Patent Pending

  • Zentman is all good, who shares a passion for guitar toys and sounds. I thought the synth thing in the axe was very cool and of course it won't be exactl like a viola. bottom line is I think that even with 6.0, these boxes are still very different. I think it's cool cliff is trying to add featured his customers want. A this point I think if someone really wants to get an exact amp match they need to o kemper as it does better at this. Tonematchin is cool but so far it's all over the map in accuracy. More like tone in the ballpark matching. Which is fine as long as the expectations don't exceed t
    This. I bet it's possible to get very close to an amp sound using ir capture on top of all the oher tools. At the end of the day the kemper just sounds more natural to me. I think we should focus on the strengths of each rather then trying to have both copy each other. Funny though that cliff Is like hey u can profile wink wink

  • "LOL, that's a mature reaction. Not my intention to bash you or win anything but just to point out the obvious :D ."
    If your intention was to point out the obvious then you would have typed "That does sound much better". 'Cause it obviously does. :)
    One mans obvious is another man's "WTF!!!????"

  • "LOL, that's a mature reaction. Not my intention to bash you or win anything but just to point out the obvious :D ."
    If your intention was to point out the obvious then you would have typed "That does sound much better". 'Cause it obviously does. :)
    One mans obvious is another man's "WTF!!!????"

    Lol, I thought I already won :D . You could say that the EQ is closer to the real thing since you only matched the EQ, but that does not make it to sound more natural. If you could improve the dynamics, response, resonance, etc... that would make it much more natural. Don't you agree with this?

  • Lol, I thought I already won :D . You could say that the EQ is closer to the real thing since you only matched the EQ, but that does not make it to sound more natural. If you could improve the dynamics, response, resonance, etc... that would make it much more natural. Don't you agree with this?

    I just wanted you to think you'd won so I could sneak in a smarmy comment after you left to celebrate your victory. Seriously, we can't debate this. It's all opinion and semantics. Nobody can really win but we can type for hours until we both start calling each other names. I don't wanna do that. I'll go back to my fanboy cave now. :)

  • I can vouch for Zent and have enjoyed his clips on TGP for a while now. Although maybe the clip he posted wasn't a Stradivarius, it did show a number of things. One being the versatility of the tone matching process and, irrespective of how you feel about the quality of the original clip, the matching tone was similar. How similar it needs to be for your approval is up to you. anyway, Zent is a music nerd like all of us here with no axe to grind so glad you're on this board and hope you keep pushing the envelope.

  • I can vouch for Zent and have enjoyed his clips on TGP for a while now. Although maybe the clip he posted wasn't a Stradivarius, it did show a number of things. One being the versatility of the tone matching process and, irrespective of how you feel about the quality of the original clip, the matching tone was similar. How similar it needs to be for your approval is up to you. anyway, Zent is a music nerd like all of us here with no axe to grind so glad you're on this board and hope you keep pushing the envelope.

    I need to clarify that post of mine. The original is the Axe synth. The EQ'd version is just the EQ from a viola applied. I actually never posted the original viola because there was no point. I just thought it was kinda neat that it helped me make my viola tone a bit better IMHO. It's a pretty neat tone that works well live and the folks seem to like it. Not a Stradivarius as you stated. :)
    The IR used is a cello body and the EQ helped bring out some of the character I had buried with my tinkerings. ;)

  • Well, it seems to me that both zentman and mahd are right: a synth sound whose EQ is closer to the natural sound the synth is trying to emulate is of course - and by its definition itself - better. Of course tone matching doesn't influence dynamics, armonic complexity function of dynamics and so forth.


    Let's think of a simulated acoustic piano. Whoever has ever played a Steinway Grand will tell you that no digital modelling can reproduce its complexity. OTOH, if the same digital modelling is at least EQ-matched, the modelling can IMO be said improved.
    I can't find a reason why the two statement can't be both true.


    Doesn't seem rocket science to me, so of course the two above mentioned honourable members of this noble assembly were discussing about something else ;D

  • What does patent pending mean?

    One of the biggest reasons that any person should go visit a patent attorney is that they can help you get started and help you decide if you can even get a patent. navigate here

  • What does patent pending mean?



    The expressions "patent pending" (sometimes abbreviated by "pat. pend." or "pat. pending") or "patent applied for" refer to a warning that inventors are entitled to use in reference to their product or process once a patent application has been filed, but prior to the patent being issued or the application abandoned. The marking serves to notify potential infringers who would copy the invention that they may be liable for damages (including back-dated royalties), seizure, and injunction once a patent is issued.


    (Wikipedia)

    "Music is enough for a lifetime, but a lifetime is not enough for music" Serghei Rachmaninoff


  • this thread started a while ago, but where are these technical references to the Kemper's profiling process? I have the US patent, but it seems some of the earlier posts references additional information released by Kemper. I, as well, am a music nerd and would like to continue learning about DSP.


    Is the profiling signal sent to the amplifier simply wave playback? IE, is it always the exact same signal sent to every amplifier being profiled? I thought maybe this is the case, but maybe the signal is generated by a process, so that the signal dynamically changes algorithmically depending on the return signal, which will differ with different amps/cabs/mics/rooms. It'd be nice if it was simply a fixed signal, as that would open up the possibility of "hacking" the Kemper by figuring out how to tweak the return signals, such as recording them then combining multiple of them and feeding that to the Kemper during a "dummy" profiling process.


    FWIW, I do not think intellectual property laws better society (see Boldrin and Levine's Against Intellectual Property, available for free online); however, that does not mean I think anyone who files a patent is doing something morally illegitimate.