Stormhenge Superthump 50 Amp

    Quote from stormhenge

    So, your main problem with me is with the photo incident? Maybe you should have asked ST how he feels I handled the situation, and whether or not I was unreasonable in my reply, or in my reasons for my response, before using that as the crux of your argument. I think you'll find not everything is as it might appear. Which is a huge problem online, but C'est la Vie.


    As for the sound of the amp suits, yes they would be complicated, but I'd be very interested in seeing not only the arguments but the results. I think we stop short in defending artists (and yes, I behold amp makers as artists) and hold ludicrous this idea that claims of ownership are really so hard to defend. We almost dismiss their rights to what they create like a reflex . As if art has no real value, and cannot be quantified or qualified - re: the defunding of art and music programs in public schools, the entire streaming model for both movies, TV, and music. And in everything I've already said regarding amps ad naseum.


    For the record: Fender would have a great case that the designs for nearly every high gain amp ever built was stolen from them. I mean every time we cover a published song we gotta fork over 10 percent. Shouldn't we all be forking over 10% to them. And before you ask, I'm more than happy to fork over 10% to Marshall for the parts of their design that I used.


    You're absolutely right. If you look at it, if things keep going like this, eventually all of us creatives are going to have to work at canneries and produce white goods, because those can't be digitised. It is legalised theft, in my opinion, because the scale is so large, it is impossible to tackle without draconian measures like DRM. And it's only things that can be digitised, like art and music, where this kind of pilferage is permitted.


    We could also have patented the engine, the television, the radio and yes, amplifiers, if lawyers were as onerous a century ago as they are now. The flip side is that this would have killed innovation.


    As far as the picture issue, I believe ST was making a point rather than being averse to the picture being usef. Kudos to you for resolving things with him, but he had to call you out for the discussion to take place.


    Again, my issue is not with your stance on the need for proactive measures to protect creators of art, or on your stance about not releasing your hard work for free.

    Quote from stormhenge

    For the record: Fender would have a great case that the designs for nearly every high gain amp ever built was stolen from them. I mean every time we cover a published song we gotta fork over 10 percent. Shouldn't we all be forking over 10% to them. And before you ask, I'm more than happy to fork over 10% to Marshall for the parts of their design that I used.

    With that mindset. When ever you record a song, shouldn’t you be paying a percentage to Apple or Microsoft, plus Protools (or what ever software company you use), maybe your internet provider because you sent that file over their network. Let’s go full on capitalism (now you all need to pay me because it’s my idea). Sigh...


    Edited, thought this was your copyright thread.

    Edited once, last by mnmountainbiker: I thought it was the copyright thread ().

    Quote from mnmountainbiker

    With that mindset. When ever you record a song, shouldn’t you be paying a percentage to Apple or Microsoft, plus Protools (or what ever software company you use), maybe your internet provider because you sent that file over their network. Let’s go full on capitalism (now you all need to pay me because it’s my idea). Sigh...

    No, because Apple and Pro Tools set their price for fair use. If I make music with their products I'm adhering to EULA and fair use. If you re-read what you quoted of my words, you'll see I was referring to AMP MAKERS ONLY in that instance, not musicians. Musicians pay for the amp, so they can get unlimited use out of it for whatever purpose they choose. That's the agreement you both enter into.


    And am I crazy? Does no one else see the irony of me being called a hypocrite here? It's not like Kemper is giving their amps away for free, or allowing their devices to be copied and distributed for free. They get paid, and paid well for their innovation. An innovation that allows anyone who PAYS THEM to do to other's tech, what they will not allow anyone to do with THEIR tech. You can't get a Kemper for free (unless you gotta rich uncle). And I'M the hypocrite? Their whole business model is cloning. THEIR WHOLE BUSINESS MODEL. And I'm somehow the villain for resisting, and trying to change things. It's not like free profiles are only being distributed by 3rd parties, on privately owned sites, and it's a case of... "Well, we can't control what people do with our tech." THEY LITERALLY HAVE THEIR OWN DISTRIBUTION NETWORK built into their app. Here. Here's a rig exchange...take free shit. It's ok. YOU STILL NEED TO PAY FOR OUR SHIT. But everyone else's.... help yourself. We've even made it super easy for you. You don't even need to open a web browser.


    I don't even have a business model, except in theory. And in theory it's selling my hard work to those who wish to partake, and trying not to allow it to be redistributed for free. I'm not in the ubiquitous cloning business. I made a better version of a Marshall than Marshall currently makes, or some may argue, EVER made on purpose. Their magic amps were made on accident. I figured out a lot of what comprised those mistakes, and implemented them, and then improved upon them IMHO. - - Nothing Orange, Wizard, Blackstar, Fortin, Soldano, Friedman, Suhr, Metro, or Germino haven't done over the years. But my model is a variation on a theme, bringing something into existence that didn't previously exist, or was realistically affordable. My model is not making something that's primary use is the cloning, distribution, and playback or devices.... And like I said, I'd happily pay a percentage to Marshall should it ever come to that. They earned it.


    The irony of blasting me in Kemper's defense, is more than a little mind-numbing.

    Creator of the Stormhenge Superthump and the DSL MAX mod. Amateur tinkerer, and lifelong tone chaser. Magically broken.

    Gabrielle Graves bassist and producer

    Edited once, last by stormhenge ().


    The hypocrisy stems from blasting the Kemper model and then using it yourself. I'm not sure you see that. No one is trying to attack you or demean your work. But statements like "Marshall made its magic amps by accident" are just too much for most folk.


    You really should sell your amps as a commercial product and hear what other people think of them, rather than boasting on a forum about how great they are (as the inventor) and then accusing the company and the userbase of I don't know what exactly.


    Like I said in my original post, it isn't what you are saying, but the way you say it.

    Tone X just dunked on Kemper. The profiler is light years ahead... the pedal itself is a very workable solution for most... the pro level version (with fx loops and XLR outputs for under $700) will be the nail in the coffin. Sad they abandoned the onboard plugin angle and closed system. But making the profiling computer side was brilliant. Makes the outboard device options way more flexible and cheaper, and adding all the other developmental stuff back in to another device is still an option, and will likely still retail for half what Kemper is charging. And moving to a licensed closed system is still possible, just not as likely now that they went open. Oh well.

    Quote from Vinny

    i wonder who could be this company? :) (well ,now you know)

    Creator of the Stormhenge Superthump and the DSL MAX mod. Amateur tinkerer, and lifelong tone chaser. Magically broken.

    Gabrielle Graves bassist and producer

    Quote from stormhenge

    For the record: Fender would have a great case that the designs for nearly every high gain amp ever built was stolen from them.

    Actually, they wouldn't. Leo started out just copying generic amp designs from RCA, GE and Western Electric. He had to license certain aspects of his circuits from AT&T. Look at a tube chart from one of his early amps. You'll see the licensing notices printed on them. Marshall's early amps were copies of Fender amps that were difficult to get and pricey in England. If Leo could have sued Jim Marshall he would have but he didn't own the circuit designs in the first place.

    Tube manufacturers supplied sample circuits which told amplifier manufacturers how to employ them - same way IC developers do today. Applications for audio preamp and power tubes were largely related to PA systems - amplifying the voices of announcers and vocalists and miced musical performances. Direct amplification of electric instruments started out by borrowing the speaker drivers and amplifier circuits from these PA systems and housing them in portable enclosures.