Look if it’s not in Ulis business interest, fine.
He still does not have an agreement from the original creator to use their work, eg theft.
2 Likes
Uli over on GS posting entire correspondence. What a loser.
1 Like
truly an ugly day in the history of acid
1 Like
looser? devilfish guy first posted details from confident corespondece
1 Like
Yeah, and the devilfish guy forgot to mention he tried to ask Behringer for $300000 per year for licensing his unpatented mods… it’s only fair to release the whole discussion in my opinion if the other side hides details.
2 Likes
Whether you agree with him or not, that does not give Uli the right to steal his design.
1 Like
“Details” is hardly the actual correspondence in full.
1 Like
Me too. Ordered their Pro-1 one recently. Nice synth, but this has made me decide to send it back. I just don’t feel good about it.
3 Likes
WOW
truly no bottom
and here my popcorn machine just broke down.
7 Likes
Meh. GS is not a hot bed of cool headed discussion or thoughtful discourse. Probably why Uli chooses to engage there.
2 Likes
Maybe not such a bad decision to cancel my TD-3 and order a Strymon Deco instead. It seems Robin from Devilfish wanted too much, Behringer offered way too little from what I gather. It would be nice to come back to the negotiation table. Behringer could have had a win / win here for consumer sales and a boost to their public image. Why not be inclusive within the gear community instead of always being the target? An opportunity squandered perhaps. But at this point to just steal the ideas is kinda low.
4 Likes
I’ve been using my Deco on my AR to nice results. I always think to sell it but when I get it out again I hesitate. Great, wild delay/modulation stuff when mucking about with lag time in bounce mode.
1 Like
“I don’t need to license the Devil Fish to anyone, since in the next few years I will produce my own…”
So, let me get this right… the guy complaining about Behringer potentially stealing his ideas is going to straight up “steal” Rolands design as well, but add his bits and make a 100% markup on it? But Behringer is the only party doing the stealing and that’s who we should hate? Got it. 
And for the record, I don’t care what the guy builds or what price he sells it for. If he can get $2K or $10K good for him… the market will dictate. If he builds/clones something that’s no longer for sale (as new) where the patents have expired, I’m totally cool with that.
I just think there’s a good bit hypocrisy involved when it’s totally cool for the ‘little guy’ to do it and not Behringer. Had Robin beat Uli to the punch and released his $2K clone I highly doubt there’d be nearly any level of the animosity that Behringer gets.
8 Likes
Except your comparison falls apart upon closer inspection.
No one here is upset behringer cloned the 303. Its been cloned since the 90s and theres currently atleast 4 different clones and homages currently on the market.
People take issue with behringer potentially copying a boutique modification of the 303, not the 303.
1 Like
Terrible amount of shit you wrote there 
So you’re the judge of quality Acid eh? Excuse me while I skim over some of your productions…
Which reminds me.
Many, many bad acid tracks were made using REAL TB-303’s … and many more will be made with
tb-03’s , tt303’s, tb3’s, x0x’s 202’s, 101’s, and the rest… it’s not the gear is it. And it doesn’t matter how much it cost you. . . I don’t think you need reminding that a tb-303 cost nothing to buy in 1986.
Anyway 
#housemusicwasbetterbeforeitwentacid
3 Likes
I’ll politely say that I disagree with that assessment having read the entire thread since it started. Lots of people have exception with Behringer making clones in general, so I don’t find that accurate at all. If you don’t see that, so be it.
FWIW, I’d find Behringer reproducing the Devil Fish mods, as is, over my line for what’s acceptable even though it’s legally fair game. That’s one product I wouldn’t support. That said, I still find a lot of hypocrisy around who’s able to create clones and who’s not.
5 Likes
Really? Said pretty tongue in cheek, hence use of smilies etc and even the dropdown box I put after.
To me these kind of jibes cause no harm except maybe striking a nerve with Behringer fan boys, unlike say stealing someone else’s work, so you have a problem with my crappy jibes but not Behringer ripping people off?
Nope. Feel free all my early acid records (I think, if not most of) are on discogs, I think its shit now though like most acid from the 90’s is, I never listen to it. I have quite a bit of newer stuff from 2007-2015 on youtube, have at it.
Yep, you’d never hear me say otherwise.
And you definitely don’t need a 303 clone from Behringer to make acid either, so the whole democratising acid bullshit is laughable, you can do it on a £5 app.
Depends what you mean by acid, if you mean 99% of stuff between 91-98 then I agree, but the earlier 86-90 stuff was good.
1 Like
I don’t think they do, it’s more about the ripping people off, and their general slimey business tactics going back to the 90’s. Otherwise people would be complaining about other clones too, right?
2 Likes
Sure, I won’t entirely disagree, but I feel (just my opinion) that it’s easier to hate on Behringer right now being a bit of David vs. Goliath. People usually want to side with and cheer for the underdog and that’s fine. I don’t want to rehash it all (not worth it), but I guess I’m remembering a lot of the now deleted posts trashing Behringer and cloning in general. We’re all biased in our own ways and view things somewhat differently.
I’m totally OK with cloning in general, as long as it’s legal and have bought several Behringer devices at this point. I’m not OK with them outright reproducing the Devil Fish mods, but that’s my personal limits. I wouldn’t judge someone else for buying it though.
5 Likes