Kemper Question

[Studdy]

I hope this question isn't dumb, it might be. As far as modeling goes I have never used and AXE fx or Kemper. Only eleven rack and line 6 stuff.

People praise the kemper, what is it that makes the kemper not easily replaced by software? I know it obvious reasons for live use. But im talking in studio. I like the eleven and line 6 plugins just as much as their hardware. And love some of the amp sims and cabinet stuff thats happening.

Im sure there is a simple answer to why the kemper is so great and can not be emulated by software, i just wondered if someone could tell me. Thanks!

 

[Keregioz]

Assuming you've at least googled kemper you should know that it's a profiling amp. There's not, as far as I know, a profiling software plug in.

 

[xFkx]

I imagine both units could run as software programs inside a DAW, but hardware units are much more profitable.

As, to why are there no 3'rd party software replacements, I assume for the same reason not every country has a space program. Time and money for R&D, and some kind of magic coding talent.

Probably in 5 years time you'll have a kemper lite in your smartphone though..

 

[Keregioz]

I imagine both units could run as software programs inside a DAW, but hardware units are much more profitable.

As, to why are there no 3'rd party software replacements, I assume for the same reason not every country has a space program. Time and money for R&D, and some kind of magic coding talent.

Probably in 5 years time you'll have a kemper lite in your smartphone though..

I may read his post wrong but I think his question was why kemper isn't replaceable using the existing software amp sims not why can't there be a software version of kemper.

 

[xFkx]

I may read his post wrong but I think his question was why kemper isn't replaceable using the existing software amp sims not why can't there be a software version of kemper.

ah, might be true. I was spending way too much lately thinking about the complexity of algorithms running inside the kemper, so I went with that.

 

[Studdy]

"I may read his post wrong but I think his question was why kemper isn't replaceable using the existing software amp sims not why can't there be a software version of kemper."

Not what i meant, i mean why has no one created a software that replicates the kemper. And is it possible.

 

[exoslime]

"
Not what i meant, i mean why has no one created a software that replicates the kemper. And is it possible.

"
Not what i meant, i mean why has no one created a software that replicates the kemper. And is it possible.

most likely its LOTS of work to do such.. i doubt someone can code this in a weekend or two
from what i have heard the development time for kemper was a very very long time, and christoph kemper, the head of the company is someone who is already long in the business as he developed the Access Virus Synth with lots of indepth knowledge

as there are not any software avaliable now that does a similar thing, i can only assume its a very hard job to do such
of course its technically possible to create such a software, as the kemper is also just a small computer that runs a dedicated software on some OS. perhaps in some weeks/months/years also software application that does a similar thing like the kemper will be available.i dont know.
but on the other hand, the kemper is not that expensive for what you get for.
you have an low-latency great sounding all in one box.

 

[jeid]

Same could be said about the Axe Fx I guess, but I'm guessing the processing power is one of the reasons for that. Quite likely a similar story for the Kemper.

 

[Soul Forlorn]

Pretty sure I've read somewhere where Cliff (Axe Fx founder) said that it would be way too demanding on a computer's resources to be in plugin format and too many issues with piracy. I would assume the same for Kemper.

 

[jeid]

That, plus there's more money to be made from physical units I'd suspect

 

[phisk]

The "powerful" 12 year old Tigersharc DSP *cough cough*

 

[exoslime]

Pretty sure I've read somewhere where Cliff (Axe Fx founder) said that it would be way too demanding on a computer's resources to be in plugin format and too many issues with piracy. I would assume the same for Kemper.

thats where Universal Audio could have jumped in.. UAD2 are also powered by Sharc DSP Processors, but still, imagine how your computer would freak out if you going to load 10 or 12 instances of such a plugin + all the other plugins like you usually need for mixing.. way too much hassle for me.. i rather record some audiofiles plus a DI track down to disk, and if i ever would really change the sound of the guitars. i´m going to replay or reamp it.. done..
there is actually no need for me to have Axe FX or Kemper as a Plugin.

the great thing for me about those devices is that you have all in one box..
very good HI-Z Input
very low latency
high signal quality
many routing and output options.
and you can use it for recording, rehearsal, concerts, or even practicing and you DONT need a computer to just practice guitar.. you can turn on the kemper/Axefx.. plug your headphone into the headphone out and go for it..

also for the developers, i think you can develope more efficient if you have a closed design.. but with normal computers on windows and mac os operating systems, there ares so many variables that it gets way more complicated and you need to programm routines to make the programm stable, which costs lots of recources

 

[abt]

One of the most fundamental traits of a hardware device that does the job that the Kemper does is control. Every step of the signal flow inside of the Kemper is changing that sound in some way. It doesn't really matter how it's changing it, good or bad, adding artifacts or not, colouring the sound, it makes no difference. What matter is that the Kemper boys know what's happening in that magic box and they know how to deal with it in order to get the desired result. I've no doubt with the amount of processing power we all have at our disposal very good results could be obtained with a software version even on a modest setup, but you'll never get the same results with greatly varying hardware. Keep in mind we're talking about profiling here and not modeling. Profiling is going to capture every step of the way where modeling is going to try and behave like a hardware device.

The same applies to sharing profiles, you're going to get far greater variation if everyone's using different hardware.

 

[Jormyn]

Not to mention, a hardware unit with assorted audio inputs and outputs is pretty much guaranteed to work with anything you plug into it. Plugins have conflicts with hardware, with software, driver issues, etc all the time that developers have to deal with,