Ethics and kemper! henning pauly with his axe in the throat

  • i think he just gets it wrong ...


    The kemper is not going to hurt amp sales . if anything it drums up an interest in tube amps for people who dont have access to them but they hear a profile they like , now they want the real beast .
    I think there will allways be a demand for tube amps , like theres a demand for classic cars. .you can get a replica , but the original holds value and ussually goes up as it becomes more rare, example marshall plexi hella expensive... mesa mark iic + insane expensive



  • yep its like for him he has a million dollar studio , can crank any amp anytime and mike it .
    never has to worry about living in an apartment or condo where you cant turn the amp past 1 on the volume knob


    so for this guy he thinks .. why use a kemper I can us the real thing !


    but I wonder if he can play ? ;)


    Alot of guys who own 1000 amps look good on paper and then you hear them play , ouch !!! <X


    slop fest !

  • I also tried the Kemper at Thomann ... and i really did not like it ... clean yes, overdrive okay, highgain was horrible ... a few weeks later a friend of mine bought one ... visited me and we profiled my amp ... on the same day i ordered one ... i think ther is enough said ... don't judge a kemper by it's stock profiles ^^ and i profiled 3 amps of my friends and everybody was impressed hearing their amp and the kemper A/B



    the other claims are strange
    i mean this whole ordering something for a record or something like taht is not since the kemper it is since this 30 days money back thing ...

  • Henning compares profiling to downloading MP3's. MP3's involve a perfect digital copy of an entire song or album rather than a portion of it. It's like comparing movie piracy to screengrabbing.

  • so if i bake a pie , that looks like a copy of the apple pie my nieghbor baked , is that pirating ?
    maybe i used the same ingredients , dough flour apples . it tastes the same
    is it immoral ?


    maybe he baked his first so now i cant make a pie because first one is the winner , after that everything else is a copy


    really i dont bake pies anyways


    didnt marshall copy fender when they started out , changing a few components here and there ?
    didnt mesa boogie copy fender and then add gain stages ?


    was that immoral ?


    you have to start somewhere


    :/

  • I feel that Henning has missed the point of the Kemper, and used the wrong comparison to justify his feelings.
    However, and I respect his feelings, but sometimes he talks so much that he gets slightly off topic and this is where his logic becomes flawed. He needs to state his point first in a short concise way, then ramble about whatever he wants too.


    I can tell you that no matter what anyone says, there is no way I would either feel guilty or sell my Kemper because someone else's logic caused me to feel that I was stealing something from another company and using it on my Kemper without paying royalties.


    I look at it this way...if I was pirating a movie, that would be wrong. But if I repeated a saying from that movie, what, if anything, would I then be stealing, which would cause me to be arrested?

  • I haven't read the whole thread but quite honestly:


    We're using a copy machine and copy the sound of another device. Label this any way you want! Is it ethical? You decide!


    BUT THINK ABOUT THIS:


    I generally disagree with people selling profiles - the KPA is a device that copies a sound from another device. The seller sells his copy!


    Personally, I could copy the commercial sellers sound and sell this as well. It's exactly the same thing. I wouldn't object to anyone doing so.


    So, either you agree to the whole concept of copying/pirating (even profilling the profiles of others and make it yours) or you choose another device...

  • I feel that Henning has missed the point of the Kemper, and used the wrong comparison to justify his feelings.
    However, and I respect his feelings, but sometimes he talks so much that he gets slightly off topic and this is where his logic becomes flawed. He needs to state his point first in a short concise way, then ramble about whatever he wants too.


    I understand his position, but it's a futile point because he's suggesting that in order to use a profile the fair solution is to potentially pay royalties not just to the amp manufacturers, but to the manufacturers of the components inside of the amp(tubes, diodes, etc.) or at least that's what he was offering for consideration. It's a silly point because no one who records music in a studio and then licenses it for commercial use in movies, marketing material, etc. pays royalties to any of those entities. Studios certainly don't pay royalties to amp manufacturers even though they use those amps on a daily basis to create products that will be licensed for use in other projects.


  • The KPA doesn't copy amps in their entirety, it clones the sound of an amp at a specific setting. Again, it's akin to taking a screengrab of a movie rather than creating a copy.


  • The KPA doesn't copy amps in their entirety, it clones the sound of an amp at a specific setting. Again, it's akin to taking a screengrab of a movie rather than creating a copy.


    What would happen if I create a software that clones commercial profiles seeking to re-create the re-creation of the sound of amp X?

  • The time continuum could stop and the entire galaxy as we know it would explode!!!


    Seriously - nothing would happen. You would do the exact same thing the KPA does - but in your software!


    As a user of a copying device - I support that

  • What would happen if I create a software that clones commercial profiles seeking to re-create the re-creation of the sound of amp X?


    This Italian company (http://www.acustica-audio.com/) makes Nebula which is very close to doing exactly the same thing you talk about, they use dynamic convolution to copy EQs, Compressors, and they also sample reverb hardware units (not static impulse) but also the knobs.


    I think, as of now you can sample dynamically the drive Knob in the KPA if you desire if you have Nebula.


    So as you see, it's just a matter of a short time before someone will be able to sample (Dynamically)all the knobs of any hardware device.

    Edited once, last by Dean_R ().


  • This Italian company (http://www.acustica-audio.com/) makes Nebula which is very close to doing exactly the same thing you talk about, they use dynamic convolution to copy EQs, they also sample reverb hardware units (not static impulse) but also the knobs.


    As of now you can sample dynamically the drive Knob in the KPA if you desire if you have Nebula.


    So as you see, it's just a matter of a short time before someone will be able to sample (Dynamically)all the knobs of any hardware device.


    Wow! Interesting evolution! THanks

  • I agree that Pauly is raising a valid question, but he has no credibility the way he is promoting shameless cheap Chinese guitar-copies for Thomann.


    True, but as he states he has been trying to talk those companies out of copying and come up with an own lineup instead.


    I think the fundamental question in his vids is this:
    Does a good profile make someone (or many) buy the profile instead of the real amp. This is where most comparisons in this thread fall too short imho.

    Gear: Strats & KPA. Plug Ins: Cubase, NI, iZotope, Slate, XLN, Spectrasonics.
    Music: Song from my former band: vimeo.com/10419626[/media][/media][/media] Something new on the way...


  • Is it piracy when an artist creates a recording using an amp at a studio that he later licenses to others for commercial use in their projects?


    I dunno... what do you think?


    Is it piracy to copy a sound from a device?
    Is it piracy to copy a sound from a human (seller)?


    Is copying = piracy?


    Well, we're using said device!

  • If an artist buys an amp, records a song, and then licenses that song out to other companies to use for marketing purposes, movies, etc., is that artist ripping off the amp manufacturer if they don't pay them royalties? Once I buy an amp, am I free to use it to produce works that can be sold to other entities who will themselves license the product? In my opinion, yes. Studios and artists have been doing this for decades. What's the difference between creating a profile and giving it away / selling it vs. creating a recording using an amp with the intent of giving it away / licensing it to others who in turn intend to use it commercially in their own product?