ModularGrid uses so-called cookies to ensure it's so-called functionality. We also use dubious tracking scripts. Find out more in the Privacy Policy. We use cookies and wanna let you know.
Ho, I'm new in modular, well, very new, just finished my empty case and I'm starting to design and find modules for my first patch.
I've noticed that Behringer has a lot of modules, plenty of functions, but people seems not be interested in them.
Poor quality reasons maybe?
I'll wait your opinions.
Sorry for my English....thanks
I think it's a combination of quality issues and distaste with some of their business practices. I don't really have a dog in the fight (aside from just generally not liking large corporations), as I'm not really up on their history and far from an expert on all the issues involved. I started my modular journey with 4 neutrons which I still own and use to some degree, they are great bang for the buck and a great way to get started in modular IMO. But I've never tried any of their eurorack modules, and haven't read particularly great things about them. I imagine some of them are probably good value, while some of them probably suck haha.
I think it's a combination of quality issues and distaste with some of their business practices. I don't really have a dog in the fight (aside from just generally not liking large corporations), as I'm not really up on their history and far from an expert on all the issues involved. I started my modular journey with 4 neutrons which I still own and use to some degree, they are great bang for the buck and a great way to get started in modular IMO. But I've never tried any of their eurorack modules, and haven't read particularly great things about them. I imagine some of them are probably good value, while some of them probably suck haha.
-- adaris
Thanks
I barely can have an opinion because I have no Behringer modules. But I'm pretty sure it will stay that way. Their reputation for announcing copies of old synths that they deliver a decade late doesn't help. But for me, it's like discussing McDo when you have plenty of good restaurants in the neighbourhood that aren't part of a huge chain. Or Coca vs Pepsi when you have a few microbrews and even some vineyards around. It's so bog standard there's just not much to say. There are other manufacturers who make many very standard modules (Doepfer or Ladik comes to mind) or copies (After Later, for example) that don't make a big fuss about it and announce when they can ship. Much more interesting to discuss modules when you actually can get one to see how it does what it doesb
It's not necessarily that people don't like behringer modules... it's more often that people just don't like behringer... they have had a bad reputation for making poor quality rip off products since they started... that combined with the general attitude of Uli don't really win supporters...
not all their products over the years have been poor quality, but the ones that aren't have historically been the minority... too many bad apples...
"some of the best base-level info to remember can be found in Jim's sigfile" @Lugia
Utility modules are the dull polish that makes the shiny modules actually shine!!!
My two cents... Respecting all opinions, I do buy & use Behringer products [modules, semi-modulars, microphones, etc]...even on stage with "Hans Zimmer live", etc... I use them because THEY SOUND GOOD & THEY WORK FOR ME... to each their own. Blessings to all!!
Hi there! Despite the fact that some of their practices are bull****, i have to say most of the gear sounds pretty decent, at least to my ears. Model D is a great example. If i can´t find a Minimoog or a TR909 for less than 6000€ (or find them at all) and want to have those sounds, I don´t see why I shouldn´t use a B product. I know there is a TR8s and it is awesome (first hand experience) but maybe you prefer the simplicity of the original. Roland is refusing to reissue this, I see why and respect that but others maybe don´t. They want a copy, they buy a copy.
I worked in development myself and can understand that they safe tons of money by copying. And this is where it gets nasty. Using products that are actually in production like the Mother32 or Dfam, from a small company thats probably struggling due to corona, chip shortage, whatever... is an absolute sh**move. I don´t think this is helping the industry because we definitely need developers like moog. If they have to shut down operation, that would be a loss for all of us.
Anyway... let´s just have more fun wiggling and choose wisely what to buy.
Yes, they are often big. Yes, Uli can be…different. But for, say, the ARP 2500 stuff there is no alternative. The quality of all the B stuff I have is just fine, euro and other. (Queue smarmy laugh emoji’s - get a life,people)
I avoided Behringer products until recently I bought—and subsequently returned—two Neutrons that I'd hoped would fit in with my other Eurorack equipment. It's not that they were a bad concept, just that the execution was flawed. The first had too much crosstalk between the overdrive and VCA circuits, and the second was built so badly that it wobbled every time we pressed a button or tweaked a knob.
Behringer has always been the Walmart of music equipment. Their business model is selling cheap gear to consumers who can't afford, or won't pay, the higher prices that name brand manufacturers charge for their equipment. I don't buy Behringer gear for myself or for my studio not because they aren't "good enough" sounding, but because I don't have time to waste on all the extra cost and work one has to do with inferior equipment. I'd rather pay the higher front-end price for name brand gear because after the mix is printed, the cost will actually be lower.
It's not news that Behringer clones other designers' gear—they do it with all their products, not just synths—and I don't have a problem with that. It's just business and competition. I don't like how they go about doing it though, and that's about behavior rather than actual methodology. Many of their products are designed to look so close to the original that it's not even a joke anymore (review the Swing, for example, which is a nearly exact copy of Arturia's KeyStep 37, or the Pro-1 modeled after Moog's Pro One).
The thing is, Behringer is capable of designing and producing good equipment without having to resort to ripping off other designs. The DeepMind 12 is a major accomplishment. The Neutron, despite it's manufacturing flaws, is a cool piece of gear for the price, as can be said of the Crave. Why not focus on creating unique gear, or if you're going to clone, then make something that looks different enough to be unique, but make it better? Hard to say, but it doesn't matter now, because Behringer have a reputation for building inferior gear and stealing other designs. I feel they harm the industry and we musicians and engineers rather than they do for themselves sitting in the group as an equal.
The other reason is about ethics and personal responsibility. It's not always productive to discuss, but it cannot be overlooked:
I think what Uli did to Dave Smith and Peter Kirn, and tried to do to Tom Oberheim, were not just churlish and petty behaviors but an example of a fundamentally flawed human being. If someone is willing to beat up a total stranger—AND FOR NO ACTUAL PURPOSE OTHER THAN EGO—in the full view of the public, customers, vendors and professionals alike, then that person/company will not get my business. End of story, full stop. As of today, I own only one piece of Behringer gear: a rack EQ that was left in the studio by an engineer I hired. It stays where it is simply because I didn't pay for it and I don't even want to devote the energy to remove it from the gear rack. I can't actually recall when we used it on a track because even my dbx 231 is better, and that's not saying much.
Every industry needs a bratty nephew that is just a pest to everyone, and that's the role that Behringer has decided to play in our music equipment family.
"I'll just plug this in here and see what happens."
Hmm... I have a Behringer Neutron & Model D & 2600 all work well and as they should. Very good price-quality ratio.
I also have 9 pcs of Behringer eurorack modules.
In terms of quality, they are no worse than modules from other manufacturers. In fact, even better than a few manufacturers. My current modular currently has 69 modules and behringer's modules are actually the 2500 & System-100 modules I use the most at the moment. Apparently some of Behringer's early system-100 and system-55 modules have had a calibration problem. At least for System-100, the problem has been fixed.
In terms of durability, of course, the potentiometers could be attached to the front panel and not directly on the circuit board.
I will continue to buy Behringer modules if I find a module that interests me.
I have a Model D, Poly D, and a couple other small pieces of commodity/utility gear from Behringer, and agree that the accessibility of their reissue work has really opened the world of synths to a lot of people that otherwise wouldn't get into it. However, in addition to the examples of Dave Smith and Oberheim noted above, the latest scenario with Mutable Instruments last year is why I've decided to avoid their modular gear going forward. I know Emilie made the designs open source and that has been a big boon for smaller companies making clones or variations on the designs (After Later, Cal Synth, etc), but it's an entirely different scenario when a large corporation lifts the design without giving credit (Mutable Plaits -> Behringer Brains). If they end up producing their clones of the Synthi or the Music Easel, I might consider it, but I'll be thinking about it way longer and harder than I did when I bought my Boog clones.
So yes, buy the modules that interest you, but I think there's a place for personal responsibility in whom we support with our dollars.
