Behringer Displays VC340, Pro-One, 808, MS-101 Clone Prototypes

At Superbooth 2018, Behringer was displaying the recently released Behringer Model D and the upcoming Neutron synthesizer – but also a wide range of engineering prototypes of clones of classic electronic music gear.

Behringer didn’t really announce anything at the show – they’d previously released teasers for everything on display. This included the MS-101 prototype, which they teased more than a year ago; the RD-808, which they teased late last year; the VC340 prototype, which which they shared teasers on earlier this year; the ARP Odyssey clone, which they teased four years ago; and their Pro-One clone, which they teased in March.

They also did not announce that they were releasing this array of gear and they haven’t shared official details on any of the new designs, release dates, etc. They displayed engineering prototypes, which were taken off the engineers’ desk and shipped to Berlin for Superbooth. So specs, pricing, ship dates, design details could all change.

Nevertheless, Behringer made a massive statement with their booth. By showing the wide array of clones of classic gear, they made clear that:

  • They are very serious about their plans for the synth and electronic music gear market;
  • They they have the resources to follow through on these plans; and
  • They are going to continue to attack other industry leaders by cloning their most iconic gear.

Here’s a quick look at what they had on display:

Behringer Vocoder VC340 (Roland VP-330 Vocoder Plus clone):

Behringer Pro-One Clone:

Behringer ARP Odyssey Clone:

Behringer RD-808 Drum Machine:

The RD-808 was probably the most clearly a prototype of the gear on display, with the drum voice labeling done by hand.

Pricing and Availability

Details on all the new gear displayed at Superbooth are still to come. Behringer previously leaked preliminary specs on a range of  drum machine clones and synth clones that they are planning, removed the information from their site.

69 thoughts on “Behringer Displays VC340, Pro-One, 808, MS-101 Clone Prototypes

  1. it`s weird somehow.

    On one hand it looks like with all the offerings we (the ones with normal or low budget) live in paradise but still, i can`t enjoy it. I feel mixed about all these clones cause i know somebody just replicates the idea of someone else but not in an elegant way like “i will create a synth” but more like ” i will re-create your synth”.

    Feels a bit like the forbidden fruit. Cause i know if i buy it i pretty much directly support (even though this goes for more products than one wants to admit) low wages and and bad quality and quite a few negative things.

    So while i get that many are happy for it at first glance i find it a dangerous path we are in with wanting everything and cheap. On the other extreme are the manufacturers who are greedy in another way and ask for completely crazy high prices.

    I dunno people. Paradise is not here just because of affordability. wish it was so easy

    1. Any criticism of these Behringer clones usually comes down to the same three arguments:

      1) Replicating ideas: The idea of copyright/patents is that the original creator can reap the fruits of his labor for a certain time. Moog, Roland, etc. have had that time. People nowadays still want those old instruments, so it’s not that strange that somebody decides to clone them. Roland and Moog could have done that too, but they don’t seem to be interested (except perhaps for the model D). Fine. They could have started low-budget brands to bring these product back to the market for more affordable prices (like Fender does with Squier and Gibson does with Epiphone). But they don’t seem to be interested in that either. Fine. Just don’t be surprised that somebody jumps into that hole. I feel that the synth market is finally catching up with the guitar market. You want to pay big money for a ’52 Fender Strat? It’s there. You want to buy a knock-off Strat that plays fine for $300? it’s there as well.

      2) You know you will support low wages: Tell me more. Because so far this argument has been made numerous times, but it seems to be more based on gut feeling than hard numbers.

      3) You know you will support bad quality: Tell me more. Because so far this argument has been made numerous times, but usually it is based on experiences people had with Behringer 20 years ago.

      1. 1) If you need a better description on what is an inspired creation i can`t describe it better. Sorry about that
        2) Something like Foxconn is only one example. If you say this is gut feeling you probably work either for Behringer or someone who profits in the same way. If on the other hand you don`t work for them you must be taking crazy pills to even start to argue against low wages as if they are an urban legend and this leads to the conclusion that you probably work for Behringer.
        3) Because the Deepmind is a milestone in quality.

        “Tell me more” this sounds like a robot gathering information

        Rock on

        1. 1) You want all creation to be inspired it seems. Good. I’ve accepted that some creation is inspired and other creation isn’t. In a strange way, Behringer clones are inspired on another level though: They have the vision that people still want these old machines and they’ll bring them to market for affordable prices. I’ve never seen that in synth history, have you?
          2) Behringer produces at Foxxconn now? I’m not a Behringer employee, so you have to tell me.
          3) Have you owned a Deepmind? Honestly interested here.

          1. 1) we agree more or less
            2) I never said they produce there. I answered to your question where you claimed i was relying on gut feeling and i just brought up one example of many that modern slavery does exist and is very real. I also know that when you see a product that is good and priced too good to be true, it almost certainly is exactly that. Too good to be true.
            3) I have tried one out occasionally cause a friend has it. Yes it feels cheeper than my mopho x4 keyboard. And i am in no way a specific brand supporter. I just see there is a big difference when you touch both devices and compare

            “i am not a Behringer employee so you have to tell me” actually no, i don`t have to tell you anything. If you are a Behringer employee and lying then you know the answer and are just fishing. If you don`t know where they produce you are also lying cause from what i read you are informed double the amount that would be required to know this but less smart than you think this being a result of arrogance which always gets in the way of a mind blossoming

            1. 1) Nice
              2) You simply can’t argue: “Foxxconn is known to have problems. Foxxconn is in China. Behringer produce in China. Therefore Behringer have problems.” I honestly don’t know where Behringer produces, and as you claim you *know* you will support low wages, please inform me. I have no idea why you lash out at me for just asking questions. And please stop making assumptions about what I do for a living or what my motivations are. There’s nothing behind the questions. I’m just trying to figure out your line of reasoning, because it would help me understand 95% of the people who criticize these clones.
              3) I wouldn’t be surprised that Behringer tries to find the sweet spot of durability and manufacturing costs. So I can imagine it feels cheaper than for instance a Mopho. But does that mean low quality? Have you ever touched an SH101? It feels like a toy. But mine is still going strong after 37 years. So ‘cheap feeling’ doesn’t necessarily equal ‘low-quality’. I think in 3-4 years time we can really tell whether these Behringer clones are low quality or built to the lowest quality that can still be called decent.

              1. 1) .

                2) So you can argue that maybe in the world we live in, there is a factory in china producing affordable if not cheap products and is the opposite of foxconn and they respect workers that make a decent salary? If Apple who is selling rather expensive products produces in foxconn you want to tell me you honestly believe behringer found a magic way to respect workers and at the same time produce cheap products in China? We might be living in another reality. I admit that cause i struggle to understand how this is possible. As to where they produce, it was hard to find out cause it`s a state secret:

                I am sure it`s going to be paradise compared to foxconn and everybody of the employees are in for a treat. They will earn 8 instead of 5 cents a day or something like that philosophy

                3) I guess time will show.

                1. 2) I’m not arguing anything because I don’t have enough information. And looking at Wikipedia or some articles about Behringer plants in online newspapers that I can’t gauge the trustworthiness of doesn’t change that. You claim to know, but the only thing I get when asking questions is that you simply can’t imagine that Behringer treats their employees fairly. That’s not an argument, that’s a gut feeling, as I said before. And while I share that gut feeling up to a point, I’m careful to distinguish between my assumptions and facts.

                  You did know that Foxconn is not owned by Apple, right? So maybe it’s the Chinese Foxconn owners trying to maximize profits. From what I’ve read, Behringer owns their own plants, so maybe they’re able to do things differently. I don’t know, but most people that claim that Behringer prices can only be low because of modern slavery underestimate the possible savings of manufacturing on a very big scale, in my opinion. Also I wouldn’t be surprised if Apple is looking for far bigger profit margins than Behringer is. Again, I don’t know. But, and I think that much is clear now, neither do you.

                    1. Those PR videos are pretty common. The nice conditions disappear once the cameras are gone.

                    2. I would take those videos with a grain of salt. Just as I don’t take people that say the nice conditions disappear once the camera is gone too seriously.

                    3. I believe The reason Roland (botiques) & Korg (volcas) keep getting smaller is because of the factories are full of children building synthesizers. Do you really think these companies want to put mini keys on synths? Do you really think Roland wanted to make crappy miniature versions of their legendary gear??! Behringer might have sweatshops but at least they are using full grown adults. Think about it!

                  1. Ladies ladies calm down…Johnny Bravo is here to save the day!

                    but really it boils down to 3 facts

                    1. People want faithful (with new twists) recreations of classic synths. If the original manufactures dont supply what the people want then they deserve to be surpassed by others. Whether from Roland or Behringer they will be built cheaply by workers paid almost nothing. (only high end models from major manufactures are made in better locations example: Korg Monologue is made in Vietnam but the Korg Prologue is made in Japan. Some smaller companies will build locally which os always good and you can choose to support them if you wish, just expect higher prices. Build quality now in China amd similar areas is a lot better than it use to be. (but has nothing on Japan)

                    2. Patents are sacred for a set amount of time….afterwards it should be fair game to all.

                    3. The world is a cruel and evil place. People are abused mentally and physically all over….we do what we can to survive on this rock.

                    1. If you feel sorry for this companys go work your ass off and buy overpriced gear… Or maybe you are lucky and one of the rich musicians…

                      Why are synths so long overpriced may ask a few people because they want a HIGH profit…

                      I know Roland , Korg, DSI and Moog can produce on the same price level like behringer but they want us to pay for their names…

                      Roland takes more money for their shit ABC technology then the Model D costs… Sorry sorry sorry this makes me sad…

                      Im glad Behringer does so amazing new synths…

                      And all the crying people here are crying here because they have make a huge investment in names and dont want that other people have the same technology for 1/10 off the price that they have paid…

                  2. 2) Why exactly does Apple have to own Foxconn in order to support the working conditions there by pumping big capital in? Quite the mystery to me. Do you want to say that Apple does not know what is happening there? So if i would pay someone in China or India , Malaysia Bangladesh etc etc to deliver a product like let`s say a synth or a pair of Jeans and he steps on some heads in order to keep cost down , i would`t know and it makes me uninvolved? And it`s maybe “The Chinese Foxconn owners” . Yup. Alrighty then. Same goes for the Sierra Leone diamonds i suppose. It`s the fault of the bad men with the whip that are torturing the workers in order to maximize profit. It`s not the market for diamonds . You are probably right. What i mention does not exist. Also the new Behringer plant (which is actually secret and maybe does not exist so shhht) i am sure will be the symbol of a new era where everyone is equal and human rights respected. A new hope like star wars And then i will go to a beauty contest and repeat part of what you say mixed with some other similar things. It sounds so much better and full of well studied arguments based on hard research rather than a dumb gut feeling like poor me. Only i am not enough good looking to go to the contest. Hmmm Too bad . And i wanted to tell them ” Uga Uga Apple good holy , foxconn chinese evil man not apple fault ,, uga uga world peace clone everything! Long live Dolly uga uga peace and prosperity, underestimate possible savings, big scale, big words 🙂 Dolly Parton? (voice in the backround) No Dolly the sheep! (other voice in the backround) that helped our planet grow stronger and cleaner than ever already. uga! also plastic bag cheap! me likes!! practical and cheap and nice colors! uga uga! joy! ! me need more plastic bag. hungry eat Plastic! uga uga (eats micro plastic flies away and farts Co2) ” hmmm i think apart from my looks this text would probably not help winning the contest either but i learned a lot. A.I next level style. So thank you

        2. #1 is pure snob value. People have been begging Roland to re-release remakes of the classic synths for years, meanwhile Roland pours all its effort in digital circuit emulation technology without a clear outside market for that. Roland doesn’t want to remake old systems because having the originals be super-expensive gives their brand a premium halo. Well they had the opportunity and now Behringer is going to take it from them. Sure, the new Roland digital drum machines are very nice, but some people just want an 808 or a 909 and don’t mind if it’s a clone as long as it’s a good approximation of the original at an affordable price point.

          Korg figured out how to sell to this market a few years ago and has been doing great and attracted a great deal of loyalty while still maintaining position at the high end. Roland has spent years giving people imitations of what they were actually asking for and before finally caving and making some analog stuff. I predict they’ll be a shadow of their current selves within 10 years.

          #2 low wages – a nonsense argument. >90% of the production of synths like this is done by machine, that’s the whole reason electronics are so cheap nowadays: surface-mount technology done by pick-and-place robots. Only the final physical assembly is done by hand.

          #3 quality – not really an issue since Behringer bought Midas several years back. Products from established manufacturers like Moog, Lorg etc. often have hiccups (in hardware or software) during early production runs.

          1. 1)…..
            2+3) yup. Also Levis jeans are done by robots. Everything is cool. And the waste byproducts of big scale production do not exist. I also heard that the new synths will be eatable (but it might be a lie. Don`t know what to believe so don`t take my word on it) . You are right. low wages only make 10% of the worldwide production 90% is para-dies with cha-cha sexy robots making the voodoo dance work flow. Or pa-ra-di-se aha aha. Almost makes me wanna dance. I am so exited! we found a solution to “action-reaction” now we only have action as in: we can produce super cheap, in super big quantities , is nice quality and the best part? There is no Reaction as in : It has 0% yes you read right 0% impact on the environment and is build to last and smell sexy! . Thank God we are there. Thats it. All the years of industrial revolution and we found the solution just now. just like that! . I am going to church. Bye

    2. Musicians have been asking the original manufactures to reissue modern clones of these synthesizers for years. They refused to meet this demand, especially ROLAND. Behringer finally has listened to musicians and provided the instruments many of us have asked for many years for. Not only are they doing a fantastic job at cloning them they are making them super affordable which is amazing! So much new cool music is going to be made because of quality synth tones super affordable. The entire music industry is filled with clones and reissues. Why should the “analog synth world” be any different???? Ever use a sample of any of these instruments? I really cant understand your logic. Think about guitars, pedals, eurorack, plugins ever seen a clone before??!?? PEOPLE WANT THEM!! All the haters will have a behringer synth in their studio.THank you ULI!!!

    3. Unless the synth was made in the USA, Europe, or Japan the wages will be low (prob still low in the first world countries as well, just not as abysmally low) This world is a cruel and messed up place….unless you want to devote your life to bettering the world and are going all in dont think on it too much, if you have a soul it will suffer with these thoughts)

    4. “Feels a bit like the forbidden fruit. Cause i know if i buy it i pretty much directly support (even though this goes for more products than one wants to admit) low wages and and bad quality and quite a few negative things.”

      Do you also agonize over the clothes you wear, the food you eat or the other electronic gizmos you own? Who made the jeans you are wearing and how much did it cost to make versus what you paid for them? How much is ‘low’? What specifically is ‘bad’? What other ‘negative’ things?

      I’m all for ‘fair is fair’ and I also strongly hate people being ripped off but the counter argument is do you want to necessarily spend $5000+ for a genuine Minimoog (nothing against Moog – just using them as an example)? How much of that is profit and who gets the cream? Do all of the workers who work at Moog (or wherever they now make it) share in the profit from that sale or do they still get paid their basic wage regardless? Who gets to drink from the well? How is your money distributed when you buy ‘Genuine’?

    5. Obviously haven’t seen the YouTube vids of behringers factory in Malaysia. It looks a lot nicer than where I work. And probably better than most peoples working environment to be honest. You’re speculation about poor wages and bad conditions is purely that. Speculation. Zero evidence or fact given to support your statement

  2. it’s soooo true! TOO much attention payed to the past and not enough to the future and to us “OLD” ones out there, that’s what synths were about in the first place, the future! that’s why the 80s sounded like it did to begin with, let’s make a NEW 80s not keep repeating the old one!

    that’s my manifesto for the night.

    1. In the studio there’s no old and new. There’s things that work and things that don’t. And many of these old things have proven to just work. That’s why people still use compressors from the 50s and 60s and synths from the 70s and 80s. That’s the problem with making new things: They have to work as well as the old things to be accepted But sometimes it happens: Virus, Nord lead. And in the end it’s what people do with it. Any decent artist can make anything sound like the future.

    2. Some of the best futuristic music is being created by artists with tons of retro synths and gear. Some musicians just become uninspired or stuck in a time period and no longer can create the future. It comes down to the artist not the gear. Plus there are always plenty of new synths to look at if these Behringer synths are uninspiring to you. For me Im excited and I have owned or own most of the originals.

    3. So bored of this argument. There’s plenty of new digital synths to play with but it turns out many people like the sounds of particular older instruments and want to keep playing them. Just like many people still like the sounds of electric and acoustic guitars, wind instruments, drums…

      The problem with so many digital instruments: they offer infinity of polyphony/oscillators/filters whatever. Fine, but when you have endless options nothin gis distinctive. There are in fact endless choices of software instruments and lots of music being produced with those but for some reason it doesn’t satisfy you so you put the blame on people who enjoy older instruments as if they were somehow preventing new sounds and music from being created.

  3. People are being cloned as well so what’s the difference? Look at architecture…you can’t tell me there isn’t cloning going on there as well…bees n ants do it,…why not humans? People are still using light bulbs, paper clips, toilet paper, etc… a lot of folks …if it works n sounds good why fix it? So many synths today are rehash of yesteryear anyway n packaged like it’s all brand new ideas n at a price tag that’s ridiculous! But why think so hard on this? Keep tweaking those dials all!!!

    Just my thoughts…which are probably cloned as well…

  4. In the studio there’s no old and new. There’s things that work and things that don’t. And many of these old things have proven to just work. That’s why people still use compressors from the 50s and 60s and synths from the 70s and 80s. That’s the problem with making new things: They have to work as well as the old things to be accepted But sometimes it happens: Virus, Nord lead. And in the end it’s what people do with it. Any decent artist can make anything sound like the future.

  5. lol, this is pure brand piracy = the unauthorized usage of protected brand names, labels, and designs. can someone plese sue uli? this is not funny anymore. design your own shit, behringer!

    1. “Someone please sue Uli” is THE HISTORY of Behringer!

      Legal cases
      In June 1997, Mackie accused Behringer of trademark and trade dress infringement, and brought suit seeking $327M in damages but such claims were later rejected by the court. In their suit, Mackie said that Behringer had a history of copying products by other manufacturers and selling them as their own. The Mackie suit detailed an instance, in which Behringer was sued by Aphex Systems for copying the Aural Exciter Type F—in that case Aphex Systems won 690,000 Deutsche Mark. The Mackie suit also mentioned similar cases filed by BBE, dbx and Drawmer. On 30 November 1999, the U.S. District Court in Seattle, Washington, dismissed Mackie claims that Behringer had infringed on Mackie copyrights with its MX 8000 mixer, noting that circuit schematics are not covered by copyright laws.

      In 2005, Roland Corporation sued to enforce Roland’s trade dress, trademark, and other intellectual property rights with regard to Behringer’s recently released guitar pedals. The two companies came to a confidential settlement in 2006 after Behringer changed their designs.

      In 2009 Peavey Electronics Corp. filed two lawsuits against various companies under Behringer/Music Group umbrella for patent infringement, federal and common law trademark infringement, false designation of origin, trademark dilution and unfair competition. In 2011 The Music Group filed a lawsuit against Peavey for “false advertising, false patent marking and unfair competition”.

      1. > The Mackie suit detailed an instance, in which Behringer was sued by Aphex Systems for copying the Aural Exciter Type F—in that case Aphex Systems won 690,000 Deutsche Mark.

        Ah the good old days. Behringer wasn’t the only one. A couple weeks after I was hired as a design consultant for a gig the VP came into my lab, threw an Aural Exciter on the lab bench, and said, “Figure out how this works and clone it.” I’d never used one of them before and it sounded like a fun project. I didn’t even open it up. I ran some test signals through it, noted the output, played with the controls, wow that is simple stuff. Patched it up in a modular to verify I was right, yup. Then built with parts and had a hardware prototype done by the end of the day, and a standalone digital one a few days later. Never opened the device, never looked at the schematics. Didn’t even know there was a patent on it until you just mentioned it. We sold a bunch of them, and ours had way better features than Aphex’s. I guess they never realized I cloned them. Given how trivial it was it’s astonishing that such a thing was patentable in the first place.

  6. When I see so many clones of classic synths that look ‘almost’ like the originals it kind of solidifies my feelings about what Behringer is doing. The idea that one of these is the exact same as an original because they sound the exact same is like saying a $100 fake Rolex is the same because it also tells the time, and it’s better because it’s 80 times less expensive. As good as these clones look and as great as they sound (some of them) they are basically knock offs. The B Model D is not a Model D. It just sounds like one, and it’s dressed in a cheap copy of its clothes. The MS-101 might sound spot on when it’s complete, which for most is all that matters, but it’s not a 101. I get why Behringer are doing this, there’s a huge market for people who want these synths but can’t or won’t pay the second hand prices. And why should they? I really want an OSCar, and after a number of failed attempts at buying one when they were ‘only’ £1200 I’ll definitely buy a Behringer knock off. And I bet thier copy will sound the same, and have midi, USB, sequencer etc etc. But it will never be an OSCar, just like that fake watch for $100 will never be a Rolex.

    Personally, I think expired patents are fair game. And if a synth isn’t being manufactured anymore, and there’s no plans to bring it back, then why not copy it? But like the Korg MS20 mini, which didn’t need to replicate the original form and could have been much more interesting in a redesigned case, I don’t get why there is a need with these Behringer to replicate the external design so closely. This for me highlights the knock Off nature of them. If they retained the familiar layout of the originals but altered the graphics and form, they would be more honourable updates, rather than slavish copies that don’t quite look right.

    1. “it’s dressed in a cheap copy of its clothes”

      Well that is provably false. The Behringer models all have additional features, upgrades to modern tech such as USB and MIDI, and more reliable better modern components and highly precise assembly using robots and SMD tech. They are demonstrably better than the old instruments they are based on, which they are not clones of because if they were they would be the same and not have all these great new features.

  7. The saddest thing about all this is going to be if Roland try’s to make a real analog tr808 or sh101 clone after Behringer hits record sales numbers.

    1. Roland needs to come out with a new,fresh, not hipster BS, analog drum machine with a new style all to its own ,to usher in a new age…but they are scared….SCARED! If they just did it, man it would be great. Start from scratch (just please have individual outs,knob (button) per function, and a metal case)

  8. “They are going to continue to attack other industry leaders by cloning their most iconic gear.”

    Pretty much says it all.

  9. It’s pretty strange to assume that Behringer are legally sound in making these clones because their patent has expired. Not only is this not exactly how patents work (expiration date depends on a number of factors, not just time since it was issued / last produced), but Behringer has been sued, multiple times, for breaching copyright. In the case of the Arp Odyssey, it’s a pretty grey area when one of the original designer is currently making the synth for another company. The same applies to Roland – you can’t simply produce your own version of a mk1 product when the company who produces it moves onto mk2 – and Roland would have a pretty good case in arguing that the tr8 / tr08 are simply new versions of their existing patents. It’s not clear cut, which is why Behringer might think they can get away with it, but history shows that their business model is to ‘clone first, check later’. You don’t have to care about these things, but I find it amazing how many of Behringers defenders are so aggressive towards people pointing out legitimate moral and legal complaints. As for build quality – the deepmind is supposed to be the new benchmark of their quality control – and I defy anyone to play the thing and pretend they are not extremely concerned about the longevity of those faders. I think it’s a pretty cool synth, and a sign of what the company could do if they wanted to – but those faders have no hope of standing up to live use.

    1. “Roland would have a pretty good case in arguing that the tr8 / tr08 are simply new versions of their existing patents.”

      Are you sure about that? Because they look like completely different machines to me. The original is analog, the others digital. I think you probably can’t put out a digital machine that emulates and looks like a classic Roland machine (of which the patents have expired, afaik). But luckily, that’s not what Behringer are doing.

      1. It is very unlikely that Roland has a single patent just for the internal analogue circuitry. More likely, the have multiple patents covering design, functionality, circuitry, etc. not to mention the case for an overall confusion regarding product distinction.

  10. Amazed that theyve seen the Korg Oddysey….im sure they know that they cant sell the ones theyve made yet and have dropped the price on it, and yet they are still pushing forward with their own version it does seem futile (although saving patches on it will be nice)

  11. At least be original in your choices.
    Korg has already done an Odyssey.
    Roland has done an SH101, 808 and Vocoder.
    Not to mention the many Moog clones.
    I don’t get it.
    Why double saturate a market that’s already completely saturated?

    1. LOL exactly, why clone clones of clones of originals, if they’re gonna clone something! That Pro-One is cool though, my guess is that the designers of these old synths are way passed that ‘era’ and don’t give a crap if Behringer is doing this? Would love the opinion of some synth manufacturers and designers on this…

    2. Why the Odyssey? Because Behringer has been planning an Odyssey since before Korg came out with their version. Additionally, people hated the “mini” Korg keys and small size, makes it look like a toy. Roland Corp totally missed a free home run on the Boutique series by not making them true analog. And yes there are many Moog clones, but not at $299. 🙂

    3. Roland’s TR-08 has absolute crap timing because it’s digital emulation is underpowered and its firmware engineers are not very talented and have clearly made basic errors in their embedded OS architecture. If you move more than a few knobs at once, the entire timing falls apart completely! The original analog circuits have tight timing and do not suffer these problems. They also have finer analog resolution for adjusting parameters. The whole reason to get these machines is to twiddle knobs! Sure it sounds OK if you only play simple sequences and don’t touch the knobs, but why get a 808 clone that has that restriction. Behringer’s new model will be analog and will not suffer these problems.

      Roland’s good engineers retired a long time ago. The new guys are not as good. The new products are not as good. Roland failed to impart their design thinking to the next generation. And now it’s too late for them.

  12. Far from a synthesist but as a + 30 years sound engineer I can only comment the sound. The common consensus on the shoot outs between the moog and the boog(?) seems to be that they sound the same.
    But they do not. Even the impeccable Mr Carr said they sounded pretty much identical in his comparison.
    But the original sounds much meatier, particularly at the low end. It also has more of a dirty grit embedded in its tone. As well as significantly less of the harshness we’ve gotten used to with modern gear. Quit saying they sound the same, cause they dont. It will be obvious once people start mixing with it.
    As for the philosofical side of the clone business: none.

    1. My friend and I did a side by side comparison of my Behringer D to his Model D reissue. While we only when through a few of the staple sounds, our consensus was unanimous. They sound the same, or enough so that it’s inconsequential.

    2. It is true that a Behringer D and Moog D do not sound the same. However, this is because all Moog Ds sound different from each other. Their resistors are lower precision than the Behringer, their caps are in various states of decay and needing to be replaced after 48 years. When you buy an original D, it takes a lot of work to restore it to sound good and be studio quality. You don’t have to do this with the Behringer. They sound like an ideal original D on the first day it was bought. Their parts have greater precision and are updated modern materials so not only is the sound more consistent from instrument to instrument, it will stay sounding good longer.

  13. >> Roland has done an SH101, 808 and Vocoder

    All are the digital replicas, sound horrible, ugly and cheap made (noisy e.t.c.).

  14. This is gross. I was excited by the Deepmind, and have even preordered a Neutron. But all of this blatant undercutting makes me question whether I want to deal with a company like this.

  15. I remember being in Downtown Philadelphia as a teenager, going to Chinese-owned clothing stores and realizing everything in them was a knock off. Fake Nike shirts, Fake Guess jeans, everything. Something about it felt very disgusting and now its even more disgusting. When you see all of those products lined up, it’s gross.

    Buy hey, you can afford it, they provide a service of making affordable synths, no one is hurt. But why not change the design a bit? Like even a smidge so its a little less scheevy.

  16. dude if they were only teasing (aka “lying”) about the EMS Synthi clone… IM GONNA BE PISSED as hael

  17. I would buy the 808 clone if it sounds even halfway decent…I have an Akai TOmCat and M.Base 11 in my mix, I would love to have an 808 clone…

  18. I don’t see how Behringer can sell these Roland and Karp clones. It’s not about the old utility & design patents, it’s about likeness and trade dress. Trade dress is intellectual property. Roland ‘still’ uses the trade dress of the 101, 303, 808, etc.. and Korg currently uses the trade dress of the Odyssey. They should sue Behringer for infringing. The only reason they wouldn’t is if they couldn’t afford it (which would be sad to some).

    1. It’s hard to claim trade dress when it says BEHRINGER right on it. Nobody is going to mistake these knock offs for the real thing. Besides after the literal 100’s of synths produced it’s hard to claim there is any distinctive value of one look over another.

      None of these legal arguments have any rigorous merit.

  19. even with low cost clones, they are still in major competition for people’s money in the synth industry as a whole. there are so many cool products coming out that it’s no longer a 1 to 1 competition. if someone has really really always wanted one of these original machines and and can’t find one or pay the astronomical prices then this might be the ticket but i think for most people it’s there, it’s an option, it might even make the wish list but falls pretty low on that wish list. it’s like the movie in your Netflix cue that’s sort of forever on the bottom always being pushed lower by more interesting things. i think what’s going on here is an open testing of the market, teasing, seeing the interest level and producing accordingly, yes it creates tons of buzz and talk but ends up amounting to just that.

  20. Holy Christ, what is so damn hard for people to understand, if you don’t like the clones, don’t but them…. end of story. Unbelievable all the never ending debate on whether it’s good for the industry or not. The more I hear people complain about Behringer, the more I just want them to succeed. I’m surprised these anti-clones people aren’t more excited for them, I mean, what better excuse for them to brag about their non-clone, pure, original hardware. See the big picture people, the clones will only validate your awesomeness!

    1. Yes, contrary to popular belief (which is usually wrong) the clones actually add value to the originals, showing the depths people will go to get a t2asye of the real thing.

    2. All these anti clone people here have maybe a real one at home and worried about their second hand market prices… Otherwise I cant understand why people dont feel good for other people getting these oportunity for saving some real cash… Its pure ENVY….

      1. I was begging a friend to sell his MS20 to me for 2000 … he refused. Then Korg announced they will make it again and he turned green … now he cannot ask for a high price. Count how many i can buy now for that money.

      2. That’s absolutely the case. Many genres depend heavily on the sound of a particular instrument. Some (not all) people who owned those patted themselves on the back for their superior musical choices while criticizing affordable alternatives as somehow lacking. It’s pure economic snobbery. If you play and affordable clone and the sound puts a smile on your face, then buy it with no regret. I got a TT-303 some years back and I enjoy it as much as I did the first day I plugged it in. I expect it will be joined by several Behringer products over the coming years because there are sounds I like and would prefer in hardware rather than sample form, but don’t wish to go broke to purchase..

  21. The market is free for all. If there are no copyright/patent issues, anyone can make anything and sell it at any price. The market will decide if it fails or succeeds. Others will buy it, others will not. So what? I never saw complaints about the crazy number of Stratocaster clones … Want a high priced original? Want a low price clone? Whatever! Select what you want and go make music! Not complaints. And while we are at it, does anyone talk about the music we are supposed to be making with our synths, cloned or original? Personally, i love the way Behringer made the Odyssey and i will buy it, but i will not buy the others they made. Not because they are Behringer, not because they are clones (i don’t care), but because they don’t inspire me to make music. The Behringer Odyssey does. It is strictly a matter of personal preference. I don’t try to impose it on others, whether they buy Behringer clones or not is their choice and i do not care about it.

    1. “… If there are no copyright/patent issues”
      The thing is there ‘is’ the possibility of copyright issue. Trade dress is a form of trademark. If a company has registered trade dress in one or more countries another company cannot sell something that looks so goddam similar. The trademark stays in effect for as long as company ‘A’ is still using the stated trade dress.. i.e Roland, Korg…

Leave a Reply