From my subjective, anecdotal perspective, most of the complaints I see fall into two categories.
- “Uli does slimy things (e.g. Peter Kirn), don’t give him money!”
- Fair point, there have been multiple events over the years to earn this reputation.
- “Behringer is making inferior clones of treasured synths and stealing the creators’ original ideas. This is an injustice to the creators, damaging to the industry, and cheapens the art.”
- This one seems misguided and lacking evidence. It also comes from an elitist position, regardless of whether a person wants to think of themselves as an elitist or wealthy. People attach part of their identity to a certain brand or object and their privileged access to it, whether due to cost or rarity, gives them a sense of prestige and uniqueness. It is the same in fashion, sports, cars, etc. They get pissed off when they feel their access has been devalued.
This attachment is even more fleeting in the modern world where the vast majority of these desirable objects are mass-produced and only exist through the disconnected work of hundreds or even millions of people. I adore instruments of all kinds, and I admire the work of people who bring their creative visions to the world, but few things epitomize “mundane replication” today like endless factory lines of electrical components across the world.
I am open to hearing other opinions, but I would say that no one “invents” or “discovers” any electronic consumer good. Cutting-edge electronics research occurs in labs. Businesses revise, reorganize, or combine well-established and widely available ideas and goods into new variations (with new marketing) that can be duplicated and sold within an ideal profit margin. The silliest idealization of this is easily the world of guitar pedals where 50-year-old designs and identical parts are praised for offering a nearly identical sound…but slightly different…and with a cooler logo.
In this case in particular, I think it is a little ironic that Behringer is not only copying mass-produced items, but their business tactic is to copy objects that are literally the most common/popular or to copy objects that the original companies stopped making.
Are they undercutting small companies? Are they damaging the industry and preventing innovation? Are they preventing original creators from pursuing their dreams by stealing their ideas?
If so, I think that is absolutely a reasonable argument against their products. I would also be open to accepting evidence of that if it could be presented, but I haven’t seen any.
What businesses are suffering because of Behringers products? Who is losing money because instruments that were never accessible to people with lower incomes now have similar versions that might be within reach? Are companies like Synthstrom, Chase Bliss, Meng Qi, or Critter and Guitari being chased out of business because Behringer makes cheap versions of famous pedals and synths?
The closest thing I have seen like this is with Robin Whittle’s Devilfish mod, but that doesn’t come off as a strong case to me for several reasons.
Again, I respect your point about Behringer undercutting small, innovative companies as something worth seriously considering from an ethical standpoint, but I rarely see this as a popular point being argued and I have yet to see evidence (please point me to it if you have it).
I also think that there is a lot of value in analyzing a massive company like Behringer on ethical concerns like employment treatment and wages, resource sourcing, environmental pollution and waste, etc. I rarely hear about these as issues of concern though, I mainly just hear privileged gear hoarders treating music like a social hierarchy and complaining about disrespecting the proud Moog/Korg/Roland legacy.
I will clarify that economically/politically I am opposed to many aspects of cutthroat capitalism and I think that corporations need far more government regulation and taxation. I don’t think Uli deserves to be rich or that a few large corporations should dominate all industries. But, in principal, I am opposed to the argument that businesses should be prevented/punished for making superior or inferior versions of popular goods at a cheaper price. Behringer might be the bad guys in some ways. If they were using slave labor or illegal mining to produce their clones, then the ends wouldn’t justify the means. But they aren’t the bad guys for the act of cloning itself.
Cloning rare and expensive objects to make them more accessible to a wider audience is good. It is a form of innovation and technological progress in a way. It makes the world more equitable. From bronze tools to cell phones, ideas and goods shouldn’t be privileged and protected.