Behringer $399 Minimoog Model D Clone (Hands-On Demo)

At Superbooth 17, Behringer is showing their new Minimoog Model D clone – a three-oscillator analog synth, in Eurorack form, based on the circuit design of the original Minimoog. 

We talked with Behringer engineer Pete Sadler, who had just received a shipment with the new Model D clone. He gave us a quick overview and demo of the Behringer D prototype.

Pricing and Availability

Behringer has not announced a release date for the ‘D’, but they expect it to be available within a few months, priced at US $399.

188 thoughts on “Behringer $399 Minimoog Model D Clone (Hands-On Demo)”

    1. didn’t have to wait too long! Look at the shitstorm below. How many times do we have to go over these arguments people?

  3. ooooh there it is,everything about you is sexy,lets have breakfast at tiffanys…
    awesome.
    But can i just say that the video’s for this event with the same ads on are like brainwashing i object to having the same synth thrust upon me when i’m clearly clicking on behringer and not novation .
    infact every video has novation on wtf is going on???
    this is beyond B.S…

      1. Novation synths are awesome. Im sure there new synth is going to be awesome too. Novation has there own sound to it that is different than other brands. Im sure it is incredible. I have the UltraNova and that is a mind blowing digital synth, I wouldn’t even it wanting sounding analog cause it sounds so nice and crisp but it modeled clearly not sampled and is a great synth. I also have the circuit which is great as well and one of a kind. But Im glad you like the moog they are awesome too but I just wanted to defend novation and I would even go as far to say you should give them a second look.

      2. I’m hoping it works as a controller for softsynths. Then you’ll have a polyphonic moog and can save the patches. It’s worth it as a controller if that’s the case. i have a feeling this could start a controller revolution if plug in makers can get the hardware mass produced.

    1. No problem with the clone, but it’s a dick move to copy the Minimoog look.

      They’ve been sued for doing that multiple times – because it’s illegal – and yet they still do it because it makes people think they’re getting the real deal for a bargain price, instead of a cheap knockoff.

      1. “but it’s a dick move to copy the Minimoog look.”

        No it’s not. Example, every guitar that looks like a strat or les paul.

        1. The fact that there are other dicks in the world doesn’t justify being a dick yourself.

          Behringer could easily create their own, original and possibly better, interface for this. But they think they’ll make more money ripping off Moog.

          1. it is actually moog ripping people off,uli told the world how much the components cost.
            i’d rather there was more music in the world,then whoever owns moog getting rich.
            i’m going to buy one just to annoy these moog snobs and their backward thinking.

            1. the moog workers own the moog company (as it is said on their boxes)…

              I used to think like you … but since i own a sub 37 i totally change my point of view… beautiful instrument… i don’t regret at all the money i put in it…

              1. Moog employees do not own the company at all, that’s the biggest bunch of PR bs. In reality, it’s a tax free retirement for the owner.

            2. Try paying people a decent living wage and giving them healthy working conditions,paid leave, workers insurance, then see how much it costs. Moog makes their gear in the us, hand made by a handful of Americans. Not mass produced in China with little to no quality control.

              Also the most expensive single part is the keyboard and moog gets the very top of the line.

              1. I think you’re fooling yourself a little bit. Moog synths are not hand made but hand assembled by the people who are working at Moog.

              2. Moog synths are indeed mass produced over in China, and then “hand assembled” in the USA. None of the electronics except on the multi-thousand dollar synths are actually full size components, or remotely “made” in the USA. Their boards from China have very little quality control.

                And the keyboards are some of the cheapest you can get actually.

            3. Uli is not following the same manufacturing standards, it’s not the same build quality by a long shot. Uli is mass producing these in China, Moogs are made by hand in America. Uli is full of crap, sounds like he’s coked to the gills, and, no, the sound doesn’t even come close to a real moog. Buy all you want, it won’t hurt Moog. Anyone who would buy this INSTEAD of a real Moog was never really in the market for a Moog.

              1. Moog PCBs are mass produced in China, the RI Model D’s may not be, but besides their multi-thousand dollar Reissue System synths, all other synth boards are mass produced in China.

                If you think that this exact same combination and order of electronic components has to have the name “Moog” written on it, in order to sound the same, you clearly don’t understand electronics.

                If you think it’s impossible to copy Moog’s designs and remake them in smaller packages for more affordable prices; you clearly do not understand electronics or business.

            4. Moog uses much higher quality switches and pots. They also pay their American assembly workers a living wage, rather than relying on cheap asian factory labor.

              1. A living wage, ha! Moog workers get paid $10 an hour, that’s hardly a living wage in Asheville, NC. They also use plastic pots, and as cheap of switches as they can afford to.

                Anyone blowing smoke up this company’s ass, has no idea what they’re talking about.

            5. The cost comes from a lot more than components alone. Moog is a (rather small) employee-owned American company. Their one and only factory is in Asheville North Carolina, and they build each unit by hand (there are myriad photos and videos of their workshop…you can even tour it yourself). Behringer is the complete opposite, a massive, big-box corporation like Walmart, and like Walmart they have a widespread reputation for producing cheap, flimsy, junk.
              I don’t care how good it sounds, 90% of them will likely be in a landfill in 20 years (unlike the 50 year-old Minis -still going strong today). This disposable gear (manufactured for the masses) has a negative impact on the environment, and pisses in the face of sustainable society.
              Oh, and how’s that Behringer customer service? (quite shit is the word on the street) With Moog on the other hand, in the rare event that you have an issue, you’ll be talking directly to the guys in the factory (even Amos himself will email you personally to remedy an issue). Hell, if you live close by, you can even take your gear to the factory and watch them repair it.
              I’m not trying to shit on anyone who may want a mini-B…to each his/her own and everything.
              I’m just disturbed by this emerging delusion that Uli is some sort of synthesizer savior. He’s no creator . . . just another business man focused on the bottom line (kinda like Trump). Odds are, he’ll still end up profiting more per unit than Moog does . . . but who cares, right? As long as you can buy a cheap synth. I’m sure everyone who buys one will be the next Hans Zimmer.
              Either way, no matter what…have fun with your toys.

              1. look at you pretending this is about sustainability ,if it was you would not have a wood synth,,,tree’s can take 500 years to grow and just replanting 1 is not enough,,,
                also not all chinese goods are bad,a lot are better then overrated over priced american goods.
                and chinese food is far superior to the big macc.
                bob moog is dead ,,,the moog you know are fake overpriced copies………

                1. Oh, come on. This is nasty trolling. Bob Moog has passed on, but the instruments are still designed and made by the same team. Do you also believe modern iPhones are “fake” because Steve Jobs is no longer alive, or that Ford cars are “overpriced copies” because Henry Ford no longer oversees the company?

                  As for the Big Mac and Chinese food comparison — Moog is neither. They’re a tiny US manufacturing company with under 100 employees. There are high end restaurants with more staff. 😉

              2. You sound like a player hater. Why be so anti poor mans moog? Plus your judging it before it is fully developed and maybe it doesn’t sound the same now but we can’t say for sure until someone does a test side by side. This will help poorer musicians who can’t afford as expensive gear. I see that as a good thing. Who cares if Uli is making a profit as a business man. I still think its good that he is putting out products. The difference between him and trump is trump doesn’t have any synths on the market . I assume all these companies would try to make a profit because that is how business works but you can still be passionate about you products. They are not going to end up in a landfill they are going to be all over youtube videos and people are going to have fun enjoying the moog sound at a fraction of the price. Whats wrong with that?

            6. The reason for Moogs higher pricing is because they are a relatively small USA based company who pays their workers fair wages. Behringer does not and enjoys several other benefits from being China based like being subsidised by the Chinese state.
              And of course Moogs R&D costs are significantly higher than Behringers,

              1. Besides, buying a Moog means buying a logo: the higher quality doesn’t even remotely make up for the +3000$ price difference, unless the few fanatics here thinks that a better build quality and a “better” sound (although most sites are pointing out that the clone is almost indistinguishable from the new Model D) are worth two wages, especially if you’re not Wakeman.

          2. There’s a long history of competition taking a design and improving on it somehow. In this case it’s price. Copying the look is allowing people who can’t afford to be cork sniffers, to enjoy something they have admired for years. Even in classical music, it was common for one composer to take a theme or motif from another composer and do variations on it. Go away.

          3. Pure B.S…. there’s copyrights, trademarks and patents for that. If it’s really illegal because of copyrights, trademarks and patents, therefore they will get sued. And if they don’t get sued, get over it…

            How many people got sued because they used the same look than Moog, or the 808, 909, Prophet, etc… Not even mentioning Strat, Les Paul and such. There’s a reason why we can have copyrights… and another reason why they do expire after few decades.

            Nobody cares when other people did clone previous product, even when it was a very similar look and feel. They just didn’t care when the copy was also expensive enough to stay for Elitist and self-proclaimed “purists”. They only care when it’s done by a company that is big enough, with enough engineers and production means to make it happen in a mass market and therefore to a very affordable price to be accessible by anyone.

            All those “purists” that define themselves by what they own instead by what they do (the human-buying instead of human-being), feel threaten because if anyone can finally get something similar to what they have, they will lose their elitist status and therefore they will become “nobody”… because of the time, they have absolutely no talent, no skills, no creativity… otherwise they wouldn’t care about “tools” others might use.

            1. they will lose their elitist status and therefore they will become “nobody”…

              LOL. I seriously doubt this will make anybody lose their status.

            2. You should. at least understand why trademarks, copyrights, and patents mean before wasting time ranting. There is no trademark issue here because the is no Moog logo on the item. It may be possible to argue that the Minimoog image defines the brand and “if” it is part of a trademark there may be some recourse for Moog. Copyrights apply to artistic works,, i.e. written or recorded works. Patents refer to inventions and have a fixed term. If Moog had patented the circuit for the Minimoog, it is probably expired. I doubt Moog are interested in a battle here as the legal fees would make it a waste of time. They produce the reissue at a price for collectors. Behringer just appeals to a different market segment. Now if Behringer stated making a clone of the Sub37 we might have a different response.

              1. This is spot on. The patents on the circuit designs have expired so the only recourse Moog would have is (I think) called trade dress. Does it look enough like a Minimoog to confuse a consumer. With the patch points on the front, the overall size/form factor and color and knob differences, I would guess that Behringer is pretty safe here. Behringer is leveraging the basic layout, but is probably different enough to be in safe territory. But, then again, I’m not a lawyer.

                1. The thing is that Moog didn’t have any Eurorack version of the Model D, so they can’t even claim any trade dress whatsoever… that’s why this whole debate is futile.

            3. You will get in trouble for copying Fender headstocks. I don’t get all this railing against supposed “cork sniffers” and “purists”, especially when the product you all are so heavily defending is ultimately just a Moog clone. All the comments about the audio are funny too. Nobody’s challenging those who claim it sounds great but if anyone says otherwise there’s the cry of “It’s YouTube audio with a camera mic!”, and as for Moog ripping you off, they offer a high quality American made product. They definitely charge a bit of a premium for certain synths, notably the Model D reissue, but those who buy Moog aren’t blind to this. With the wealth of monosynths available today nobody should get so caught up defending this thing simply because it’s another Minimoog alternative. Some of these comments are bordering on insult.

            4. This has actually been a really interesting dialectical. My opinion is ultimately irrelevant , as I’m not in the market for this particular product, but both perspectives make some valid points. Who knew buying synths could be so philosophical!

      2. Yes, Behringer Inc. is within their rights to make this. And it will sell extremely well, especially at that price. But i agree that copying the interface, and swiping the “D” is kinda cheesy and sleazy. Call it the “Model B” . We can figure out what it is, don’t need to be captain obvious. When i see that big bold D, it just screams “Model Douche”. :p

      3. Agree It is a a dick move, plus this doesn’t sound like a MiniMoog to me. It’s literally a cheap imitation that so far doesn’t sound like it holds up. Still its in dev and only heard a few short demos, but I will not be fooled by this and think that it is absolutely unessisary to clone this Model D since the original (in reissue form) can now be purchased again from Moog, worth every penny to have one of the most iconic synths ever made and made right here in the USA by Americans that care about the quality of the product they sell. This BD will without question be mass produced by factories in China by people who likely don’t give 2 cents about the thing. Want a cheap shitty clone? OK then here is your synth..the BD lol

      4. I wish people wouldn’t throw around terms like “it’s illegal”. No it isn’t. There is no “illegal” action here. There might be stuff that can be ruled as protected and not able to be copied, but to say something is “illegal” is to act as if you can be arrested for it.

        1. It is illegal to copy the trade dress or “look and feel” of another company’s product.

          Behringer has been sued for this, look up Roland versus Behringer.

          This is clearly derivative and look and feel, aka a dick move.

  6. Of course we need to see and hear the final product to properly evaluate this. But
    It looks like UB is throwing a handgrenade into the synth market. A LOT of people will find use for at least one of these beasts, affecting not only pricing for new and used synths. And also will it have an impact on the Eurorack market. It looks like a crazy lot of functionality for $400. what exiting times this is.

    1. It’s again the golden age for synths. Look for the Dominion Club of MFB at Youtube, and it will cost you just €500,- I thought.

  7. It sounds pretty good, actually. But let’s wait for the comparison video with a vintage model D, so people can say they don’t hear any difference.

      1. I don’t trust an oscilloscope. I have a birth defect in which to listen to sound I have to use my ears and not my eyes.

      2. A scope will not show you much of what the ears perceive. The phase and frequency relationships in different frequencies will be swamped by low end. Rather take a look at a good spectrum analyzer. And use your ears.

  8. Like Yoda said “so much anger… so much fear … of this little device everyone seems to be having … Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to expensive. Expensive leads to… the dark side. A powerful dangerous force it is. Dark sound by enrichment. hmmmm meditate on this i must “

  9. NI Monark interface is copied from mini Moog… Dick them too…

    Why does it look crazy that when rendering a classic synthetiser the interface looks similar to the model one? Mistery…

  10. I wonder how many low budget analog purists are out there interested in buying this. By analog purists I mean (respectfuly) people that are after a pure analog sound not affected even by the implementation of patch memory.

    If this sounds good and has that control layout I would buy it instead of the minitaur, but no patch memory? That’s a no buy for me.

    1. use your phone to record the settings ,you have your own portable digital patch memory device that can phone for pizza to .

      1. But I am not a studio producer, I am the musician, or peformer if you like. When playing live that is not viable. It isn’t viable even when recording, when I want to focus on using precious, expensive studio time playing and not trying to nail the sound I loved when I created it a year ago.

        1. If you’re a musician/performer, then getting the patch you want shouldn’t be an issue. Patch saving seems more for folks that don’t truly want to learn their instrument. If you knew the ins and outs of your synth and sound design, recreating a patch should be easy. Especially when the Model D’s controls are so simple.

          1. Ok. So to play this I should be 100% accurate in the 30 secs I have between songs and for those songs where I need 2 sounds in the song, I should have a previously programed second unit (programmed accurately in the same 30 seconds). Also, since I am a mere mortal and I play other instruments during the same song (namely a workstation) I shouldn’t let that distract me from getting the right setting in the second instrument.
            My bad

          2. I can coax the sound I want out of just about any synth, but when I’m playing in a band and need a totally different patch for the verse and the chorus, I need patch memory. Or if I have a bass sound for a live techno set, and the resonant filter cutoff needs to punch through a very precise sweet spot, I need to call it up via patch memory instead of dialing it in by ear in the middle of a song.

            So … for those who need memory, this is not the synth you’re looking for. But it has nothing to do with knowing or understanding your instrument. Different strokes.

            1. Err, progressive rock bands used synthesizers live for a decade before patch memory was a thing, so it is doable. Many of those keyboardists were virtuosos. My guess if your doing a live techno set is to use what works for you, maybe even a VA synth or laptop with soft synths. I seriously doubt that anyone in a club environment could tell the sonic difference between Artura Mini V and a real one. I don’t think lack of patch memory is a big problem if you can work without it. If you can’t then just get a synth with memory.

              1. People like Keith Emerson, Mark Mothersbaugh and Geddy Lee would actually have several Minimoogs on stage, all set up with different patches, so that they could just quickly go to the patch they needed.

                But that was over 30 years ago. Nowadays, pure analog synths of any significant complexity are not at home on stage. I am a performer too, but I won’t bring my Odyssey or MS-20 on stage.

                BTW, a good club system or open-air festival setting is EXACTLY where you appreciate the difference between analog synth bass and a plug-in. At least this is the case in minimal techno / tech-house styles (where there is still some dynamic range, as opposed to modern EDM/Trap/Dubstep). I play live with a laptop, a bunch of outboard stuff, and an OB-6. The OB will deliver MIDI sequenced parts about 5 or 6 times in a 60-90 minute set, and you can see people’s faces light up when it comes into the mix alongside the soft synths and recorded hardware synths. I honestly wouldn’t make this stuff up.

                1. Interesting, and a bit surprising, but it must have to do with the complex harmonics laying on top of the fundamental notes produced by the synth and delivered directly. Anyway, lots of options out there for analog signal path with patch memory. I’m still pining for s Sub37. Beautiful sound, deep programming and reasonably priced.

    2. I am one of the folks out there that this type of interface attracts. I seem to be the opposite of you in that I prefer not to have stored patches because I like for what I see to be what I’m getting. I’m not a touring musician and I record myself so my needs are different beyond just preferences.

      I have bought and sold many synths over the years to get my preference. I sold a Sub 37 Due to the interface and while it does have panel mode that doesn’t show you everything that’s in the menus. Now that synth sounds awesome, has great features and I could definitely make it work but I would rather have exactly what I like which exist from vintage to brand new.

      It’s great there are so many cool options these days covering many different types of work flows from computer based, computer integrated, modular (also with computer integration), analog digitally controlled, straight up analog, hybrids, wave table, etc

      By the way I don’t need analog sound over digital. I’d take a digital karplus strong or wavetables as long as the interface matched my preferred workflow.

      1. I agree, you are in a different situation and I can see it working for you. I have a sub 37 and I want to change it for something smaller that sounds as good but with the modern perks. I thought this was going to be it but it is not. The minitaur is lacking because its range limitations.

    3. The crucial point is that with patch memory the knobs and sliders etc of your hardware synth don’t reflect the changes by patches, unless they are all motorized.

      To represent the changes you can use an iPad connected to your hardware synth.

      Now lots of synth makers are struggling with precisely this over and over again.

        2. They are a big company ripping off a little company. How does that make me a cork sniffer? Behringer are completely unethical in ripping off an IN PRODUCTION product. And they’re making it cheaper by using cheap Chinese labour – also unethical.

    2. If you mean the front panel, I agree it shouldn’t be so similar to the minimoog. Using the same image is low, legal or not. But if you refer to the general technical implementation I don’t think “thieve” is a fair term. If it is legal (that is, patents for the design have come public) it is perfectly fine for them to do this. I have a tablet of acetylsalicylic acid right by my side and it doesn’t say Bayer on it. I didn’t buy it from a thieve.

    3. Why? It is 40 year old technology that is not protected by anyone. All the technology is in the public domain. People need to read more before posting.

    4. Behringer is not the first company to clone the Minimoog and sell it. Do your research before accusing a company of thievery.

      1. Just because they’re not the first doesn’t stop it from being thievery.

        Cloning a product instead of learning from the patents and going off to make a new product is unethical. Behringer are trading on the moog name and profiting off it. That’s disgraceful.

        1. They did make a new product, it’s called the Deepmind 12.

          There’s nothing unethical about a company taking a thirty year old design, adding features to it and selling it at an affordable price. What’s unethical is Moog selling Model D’s at an exorbitant price hardly any musician can afford when the actual cost of manufacturing is a fraction of that. Model D’s were in demand for years and only just last year did we finally get an actual reproduction, meanwhile other synth companies have been leaving them in the dust in terms of innovation.

          Behringer have been upfront about this since the beginning. They aren’t trying to hide the fact this is a Moog Clone and they have every right to fill a void left by companies who overprice their products.

  13. It sounds great. A silver panel would be better. Btw, why do these demos use nonsense arpeggios e sequences? At this level I would expect some demonstration of its musicality, not blips. These two UB synths are awesome sounding and set a price benchmark that favors us all as musicians. Respect.

    1. > Btw, why do these demos use nonsense arpeggios e sequences? At this level I would expect some demonstration of its musicality, not blips.

      It’s not a demo video. It’s a video of a guy at a trade show who says he literally unpacked and first saw the instrument only an hour before.

        1. Behringer didn’t produce this video. A journalist getting a big scoop did, it’s the first film of the product and getting a lot of interest. That’s being a good journalist, being the first to get a scoop.

          Choose your own adventure: You are a company product rep at a trade show. You’ve just unpacked the first prototype of a new product. A journalist sees you and comes over and asks you about it. Do you tell him to go away? Do you demo it? Do you tell him the product is a secret and not to let anyone know about it? Do you refuse to let him record what it sounds like while playing it? Or do you let journalists and buyers check out the gear because that is literally the purpose of paying to have a table at a trade show. What do you think? Would you make a good product rep? By using what strategy in this scenario?

          1. (Young and unprofessional) people that never being in trade shows before the internet era, have absolutely no idea of the real meaning of trade shows; With the whole internet journalism, they often confuse a trade show with a “show for gear demonstration”, when actually the whole “demonstration” was a very little part in a trade show before the whole internet era.

            Most of the time, in a trade show, people talking about product are product manager, engineers, sales manager… not professional demonstrators as the ones used in professional demonstrations. The whole purpose of a trade show is to be in contact with other professionals of the industry, such importers, resellers, press, suppliers, others companies for partnerships, etc… this is not a “big store with professional demonstrators” as many of the young and unprofessional people seem to think it is today.

            Most of the time, trade shows were the moment to talk about the new or future products, what they are, their specs, their price, their available dates, sometimes get some feedback from stores, take some pre-orders, maybe have some time to discount previous gear stock, let the printed press prepare their article for the next issue of their magazine, organise some beta-test, and reviews, etc…

            Today, in an internet ear with immediate 24/7 news and “I want it now” attitude, kids think everything they see in a video from any trade show should be a professional demo from the company to convince them to buy it.

            However, their ignorance is not an argument and won’t change the facts and reality of the purpose of a trade show.

            1. I agree with that being the original intention of the “trade” show as it’s implied in the title but communications has changed drastically since then. Manufacturer websites with full details of specs, videos and photos now exist along with direct email and phone number links for anyone to see at anytime with their phone or computer consumer or vendor. Manufacturers themselves generate press releases shortly before the shows that they know will get reiterated through blogs to get vendors and consumers hyped on new product announcements. The manufacturer wants the video blogger to show up as it’s free advertising. So things have changed some from the original intent and not just from the view of the consumer.

            2. >kids think everything they see in a video from any trade show should be a professional demo from the company to convince them to buy it

              doesn t take more than a minute to prepare a decent 2-bar sequence. especially when you know that your stand exhibiting for the first time a product that you have teased for a month will be flooded with people posting on the social media (which is what you really want).

              1. That’s called sneak peak, not demonstration nor introduction. Otherwise we woukd have a Press Release, and all info on their website with pictures, videos, audio demo and such… here, there’s nothing of that. But again, kids and amateurs don’t seem to understand this notion of “Trade Show”… but ignorance is not an argument. Nice try thought…

                1. the video -shot and posted by Synthtopia, which is neither a kid, nor amateur- is called ‘hands-on demo’.

                  I can ‘t see the point of trying to diminish someone that makes a non agressive comment on a video, neither do I see this as a competition to win an argument.

              2. more than valid. some people live in the past century, don ‘t know how to engage a constructive conversation throwing insults, and yet consider themselves mature and professional. lol

  14. sounds great to me, will buy one also bought dm12 and very happy. Don’t be hater, i am not living in rich country like you.

  15. Sounds like junk. Serious problems in the low mids. You can’t just cram discrete circuits onto a tiny pcb and expect it to sound the same. It’s a prototype, so time to improve it, but this can’t compete with real Moogs, or DSI, or Korg’s reissues. I think everyone is excited about a new toy to throw away money on, but this thing has the signature Behringer sound: Honky low mids, abrasive tinny highs, weak bottom. Not the same adjectives that come to mind when you hear a Moog.

    1. You were able to determine audio quality from a YouTube video, instead of hearing it live when it’s finished? You are really special.

      1. You are correct. I’m judging a prototype for sounding crappy, but what I’m hearing isn’t going to be fixed with direct sound or hearing it live. The final product may improve, but right now it doesn’t sound good. A lot of people are claiming they think it sounds good, I disagree and I am adding my opinion to the mix. I reference my credentials only to give a frame of reference. I may not be right, but my ears and my judgement pay my mortgage, so take it for what it’s worth.

    2. > Honky low mids, abrasive tinny highs, weak bottom. Not the same adjectives that come to mind when you hear a Moog.

      But it is exactly the adjectives anyone with a decent ear thinks of when hearing a real Moog recorded on some guy’s cell phone at a trade show.

      1. Of course other synths recorded the same way don’t sound near as bad. Anyway, the bandwidth between 100hz and 10khz should be intact, and I can tell a lot in that range. Why is everyone making excuses for more Behringer junk?

      2. there are other videos with direct audio instead of making use of an omni mic on a phone. still doesn’t sound right.

  16. It completely doesn’t matter if it sounds exactly like a Moog or not, because at $400 this is going to be one of the best bang-for-buck analog synths you can buy. If they had a different face plate on it and gave it a unique name, the Moog faithful would be loving it.

    1. The competition is micro/mini brutes, korg ms20, KArp Odyssey, used mophos, and Moog’s own Minitaur and Mother 32. I’m not buying a Behringer knock off when that’s what the competition looks like and SOUNDS like!

    2. “It completely doesn’t matter if it sounds exactly like a Moog or not, because at $400 …”

      Right, this does not matter. What matters though is, that Behringer are polishing their image with other brands names and especially with claiming it will sound 100% authentic.

    3. It absolutely matters whether it sounds like a Minimoog or not. At least it does to people like me. You see, I held out on buying a new Model D when I heard the news of this product. I want a Minimoog because I like its snarly bass character, and nothing – not even other Moog models – can pull it off.

      So if this sounds exactly like a Minimoog, I want it, and I’ll save over $3000. If it doesn’t, I still want it, but I also still need a real Model D.

      1. Proving that behringer a huge company is stealing money straight out of the pocket of a smaller company that works its ass off to make a high quality product ethically. Ie paying real living wages.

        1. > ethically. Ie paying real living wages

          Well Behringer is based in Germany but the synth designers making these new products are out of a shop based in the UK under the umbrella of Music Group. Rather fascinatingly, Music Group is now “based” in Manila, The Philippines, although as far as anyone can determine not a single legitimate employee in the company works from there, it’s just a front.

          But the design workers are in the UK where they have nationalized health care, guaranteed maternity leave, and numerous other benefits that the workers at US companies are simply not guaranteed.

          What do these companies have in common? Well both have circuit boards and chips manufactured in China. What do they have in difference? Well one has the final assembly work done in North Carolina, the other, more efficiently, done by the same workers that made the boards.

          What products do they make? Well Behringer makes innovative and efficient products from the latest technologies. They are a hotbed of innovation and new tech. The other company, sadly, relies on old designs from the 1960s, which have barely been updated other than to add patch memory and MIDI, both tech from the 1980s, which was 30 years ago.

          1. Oh the behringer “designers” that copied a product down to its switches? Yeah, can’t say I respect that.

            And most of moogs parts are from the states they even get their chip boards printed in the states. http://www.coolhunting.com/tech/moog-music-factory-tour

            And honestly you think they aren’t innovating? Then you haven’t actually played a sub37. Don’t expect them to go into digital synths that is not their product. But these guys build stable analogue oscillators that self tune. It’s stNdard now. It wasn’t before moog did it. And they kept the sound analogue in the process unlike other DCOs that may as well just be digital all the way.

            Also don’t fix what’s perfect… if you think anyone else has a better oscillator you’re out of your mind. Or you’ve just never heard a moog in real life. Even dsi sequential doesn’t come close.

  17. Heard a nasty glitch in the audio each time the waveform selector was changed. Does the real one do that?
    Do you want quality or a cheap imitation? Your choice. A Fender Strat sells from $200 to $3000. Are they the same?

  19. I’m surprised to be unimpressed by those videos.. I’ll hold my opinion till more demos come in, but it doesn’t feel like listening to a minimoog from 3 videos I’ve seen so far… By the way, I wish filter knobs were bigger. Oh and is the oscillators unstable like the original? (that should contribute to warm fat sound)

  20. I’m not sure why everyone is enamoured by the $400 price point since the Brutes, Minilogue (4voice polyphonic) and Micrologue (arppegiator and patch memory) are true analog and are also in this price range and sound great. The only real selling point for the Behringer D at this price is if it does a good ( or great) job at sounding like a Minimoog. Otherwise it’s just another inexpensive analog in a market where there are already great choices for true analog in its price range. However the idea of this being Eurorack compatible is a nice market differentiator. In the end it’ll come down to how good it sounds. I have to say the term “inexpensive analog” is fun to say!

  21. Without a proper kb and or arpeggiator this is really just a sound module and the price is OK (considering it’s Behringer, when you remove the through hole and potentially unique intricacies of the original).

    Will need a dedicated controller otherwise you can’t play 2 synths at the same time if you decide to use another analog synth (like the Deepmind here) to control it..

  23. I’m not so much attracted to the synth as I am the price. Alright then, both. But still, $400US for a three oscillator analogue synth module? That’s awesome, even if I don’t expect perfection at that price point. Boy I bet the folks at Moog are unhappy with Mr Behringer.

  26. Behringer just slashed the Eurorack barrier to entry to less than half.

    This box sounds really good. I’m eager to hear a production model compared to an actual Minimoog.

    What I don’t like is how small it is. Seeing the tradeshow guys trying to tweak its knobs reminds me of a Boutique JX-03 or TR-09. Too small. And at this price, you can bet those pots won’t be panel-mounted, so it probably will not stand up to “spirited” tweaking for very long.

    I also am not a fan of those rear-panel jacks, unless they’re duplicated on the front. I get that it’s a desktop module, but Eurorack stuff all about patchability.

    But this is the Behringer way. They don’t recognize that people would probably spend $100 more for more patch points and better build quality. Of course I’m speculating – the proof will be in the proverbial production pudding.

  27. Besides looking vaguely like a minimoog, how is this any better or more affordable or interesting than a korg monologue? I genuinely don’t get it.

    1. Korg analog filters sound like the cheap trash they are. The moment you bring resonance in, the filter starts to distort and squeak like a pig stuck with a knife.

  30. I sold both my real D’s in 1988 after gigging and recording with them for 10 years. This clone sounds just like they did. Though I much prefer my Voyager over my old D’s, at this price the Behringer D will be a no brainer instant buy once they are in stock at Sweetwater. Thanks Uli!

    1. If you are the Rick Emerson I am thinking of then there need not be any further comments from this point on. None. Now, cup of tea anyone?

  31. Studio Electronics has sold the SE-1 for years, which before that was literally called the “MidiMoog” and is a direct clone of the Moog even to the point that the originals were using MiniMoog Boards that were never used. Cloning the Minimoog is nothing new and anyone having a fit over this needs to get their priorities straightened out.

      1. No, it’s that fact that they’re cloning a product still in production by the company that Bob Moog gave his blessing to. I don’t mind so much remaking a product where the company is long gone and the inventor not interested anymore. Because then they’re not stealing business from somewhere else, stealing work from honest people.

  32. I personally miss the Minimoog sound. And I can also hear that sound in other YT vids taken with a cheap cam or smartphonen from a real Moog. So something is missing.
    Btw. You cannot copy a Moog. Impossible mission.

  33. Eh…doesn’t sound like a model d, but it will be useful to a lot of people at $400. Granted, it’s compressed youtube video, but it doesn’t sound nearly as rich….more like a model d vst.
    It doesn’t look pleasant to use, though, given how small and cheap the knobs are. I can’t help but wonder if the $400 would be better spent elsewhere. Hell, throwing in another $100 opens up one’s choices immensely. For instance I know my $400 (plus an additional $100)will be going to better use towards a Dominion Club.

      1. I own a model d. it definitely doesn’t sound like one, compression or not. However, I’m leaving the possibility open that it could sound closer to one in an uncompressed format, but that doesn’t mean it must sound like one. Honestly, it’s too far off of the mark to chalk it up to compression alone, but it would be foolish to remove all other possibilities, as you seem to have done.

        1. “I own a model d. it definitely doesn’t sound like one”

          Yeah … the most interesting part is…if you were blind folded and told that this was a Behringer Model D, but actually a real Moog Minimoog, then you would also say that….

          We have too many “Moog sound experts” on this platform!

          1. No I wouldn’t. You’re making a lot of assumptions about me, not knowing who I am. I am not a moog fanboy, but I do own a model d. It really doesn’t sound like one. Seriously.

            Believe what you want to believe. I’m just trying to be helpful.

  34. The nonsense they played doesn’t give me much of a clue whether it emulates a classic minimoog. Clearly they’ve never used the real deal or they would have gone directly for a few classic patches.

  36. To those who think you are getting a synth made just as well as a MiniMoog for $400: Go out and buy 9 of these Chinese knock-offs. Thats right 9. Thats about the same price as a single Minimoog. Wait 10 years and then put them up for sale. You will then see how brilliant your investment in “quality” was.

    2. a synth is meant to play ,not a investment ..
      anyway your re-issue moog is a copy and will never be worth what you payed,
      the man who invented it is gone,,you have a re-print hahaha best of luck trying to get full dollar on a re-print !!!

  37. Moog stopped making the Model D in 1981. Since then if you wanted a new one, you bought a clone. Nobody had an issue with that because, well Moog weren’t interested, so what are you going to do?

    But then 6 months ago Moog decide to reissue the Model D and suddenly it’s immoral to clone it? Give me a break. Nonsense.

    I own the reissue by the way, and very pleased I do. It’s a real Model D, which the Behringer isn’t. And that’s the difference. They are not the same thing, even if they do end up sounding the same.

    And on that note, this does kind of prove that Moog could do a hand built, high quality eurorack Model D for probably $1200. Balls in their court.

  38. If Moog can make a Sub 37 for $1500, why is the Model D reissue nearly $4000? The Sub 37 even has presets thus adding all of the digital crap you need to save each knob position plus a sequencer. But the Model D does not have this. The Sub 37 has much more controls and CV. So why such a huge difference in price for a synth like the Model D that seems to have less going on within it?

    1. I’ll bet all the money in my bank it is because it’s a “Model D” !!! and they got original components remanufactured and it’s all hand made and the 50-60 year olds who have money in the bank can spend on it and finally get that minimoog they always wanted but could never afford. Their pensions are kicking in and now they have some money to spend on and moog knows this. You don’t need a minimoog to make music. It’s like buying a copy of the same guitar Jimi Hendrix played on. There are people with money out there and moog has the balls to sell it at that price.

    2. I own both. I love the sub37, but it does sound thin compared to the model d. However, I think if I could own just one Moog, it would be the sub 37 due to the flexibility. I was skeptical at first. I’m not a 60 year old as the other poster assumed, but my rep convinced me to take the plunge. I’m happy I did, because there is something indescribable about it that this clone does not capture.

      That said, I do thing the current sale price of $2999 is a more reasonable street price. They really should knock it down a bit.

        1. Really nice synth, but the footprint would be an issue in my studio, though. Regardless, it’s not really an either/or situation. the model d is not my most expensive synth.

    3. For starters MIKE, the Sub 37 is modern surface mount technology boards, with components like chips dropped on by a robot and the boards just roll off a production line.

      The Minimoog uses an old-skool PCB, with real size transistors and resistors that were threaded through holes and then soldered on the other side. Many say these components are part of what makes a difference in sound.

      Threading resistors through holes “the old fashioned way” takes time and money.

    4. Mike i think its because moog is charging a premium due to the fact that is such a classic synth that stands the test of time. So your point may still be valid I have heard before the sub 37 is more powerful but I think the reason the price is different is due to the fact that its sort of a boutique synth in a sense. People are willing to pay big money on eBay for an old moog so if you also view it that way they probably base there prices on what an old model d would go for on eBay. Just my guess.

  40. I’m glad Behringer made this synth. It is helping expose all of the elitist BS that is taking away from what is truly important: the ability for folks around the world to create music with analog synthesizers.

    If making a $400 Moog clone helps getting a synth like this in the hands of someone who possibly couldn’t afford a real Moog but that person could actually put it to use and make something great with it, that is what’s truly important. Otherwise music just becomes something for the privileged.

    Keep it up, Behringer. Now get on that Arp 2600 clone!

  41. Hold up! — Getting back to the video people….what is the sonic effect that begins at the 2:30 mark in the video? When he turns up the bottom knob in the mixer section…I believe it’s Osc3 volume(?)
    I had a model D back in the late 80’s and can’t remember ever getting that tone out of it…

    we now return you back your regularly scheduled flame war…

  42. Oh man… I really really really hope all you people stand behind the screams of “ripoff” so this thing totally tanks in the market!

    (So I can buy like 5 of them as cheaply as possible! 🙂 )

    For $400 it even opens up a ton of potential as a circuit bending starting point!

    I’ve paid more for fuggin VST plugins than this!

    Rock on Uli!

  43. I can’t understand the Model D hype. It dosen’t really sound that good.
    I prefer an Alesis Andromeda A6 or Oberheim OB-Xa for that price. The Dreadbox Erebus sounds better than the Model D too. I tried it at Superbooth and was sadend by the fact that there is no magic ingredient. in the Moog Model D reissue.

    1. Sax you obviously werent around in the 70s and 80s when the Minimoog was the featured bassline on so many records. Thriller bassline is a Minimoog. Funky Town bassline is a Minimoog Chaka Kahn “I Feel For You” is one kickin minimoog! Millions of record sales featuring this synth means something…the public’s ear knows the sound of this synth. Its almost like the brain hears it and translates it as a “familiar friend”.

      So musicans want that sound. Hopefully this helps you understand the hype?

  45. Ive never bought a Behringer product and I dont plan on starting to now. There hole company is based on copying other companies work. ….Just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I respect Artist, not people that print out paper with others art on it (as artists). There is a reason everything they do is SO cheap…. Cause It Is!

    1. Do you have any provides that Bob didnt copy his work from someone else?

      Just because your the first on the selling desk does not mean that your the first who came up with the idea…

    2. im surprised there arent more doing what Behringer is doing…why there arent 5 music companies basing their products on other companies products? Maybe they see how well Behringer does it and just figure they cant do it any better or bother trying to compete.

      If Behringer didnt exist, i can promise you one thing, there would be some other company in its place…

  46. I keep hearing people complain about gear made in China because of quality issues. Doesn’t anyone even bother that China is a fucking totalitarian dictatorship?! This synth (like many others) is not really cheap. The workers, their society and the environment pay a big price so you can afford it and Mr. Behringer still makes a profit. So if you have big money, don’t be greedy and buy something made under fair conditions, such as basic human rights and stuff. If you have small money, buy second hand and support your local gear heads. And if you have no money at all, well you might have more urgent things to deal with than getting a Model D right now.

  48. Meh. I have a Model D Reissue and I’d still probably get this if it sounded decent and was roadworthy. Keep the big expensive beast at home and take the little guy out to gigs.

    Shoot, you could buy a few of them as time and budget allows and build a polyphonic system if you like. Almost like a preset-less Memorymoog. Get six of them, one of those midi processors that sends subsequent notes to different synths, a wee mixer and you’re good. It’d be like a mix between a Minimoog and an Oberheim 4 Voice in its implementation.

    I can’t tell yet from any audio how good it really sounds but I look forward to checking them out at some point. Keep the expensive stuff in the studio I say!

    1. Hey Pete good idea about leaving the Model D Reissue you would normally play on stage at home and taking the Behringer Model D version instead.

      You do know the Behringer model doesnt actually have a keyboard yeah? just wanted to check before you turn up to the gig and realize you have a problem performing…

      ie. they arent really the same thing at all

  50. I was at superbooth and played with both model D’s (moogs and behringers). The clone sounds nothing like the original, especially when you start adding emphasis to the filter, you get a large amoint of volume drop and you also lose a lot of bass.
    That said, still its fine for its price.
    Oh, and also i cannot see the point of this being into eurorack format..

    1. “The clone sounds nothing like the original, especially when you start adding emphasis to the filter, you get a large amoint of volume drop and you also lose a lot of bass.”

      That volume drop when you add resonance is one of the defining features of the original Moog ladder filter design (see https://forum.moogmusic.com/viewtopic.php?q=forum/viewtopic.php&f=2&t=1346 for an example of discussion on this).

      Some modern Moog-style filters tweak the design to keep volume consistent as you increase the resonance.

  51. Man who cares if it sounds like an actual Model D? Honestly to me it sounds more aggressive, but that’s not a bad thing, and hell, I’d get it for $400.

  52. Moog won’t be losing any sales to this. If anything they will profit. People who are in the market for a Moog will buy a Moog and people who like the minimoog but will never afoord it have an option to get one. Doesn’t mean they will. People who can afford the real thing will go for the real thing. I see no evil here. Everybody here who owns the real thing would’t settle for the copy, I for one thing would never buy the real one, but I just might get the reproduction.

  53. This thing sounds awesome! Super fat oscillators – would love to get my hands on this baby and at least now I can almost afford it! Was less impressed with the deep mind but this thing sounds great

  54. I think this is a great but risky move for Behringer. Some people who spent $3000 on a Moog might not be happy but you shouldn’t look at it as a bad thing you should look at it as a good thing. Whats stopping moog owners from also purchasing this for an add on with that midi-thru. Also it will allow more people who can’t afford a model d by moog to get this version. The reason I think its risky is for a couple reasons. First its going to be criticized for the reasons I said. The second is if your going to call yourself a model d you better sound exactly like a moog model d. So i am interested when people do side by side comparisons which i am confident will happen once it is released. In general this is a really good thing though cause its Behringer is trying to dive into the synth game and make great products. I have a friend who owns the deep mind 12 and he has nothing but good things to say about it. I look it it the same way people who also commented view classic guitars. Hell if the copy right is expired I wouldn’t mind making a moog clone myself. I think its a complement if anything to moog. I don’t think it will hurt moogs business because people have there minds set and will still get the moog version as well because they love the build quality and the keyboard. To all moog owners I say why not get this? Even if you have a model d you can double trouble. The price is very attractive but yeah my main concern is if it will sound the same. If it sounds the same than I say its a must for both moog owners and people who could never afford moog but want a moog sound, even though moog is getting more affordable with products like mother 32 and werkstatt. Still $400 is a game changer. I think its exciting that people who couldn’t afford the moog name can now potentially get the moog sound as long as behringer does it right. Anyway Im looking forward to see what people do with it and am def considering picking myself up one when they come out.

  55. I must admit that I find the various Holy Wars regarding equipment more than a little bit retarded. I will buy one of these. When I have the spare cash, I will buy a real Moog because the quality and overall niceness of the equipment will be vastly superior.

    I doubt that will mean I will no longer use the cheaper machine because, unless it is a total dog, it will have its own characteristics that hold their own value.

    I cannot see that the cheaper clone will harm sales of Moog equipment in the slightest, any more than Timex takes any market from Cartier but, what it will do is give people a taste for more Moog goodness and might encourage them to save up for real Moog hardware.

  56. moog is already discontinuing their current production of minimoog model d, an email went out from them last week. does that make everyone’s argument of its wrong to copy a currently produced synth moot?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *