Dave Friedman’s view of kemper.....

Quote from DeeBoughton

I get why Mr. Friedman and other amp builders like Suhr might be afraid of Kemper and the technology in general. It makes rational economic sense why they see the danger of competition.

It depends. Plenty of amp builders get along and are friends. Even Mr Friedman is a part of Boutique Amp Distribution which distributes other brands like Wampler, Bogner, Egnater, Morgan, Diezel, Tone King, and Soldano. They also make the Synergy system and he's designed a module of the BE preamp for it. That's definitely a "newer" technology, plus Friedman has an officially licensed amp sim through Universal Audio and says nice things about the OX cab emulator. He seems to understand the modern player is seeking quieter, more convenient options to the traditional 100W heads and wall of 4x12's, as much as he says he loves them.

I guess my point is they aren't so afraid of technology or even competition to a large degree. Unlike a modeler where a group of software engineers program their interpretations of an amp, cab, mic, etc, the Kemper feels different because it takes from an existing hardware. I think that's what feels objectionable to them. They feel, right or wrong, that people aren't buying their amps because they're buying profiles of their amp and thinking it's the same.

Quote from DeeBoughton

Economic motivation is a powerful incentive which tends to make all of us say things, and act in ways, that we believe will benefit us.

100% agree, which is also why I've said I don't completely agree with Friedman's view. It also cuts both ways with some Kemper users feeling threatened or offended by the suggestion that they may be part of an ethical or moral problem and lashing out in their own self-interest.

Quote from OneEng1

Kemper does not replicate a signal path in any way (Fractal does).

Interesting post & points. Admittedly, I'm not anything remotely close to a software engineer to know all the ins and outs.

My only immediate thought is that a modeler (like Fractal) tries to replicate an entire set of variables. That is programmed by a team of engineers and their best interpretations. The Kemper attempts to replicate a source tone from an entire existing chain and everything that leaves a tonal imprint as a "snapshot", which is what I meant. I can see why they feel different to someone who sees their product being used directly in its own "replacement".

Quote from MementoMori

I don't understand the parsing of hairs. If he "improved" an amp design, that requires some level of innovation even if it's not reinventing the wheel.

He does have an officially licensed UA plugin and I believe there are other digital mediums he's participated in. He also makes an FRFR cab & wedge which some Kemper users have. He hasn't avoided digital completely, he just has choice feelings for profiling.

Juts trying to differentiate between a substantial change or something new versus improving. He even "copied" the Marshall look. That's not what I would class as innovation but of course any change is new...He effectively hot rodded a Marshall, which many people have done.

I wasn;t aware of his VSt's etc and fair point about the wedges, which I guess makes it more surpising he's not backing profiling but clearly he thinks thats a step too far.

The point most people are trying to make is he is complaining effectively of Kemper using his IP, but he created that off the back of someone elses ip that is so close to the original. Yes you can say a Marshall has origins in other valve amps but Jim created a step change over those.

Quote from V8guitar

The point most people are trying to make is he is complaining effectively of Kemper using his IP, but he created that off the back of someone elses ip that is so close to the original. Yes you can say a Marshall has origins in other valve amps but Jim created a step change over those.

What made the JTM different from the Fender Bassman were the 12" speakers. To the best of my knowledge that's the only difference. Of course, more innovations came later. Likewise, Friedman has amps that are very different from typical "Marshall" offerings, such as the Butterslax.

I don't think Friedman has ever tried to pretend he wasn't massively influenced by Marshall's or modded Marshall's. Like you said, even his aesthetic is very Plexi-like. But there's a difference, to me, in hat-tipping or wearing your origins on your sleeve vs stealing.

Quote from MementoMori

What made the JTM different from the Fender Bassman were the 12" speakers. To the best of my knowledge that's the only difference. Of course, more innovations came later. Likewise, Friedman has amps that are very different from typical "Marshall" offerings, such as the Butterslax.

I don't think Friedman has ever tried to pretend he wasn't massively influenced by Marshall's or modded Marshall's. Like you said, even his aesthetic is very Plexi-like. But there's a difference, to me, in hat-tipping or wearing your origins on your sleeve vs stealing.

There were differences in the output section as well, as 6L6s were harder to come by in England so EL34s were substituted. Another difference down the line was that Leo Fender was continually working on getting his amps cleaner and cleaner, and Marshall discovered that there was an untapped market for dirty, so subsequent (Marshall) models were designed with distortion as a goal.

So which Fender circuit is the Kemper based on?

Quote from Per

So which Fender circuit is the Kemper based on?

The original toaster.

Quote from BB2019

Well I apoligize to the members here. Last night I did get heated by someone I find to be annoying. He will be ignored. I stand by my original asssesment about Mr. Friedman that offended MM. As for being a Fanboy, yes, I am a fanboy of the Kemper. That's why I am here. On their forum.

Good for you, man. Just take it easy, we're all here to discuss stuff civilly. I'd defend your right to state your POV as anyone else, it's just a good way to have any dialogue.

I don't think anyone has ever climbed down on this forum on anything, barring me... and that was my own fault

Quote from MementoMori

Interesting post & points. Admittedly, I'm not anything remotely close to a software engineer to know all the ins and outs.

My only immediate thought is that a modeler (like Fractal) tries to replicate an entire set of variables. That is programmed by a team of engineers and their best interpretations. The Kemper attempts to replicate a source tone from an entire existing chain and everything that leaves a tonal imprint as a "snapshot", which is what I meant. I can see why they feel different to someone who sees their product being used directly in its own "replacement".

I’ve said it several times before but I still stand by my assertion that tradition modelling is more piracy than profiling because of the methodology. It may be a faitly philosophical point but I still believe it is an important differentiator.

Take OneEng1 point about an IR. If you apply that to something other than profiling you can see how the Kemper isn’t pirating anthything.

Lets say I want the reverb of St Paul’s cathedral. I can go into the building and make an IR which I can then apply to my own recordings or live tones to get an impression of what it would sound like standing at a specific point within the building. (Kemper)

Or I can take the original plans an fine a plot of land to build a replica and play music in it. Even in this replica scenario the song nd will still be subtly different because the materials used will be slightly different than the original. If it’s in a different geographical location air temperature, humidity etc will all affect the sound. (Similar to Jim Marshall copying Fender or Mr Friedman copying Marshall or Fractal copying the circuits of other amps using a newer technology because the amp equivalent of half a milltion tons of marble is too expensive)

The first example is definitely not piracy but the second one actually uses the iriginal architects drawing and is therefore piracy.

I am not trying to have a go at Mr Friedamn or any other amp builder . Nor am I trying to say that Kemper, Fractal, Line 6, etc are better. They are all different and all have their place. However, i do think there is a strong element of hypocrisy in Friedman’s accusation.

The example of St Paul’s ccathedral does not apply so well to my continuation - but I hope you get what I mean.

Wouldn't it be piracy if I scan the whole building with a newly developed device and then print the whole cathedral with a giant and advanced 3D-printer?

Maybe I have to refine here and there, but all in all I printed the exact replica of St Paul’s cathedral in my aaahm front yard

A little much effort - but a good reverb nearby shouldn't be underestimated

The argument being used against Friedman is akin to saying you can't build a house using bricks because the first house was built using bricks. or you can't have a rectangle mobile phone because Apple created one first (they sued over this and lost).

It needs to be understood that there are only a certain number of ways to tackle a problem in a pragmatic manner.

In that sense, there is no point reinventing the wheel.

But you can definitely make improvements, which is what Friedman has done.

It's quite foolish to take his harmless comments in such a bad way, with people declaring "I'll never buy from him" and that he rips off designs and other ridiculous declarations.

He's an amp builder. He makes his living selling amps and cabs. To deny him a harmless grouse and paint it out as something it isn't really horrifies me.

In a way, it is typical of the times, where everyone acts like a social justice warrior, but it only if it suits them. And it's almost always taken to an extreme like this, attacking people's livelihoods unfortunately.

Quote from Ibot39

The example of St Paul’s ccathedral does not apply so well to my continuation - but I hope you get what I mean.

Wouldn't it be piracy if I scan the whole building with a newly developed device and then print the whole cathedral with a giant and advanced 3D-printer?

Maybe I have to refine here and there, but all in all I printed the exact replica of St Paul’s cathedral in my aaahm front yard

A little much effort - but a good reverb nearby shouldn't be underestimated

Display More

In that example you have still recreated St Paul’s structure in a different medium (much like Fractal etc do with component level modelling) but you still used the original architect’s plans. However, in my analogy the Kemper merely replicated the sound of its reverb without any connection to the design on the building that created it.

If you can fit St Paul’s in your yard just be careful which side you buildit on as it could block a lot of light from the main house ?

Quote from nightlight

To deny him a harmless grouse and paint it out as something it isn't really horrifies me.

In a way, it is typical of the times, where everyone acts like a social justice warrior, but it only if it suits them. And it's almost always taken to an extreme like this, attacking people's livelihoods unfortunately.

Funny, this whole thing got started because Dave Friedman used the word piracy to describe Christoph Kemper's technology (livelihood).

Just try and imagine the outrage in tube amp circles if CK went on YouTube and accused boutique amp builders, who basically jelly other people's bread, of being pirates?

Funny, most of the bigger boutique names got their start by simply re-building previous circuits, but using higher quality parts, tighter and controlled tolerances, better attention to small details, overall better build quality, and a volume knob that goes to 11. That's basically it.

I can make a pretty anemic sounding tube amp sound much better just by spending an extra $10 (cost) on an output transformer. A lot of it is not rocket science, unlike the KPA.

Funny, the richest musicians in the world own stables of boutique clones, yet most of them will declare the original their holy grail. (yes, quite a bit of sentiment is involved - but hell, that's the nature of this particular hobby we're all caught up in) - hence this thread.

Quote from nightlight

The argument being used against Friedman is akin to saying you can't build a house using bricks because the first house was built using bricks. or you can't have a rectangle mobile phone because Apple created one first (they sued over this and lost).

It needs to be understood that there are only a certain number of ways to tackle a problem in a pragmatic manner.

In that sense, there is no point reinventing the wheel.

But you can definitely make improvements, which is what Friedman has done.

It's quite foolish to take his harmless comments in such a bad way, with people declaring "I'll never buy from him" and that he rips off designs and other ridiculous declarations.

He's an amp builder. He makes his living selling amps and cabs. To deny him a harmless grouse and paint it out as something it isn't really horrifies me.

In a way, it is typical of the times, where everyone acts like a social justice warrior, but it only if it suits them. And it's almost always taken to an extreme like this, attacking people's livelihoods unfortunately.

Display More

I’m certainly not trying to say anything that might be detrmental to Dave’s business. I probably won’t ever buy on of his amps but only because I don’t have limitless funds available and I have what I need already not because I want to make an ethical stand against him or his business.

In my case I am just trying to point out that there is disconnect between what he seems to be saying (or how others are interpreting it) so I see his grouse as wrong and invalid. However, i definitely don’t wish him any harm.

Oh how 80s hair metal would have been different if Dave Friedman and Christoph Kemper had been around.....

Story goes that there was this one 50 watt Marshall Plexi head that had 'something special' going on with it (translation: it was one of a few perfect production samples of the circuit). All of the hotshot LA guitarists of that era tried to find a duplicate, but couldn't. So they did the next best thing - they stole it to use on their recordings. Was basically this unspoken thing - whomever had it didn't want to loan it out to the competition - so subterfuge was the only way.

Friedman and/or Kemper would have made it all so easy!

Quote from nightlight

Good for you, man. Just take it easy, we're all here to discuss stuff civilly. I'd defend your right to state your POV as anyone else, it's just a good way to have any dialogue.

I don't think anyone has ever climbed down on this forum on anything, barring me... and that was my own fault

I may have had one toooo many pints too. ?

I have no shame on being a fanboy. Love my Kemper. ??

Analogy is the weakest form of argument. Analogies always breakdown, and always fail. So, analogizing to the wheel or to St. Paul's cathedral don't really get to the truth of things. Some folks want to justify Friedman's and the other boutique amp "improvers'" practices by saying that they are improving a design and therefore doing something different than copying.

In reality if you open up any Boutique amp based upon a Marshall or based upon an AC30, and this includes Friedman's amps, you are very quickly going to find that the builder copied, without any alteration or apology, almost the entire original circuit. Sometimes the only "improvements" are substitutions of cap values for the coupling caps, or resistor values to change the negative feedback value. More often B+ voltage is massaged and different rectifiers are used and better transformers and speakers are offered stock. Do these things change how the amp sounds and feels, sure. However, to say that you are doing something "original" is, in my opinion, being disingenuous. Improving a circuit you have copied wholesale is a distinction that makes no difference to me. If it makes others feel OK, then go for it. As I said before, it doesn't bother me at all, because the circuits themselves can't be protected as intellectual property. It just bugs me that one guy feels he can copy away and "improve" something he had no part in actually creating while at the same time calling out others for doing something which is actually less offensive, at least to me.

Not to name drop, but I once spent a couple of hours discussing amps, along with a product we were pitching, with the most famous Dutch rock guitarist ever and his long time tech, Matt. They talked a bit about the whole mod scene in the 80s. The vast majority of the time the mods consisted of replacing stock components with higher grade parts. Re: Transformers. Once in mass production, one of the first places you can save cost is to use a lesser grade steel for the core (lots of steel in those puppies). First problem with doing this is that the transformer will begin to saturate and distort (not in a good way) in the lower frequencies. Want a tighter low end at high volumes? Use top quality steel in the transformer.

Innovation and improvement are two VERY different things.

One other thing I learned from that chat is that most of the best amp mods that end up going into production are either happy accidents or the result of hours of trial and error swapping out component values. This is not innovation.

Quote from don1960lp

Oh how 80s hair metal would have been different if Dave Friedman and Christoph Kemper had been around.....

Story goes that there was this one 50 watt Marshall Plexi head that had 'something special' going on with it (translation: it was one of a few perfect production samples of the circuit). All of the hotshot LA guitarists of that era tried to find a duplicate, but couldn't. So they did the next best thing - they stole it to use on their recordings. Was basically this unspoken thing - whomever had it didn't want to loan it out to the competition - so subterfuge was the only way.

Friedman and/or Kemper would have made it all so easy!

You had these stories obviously everywhere back then..it was the golden age of looking for the "holy grail" 50w marshall..Guys who did modifications had these "top secret"(no internet back than..) mythical status of "having THE sound..

There was a very well known marshall tuner in my region who did all these modifications for all and everyone..including the most famous and well known guitar players around.He(will not say his name) did really special work and his modificated amps sounded amazing..but broke down every few weeks!None of these "modifications" were really "roadready"!!We thought it was the fault of this special guy but years later I heard the same complaints from american,british etc guitar players from this period.It was a technical nightmare.

Copying/modifying..all good but in the end there is much more behind doing "others circuits" and changing these.

Btw..two very famous German amp tuners asked me back than to "give" my beloved 50w 2204(1981) Jcm800/JMP master volume to them..still happy that I always declined in the very last moment.No!And again no!