[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: Quality of Behringer Mixers. Was Re: Balancing Volume Levels?

ill second this,except for the FCB1010(which seems to
be pretty reliable) i havent had any good experiences
with Behringer.I think the FCB1010 is probably the
best product they have come up with!

--- S V G <vsyevolod@yahoo.com> wrote:

>       Rainier wrote:
> <<I'm slowly getting tired of people using the
> Behringer brand name like it
> was a mixture of Josef Stalin and French
> carmakers.>>
>      I am very open to hearing about quality
> Behringer mixers.  They have a quite deserved bad
> rap
> when it comes to very low quality in some of their
> products, most notably their low end mixers
> (and FCB1010 manuals).  A local pro audio repair
> shop near me does a lot of Behringer warranty
> work, a lot of it comes straight from Behringer
> themselves.  The amount of gear that goes straight
> into the dumpster is absolutely overwhelming.  We're
> talking pallet load after pallet load.  If
> they are getting compared to Joseph Stalin or French
> carmakers (a bit extreme IMHO) perhaps they
> are deserving of it?
>      I feel that the best thing that we can do as a
> group of people is to steer our friends away
> from low quality and towards high quality. 
> Sometimes high quality comes in very inexpensive
> packages, perhaps it's the physical interface
> alone... or the owners manual is very well thought
> out, or something like that.  If a manufacturer is
> selling a product that appears to be a good
> deal only to have severe malfunctioning or low S/N
> ratios, I want to hear about it.
>      The LD list is most useful to me when people
> can objectively discuss various gear, the pros
> and cons of UI's, sampling quality, how the gear
> *works* for us as opposed to against us.  I have
> learned so much over the years of being on this
> list.  Behringer mixers, and I am talking about
> the low end stuff that they produce, are not worth
> the money they charge unless fidelity is not
> important to you or your application.  In my
> experience, Mackie is a better value for the money. 
> And I would love to hear contrasting opinions. 
> Like, at what point does Behringer start sounding
> good?  How much do I have to spend before I get a
> reliable, relatively low noise mixer?  Does
> Behringer actually compete with Mackie quality-wise
> at some price point?
>      One of these days I may get inspired to get a
> better quality mixer than my two Mackies (1604
> VLZ Pro and 3204).  Then I'll talk about how much
> more of the music I'm hearing and I can't
> believe how long I stayed with the Mackies.  :) 
> Until then, Mackie rocks my sonic world.  
> <<And if anybody is interested: Way back, I replaced
> the integrated mixer of
> my Fostex multitrack (which back then was the best
> integrated fourtrack on
> the market, also superior to all portastudio
> products)...>>
>      This is where your argument gets absurd.  Which
> Fostex multitrack?  Are you sure it's
> superior to *all* portastudio products at that time?
>  Did you really try them all?  I appreciated
> your post up to this point.  Claiming that you are
> authorized to say that Fostex kicks sonic booty
> on *all* Tascam portastudio products of that time
> will not work without further backing up your
> words.  C'mon man, you can do better than this...
>      In sonic honesty and friendship,
>         Stephen
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.