Behringer today announced the BDS-3 4-Channel Analog Drum Synthesizer.
If it looks familiar, it’s because it’s a renamed version of the Behringer SDS-3 they introduced two weeks ago, a knockoff of the Simmons SDS-3 Drum Synthesizer.
The Behringer SDS-3 can be used as a standard analog drum module, but also features Mic inputs that let you trigger the drum channels using drum mics. The module also supports basic MIDI control for sequencing.
No word on why they’re changing the name, but their site suggests that the change might have been a little rushed:
Pricing and Availability:
The Behringer BDS-3 analog drum synthesizer should be available to pre-order at some retailers soon, priced at $249 USD outside the US, and $319 in the US, about 30% higher.
Looks cool and I do appreciate when B brings old circuits back to life that are otherwise mostly Unobtainium….but in today’s economy, when disposable income is pretty much non-existent for most humans (at least in modern USA)…good luck B.
“…disposable income is pretty much non-existent…”
I know, right? Attendance at Disney parks went down 1% in 2025.
https://insidethemagic.net/2025/11/disney-parks-2025-attendance-decline-jc1/
Yet many people still make sure they have the latest and greatest iPhone:
https://www.businessinsider.com/americans-cant-get-enough-of-the-iphone-17-pro-max-2025-10
If a $300 piece of musical gear is unaffordable to most in the USA, imagine wanting a Prophet-5 Rev4 or a Gibson Les Paul or a Fender Stratocaster or a Martin acoustic guitar.
Missed opportunity to call it the BDS-M
It still sucks to pay 30% more for the *exact same* product when it all comes down to certain people’s d*ck measuring contest
Do you sincerely believe that this is what it all comes down to? This is why the recent tariffs were enacted:
https://www.reuters.com/legal/legalindustry/foreign-companies-eye-us-expansion-lessen-fallout-tariffs-2025-10-06/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LayOiPkvKBw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n224P8snMkA
Behringer used to be so hated by many on this site as being an unethical company, but as soon as Behringer’s made in China tariff could be used to leverage hate against “MAGA,” now having to pay 30% more for a made in China Behringer product is an outrage.
We could do without the 30% MAGA tax that’s raising prices and slowing growth.
But hey, if you think people buying iPhones and going to Disneyland makes it all good, you do you!
You missed the point. The OP wrote, “…when disposable income is pretty much non-existent for most humans (at least in modern USA).” Is that true? Tens of millions of Americans are still spending money on things that are non-essentials. No one needs things like a trip to Disney parks and the iPhone 17 Pro Max, but Americans by the tens of millions are spending money on non-necessary expenses.
The 30% is because the Behringer product is a China made item. The importer has raised the price to offset the increased tariff on China made products. Do you know why the China tariff was enacted? The tariff on made in China items should be removed? Is that what you are advocating?
And why is this a “MAGA tax” thing? Are you not a US citizen? The current government was legally elected by the majority of US citizens. President Trump is doing what he said he would do. He is arguably ripping the band-aid off too quickly to try to level the playing field between the US and other countries, but no informed voter can say that this was not to be expected. Heck, President Trump has been saying this for 40 years:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEPs17_AkTI
By the way, how is your 401(k) and/or IRA doing?
still going, this a-hole
Classy reply. How about a reply with some substance instead of just hate.
It’ll be the same reason they had to rename the MS-101 to MS-1. Doesn’t take rocket science to work out why.
It’s all marketing / free advertisent through online bickering.
I’m sensing a pattern here.
They’re doing this fully on purpose – the Klon pedal is another example.
…meanwhile, they’ve picked the absolutely most boring product imaginable out of Simmons’ rich history of electronic drum products.
I can see that they shy away from the mighty powerful SDX drum sampler, but at least they could have had a shot at the hybrid SDS7 module!
It’s not a knockoff if it’s no longer in production.
We use the term ‘knockoff’ consistent with general usage – an unauthorized third-party copy of a popular product, designed to be sold inexpensively. Whether or not the original is currently in production is not a factor.
The fact that Behringer changed the name of this instrument may reflect the fact that it’s a knockoff, that they want to minize the risk of infringing on Simmons’ IP. This is a standard thing you see with knockoffs – you can’t call your drink ‘Dr Pepper’, so you make a similar product and call it ‘Mr Pibb’.
This is one of the tell-tale signs of knockoffs, along with copying the graphic design of the original, but making some arbitrary tweaks to keep things out of court. Other examples of this include the Behringer Toro bull logo, which is obviously derived from the Moog Taurus logo, and the way Behringer copied the colors of the Roland TR-808 buttons, but put them in a different order.
Other categories of synth copies include:
Clones – copies that are made, without compromise, so that they are functionally equivalent to the original. Behringer’s copies of Mutable Instruments Eurorack modules are clones, because they’re full-size, they’re based on the same underlying open source code, and they should sound exactly the same, as a result.
Reissues – new instruments from the original designer that are updated copies of original designs. These are usually uncompromising, premium designs, like the Moog Model D and Sequential Prophet 5 reissues.
Virtual Instruments – copies of physical instruments in software form.
Each type of copy has its pros and cons. Knockoffs are cheap, but often have obvious compromises. Reissues are closest to the original, but tend to be expensive. Virtual instruments are cheap and handy in your DAW, but often only get 90% of the original’s sound and don’t have the same immediacy as hardware.
For whatever reason, the ‘knockoff’ categorization is the only one that seems to blow a few reader’s minds. A few readers confuse the term with ‘counterfeits’, which is something else entirely, and take it as editorial bias.
I personally own 6 Behringer knockoffs, and like everybody else that buys their stuff, appreciate that their gear offers a cheap alternative to popular instruments. I’m not blind to where they’ve made compromises (copying dated designs, cheapening build quality, truncating the octave range of keyboards, using smaller knobs and controls, etc) or where they’ve made improvements (like adding basic MIDI on/off support to pre-MIDI synth designs).
But anyone that suggests that Behringer’s core business model is not making knockoffs is in denial. The company’s stated business model is that they will copy leading products, to the extent that the law allows, and offer cheaper alternatives. And this is why it’s accurate to categorize many of their copies as ‘knockoffs’.
Mainly agree because I wish they wouldn’t copy the graphics and fonts, it just looks cheap. But not sure about your definition of clones: many of the 303 clones in the 90s weren’t without compromise, although I wouldn’t call them knock offs either.
Also is it really the same kind of reissue when the original people aren’t there anymore, or the company or trademark changed hands? Not sure.
They copy the graphics on the designs because their graphic design team blows. It’s bad enough that I would be pretty surprised if the visual design team wasn’t pulling double duty. I have a ton of their stuff. I love the knockoffs, but some of their original synths are so fugly it’s hard for me to even give them a chance. I am sure the neutron rules but it is the opposite of inspiring to look at.
As far as the term knockoff goes, yes it has a negative connotation (as does, but less, the word clone), but synthhead explains the distinction perfectly. B could easily so things to shake that label if they don’t like it, but clearly that’s where their bread is buttered. Do I find it a little gauche? Absolutely, and I think thats why people have an aversion to that term. We all know it’s true, and I’d rather a truth with some sting than some BS and a blind eye. They have done a lot in the industry to bring costs down across the board and have made what used to be a very niche and expensive thing far more accessible. Although they may have put the nail in Moogs coffin and I coulda done without them knocking off their whole line with the edge, crave, etc (also aggressively ugly synths). So it’s a mixed bag. Moog premium pricing has been absurd for a long time, and in the end you make music for the sound not the name on the box.
“not sure about your definition of clones: many of the 303 clones in the 90s weren’t without compromise, although I wouldn’t call them knock offs either.”
We err on the side of a ‘clone’ being full size and functionally equivalent to the original – much as you’d think of a genetic clone – a faithful copy or the original.
Let us know you you’d categorize the 303 clones that weren’t faithful to the original. If they’re not faithful to the original, they might be a copy, but not a true clone.
plenty of other products that are copies of old synths and drum machines that you post but dont describe as a “knockoff”…you seem to persist in saving this specific rhetoric for Behringer, like its some form of hate-speech. Youre effectively chastising half of your readers, me included, for liking these products. Sad really.
Thanks for your feedback!
We’ve never ‘chastised’ anyone for buying knockoffs. We own some Behringer knockoffs ourselves, precisely because they are useful, inexpensive copies.
It sounds like you’re either insecure about your Behringer purchases or just offended by the statement that they are knockoffs.
Behringer’s business model is making knockoffs, though. They’ve as much as stated this, and anyone that looks at their line of synths can see this. The suggestion that stating this fact is ‘some form of hate-speech’ is absurd.
Nah, it’s a knock-off.
Definitely a knock-off.
i used to be angrier against this lazy reingineering of other people’s products, rather than making something new and more interesting (like the Neutron). But after reading hundreds of discussions and realizing how many Stratocaster knockoffs I’ve seen in my lifetime, I no longer give a hoot. Let the lawyers figure it out. It’s still a lazy way to make products – to completely steal someone else’s design, flaws and all.
synthhead,
Do you enjoy dealing with the angry mob who populate the replies?
We don’t see much of an ‘angry mob’, when there’s really only half a dozen or so readers that regularly have extreme opinions on our posts.
I feel like we have an opportunity to use the comments section of the site to get a better understanding of what people think about new gear and our coverage, and an opportunity for us to let readers get a better sense of what others are thinking, too.
I don’t always agree with these views, or love having to deal with comment moderation, but I value having a sense of what others are thinking, and the range of perspectives in the synth community.
I think there’s way too much endless chatter around a topic that has already been beaten to death. Instead of constantly re-igniting the same debate, people should just appreciate that access to so-called “knockoffs” has become cheaper than ever — and that the quality you get today is genuinely excellent, aside from a few minor issues that are easy to overlook.
For me, the important thing is that musicians finally have access to instruments and gear that would have been completely out of reach before, simply because other companies were more focused on protecting high margins than on supporting the creative freedom of artists. That’s why, in my view, Behringer is more like the Robin Hood of musicians — bringing affordable tools to people who just want to make music rather than pay premium prices for a brand name.