New Powered Behringers = Opera?

[Craig Vecchione]

 

Here is another thought, some, if not most, of the best advice comes from a group of engineers that design products for different manufacturers that we are very fortunate to have on this board. Think of at least one reason there is no-one from Behr. on here. Enough of this "competition" and they are out of a job, and music gear will stop developing right where it is. It costs alot of money to design and develop a new product, and the company that pays to do so, has to get their money back.

 

 

You think the average 20-something cares?

[Craig Vecchione]

And don't use the tired, "it is the only gear I can afford" excuse. My first PA was a set of Koss headphones used as a mic, plugged into the second input of my TNT 100 that I was still using for my bass. It sucked, so I saved and bought a Rat shack mic, plugged into a ampeg flip-top head(wish I still had that) through a pair of Standell 4-12 columns. That sucked too, but it worked.

 

Loser.

 

You're supposed to spend a few bucks on stuff that *looks* just like the real stuff, but still sucks. It's the MTV/VH1 mentality...performance takes a back seat to appearance.

[jbutler1982]

I dont see anything immoral about "stealing" a design if you think you can sell it cheaper and beat the original company. It is up to the original company to protect their intellectual property. There isnt some "gentleman's code" in the industry that every company lives up to except Behringer. Give me a break. Either the developing company isnt properly protecting their intellectual property, or the laws governing intellectual property are not functioning properly. Either way, to expect Behringer to stay out of the low-end market place is ridiculous. If a company develops a product, they have to figure out a way to make money off of it. If it cannot be patented, then they are open to all forms of competition (As they should be).

 

"You think the average 20-something cares?"

 

I would bet you that over half of the products in your home are low-cost rip offs of a product designed by someone else. Pots and pans, for example... unless you own a $100+ dupont frying pan, you're buying it from someone who ripped off their teflon design. Computers, for another. If you're typing on a gateway, emachines, toshiba, compaq, dell or any of the cheap laptops, you "dont care enough" to support Hitachi or NEC, the companies to first develop the internal design of a laptop.

 

Give me a break. Every industry works this way and for all the condescension and elitism, as soon as you leave live music gear im sure you have no problem buying from companies like Behringer.

 

Oh, and I hope you dont drive a Mazda6 like I do ($15,000). Its just a low-cost clone of the Volvo 260 ($32,000+). So, SHAME on any 20-somethings who drive Mazda6s for not caring! *rolls eyes*

[gspointer]

I dont see anything immoral about "stealing" a design if you think you can sell it cheaper and beat the original company.**

 

 

This makes me very sad.

[gspointer]

And the reasons they are able to sell it cheaper are
1. They have a fraction of the design cost.(as they just copied someone elses design.)
2. It is a lower quality
3. support is lame/non-existant

[jbutler1982]

Exactly. Thats the whole point. So people who want or need something cheaper have that option, and people who want better quality and support can pay more. Im not sure what the problem is...

[jbutler1982]

Plus, if you're going to quote me, do it right. Be intellectually honest. Dont quote my first sentence and then put "rolls eyes" at the end as if they were adjacent in my post. They weren't.

 

The "rolls eyes" comment was directed at the other poster's comment condescending to "20 somethings" because they dont take a principled stand against Behringer's copying.

 

Putting the *rolls eyes* after that implies that i consider it a non-issue. I dont. I can see where engineers are coming from that dont like copying. I just dont think its Behringer's fault. Get mad at the patent rights regime that isnt serving you if you'd like, but expecting Behringer, in the real world, to be on some sort of self-policing honor system and not copy is stupid.

[gspointer]

The roll eyes would not come out without leaving the asterixs', I have removed it, and it did not effect the post or quote.

[Dark Ice]

I would bet you that over half of the products in your home are low-cost rip offs of a product designed by someone else. Pots and pans, for example... unless you own a $100+ dupont frying pan, you're buying it from someone who ripped off their teflon design.

 

 

I'm pretty sure that pots and pans have been around since just about the stone age, btw....

 

 

Computers, for another. If you're typing on a gateway, emachines, toshiba, compaq, dell or any of the cheap laptops, you "dont care enough" to support Hitachi or NEC, the companies to first develop the internal design of a laptop.

 

 

Ohnonono! Theres a difference here! Toshiba, dell, compaq etc didnt copy those designs, they designed their own varients on the same concept.

This is *much* different from Behringer, who showed up to NAMM with a protorype for their EP series amplifiers which still had a QSC mainboard in it!

 

Steve.

[tlbonehead]

Exactly. Thats the whole point. So people who want or need something cheaper have that option, and people who want better quality and support can pay more. Im not sure what the problem is...

You can usually get good deals on "hot" items. Evidently you have no problem buying something stolen?

[jbutler1982]

With the pots and pans, Dupont did a really new design of a frying pan. Instead of having sides that went straight up like on the old iron skillets, dupont made those flared sides that almost all frying pans have nowadays.

 

The computer / car analogies i was trying to draw were in reference to the poster who, with his voice full of condescension toward the ignorant 20-somethings, implied that all consumers should care that all of the goods they buy arnt copies.

 

This stuff goes on in every industry on the planet. Either protect your stuff through legal channels, complain about those channels, or dont complain. Blaming Behringer is just naive. I mean, lets say Behringer copies these QSC amps. The cheapest QSC amp ive seen is $329. Lets say somebody doesnt have the cash for that. They cant buy QSC. They have to buy Behringer. Behringer fills, as much as you dont want to admit it, a needed market.

 

Companies that engineer a product should not be immune to copying and competition. This shouldnt be an engineering contest.

[jbutler1982]

tlbonehead: against the law. My *Entire* point is that this anger toward Behringer should be directed at a system which doesnt allow the property to be protected.

[tlbonehead]

tlbonehead: against the law. My *Entire* point is that this anger toward Behringer should be directed at a system which doesnt allow the property to be protected.

What about the times that Uli has been found guilty of theft? Since the law is your only moral belief, why are you dismissing the fact that the company has been found guilty more than once?

[Dark Ice]

tlbonehead: against the law. My *Entire* point is that this anger toward Behringer should be directed at a system which doesnt allow the property to be protected.

 

 

Ok, so we should direct our anger at the system, but condone it by buying Uli's stolen goods?

 

Steve.

[timmcallister]

And don't use the tired, "it is the only gear I can afford" excuse. My first PA was a set of Koss headphones used as a mic, plugged into the second input of my TNT 100

I thought I was the only one. I used a radio shack headphone for a mic, wrapped around my head, and cause I was drumming at the time, it was hands free!

and then in '79 we graduated to shure vocal master 4-10 columns!! whhheee!


and floor monitors? I didn't actually get close to one for the first five years I played in bands. and then it freaked me out, having that sound come up from my feet!!!

and then I had to walk to school, uphill both directions!

ahh... kids today...

[ViLo]

http://www.ion-dj.com/manuals/iDM01%20Manual%20V2.pdf

 

Alesis SR16 Drum Machine

iON M01 Drum Machine

 

Hummm.........

[jbutler1982]

I didnt realize their copying was so egregious. If they are literally pulling parts out and reselling, thats a little over the top.

 

I just think that sometimes people have a tendancy to villanize companies like Behringer is their own field, but outside their comfort zone buy from those companies all the time. For example, Mazda's entire product line is copying more expensive cars, cheaper (sedans are all volvos (i think they're all part of Ford now, so im not sure its a huge deal now, but the point is the same), their CX line is the lexus SUV, etc...). I know 70% of the products (minimum, probably more like 98%-99%) we all own are from companies like Behringer.

 

I wasnt aware he had actually performed illegal actions. But I think as long as it is kept legal, there is a market for low-quality copies and that market must exist to drive competition. Contrary to belief that high-end developers / engineers who are hurt by these copies will throw up their hands and give up, I think the copying spurs them to constantly have to stay one step ahead of the copiers and make sure their products have real value. I guess there might be some argument about companies ceasing to innovate b/c of Behringer.... I just dont think history bears it out.

[Preacher Will]

tlbonehead: against the law. My *Entire* point is that this anger toward Behringer should be directed at a system which doesnt allow the property to be protected.

 

 

You and I and all of the others who buy the product are a part of "the system." No outside power would be required to enforce intellectual property rights if the end users, the purchasers, chose not to buy products that violate those rights. It isn't "the system" that is at fault. It is the selfish and immoral actions of the people who make up "the system" that is the problem.

[Gregidon]

http://www.ion-dj.com/manuals/iDM01%20Manual%20V2.pdf Alesis SR16 Drum Machine iON M01 Drum Machine Hummm.........

Not going to lie, those look close enough that it makes me believe one is just a re-badged version of the other (which is completely legit). A company i've worked for does this for various reasons. It is very legal and there is no infringement going on... if that's in fact what is going on here.

[jbutler1982]

"You and I and all of the others who buy the product are a part of "the system." No outside power would be required to enforce intellectual property rights if the end users, the purchasers, chose not to buy products that violate those rights. It isn't "the system" that is at fault. It is the selfish and immoral actions of the people who make up "the system" that is the problem."

 

 

I would bet that out of everything you own, 70%+ of it is a cheaper version of a more expensive product developed by the company selling the more expensive product.

 

As I said, its nescesary to drive competition. Now, maybe Behringer crosses the line, and there IS a line, but I dont think looking at something, thinking "Theres no patent here" and i can make this cheaper, popping the top and doing it is immoral.

[tlbonehead]

"You and I and all of the others who buy the product are a part of "the system." No outside power would be required to enforce intellectual property rights if the end users, the purchasers, chose not to buy products that violate those rights. It isn't "the system" that is at fault. It is the selfish and immoral actions of the people who make up "the system" that is the problem." I would bet that out of everything you own, 70%+ of it is a cheaper version of a more expensive product developed by the company selling the more expensive product. As I said, its nescesary to drive competition. Now, maybe Behringer crosses the line, and there IS a line, but I dont think looking at something, thinking "Theres no patent here" and i can make this cheaper, popping the top and doing it is immoral.

So if you wrote a song and put it on your myspace site and didn't have it copywrited and I heard it, liked it and made a huge hit out of it, calling it my own and reaping major money, you wouldn't have a problem with it?

[Craig Vecchione]

 

I dont see anything immoral about "stealing" a design if you think you can sell it cheaper and beat the original company. It is up to the original company to protect their intellectual property. There isnt some "gentleman's code" in the industry that every company lives up to except Behringer. Give me a break. Either the developing company isnt properly protecting their intellectual property, or the laws governing intellectual property are not functioning properly. Either way, to expect Behringer to stay out of the low-end market place is ridiculous. If a company develops a product, they have to figure out a way to make money off of it. If it cannot be patented, then they are open to all forms of competition (As they should be). "You think the average 20-something cares?" I would bet you that over half of the products in your home are low-cost rip offs of a product designed by someone else. Pots and pans, for example... unless you own a $100+ dupont frying pan, you're buying it from someone who ripped off their teflon design. Computers, for another. If you're typing on a gateway, emachines, toshiba, compaq, dell or any of the cheap laptops, you "dont care enough" to support Hitachi or NEC, the companies to first develop the internal design of a laptop. Give me a break. Every industry works this way and for all the condescension and elitism, as soon as you leave live music gear im sure you have no problem buying from companies like Behringer. Oh, and I hope you dont drive a Mazda6 like I do ($15,000). Its just a low-cost clone of the Volvo 260 ($32,000+). So, SHAME on any 20-somethings who drive Mazda6s for not caring! *rolls eyes*

 

 

 

 

It's not a question of stealing and "stealing", in quotes as though there are some forms of theft that are sorta-kinda okay. Is it okay for Behringer to claim their clones of Boss pedals are licenced, when in fact they are not? I guess not, as they pulled the products off the market. Is it okay for them to steal Mackie's and Alesis' designs, which were protected, but basically daring them to sue? I guess not, since they settled out of court. Perhaps you have some affinity for this type of "let's see what we can get away with" business ethic. I don't. It's not helping you get a better deal....all it does is raise the price of legitimate companies, which allows the dishonest companies to raise their prices too. Your discount gear costs you more as a result. So you and the legit company are suffering just so theives can get more money. But you're okay with that?

 

Second, it's not just Behringer. Nobody said it is. But the thread is about Behringer.

 

Third, if my pots say Teflon, then it's Teflon, which is a DuPont patented technology. They make money providing either the product or licensing it to others to produce. There are other non-stick coatings, but they can't call it Teflon unless it's the same molecule/compound, and that's a slam-dunk easy case to prove and win. The concept of a laptop computer is not protected intellectual property, and if it was, then NEC or Hitachi (which has the patent you're implying exists???) would be making money by licensing the protected aspects to Gateway, Dell, etc. regarding your "condescension and elitism" remarks, calling a thief a thief is elitist??? Condescending? Probably...I don't have respect for theives.

 

As soon as I leave music gear...if I know a company engages in the same behavior as Behringer, I won't buy from them either. But you're making assumptions about things like teflon and laptops that aren't true.

 

Now, regarding the Mazda6 and the Volvo 260. I used to work for Volvo. The Volvo 260 series was produced by Volvo from 1974-1985. The Mazda 6 has been in production from 2002 to present. The 260 is a rear-wheel drive car, the 6 is a front/four-wheel drive. No similar major parts, though it's possible small components are commonly sourced, as both Mazda and Volvo are owned by Ford Motor Company. The Mazda 6 platform has been used for a wide variety of cars, minivans and SUV's under the Ford corporate umbrella. And that's fine and legal.

[jbutler1982]

"The concept of a laptop computer is not protected intellectual property"

Exactly! I have twice said in this thread that stealing protected intellectual property is wrong and crosses the line.

"Condescending? Probably...I don't have respect for theives."

I wasnt refering to condescension to Behringer, but rather your post about "twenty somethings" who dont care who they buy from, as if there was some duty on them.

"It's not helping you get a better deal....all it does is raise the price of legitimate companies, which allows the dishonest companies to raise their prices too."

I am going to strongly disagree with this. Of course it lowers prices or leaves them unchanged. If you can get a copy of machine X for $200, the maker of $400 machine Y might leave the prices unchanged, most likely will lower them to compete, but certainly the existance of the cheaper competitor wont have an upward effect on prices. If anything, it makes the expensive company keep quality up so that they maintain their edge on the cheap company.

If companies like Behringer didnt exist, the companies who develop products would have no incentive to offer them at decent prices with reputable support. If, say, QSC had complete protection against people copying their amps and selling them, QSC would be free to produce an amp and provide horrible service, knowing that their the only game in town for a RMX-series. Now, maybe you trust these companies to provide good support and a quality product w/o the competition a low-end company like Behringer provides... but I sure dont.

Like I said above (the two Behringer threads are running together in my head, so i think it was this one), there *is* a line. I just dont see popping the top and copying a non-patent protected item because you think you can manufature it cheaper and fill a need as a bad or morally reprehensible thing.

I am probably wrong about the Volvo part number, but when I bought my 6, the salesman specifically said it was just like some 6-cylinder volvo on the market but cheaper. What about the Mazda CX? Even the commercials say it is "Just like the Lexus SUV" but costs 1/2 the money.

The teflon example I meant the graduated sides of a frying pan. Dupont was the first to design them like that (instead of the old straight-up sides). Also, do you buy or use any generic drugs? Do you buy or use generic brand household cleaners? Do you have a digital watch not made by Hamilton?


ps. Can someone please tell me where the quote button is?

[guitarharv52]

The quote button is to the bottom right of where you wrote where is the quote button.It is on every post.You'll see it and go "D'oh":D

[Craig Vecchione]

 

"The concept of a laptop computer is not protected intellectual property" Exactly! I have twice said in this thread that stealing protected intellectual property is wrong and crosses the line.

 

 

You seem to think that if Behringer copied it, then it couldn't be protected. Not true. They seemingly copy anything they please, and dare to be sued. The hope is that an international lawsuit costs more than the possible reward of protecting the property. It obviously works, but you seem to think this is okay.