The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Why is Behringer able to produce reissues Roland cant?
Old 16th March 2019
  #121
Lives for gear
 
gentleclockdivid's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by camus2 View Post
People here forget that Uli Berhinger is a former engineer who built his first analogue synthesizer at 16. How much people here can boast about doing that? He might be a questionable business man but he is clearly passionate about analogue synthesizers, that's the difference between Behringer and Roland.
Yeah , sure we all know that , the story of uli his first synth ... but did anyone actually played or even seen it ,except in the 90's behringer brochure ?
And how come Uli hasn't designed anything after that , simple , the guy is a businessman and not a synth designer
If he was a passionate synthhead we would have seen behringer synth in the previous decade etc..be it digital or analogue , but noppes .
Old 16th March 2019
  #122
Lives for gear
 
pppch's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gentleclockdivid View Post
Yeah , sure we all know that , the story of uli his first synth ... but did anyone actually played or even seen it ,except in the 90's behringer brochure ?
And how come Uli hasn't designed anything after that , simple , the guy is a businessman and not a synth designer
If he was a passionate synthhead we would have seen behringer synth in the previous decade etc..be it digital or analogue , but noppes .
the synth is lost had disappeared in a move
has never worked properly..filter was not stable
but that does not matter .. if I consider what I did at 16 .. sure no synths built
Old 16th March 2019
  #123
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben F View Post
Because it would be like Porsche realeasing and electric version of their 911 and calling it innovative. They are missing the point.
If there weren't electric 911s before then calling "innovative" would just be accurate because it's introducing something new and that's what "innovative" means, whether fans of the 911 approve of it or not has no bearing on that.
Old 16th March 2019
  #124
Lives for gear
 
White Falcon's Avatar
Attached Images
Why is Behringer able to produce reissues Roland cant?-roland.jpg 
Old 16th March 2019
  #125
Gear Nut
 

The only thing that I don’t like about Roland is that JP-08 and company only have four voices. Besides that, I mean, I can recognize that I am literally not entitled to something like a real analog reissue Jupiter 8 or Juno 106 at Behringer prices from them. Neither are you.

What this means is: there is nothing wrong with Roland at all, really.
Old 17th March 2019
  #126
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Treebase DMX View Post
LOL. Is that People using auto-accompaniament machines and trying to replace drummers and bassists with electronic boxes?

Or does someone think that Roland intended the 303 and 808 to do what they were used for ?

Roland are the old farts who were never in touch with the cutting edge of electronic music...
Cheap, non-"professional" gear... Shouldn't need spelling out for you.

Also, does it need explaining that what gear is marketed as and what its intended to do by its designers can be two different things? The 303 was used for exactly what it was intended to do (Try using it for anything else!), the TR808 was used exactly how it was intended. Could Roland have predicted House, Hip Hop & Techno? No - But the way the gear was used is exactly how it was meant to be used. Otherwise people wouldn't have used it and opted for gear better suited to what they were trying to do...

But none of this stuff was considered "pro" at the time, their new gear focuses on the same target market. Its still old ****ers not getting it.
Old 17th March 2019
  #127
Lives for gear
 
cogsy's Avatar
 

Are we doing a Roland roast thread? Can I join??

I'll go with the explanation of a few previous posters. Roland is publicly traded, so they have certain obligations to their share holders, to include pumping out endless iterations of plastic, digital crap and overcharging you for said plastic digital crap. Their new subscription is the worst of both worlds, an idea born on a boardroom by middle management.

I have bought, sold, and returned multiple pieces of Roland gear, and I have learned the same lesson each time. They either have good ideas marred by a flawed interface, or bad ideas masked by a good interface. They almost never strike a good balance between form, functionality, and usability. And they NEVER fail to disappoint at NAMM.

They want to "innovate" at all costs (D-beam! Digital Cajon! Micro-Synths!), the cost usually being making an interesting, playable instrument. Behringer doesn't care so much about about innovation (or timely release of products), but they are trying to get form, functionality, and usability at a good price point. Making cool analog synths as affordable as an acoustic guitar will grow the market and bring more people into the fold. I see that as a good thing.
Old 17th March 2019
  #128
Lives for gear
 
Ben F's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToyBox View Post
If there weren't electric 911s before then calling "innovative" would just be accurate because it's introducing something new and that's what "innovative" means, whether fans of the 911 approve of it or not has no bearing on that.
It would be an inferior progression of the product and entirely missing what their target market was asking for.

Hence the reason Porsche will fully factory restore a 911, even though the new models are more innovative. They realise their customers love the originals and cater for that market.

Roland on the other hand release pale imitations of their past products captilising on their past and call this innovation. Behringer are now doing what Roland could have done in the first place.
Old 17th March 2019
  #129
Lives for gear
 
Pale Pyramid's Avatar
One way to look at Roland not doing what you want... all the synths people call classics..several weren’t commercially successful. They were not popular in their time. The others were unaffordable like the Jupiter 8 etc.

Today’s Roland may be the classics of the next generation. They may take these digital synths that everyone complains about and a new Warp records scene or the like will pop up around them in the hands of new artists. So you may just be living in a golden era of Roland right now.

The se02 sounds amazing. So does the system 100 type reissue that Molekko are making for Roland. I have played that several times and love it. I also loved the JDXA the few times I played on it. But many will not be able to afford these just like with Roland in previous eras.

The Behringer build qualities also impressed me. At that low price the ones I’ve got my hands on seem solid and sound great too. Obviously love and pride went into designing and building those from start to finish.

People will look back at this time we live in and talk of it as a golden synth age.

I’d complain the most about never being able to save money because of Behringer or Roland. Rather then complain for other reasons.
Old 17th March 2019
  #130
Lives for gear
 
Acid Mitch's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by monomer View Post
Hmm,.,. sounds super dodgy to me. Normally there is no such thing as 'free'. Everything has a cost and
I never said “free”. I said almost free.


Quote:
Originally Posted by monomer View Post
it would be strange if a part of a cpu would be sitting there doing nothing and waiting .
It’s not that strange. With multicore cpu’s the software has to know how to use the additional cores, otherwise they just sit there waiting. If you look at some of the arm documentation, it talks about using multiple cores for parallel calculations.

There are other examples of stuff Like Cirklon and Electron sequencers being able to generate additional notes from a mono track for almost free
Old 17th March 2019
  #131
Lives for gear
 
monomer's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acid Mitch View Post
I never said “free”. I said almost free.
Yeah, i mean your kind of 'free'.


Quote:
It’s not that strange. With multicore cpu’s the software has to know how to use the additional cores, otherwise they just sit there waiting.
Nah. With multicore cpu's you just have more of the same. But it's not free. It's just part of the CPU. There is no magic 'getting one for free' stuff going on.


Quote:
If you look at some of the arm documentation, it talks about using multiple cores for parallel calculations.
A lot of cpu architectures have multiple cores.
But each core still needs to be programmed. It's quite litterarily as if you had multiple processors. Nothing free or automatic about it. As a programmer you still need to put them to work.

Quote:
There are other examples of stuff Like Cirklon and Electron sequencers being able to generate additional notes from a mono track for almost free
That kindof doesn't make sense. It's either capable (has the resources for) the notes or it doesn't. And anyway, for modern hardware generating a few notes at control speeds is peanuts. They should be able to do heaps and heaps of notes in the first place. No secret 'getting one for free' stuff going on.
Old 17th March 2019
  #132
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acidizer View Post
ACB system-8 lets me have 4 different engines in one box and the native engine is the best and most interesting part. an analogue version would either be impossible or seriously compromised and come at a much greater cost. it is an excellent package having those 4 distinct flavours or colours on tap is very powerful and great for building tracks up with only one keyboard. the excellent FM implementation shows how flexible it is. i don't want to be hamstrung just so i can say something is analogue. that's stupid and backwards thinking and dangerous thinking for a company. even dave smith branching out into digital crossover with the prophet X. analogue has been done and done well.

there will be a next ACB product that uses the code in interesting ways. this is their business model you can see they done supernatural across many products that many musicians have taken advantage of and this is where they earn their crust. even the now-coveted machines that had a second life as dance music staples were originally intended as mass market products designed to help the budding musician.

i know i'd rather have something new and exciting and useful rather than something that is nostalgia based and liable to get old once the novelty wears off. it's kind of weird how people expect or demand that they remake old products. it's not like these old products aren't represented today or that roland don't make analogue gear because they are and they do.

you can be sure if they did all-analogue remakes of their classic machines people would say they don't sound as good or don't have the same magic or some other such bs.
Here here. Couldn't have said it better myself. Truth and wisdom in this post.
Old 17th March 2019
  #133
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by cogsy View Post
Are we doing a Roland roast thread? Can I join??

I'll go with the explanation of a few previous posters. Roland is publicly traded, so they have certain obligations to their share holders, to include pumping out endless iterations of plastic, digital crap and overcharging you for said plastic digital crap. Their new subscription is the worst of both worlds, an idea born on a boardroom by middle management.[...]
FYI, they're no longer publicly traded: they've gone back to being private since the 2014 management buyout made in conjunction with Taiyo Pacific Partners, a US based private equity firm.

The Cloud is very much from the new management, and a lot of what we've seen in recent years come from the new post Mr. K. "Unleashed" Roland, results of major internal and strategic changes.
Old 25th March 2019
  #134
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pr0gr4m View Post
Granted, both of those examples are more than just recreations as they are entirely better, stronger, faster than the originals. But still, it illustrates the point that companies don't generally rehash the past. They try to make new and better things.
I love your idealistic view of companies, but I dont share it. Some companies may do just that, sure. But most companies, at a certain point at least, aim to make profits. If you dont make profits its a hobby, its not a business. So many companies make the same thing over and over just repackaged, until sales slow down and then they make a new thing improved just enough to sell. Or in software they rent stuff to you with a low initial cost but a far greater long term cost like the Roland cloud, or office 365, or the adobe stuff, ...
No its not all dark and they are not all working to get you, but most work for them first. You just hope youll find a case where its win-win.
Old 26th March 2019
  #135
Lives for gear
Want.

Old 27th March 2019
  #136
Lives for gear
 
pr0gr4m's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatB View Post
I love your idealistic view of companies, but I dont share it. Some companies may do just that, sure. But most companies, at a certain point at least, aim to make profits. If you dont make profits its a hobby, its not a business. So many companies make the same thing over and over just repackaged, until sales slow down and then they make a new thing improved just enough to sell. Or in software they rent stuff to you with a low initial cost but a far greater long term cost like the Roland cloud, or office 365, or the adobe stuff, ...
No its not all dark and they are not all working to get you, but most work for them first. You just hope youll find a case where its win-win.
OH! You were finished? Well allow me to retort. I don't expect everyone (or anyone) to share my view of companies but I would hope that they would read my comments while taking in to consideration the context of the thread.
Old 19th April 2019
  #137
My Rhythm Machines book 3 on the drum machines from 1990 onwards shows just how many Roland copies have been made in the last 30 years...talking dozens made by the likes of Jomox and Acidlab and including Roland themselves, not to mention the Boss DR series that have the vintage samples of these great classic drum machines (Not a plug for the book but a historical fact). But it seems a shame that musicians wish to go back to the sounds of old without making an effort to create their own drum sounds that suit their particular type of music. So much of what I heard at the recent BRIT music awards seems to have the same computer generated sounds, particularly Calvin-Harris produced stuff - same sounds, different singer. Each to his own, he's a millionaire producer and I am not...we just seem to be missing something here...hearing Blasphemous Rumours by DM back in mid-1980s and the sampled smash of concrete etc seemed so unique and progressive and original. If I could have a Roland Jupiter 8 or a replica made by a 2019 company, I know which one I would go for (with money not an issue).
Old 22nd April 2019
  #138
Gear Head
 
mjames4208's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elsapo2001 View Post
Roland is a bigger company, both manufacture in China etc.. so why is it Roland can only offer reissues that are just Softsynths in a box and Behringer for about the same money release reissues based on the actual analog circuit design?

Roland actually owns the designs so for them its even easier for them to reissue instruments based on past designs where as Behringer has to do more work to do so and they can.

Where did Roland go wrong? Did they misread the market and figured throwing some **** VA psuedo reissue as a Boutique good enough for the unwashed masses and were caught off guard by Behringer?

Something seriously went wrong at Roland to be in this situation.
By doing this, Roland gets to double dip by cutting their costs.
Behringer has to pay the licenses fee to Roland and Roland gets $$$$ for every Reissue sold by behringer.
Old 22nd April 2019
  #139
vlz
Gear Addict
 
vlz's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjames4208 View Post
By doing this, Roland gets to double dip by cutting their costs.
Behringer has to pay the licenses fee to Roland and Roland gets $$$$ for every Reissue sold by behringer.
Is that right about license fees (or say, royalties)? I've never read that anywhere. If that's the case, wow, they really are an efficient machine, keeping costs down AND paying Roland...
Old 22nd April 2019
  #140
Lives for gear
 
Rob Ocelot's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjames4208 View Post
By doing this, Roland gets to double dip by cutting their costs.
Behringer has to pay the licenses fee to Roland and Roland gets $$$$ for every Reissue sold by behringer.
No evidence whatsoever that there is this type of agreement between Roland and Behringer. If one did exist it would extend to use of trade dress elements (logos, UI, case design) and frankly the Behr reissues don't resemble their inspirations closesly enough for anything to be infringing. The design of the circuits inside are not protected by copyright. Behringer appears to be writing their own OS/firmware to control these devices -- though no one has looked closely at the code, yet.

I look forward to someone presenting evidence to the contrary.
Old 1st May 2019
  #141
Gear Maniac
 

Thumbs down

Quote:
Originally Posted by cogsy View Post
Digital Cajon!
Wait, what?? Holy ****crackers, could I really miss something so goofy? Let me just Google that...


WOW!

There it is: the stupidest Roland product in existence! That is...really something.

I thought their "909-branded" turntable was inane...
I rolled my eyes at the "Boutique" emulations and their ridiculous control surfaces...
I thought the TR-8 and whole Aira line-up was a cynical joke, with ****ty patch memory across the board and a stupid digital Kaoss-pad wannabe 10 years late to the party trying to call itself a TB-303 (with an awful unpronounceable name: Eye-ruh? Air-uh? I was calling it "Aria" for a while)...
I've wondered how much of the cost of licensing D-Beam gets passed to the consumer...
I personally don't give a nanofugg about plug-outs, VST support, etc...
I've laughed at their "We Design the Future" crap in the face of constant callbacks to legacy products...

...but a F U C K I N G digital cajon? I'm honestly blown away. We're all adults here, I assume: can anyone help me comprehend what they were thinking? It's priced $600+tax here in Canada, and is advertised to run for 12 hours on 6 AA batteries. When the first digital cajon in use runs out of batteries, do you think the owner will have an existential crisis and just kill themselves? Personally I think that's the best performance you could pull off with this thing.* This --thing-- is the first time I was able to truly associate something tangible with the phrase "cultural appropriation": a humble box with a porthole in the side, sat upon and played with the hands by those with more heart and rhythm than money or training...into this $600 thing. And there's the optional pedal accessory so you can run your voice into your sad fraudbox. Good old Roland, always selling us options!




*"Let me just grab my rope and climb up here a second!" (use Roland 6-pin connector, sold separately)

Last edited by thehighesttree; 1st May 2019 at 07:01 PM.. Reason: I'm honestly in awe at this
Old 2nd May 2019
  #142
Lives for gear
 
Acid Mitch's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mjames4208 View Post
By doing this, Roland gets to double dip by cutting their costs.
Behringer has to pay the licenses fee to Roland and Roland gets $$$$ for every Reissue sold by behringer.
Behringer are not giving Roland, Moog or anyone else they clone royalties.
Old 2nd May 2019
  #143
Lives for gear
 
Acid Mitch's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by thehighesttree View Post

...but a F U C K I N G digital cajon? I'm honestly blown away. We're all adults here, I assume: can anyone help me comprehend what they were thinking?
They were thinking "wouldn't it be great if Cajon players could get a wider range of sounds from their instrument that are easy to record and/or amplify. Many gigging players would also like to be able to use the onboard speaker for backing tracks or to amplify other instruments without lugging around more amps and speakers so we should include an audio input. "
Plus they get to be the first one to do it and have the market cornered since there is no competing products.
Why don't you think that's not a good idea?
Old 2nd May 2019
  #144
Lives for gear
I was recently reading about Roland’s late founder. It basically comes down this. Roland as a company only are interested in pushing the envelope forward and not really invested in looking to the past. That’s why they were able to make truly innovative products such as the Jupiter, Space Echo, various classic pedals and the 808. Some of which flopped because they were too ahead of their time. These days they are heavily invested in digital technology. However no other music tech company has a history and a heritage like they do; not even Moog, Sequential or Yamaha.

Behringer’s business model is to cheaply mass produce clones of other people’s hardware. That’s what works for them. They are different from Roland.
Old 6th May 2019
  #145
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acid Mitch View Post
They were thinking "wouldn't it be great if Cajon players could get a wider range of sounds from their instrument that are easy to record and/or amplify. Many gigging players would also like to be able to use the onboard speaker for backing tracks or to amplify other instruments without lugging around more amps and speakers so we should include an audio input. "
Plus they get to be the first one to do it and have the market cornered since there is no competing products.
Why don't you think that's not a good idea?
Well, I do think it's a bad idea, but typos aside: would you buy it? I'm guessing no. The rationale you've given could be applied to anything: "Does anyone else make an egg-poacher for scuba divers?? Sure it's idiotic and there doesn't seem to be a market for it, but scuba divers must get hungry too and nobody's cornered the underwater egg-poaching market yet!" A flimsy justification doesn't negate how ****ing goofy this is, it shows that Roland has its hardcore fans who'll justify anything, unless you're just playing devil's advocate...I mean, it's a more realistic possibility that you actually going out and buying that stupid drumbox. Why not just build the digital guts into a hat or an old typewriter while you're at it?
Old 17th May 2019
  #146
Lives for gear
 

I’d love to witness a teardown of actual parts! Tiny SMD PCB boards? Wonder when Filters will actually be physical?
Old 21st May 2019
  #147
Lives for gear
 
ionian's Avatar
Roland's doing just fine. They make products, that frankly make me quite a bit of money so I could care less that they keep doing what they're doing. Their stuff sounds great, a lot of it is forward thinking, and fills a lot of needs. You can't underscore how good their stuff is. You can complain all you want, but Roland stuff sounds like a record the minute you turn it on.

B*******r does what they do best - releasing cheap, trash versions of other people's old designs.

The bubble on this forum is far from how the real world works.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #148
Here for the gear
 

I’ve picked up a 303 !

Hi, sorry, a bit new to all this - I’m a bit old.
Managed to pick up a 303 on long term loan, it’s sounding a little flat, not how I remember them back in the day when I had two - perhaps I don’t remember what they really sound like, who knows.

Was wandering - is there any trim pots inside to adjust the range of the filter, res, envelope etc ? Not going to go in for mods as it’s not mine and it’s in bloody good condition.

I do have a good tech but he’s rushed off his feet, just wandering if any of you nice people might have some info or could point me to a thread?

Regards - Ed.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #149
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by edtumog View Post
it’s sounding a little flat, not how I remember them back in the day when I had two - perhaps I don’t remember what they really sound like, who knows.
Every TB sounds differently, and the differences in sound between various units can be wide.

Quote:
Originally Posted by edtumog View Post
Was wandering - is there any trim pots inside to adjust the range of the filter, res, envelope etc ?
Ok, remember you are dealing with 35 years old plastic, so be very careful. Inside the unit there is a trim pot calibrating the range of the Cutoff. That's the only mod I'm aware of not necessitating a solder and that can be easily reversed. If I remember well, the Cutoff will not be able to go as low as it goes now when you set it at minimum.

The description of the mod can be found here:
http://www.firstpr.com.au/rwi/dfish/303-mods/#4.1

The TM3 can be found on page 6, TM3 is near the "mode" switch, at right:
http://dl.lojinx.com/analoghell/Rola...rviceNotes.pdf
Old 4 weeks ago
  #150
Here for the gear
 

Hey - thanks so much for spending your time on my post.
Now I know I’ll probably speak to my gear repairer and ask him to do it, if he’s not too snowed under with other work - I’m too clumsy for that.
I use to own two back in the day, one was a bit dull and the other was a beast - so yeah I know they can vary quite a lot.

Thanks for your time - Ed.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Deleted User / Electronic Music Instruments and Electronic Music Production
796
ponkine / Electronic Music Instruments and Electronic Music Production
39
decoder303 / Electronic Music Instruments and Electronic Music Production
133
clemzack / Low End Theory
4
analog1 / Electronic Music Instruments and Electronic Music Production
189

Forum Jump
Forum Jump