I personally don't understand why one person would care what gear another has as long as they are happy with it, but I think its important to separate that idea (caring what gear someone uses) from the general idea of interwebs, e-penis and what not, which is just that people become careless in what they say on the web and don't consider impact on the other side.
That's exactly my point, I don't understand it either.
What I do understand (to a certain extent) is the anti-Uli fervor, simply because he has done some very "unsavory" and litigious things that seem to reek more of the insecure than the talented. But then again, he never claimed talent, he claims profit. And it appears he is very effective at what he does.... it's just that in the realm of music creation, corporate success tends to not get as much respect as authenticity, and this is where his company seems to show weakness. Lots of marketing, lots of cloning, and lots of teasers and lots of promises then on to the next thing.
I believe it is this, and the perceived hubris by an industry that admires art over sport, that makes people hate what his company is doing.
Absolutely! I certainly understand the flack towards B, but not the generalization, categorization and polarization, applying a broad brush approach, derogatory name-calling, etc etc, between USERS of supposed "camps" (which are non-existant imo, just a fabrication in some peoples minds). I don't care which "side" one is on (though I don't even view it as sides), but all that is just silly and immature. And trying to paint a black/white picture of the "camps" as above, isn't convincing either... Some seem to try to make it an issue of the "righteous" vs the "damned". "THIS side is made up of only good guys, always polite etc etc. But THAT side... oh man, they're practically *insert derogatory name-calling here*" (No, I'm not even gonna...)
That said, the worst and most common hostility that I've personally seen, seem to be the purists belittling those who own a B. Why not leave them alone? Yes, many are poor "noobs", superhappy to be able to own a cheap analog synth. And I don't think defecating on them will change their minds, I mean how is that constructive...?
[/quote]
As far as forum arguments of one camp belitting the other, I think that it creates fertile ground for flame wars when someone says "OMG I just got a PolyD and it sounds the same as a Minimoooooog" or whatever. Its like its asking for trouble of the unproductive variety.
Yup, and I bet there are some "trolls" who don't necessarily even own one, and poke 'em in the eye for fun. I mean, some of those purists seem so easily offended, they're practically troll-prey. Even if they're sincere and not trolling, I don't understand the urge or need to correct them, and even moreso to act condescendingly towards them. Yes, many noobs with a D. No, they don't necessarily know what they're talking about. So what? I don't get it, especially when some make derogatory comments, "People who play Behringer synths or budget gear in general religiously always seem to go on videos of Moog Ones, Prophet Xs, Quantums and bash the gear and the user out of spite.", at the same time as boasting how "righteous" their camp is, only made up of good guys who "...never go on other people’s channels and bash them for using lower tier gear or budget equipment. They are always supportive."
That's my concern.
I personally don't believe Behringer instruments are bad, and I do believe (despite not having owned one, and from my observations) they are probably a REALLY good bang for the buck. The only Behringer gear I have owned (briefly) was an audio interface -- one that had very high ratings and supposedly good pre amps. But under scrutiny it had crosstalk problems, and this is the kind of thing that really affects the final output. It's probably not something someone with only 1 or 2 instruments would notice.
As far as the creation of this thread, I was really just being goofy when I posted it. I love my P10 and to me the idea of Behringer coming out with a 16 voice clone that holds up to the real deal is kind of humorous in itself, because the voicing is such that more than 10 (or 5 in poly unison) is so thick that the idea of even finding room for 16 voices in a mix (without intentionally thinning it out) was kind of funny to me. It was kind of like someone in marketing decided a higher number on the badge would end up with some folks saying its better because it has more voices... lol
I agree.
Overall, I think Behringer would get more respect if they simply did one thing -- figure out ways to make unique instruments. What can they bring to the table (even if its small or incremental) that other instruments have not yet done? Don't focus on imitating others with mediocre results and doing so with a marketing approach. Focus on making musical instruments that have a distinct sound... that if you're lucky, will make its mark on music in some way that is hard to reproduce any other way. This is the very thing that made vintage instruments great. It seems like Uli made up his mind he wants to be a follower with good marketing rather than a leader, and that's where the bad rap comes in.
I agree. While I can understand cloning the D to make available for poor people (which I think popularizes synthesizers overall, to non-musicians for instance), and make lots of profit off it, I was hoping they'd get back on their previous track, following up the Deepmind with an original instrument (well, they did the Crave, but...). I'm actually not very interested in their clones, but would love to see what they could do with all the knowledge they've acquired from the cloning and backwards-engineering... Putting together elements from various classics with newer, preferrably innovative, elements. Ie they should have collected a great amount of tools for their toolbox by now... I'd be interested to see what could be made with those tools, reimagined and with some inventiveness.
So, in essence... my main point was the polarization and generalization that leads to name-calling etc. "Camps" that I fail to realize. I view any synth-owner as an individual, and not part of some imagined "club" where everyone's the same. Shit on the B if you like, but don't shit on people.
Just to clarify, in case someone thinks I'm hypocritical when using "purist" as a word (I don't want to invite making a hen out of an egg). Again I DON'T view it as two camps, so when I say "purist" I don't mean to generalize, but rather imply a role that someone chooses to play in the context of a discussion, regardless of them owning a Minimoog or whatever, or not. I think it's a TINY amount of OG synth owners who act the "purist", just as I think it's a TINY amount of D owners who act "D=Minimoog". Most just don't bother or care, (I don't,) they just want to play their synth, no matter if it's a D or a Minimoog they own. No need to justify either. Which is why this "generalization" and black/white picture painted disgusts me so, it's judgmental. We should be ABOVE that crap. THAT'S what I personally bother and care about, and the reason why I sometimes reply to posts in this kind of thread.
22 Replies
5047 Views