This tbh
it speaks for itself when people are already complaining about price or their negative opinions on TE before they have even seen their new product…its akin to purposely picking a fight with someone
4 Likes
I have a theory that the screen-free OP-Z came about partially because of the trouble TE had with screens on the OP-1. I mean, we all carry a super high def screen with us at all times, so why not use that?
3 Likes
It is definitely a possibility since this had been going on for years. The supplier kept upping the price for the screen as a silent way of forcing TE to change screens and then just flat out refused to when TE still kept buying it.
I don’t have first hand accounts of this so it’s a bit hearsay, but I have been told from solid sources that this as the root cause of the whole screen debacle.
4 Likes
Ah man, privacy and Google have to be the most incompatible pair I ever heard 
I was talking about a proper full-on Linux phone running a very efficient Debian Linux based distro. So open and transparent you don’t even have to buy it ready made. It’s possible these days even for a beginner to throw their own Linux-based phone together if they really wanted.
Even a matching Debian Linux-based tablet can be built or purchased.
I meant even in its current form. Although personally I think they should keep-up the premium price of the OP-1 Field, but release a less-premium plastic version along side it. It should be plastic, slightly less portable by being fatter, but be 100% compatible and feature identical to the OP-Field and sell for around 500.
It would require minimal investment because the work has already been done on the Field, and it would massively increase their ROI for the core design. It would allow TE to retain their premium brand image by continuing to offer the premium aluminium Field to those who can afford it, while at the same time keeping the competiton at bay in the form of the more budget-friendly version.
Exactly, and I’ve never understood why they don’t do that because let’s face it, they’ll have no choice in the matter if Behringer comes along with a clone and starts dropping them at 400!
None of us really know how TE balance their finances, but considering the popularity of the device and the price they’re charging for it, I would not be surprised if that particular stream of income suddenly comes to a grinding halt when a clone arrives.
And a clone will arrive, it’s inevitable. Uli’s far from stupid, in fact I’d say he’s a bit of a hero of mine really and I can’t imagine he’s going to hang around much longer, watching you being charged nearly two grand for something he can sell you for 6-8 times less.
1 Like
I really dont think a clone will be ever be made, atleast not a good one. Similar devices with off the shelf parts have already been attempted by others with little success (see LMN 3, or OTTO)
Uli was able to clone so many classic synth designs because they are all using off the shelf, readily available parts whereas teenage engineering seem to do everything mostly in house/ custom for both hardware and software, and its become integral to their user experience
It would all come down to the cost and effort of developing and manufacturing a similar custom software and hardware experience to the OP-1 which i think most if not all manufacturers (including Behringer) would not deem to be worth the investment for a mass product.
Actually TE seem to be the only company in the synth market that genuinely believes their products are worth making regardless of the required cost of custom in house manufacturing/developing which ultimately prices them out of the very consumers that would otherwise buy their products…
That is the irony of TE and i guess why they are always made fun of lol
3 Likes
Why would anyone clone it, it’s far from perfect…but I am surprised there haven’t been more hand held synth/sequencers in the style of the OP-1 considering its dominance for over a decade.
there hasn’t even been a proper clone of the original op1 cause it wouldn’t be cost effective
plus a significant part of the appeal is the overall interface & tape recorder…other manufacturers have their own concept of sampling/recording & the software developers needed to duplicate TEs dsp and menu on things like op1 or op1f would not be a wise use of resources
i imagine most companies are content to let TE stay in their lane untouched
i propose the radical idea that TE prices aim for professional musicians and studios because these are the folks who will always be able to afford the cost and know how to use their instruments to create magic
I thought of this too
As imperfect and divisive as OP1F has been, what on earth would make someone with a capitalist mindset think it’s worth cloning?
1 Like
A bit of talk here about off the shelf vs custom parts… Are TE using custom fabbed LSI IC’s? I’m pretty sure they’re not making their own resistors/caps/op amps so they’ll be off the shelf too.
1 Like
I’m not so sure about that. I happen to know that Uli was scouting for FPGA programmers quite a few years back now, and if you know what an FPGA is you’ll understand the expertise involved and the insane amounts of processing power it facilitates.
I’m guessing we’re about to see a whole bunch of super-powerful digital products from Behringer. Samplers, physical modelers and who knows what else. The OP-1 in comparison uses an off the shelf CPU that costs peanuts to buy.
Food for thought.
Also, you shouldn’t be so keen to see Behringer as a clones-only sperm bank, especially as the very engineers that designed the hardware that was cloned are now working for Behringer. In fact it wasn’t that long ago that Uli announced the original MS-20 engineer is now part of the Behringer engineering team.
I would not be surprised that if (or rather when) Behringer clone the OP-1 that it will be FPGA based, and if it is, the power available to it will make the OP-1 look woefully underpowered.
There’s nothing technically unattainable about the OP-1 for Behringer, it’s just a very good design.
1 Like
Correct, it’s just a bog-standard off-the-shelf CPU that can be bought for around a dollar or two I believe. It’s the software and design that makes the OP-1 what it is, and the lack of competition that allows it to command such a high price.
Behringer, I am confindent, could make some ‘adjustments’ to product pricing in that regard 
1 Like
I think that’s definitely one part of the current price for sure… but not the only part.
1 Like
Thing is, a large part of the joy you get from using an Op1 / Op1f doesn’t come from how powerful it is… It comes from the beauty of the object itself, how well made and designed it is, from the simplicity of the association between color coded knobs and quirky and beautiful UI… All of this is not related to the parts used inside, it’s how they are combined into something meaningful: it’s design… and I’m pretty sure TE has protected most of it with patents / copyrights.
Furthermore, big B has a tendency to always botch its clones’ design, there’s always something off or ugly. You know, like these knock off Batman toys sold in “All for a dollar” shops. Pretty sure an Ob1f would be a bad taste fest designwise.
6 Likes
Regarding the price, it’s a much, but i agree with others here; it only matters how much you are willing to pay in return to what you are getting! In that regard even the matriarch is overpriced to me!
To me the field is expensive only because I don’t think I could make music im satisfied with atm. Maybe if they update it with a powerful sequencer and few more synths.
2 Likes
yeah im not implying that it cant be done in terms of hardware power, i dont even see TE as a company that cares too much about power unless its necessary
The identity of TE products and what makes them different from other compaines seems to be moreso the attention to hardware design (which is custom) and software integration/optimation with said design, which again is custom.
Their way more powerful chips and talented programmers, but its more a mindset thing as to what actually are the priorities in manufacturing a product where TE seem abit odd compared to other companies. Thats more so the reason i dont think a good clone will be made because the OP-1 and other TE products are not really made with that rational ‘specs and power and practicality’ mindset
Hell the original OP-1 was made with a old cellphone processor and i think that speaks to what they value most in designing products
3 Likes
Should have just read your message before my long response ha… Well said!
1 Like
But this experience is related to the parts they’re using inside. The OP-1 would not be the same if it were built into a bulky, mostly-hollow plastic enclosure populated with completely off the shelf components like most comparable products, even if it still had the same UI. TE has a cohesive design philosophy and it’s baked into their products at every stage of product development.
This is just my speculation, but TE does not seem to compromise on hardware design: they have a concept for what a product should look and feel like, and they follow through on it even if it means fabricating custom components (which can get expensive). The result is a kind of product that nobody else is making, because it doesn’t fit the typical business model, but that’s also why their products resonate with people so strongly.
I think the TE/Apple comparisons are typically off-base and not instructive, but I’m reminded of something from Walter Isaacson’s biography of Steve Jobs, where Jobs was talking about his father who was a carpenter:
It was important, his father said, to craft the backs of cabinets and fences properly, even though they were hidden. “He loved doing things right. He even cared about the look of the parts you couldn’t see.”
2 Likes
Prototyping R&D costs and machining the custom metal enclosure were the greatest contributors to the eventual price
As stated above, lack of competition is more chicken-and-egg than you’re willing to admit. The competition doesn’t want to burn through money, can’t do it cheaper and therefore haven’t touched most TE stuff with a 10-foot pole. It’s a completely avoidable PR disaster…so they avoid it
First, I’ll thread the needle between the opposing opinions on this: I’m largely OK with Behringer clones and think the updated designs are perfectly fine. I also think they will never consider cloning TE products other than POs (if anything).
Now, about the TE design language, I have to say…I like their choices because it makes em easier to use and I don’t that’s anything you can protect from a potential clone. The audio engines could sound different but anybody who adopts the same visual link between coloured encoders or buttons would have a decent system in place. That’s one key part of why the complexities and quirks of the OP1 feel intuitive for many people. As an example I don’t need to read extensive notes to understand that record, tape mode, input select, and the 4th encoder share certain functions cause they’re all the same colour!
That makes it a joy to use and makes it easier for most people to focus on making music instead of hesitating mid-performance or during a jam to figure out how to do what they want.
1 Like
People are just ignorant of what stuff costs. ¯\(ツ)/¯
Look at the next-most-obsessively-designed synth I can think of, the Dirtywave M8. Amazing feel. Fantastic feature set. Wonderful software. As off-the-shelf as components can reasonably be (it’s stock teensy, LCD, battery, and keyswitches in a custom case). Pretty much a best case scenario for the “bill of materials” crowd.
So I feel like a lot of people here would say “oh, that’s $100 worth of parts, should cost $150” or something. But it lists at $600 and makes so little profit that they’ve been worried about making rent once or twice. And that’s obviously not accounting for the years of development, prototyping, and frequent updates that go into the device. And it’s 1/4 the size and maybe 1/2 the features of the OP-1f.
Or hell, how much 
gear would you have to stack up to cover everything the OP-1f does? A DT for the sampling? An ST for the engines? We haven’t even hit multitrack recording or editing yet, and we’re already over cost.
Shit costs money. Nice shit costs more money. Stop pretending like it don’t.
26 Likes
This is something that needs to be more widely known. I worked on a product about 2 years ago and the whole manufacturing process (stressful as hell) enlightened me as to how expensive things truly are. Larger companies are much more easily able to meet economies of scale, which has completely warped people’s perception of how much things truly cost to make.
11 Likes
Respectfully, realistically- I don’t think you know what you’re talking about.
3 Likes