Meaning they start building better things.
…and a new HP Deskjet.
Yep.
Brand snobs are often one’s who lack for “seriousness”.
I’ve owned 2 sets of 2031A’s.
The first set I had for a few years, and then got the upgrade bug.
Traded them in for a pair of KRK v6’s.
Big mistake…for me, anyways.
While the KRK’s did have an overall better sound, they put out as much HF hiss as a tire with a spike in it.
It was absolutely unbelievable for gear at that price. They were impossible to use as nearfields unless cranked to db levels to give me tinnitus.
I thought it might be a dud set or something in my system, except when tested back in the store they were the same.
So, I tried some other brands, and eventually got so fed up I bought a second set of 2031A’s.
What bliss to be free of hiss.
Over the years I’ve come to know the Behr’s character and mix around any shortcomings…but you have to do that (to some extent) with any monitoring system at any price.
QuBe.
Well…this is a difficult dilemma…
for sure everything Bear-ringer has made sound plastic, hissy and harsh compared to other, slightly more expensive gear. Especially mixers, preamps, compressors and effects. Especially mixers - stay away from those.
I have had quite a lot of their stuff but not anymore. Their microphones are usable - given the price - but that’s about all. You do not want to have anything else made by them in your recording chain.
For the reasons already given earlier in this thread there are many reasons why to use Bear-ringer in live enviroment - if (when) it breaks you can just get another one. And in the small clubs where wannabee punks are playing…who cares if it is Beta SM58, 58 …or T-bone 85…
But - like mentioned earlier - their prices are low and it makes it possible for newcomers, young artists whatsoever to have a start. And they are not that bad - given the price. And their pricing policy and strategy has brought more competition into entry level market. And it is not only Bear-ringer - Phonic, Samson and many more are just alike.
This industry needs these cowboys 
You can have a full 7,5 kW PA with 1 kW wedges, all the effects, mics and mixer with a fraction of the price of nice Midas.
But there’s no way I could ever buy a Bear-ringer mixer for 2,5 grand…digital or analog.
braunie
I’ve owned different Behringer gear over the years and still do. No complaints from me except for one piece of crap I had a few years ago - a small tube pre “Ultragain MIC200” - that was pretty poor I thought. But everything else works and works very well.
I have a pair. I think they’re great.
‘Behringer bashing’ is and has been for many years something of an institution. Mostly it seems the harshest criticism comes from those that have had no direct experience themselves but rather feed on the tales of woe from others. Over time the stories get exaggerated and perpetuated. Behringer was tarred with a brush 10 years ago or so and while it’s probably a whole different company now it’s hard to shake off the past it seems. 
Truly said Sherz. I’m guilty of that as well. I’m also guilty of owning a couple of Samson products, which I like very well. I don’t use them for recording, except for some Samson M40 speakers which I only use for a stereo reference.
nope but i do have a decent sounding system instead
i have 3 composers sitting in a disused rack ,when they came out in about 93 i think it was they were ok along with the alesis 3630 budget compressors but thats when behringer actually cared for abit more about quality and not flood the market with quantity , i do have bits and peaces of behringer floating around but only blow the dust off the units when required cause even in bypass mode they decrease the natural single path with added distortion , hence back to an earlier note ,they are good to add for fx but IMO on my system there are alot of other things that can give a lot better distortion for about the same money !
im not being a gear snob its just what i’ve heard over the years 
regards
freq
I have a Samson CO1U USB condenser mic which is simply awesome for doing Skype… cant really fault it for that use, its sensitivity is great. Useless for DAW purposes, however it works well with Audacity also on my laptop. I’ve seen Samson lumped into the same bashed-camp as Behringer here and there…
Samson? I’ve had a Servo 170 studio amp for about 15 years. It sits there doing its thing with no worries. Never thought about replacing it. Happy with the sound and hardware quality.
Had several bits of Behringer gear - only one with any longevity was the BCR2000, but due to an appalling lack of support I gave up on it. Had an Ultragain Valve Pre which was noisy as heck. And some crappy little mixer which was … crap!
If anyone thought the Alesis 3630 was/is a good compressor they would probably think the Behringer compressors were/are good too!!!
Really, the 3630 what a piece of crap… (unless you have the black lion mods on it, then it is actually very good)
Yes I have direct experience of both.
We used to call it the dirty 630
there you go that sums up budget compression !
freq
…but yet again 3630 is pretty ok for live mixing or was, nowadays you can get something like Dbx 186 quite cheap and that is also usable in studio.
I had the BCF2000. Their support was indeed lacking but I found what I needed elsewhere. BUT I sold it in the end, not because it was no good, it was in fact amazing value for money BUT I sold it because from a workflow perspective I just couldn’t make it useful. And for the same reason I’d probably reject similar devices from more ‘reputable’ vendors for the same reason.
i see behringer have got it in the can
I fall somewhere in the middle of this discussion. Behringer is low-cost, entry level gear, and therefore serves a market niche that might otherwise have nowhere else to go. I think that’s good. But I agree if vyou are a serious recordist, your ambition should be to save your shekels and gradually upgrade to better and better equipment. Actually, I DO think it can translate into better music, in fact, I have no doubt it can.
I’ve never owned in Behringer gear, so I have no opinion about it being “crap” or “noisy” but I have heard a conspicuous number of reports about them malfunctioning. To me, it would be money better spent to step up a bit and buy, for example, a Mackie mixer, that doesn’t have the noise or sturdiness issues.
But I will say this: as far as cubase.net goes, one of the best – if not THE best – songmakers that haunted these boards for years used a Behringer mixer and a Soundblaster and the sonofabitch phuckin’ rocked, man. So there.
(Hi Onkel! 
)
Hello,
when Behringer should make “only” bad devices, then it wouldn’t that big now. That mixer looks very interesting, and also the price.
Cheers,
Chris
Can’t agree with that… there are all kinds of companies that make bad products, that are quite “big” – a lot of musicians, too
So, what you’re saying then is my music will likely be much better if I didn’t mix on Behringer monitors? 
McDonalds being a prime example.