. They were fined $1M by the FTC (it might have been another agency - going from memory here) . Shortly afterward, the DDX was dropped from the US market. It is apparently still sold in other markets. There was a published list of products and their compliance, etc regarding this matter. I'll look for the documentation of my statements here and posts some links and/or docs. I don't think Behringer intended to skirt regulations or harm its customers, but rather that because of their aggressive pricing, they maybe could not afford to pay for all the testing necessary for UL certification and had to make some hard business decisions in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted January 26, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted January 26, 2007 I subscribe to DDX3216@yahoogroups.com and this was posted today. I checked on the Behringer website and it is indeed still being sold in some places on our fair planet. I own a Behringer DDX3216 and would still be using it live if it had a more compact form factor. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The DDX is not dead, only in the USA apparently, and not by choice it seems. Most of you probably know this, but Behringer suffered a legal setback because they didn't keep up with their statements of UL compliance. They were importing goods labeled as UL compliant that were not. The DDX fell into this category. They were fined $1M by the FTC (it might have been another agency - going from memory here) . Shortly afterward, the DDX was dropped from the US market. It is apparently still sold in other markets. There was a published list of products and their compliance, etc regarding this matter. I'll look for the documentation of my statements here and posts some links and/or docs. I don't think Behringer intended to skirt regulations or harm its customers, but rather that because of their aggressive pricing, they maybe could not afford to pay for all the testing necessary for UL certification and had to make some hard business decisions in the end. Who gave you this story? The legal problems were with the FCC. Behringer has failed to obtain FCC certification for 66 products totaling $1.17M in sales since 2000. They lied about compliance after being served notice, and continued to sell the devices for at least a year after. There is no indication that Behringer has either obtained compliance or ceased selling the devices in the US. FWIW, I've read that it costs about $3,000 per model to get this certification for "digital devices". Perhaps dboomer can verify the cost. If this is true, for less that $200,000 Behringer could have, and still can, comply. But they would rather spit in our faces. And with people willing to buy their junk no matter what, I suppose I can't blame Uli for being so arrogant. False economy and ignorance rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ed Dixon Posted January 26, 2007 Members Share Posted January 26, 2007 We have a DDX3216 at church. Works very well. Very flexible for different service options we have every week. Ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted January 26, 2007 Members Share Posted January 26, 2007 I subscribe to DDX3216@yahoogroups.com and this was posted today.I don't think Behringer intended to skirt regulations or harm its customers, but rather that because of their aggressive pricing, they maybe could not afford to pay for all the testing necessary for UL certification and had to make some hard business decisions in the end. Bull{censored}. It was an FCC issue as Craig stated, and they absolutely intended to skirt the system. I read the FCC ruling and they were given many chances to comply but blew the FCC off. This was the largest penalty and most agressive skirting of the compliance regulations in FCC history. Let's call it what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members boomerweps Posted January 26, 2007 Members Share Posted January 26, 2007 It was failure to test for radio interference of digital components. Nothing safety related. HUGE thread on the LAB when the FCC filed against Behringer. Links to the list of products affected. This affected basically ALL of their digital based gear after a certain date including every mixer with an FX chip in it. They are still selling much of them although several have been superceded with new model series. Note: The FCC doesn't hunt out non-compliers and regulation violators. They have to get tipped to them or complained to with specifics. Somebody researched the models and turned them in. After being informed they were under investigation, Behringer chose to ignore the FCC and continued to sell the non-compliance CERTIFIED items and that flat out pissed off the FCC, like any other "good" governmental beauracracy. Makes you wonder about all the other inexpensive electronics manufacturers that people aren't pissed at. Hmm? Boomerweps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members prosigna Posted January 26, 2007 Members Share Posted January 26, 2007 Bull{censored}. Don't sugar coat it. Tell us how you feel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted January 26, 2007 Members Share Posted January 26, 2007 Yup, that pretty much sums it up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alby Posted January 26, 2007 Author Members Share Posted January 26, 2007 Who gave you this story?As I said, "I subscribe to DDX3216@yahoogroups.com and this was posted today", that is the beginning and end of it, I make no viewpoint of my own on the topic, nor am I going to. The poster's name was/is "Steve M" and no that is not me. You are welcome to dialog here or on DDX3216@yahoogroups.com as to your viewpoints. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted January 26, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted January 26, 2007 As I said, "I subscribe to DDX3216@yahoogroups.com and this was posted today", that is the beginning and end of it, I make no viewpoint of my own on the topic, nor am I going to. The poster's name was/is "Steve M" and no that is not me.You are welcome to dialog here or on DDX3216@yahoogroups.com as to your viewpoints. straight from the horse's mouth: http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2006/FCC-06-13A1.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted January 27, 2007 Members Share Posted January 27, 2007 straight from the horse's mouth:http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2006/FCC-06-13A1.html Pretty much sums it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alby Posted January 29, 2007 Author Members Share Posted January 29, 2007 There is no indication that Behringer has either obtained compliance or ceased selling the devices in the US. Since the topic at hand is specific to the Behringer DDX3216 can you please explain how you came to your above views about the Behringer DDX3216 given that: 1) I assume you mean that Berhinger has not ceased selling the DDX3216 in the US. 2) The DDX3216 is not sold in North America any more but is still sold in other countries. 3) As of yet you have not put forward any info as to why Behinger stopped selling the DDX3216 in North America. 4) It could be that Behinger stopped selling the DDX3216 in North America for reasons other than noncompliance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Scodiddly Posted January 29, 2007 Members Share Posted January 29, 2007 I don't think Behringer intended to skirt regulations or harm its customers, but rather that because of their aggressive pricing, they maybe could not afford to pay for all the testing necessary for UL certification and had to make some hard business decisions in the end. I would interpret that statement as meaning that Behringer decided to gamble on non-compliance. That they were willing to sell the product here despite not following the law seems to bear that out. When they got caught, they stopped the illegal activity. Whether or not it's a good piece of equipment, it seems clear that the company was knowingly breaking the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted January 29, 2007 Members Share Posted January 29, 2007 Note that it took a LOT of effort to get them to stop, including I believe, an injunction and prohibition to import until the certifications are complete. Note that they didn't have the CE certifications either for most of those products. Now how does that level the competative playing field for the rest of us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alby Posted January 29, 2007 Author Members Share Posted January 29, 2007 Now how does that level the competitive playing field for the rest of us?Unless or until all countries, political parties, corporations, small businesses and individuals agree to act in a open honest cooperative manner, the playing field you refer to will never be even close to level. Ayn Rand as per Objectivism, one's respect for the rights of others is founded on the value, to oneself, of other persons as actual or potential trading partners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted January 29, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted January 29, 2007 Since the topic at hand is specific to the Behringer DDX3216 can you please explain how you came to your above views about the Behringer DDX3216 given that:1) I assume you mean that Berhinger has not ceased selling the DDX3216 in the US.2) The DDX3216 is not sold in North America any more but is still sold in other countries.3) As of yet you have not put forward any info as to why Behinger stopped selling the DDX3216 in North America.4) It could be that Behinger stopped selling the DDX3216 in North America for reasons other than noncompliance. Where did I state that my above views were "about the Behringer DDX3216"? I did state "devices" (plural). Though your thread was specific to the DDX, you posted general information about Behringer getting into trouble with a government agency, had the wrong agency and obviously didn't know the details. I provided what I could find to clarify the FCC issue. You're free to assume whatever you wish regarding whether the DDX was dropped due to the FCC issue or some other factor, as it's doubtful anyone in the general public would be privy to Behringer's marketing decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alby Posted January 29, 2007 Author Members Share Posted January 29, 2007 You're free to assume whatever you wish regarding whether the DDX was dropped due to the FCC issue or some other factor, as it's doubtful anyone in the general public would be privy to Behringer's marketing decisions.I made no assumptions as why the DDX was dropped, however I did speculate that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted January 29, 2007 Members Share Posted January 29, 2007 Alby, what's the deal with you? Wake up on the wrong side of the bed? You seem bent on picking a fight and arguing things that we have presented pretty clear evidence on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted January 29, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted January 29, 2007 Wow, way to parse and spin. While the DDX could be part of "the devices", I never mentioned it at all in that post. The phrase "the devices" is as you know, plural, and not at all specifc, especially lacking any previous definition on my part. But thanks for playing. The picture of you is becoming much clearer. Nature does indeed abhor a vacuum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted January 29, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted January 29, 2007 This makes more sense now: http://acapella.harmony-central.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1509218 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted January 29, 2007 Members Share Posted January 29, 2007 Plural as in 50 devices or 66 devices... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alby Posted January 30, 2007 Author Members Share Posted January 30, 2007 Alby, what's the deal with you? Wake up on the wrong side of the bed? You seem bent on picking a fight and arguing things that we have presented pretty clear evidence on.The intention of the thread I made reasonably clear from the start: i.e. one DDX poster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alby Posted January 30, 2007 Author Members Share Posted January 30, 2007 There is no indication that Behringer has either obtained compliance or ceased selling the devices in the US.your phrase Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted January 30, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted January 30, 2007 It Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Gregidon Posted January 30, 2007 Members Share Posted January 30, 2007 Ah yes, the point: The DDX isn't sold in the US and Canada.There. Done, we all can move along. Thanks. You yourself pointed out that he's a troll.... why continue to argue with him? (not sure I %100 believe he is, but seriously, why the asinine tactics?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bazza54 Posted January 30, 2007 Members Share Posted January 30, 2007 Why do normally rational folk lose all rationality when the subject of Behringer is mentioned? I couldn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.