Thought this was interesting. Take a look at the front panels.


The middle is the Jasper clone.
The bottom is the Behringer WASP Deluxe.
Note the knob layout for each.
Clone of a clone? Depends on the internals. Reminds me of the original Technology Transplant (Cyclone Analogic) TB-303 and x0xb0x clones - see this post. This is also worth a read.
Update: Note the ENV hold switch, ENH waveshape in the oscillator section, and Noise level knob on the Jasper & Behringer clones. They are in the exact same locations yet completely absent on the original. These were introduced in the Jasper.
This is, or rather should be, no surprise. Not because of any inherent Behringer bias, but rather because we've seen this before with Behringer products. One does not have to look far, or hard, to see further examples of this practice. Compare moog's reissue D with the Behringer D and then compare both with an original. There are many other examples for the technically minded to see.
ReplyDeleteAm not a Behringer hater, and wish they would do actual cloning from originals rather than what's seen -again- here. What's legal and what's ethical are not necessarily the same thing.
This was also why a few weeks ago, I silently cursed under my breath as I remembered the Deckards Dream CS-80 inspired synth. I had so hoped for a new CS-80 from Behringer. At that moment the sad realization arrived that Behringer's promised synth is far more likely to be only a clone of the Black Corp product. Perhaps with a couple new add-ons, but still more DD than CS.
Uli even defended this practice in a post he wrote about Coolaudio's BA662 clone. Which is also a clone of Open Circuit Labs clone. He is correct that what he and his company is doing is not illegal.
But it *is* a d**k move in a small industry, aimed at those who are least able to defend or survive the practice.