The Kemper Foot Controller: A Proposal

    Hi Mr Kemper,


    it's very cool that you discuss this in the community.


    I still like your design proposal most, but i have a little suggestion.


    A very important part is a good as possible readable display for dark clubs and also for daylight use like at a openair festival.
    In the picture it looks like you want to use the same display like in the KPA(isn't it?). This seems to be the easiest and cheapest way, but due to good readable i think a lcd display is not the best option. First I was thinking about a vfd display, but they have an aging treatment and still aren't cheap. So i looked around how it seems about a monochrome oled display and i found one from Densitron Technologies. it's a 5.5" greenlight pmoled display with 256x64 pixels and the price for 100 of them is 'only' about 100 us-dollars (on the newark site). By ordering them directly by the manufacturer and with bigger quantity it might even be cheaper. maybe it isn't the cheapest option, but it could be a very good invest and an unique selling proposition!


    Due to good readable in the daylight, it can be a good thing to mount the display lowered. and may a fixed or removeable glare shield. and an anti glare protection glass for sure.


    hope i'm not to late for this suggestions... ;)

    Thank you for your votes.


    Analysis:
    1. Most go for the bank buttons on the right foot.
    2. A majority go for the Fx-Buttons on the bottom row. Very interesting!
    3. A small majority go for 6 buttons width instead of five.


    There is a little logic gap here, as all three questions were not as independent from each other, as I thought.


    Three of you chosed the 6 button design with Fx buttons on the lower row.
    This does not make too much sense, as this design can easily be done by 5 buttons per row, as seen earlier in this thread.


    [Blocked Image: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8557148/fotos/_transfer/temporary/KFC_CK_2.jpg]


    Can the three of you explain their vision?


    CK

    this is exactly, why i'd so much prefer the approach with 5 switches per row... looks perfect to me :rolleyes:



    little reminder: with this 5 button design, it should be possible to fit the foot-controller in that front pouch of the namba bag. not too important for everyone, but for me that would be the ultimate travel-setup!!!

    Edited 2 times, last by kilihahn ().

    Quote from ckemper

    Three of you chosed the 6 button design with Fx buttons on the lower row.
    This does not make too much sense, as this design can easily be done by 5 buttons per row, as seen earlier in this thread.


    Can the three of you explain their vision?


    Maybe I misunderstood.
    I thought 5 buttons meant there would be 3 rows.
    I just want the smallest footprint possible.
    5 buttons is fine with me.


    As far as FX on the bottom row, see below.
    I agree with guitarnet70.


    Quote from 'schneidas'


    how can some of you guys want rigs in the middle? This would be way too awkward


    Quote from guitarnet70

    It all depends how you're used to work. I tend rarely to change rig during a song, I instead prefer to use the volume on the guitar and the stomps

    for me it's perfect :thumbup:


    and now it comes out when?
    because I need tomorrow :D

    Quote from ckemper

    Thank you for your votes.


    Analysis:


    2. A majority go for the Fx-Buttons on the bottom row. Very interesting!

    Ok, I re-analyzed this, as some guys were voting multiple times ;) :


    -FX on bottom row:
    MoreK, killihan, Chris Beaver, richaxes, guitarnet70, Doc, Stemast, TMV
    8 votes


    -Rigs on bottom row:
    DanielRigler, Steeldom, Vitchpat1, schneidas, RAPH, ace, jakeykim, JoeBlob, luntho, imall41(vote change), Gibson
    11 votes


    -Neutral:
    and44, Zappledan
    2 vote


    [UPDATE]So the "FX on bottom row" is only a small majority. ;):P
    Ok after some vote changes, the "rigs on bottom"-crowd seems to be the majority temporarily. Though I'm still hoping CK considers making them freely assignable - so everyone is pleased.[/UPDATE]


    Please consider this: I really think it depends on your workflow and/or musical genre. E.g. The music I play goes from clean to super distorted, semi-dirty etc. 1 rig cannot possibly cover this for me - so my "worklow" is bound to change rigs quite often (rigs on bottom).
    Others play music that can be covered by one rig (FX on/off on bottom row makes more sense here).


    So, to make everyone happy: make those buttons freely assignable... :thumbup:

    Edited 12 times, last by schneidas ().

    Quote from ckemper

    Can the three of you explain their vision?


    I also thought that 5 buttons meant three rows, so I'm OK with the 5 button arrangement. I can live with either FX or rigs on the bottom. I'm not a gigging musician, so I defer to those who are ...

    Go for it now. The future is promised to no one. - Wayne Dyer

    I guess the first row and the second row can both be reached very good. I wonder if it would be good to have these coloured lights on the first row...not as good visible when they are under a foot, maybe they are better in the second row, where you switch with the tip, not with the whole foot?

    can't these preset-nerds just buy an axe fx and programm their mfc to 15 p/c's? just kidding of course (!)... :P
    it is a testament to the kpa, that folks want to use it like a pedalboard -> amp setup. you don't need 20 sounds per song, if your preset doesn't suck after some seconds...
    so, to feature the ingenious multi-stomp-in-one-switch-control ck came up with, it should be prominent and on the bottom... hope this makes sense 8|

    Quote from kilihahn

    can't these preset-nerds just buy an axe fx and programm their mfc to 15 p/c's? just kidding of course (!)... :P
    it is a testament to the kpa, that folks want to use it like a pedalboard -> amp setup. you don't need 20 sounds per song, if your preset doesn't suck after some seconds...
    so, to feature the ingenious multi-stomp-in-one-switch-control ck came up with, it should be prominent and on the bottom... hope this makes sense 8|

    LOL, preset-nerds! :D
    It's years and years of conditioning (thanks Zoom, Boss and Line6!) plus (in my case) musical genre.
    Your opinion makes sense to me, it's just not the way I work at all.

    Quote from ckemper

    2. A majority go for the Fx-Buttons on the bottom row. Very interesting!

    I strongly advise you to make this configurable. If not, you will cut your potential sales by 50%. For me, this unit is completely useless with rig switching in the second row. For the effect board junkies it is vice versa.

    Quote from kilihahn

    can't these preset-nerds just buy an axe fx and programm their mfc to 15 p/c's? just kidding of course (!)... :P
    it is a testament to the kpa, that folks want to use it like a pedalboard -> amp setup. you don't need 20 sounds per song, if your preset doesn't suck after some seconds...
    so, to feature the ingenious multi-stomp-in-one-switch-control ck came up with, it should be prominent and on the bottom... hope this makes sense 8|

    It strongly depends on what you do. The term "preset-nerds" meant is totally untrue. Look at the pedalboards of pros on big stages. With rigs made from people like Bob Bradshaw. These people sometimes have only one amp and multiple effects. So a preset is not to have everything changed but to change multiple effects on and off. I could easily counter with "effect junkie" :P But that wouldn't be true as well. I also like to have a lot of fx options BUT i don't want to do stepdances on stage if I want to go from "compressed chorused clean" to "lead with delay". You know what I mean? ;)


    I totally agree with JoeBlob. This feature should really be switchable.

    Quote from Steeldom

    The term "preset-nerds" meant is totally untrue.

    Don't take this too seriously - killihahn was just joking.


    Quote from Steeldom

    So a preset is not to have everything changed but to change multiple effects on and off.

    Quote from Steeldom

    I also like to have a lot of fx options BUT i don't want to do stepdances on stage if I want to go from "compressed chorused clean" to "lead with delay". You know what I mean?

    I think you have 2 excellent points there that cannot be stressed enough!

    Ok... so it seems like we have these cases:


    No1: those who like the KPA to be more like a single amp-setup with moderate FX change. No rig change needed during a song.
    ->FX on bottom row


    No2: those who need more amps/rigs per song. But also those who need the KPA to switch multiple FX simultaneously without having the mental ability ( :D ) to tap-dance during a song. Those would obviously want to change rigs more often.
    ->Rigs on bottom row


    I reckon we'd be close to a 50 - 50 for both these camps if all 1000+ members voted.


    Hence, it might make sense to let the player decide if he wants to assign FX or rigs to the bottom row.

    Quote from schneidas

    I think you have 2 excellent points there that cannot be stressed enough!


    These are good points, and seeing as I am using a pedalboard along with the KPA, it won't make all that much of a difference to me with the effects on the top row.


    So change my vote to ,
    Effects top row.
    Rigs (patches) bottom row.


    This should make schneidas happy with the vote tally :)


    Whatever CK decides to do, I will buy it.
    Just grateful for being asked.