rock soderstrom
Tour de France
+1 The KT Pultec clone is the weakest in this series. 76KT and LA2 are perfectly fine, I see no reason to replace their transformers with high dollar iron from traditional manufacturers.
Berheringer part 2 electric boogaloo
- Thread starter pucho812
- Start date
Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:
living sounds
Well-known member
I've replaced signal path tubes and capacitors as well as T4Bs in my KT-2As and yes, they sound pretty good. Still tempted to replace the unshielded switcher with a linear PSU though.
That being said, if I had to start over I would just buy Golden Age Audio Project Comp-3A and be done with it.
pucho812
Well-known member
dejavu, the feeling you have seen something before...
living sounds
Well-known member
Wow. We know Uli knows no shame, but still... wow.
I saw a social media post about that yesterday, and was floored. They don’t even attempt to hide it aesthetically haha.
rock soderstrom
Tour de France
Komplett Schamlos - Uli Behringer knows no mercy with his competitors. He is a direct descendant of Atila the Hun King, I believe.
pucho812
Well-known member
Warm, audio scape, heritage, etc… how are they any different.
Sadly he owns well known brands now, if he were smart he would have kept them doing their own thing. But sadly he did not
Sadly he owns well known brands now, if he were smart he would have kept them doing their own thing. But sadly he did not
If doing their own thing was profitable he couldn't have bought them.
This is extracting value from residual good will in old brands.
JR
living sounds
Well-known member
Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think they are more or less copying the design of relatively recently released units.
Is this? The video makes it sound like both the 610 preamp and the 1176 compressor are copies of designs by Bill Putnam from the late '60s.
I guess you're talking about it looking like the UA 6176... is there anything particularly original in that design?
Last edited:
rock soderstrom
Tour de France
As far as I know, electronic circuits are difficult to protect and can easily be copied.
However, the design of an actual device (better product) can be protected much better. Think of the Fender headstock as an example.
This is a legal issue, and one that transcends national borders, which makes the whole thing very complicated and expensive.
Copying a current product almost 1 to 1 is shameless and, in my humble opinion, illegal, but Behringer has been doing this for years (e.g. Mackie), it's part of their "philosophy".
Uli B. is experienced in this and has great confidence in his legal department and he has really deep pockets now...
However, the design of an actual device (better product) can be protected much better. Think of the Fender headstock as an example.
This is a legal issue, and one that transcends national borders, which makes the whole thing very complicated and expensive.
Copying a current product almost 1 to 1 is shameless and, in my humble opinion, illegal, but Behringer has been doing this for years (e.g. Mackie), it's part of their "philosophy".
Uli B. is experienced in this and has great confidence in his legal department and he has really deep pockets now...
Yep, the whole product design, everything your eyes can see. As already mentioned, product designs can be protected, but (historical) electronic circuits cannot.
I don't know about easy. Novel circuit configurations that deliver demonstrable utility can be patented. The running joke about patents is that they only give you the right to sue. Major patent lawsuits can cost $1M so it's a game for companies with deep pockets. My old employer sued Behringer over a patented invention of mine (FLS EQ) that Behringer had copied. Behringer won, by not losing in court.
Another time Behringer copied a small mixer design of mine almost verbatim. They even copied my data sheet specs for their trade show literature
. We did not protect the "look" of that mixer so did not go after them. What they did was not illegal, but not very honorable.There are different kinds of IP protection. There are "design" patents that protect the look and feel of a product implementation. The classic example of a design patent is the shape of a coke bottle. Some successful defenses of design patents have occurred with hand held test equipment (like VOMs) where color schemes general layout have been copied. The second general category of patents are "utility" patents. Utility patents demonstrate some novel benefit from a specific combination of components.
Unless you secure patent protection in every country they can copy stuff in unprotected regions. The injury to the patent holder is if you try to sell the copied IP in a home market that steals sales from the patent holder.
If the product is protected by design or utility patents the primary recourse the patent holder has, is to sue for damages.
indeed... Back when Behringer was copying small company category killers that was a major growth engine for his business. In my judgement most of that low hanging fruit has already been harvested.
Novel electronic circuits can be patented but protecting them is less straightforward. My FLS invention (LEDs above the sliders to indicate where feedback was occurring) was protected by a utility patent. Behringer secured their own utility patent on a circuit variation that effectively did the same thing. These are generally considered "improvement" patents and do not automatically grant authority to use the underlying invention. This case did not go to court until years after I had already left Peavey so I was not personally involved in the legal arguments. I wrote a statement trying to inform Peavey's counsel. I was unimpressed with the expert witness hired by Peavey's lawyers. I was not surprised that Behringer escaped penalties in court. In the crystal clarity of hindsight Peavey's patent lawyer who wrote the original patent could have done a better job on the claims section.
JR
Similar threads
