i’m skimming the thread and didn’t realize it was a rhetorical question until after i had already checked youtube for factory tours.
vs
obviously not a direct comparison (for a number of reasons, eg it’s not clear how much of the dreadbox assembly work is done in house or where they get their raw components from, etc), but the difference is pretty striking.
one is a small team designing, assembling and shipping their products in greece. the other is 3000 workers in their early 20s living on site in dormitories in zhong shan, a city described by the narrator as being “a building site the size of tasmania. it’s smoggy, and everything is covered with cement dust mixed with diesel.” (they have since moved facilities but as far as i can find, no outside media groups have actually been invited to see the new building, which, yikes?).
the working conditions don’t seem worse than the ones that produced my phone or the computer i’m writing this on. but it sure doesn’t feel great. on the other hand, i am very sympathetic to the argument that behringer clones expand access to folks who can’t afford the expensive originals, i would never judge anyone for using a behringer product.
bleh. nothing i’m writing hasn’t already been better said by others here. i guess what i have a hard time with is the enormous environmental costs associated with producing and transporting these consumer electronics, which is compounded by the fact that, prior to the IT’S ANALOG resurgence a couple years ago, most people seemed to be totally content with software emulations of these classic pieces of gear.
i could be wrong, but to me it seems that, to the extent that gear or any kind of non essential product can be produced in an ethical/sustainable way, behringer has not been set up to produce in that way.