Looper feature for non-Remote users

Quote from MisterB

My guess #1: Kemper will sell the KPA and the remote in the future ALWAYS together. Probably at a lower price for the bundle. Then everybody has the looper...except for "old" users that do not want to buy the remote.
Guess #2: Somebody will reverse engineer the commands and make the looper available to everybody.

But, as stated many times, I'm not buying the remote to get a looper. I really like the concept/integration/. Hence, I just ordered under the early bird program.

If handshaking between remote and KPA is based on random number encrypted with public/private key -then reverse engineering may be very hard or not possible.
Even when the commands will be send in plain form you have to have remote to do initial encoded handshake.
It is easy to implement.
Of course this is only my theory how it can be done to prevent reverse engineering.

I wonder if Kemper could make a smaller remote for the looper? It could use the same Ethernet connection and would only need four or maybe five switches to trigger the looper mode and it's functions. No lcd screen would be needed and I would think it would be much cheaper to build. It would be perfect for those who have a midi controller they are happy with and would like to use the looper.

Cheers,

jayson

Quote from jayson

I wonder if Kemper could make a smaller remote for the looper? It could use the same Ethernet connection and would only need four or maybe five switches to trigger the looper mode and it's functions. No lcd screen would be needed and I would think it would be much cheaper to build. It would be perfect for those who have a midi controller they are happy with and would like to use the looper.

If you need only looper from remote, buying dedicated looper would be cheaper solution. Because even if Kemper made such simple switch for looper functions, I don't think it's cost would go under 200€.

I'm quite new to the Kemper, having acquired a Rackmount late last year. I also have a lot of other high-end gear inc Axe-Fx etc. Overall, I'm impressed, though I've found it a much steeper learning curve than the Ax.

i have used a trusty DMC Ground Control - the original narrow one with small footprint - for over 20 years. It's compatible with my DMC/Voodoolab GCX rack switchers, it has never let me down and has kept pace with the alarming expansion of my gear. Not many products that old could deliver such inbuilt non-obsolescence!

So, I'm disappointed to read that the new looper feature will only be available to purchasers of the new - albeit attractive - remote. That said, my experience of switching loopers via midi is not good, far too much lag, so I agree with the post calling for a small, simple and cheap compatible switching unit.

Maybe some enterprising boutique maker out there would like to have a go?

Bob, just out of topic, let me say that you're probably the first person I hear saying they find the Fractal easier to use

+1

We have found looper on MIDI !!!
For more info please follow this thread:

http://www.kemper-amps.com/for…postID=205476&#post205476

+1 on this.

I'm posting this here, because I am unable to post to the other thread you linked. I get a session expired on that thread alone and further posts to that thread have stopped. Hmmmmmmmm ... but I can post everywhere else. I won't say any more about that...

There's clearly no technical reason why this can't be done.

Obviously CK and team can choose to reserve this functionality for Remote users only, but with public awareness that this feature was available and then removed leaves Kemper in a somewhat unenviable position:

• On the one hand, they have a reputation of listening to users and delivering solutions and upgrades with every update. So this move to actively remove the "hidden" looper features in FW 3.0 runs contrary to that ethos and leaves a bad taste in your mouth. It would benefit users to make the looper functions available via MIDI with little or no work on their part.
• On the other hand, they have marketed and sold the Remote with "exclusive looper access" being a top-line feature. To simply open up the looper to all users via MIDI would most certainly anger some users. I'm not sure I'd ever use the looper, but if I bought the Remote and part of the purchase motivation was looper access, I'd be pretty upset if it was accessible via MIDI all along.

There's no right or wrong here and Kemper can decide how and when to market and sell their own products and I don't have a problem with either path they take. It's their company, not mine.

That said, knowing the MIDI assignments were implemented in software and later removed in tandem with the availability of the Remote, sure does make it appear as though features were removed to sell more Remotes, which certainly doesn't cast Kemper in a very pleasing light.

I can post in that thread, so maybe just a temporary glitch.

I agree with what you say about it being Kemper's decision. I'm not sure I agree that it runs contrary to their ethos or leaves a bad taste in your mouth - not for me anyway. But there'll be a lot of noise about this, sadly.

Anyway, to address your last sentence: I would think that the reason for the midi control of the remotes were probably to TEST THE LOOPER FUNCTION before development of the remote was done or begun. Just want to throw that in there as a possible explanation before things start to get ugly.

Yes, I actually agree that the looper was probably tested initially with MIDI.

But that will still lead many people to an unfortunate conclusion: that MIDI assignments were implemented in software and later removed to sell Remotes.

And I'll say it again, that's a perfectly viable marketing/sales strategy.

It would be awesome, and I'd really like it too But it's not crippling an existing feature, since it was never a feature... In my opinion. It has never been advertised as such APART from the remote.

We must remember that Kemper's reasons for making the looper exclusive to the Remote were practical ones; the feedback afforded by the Remotes screen and LEDs, and the reduced latency and response of switching via CAT5 rather than standard MIDI. I'm guessing they arrived at these conclusions after testing the looper functions via MIDI in the FWs pre 3.0, and therefore the MIDI implementation of the looper was deemed nonviable and removed, if for no other reason than for streamlining 3.0

Again, it has never been promised that the looper would work with anything other than the Remote.

Cheers,
Sam

Latency in the MIDI protocol will be sub-millisecond and the difference in transmission over DIN vs CAT5 would not be detectible. Those latencies are dwarfed by the latency incurred processing the data by the Kemper CPU, which would be the same for either protocol.

Quote

On the other hand, they have marketed and sold the Remote with "exclusive looper access" being a top-line feature. To simply open up the looper to all users via MIDI would most certainly anger some users. I'm not sure I'd ever use the looper, but if I bought the Remote and part of the purchase motivation was looper access, I'd be pretty upset if it was accessible via MIDI all along.

There is an easy way to balance this, in terms of public relations. The remote gives you easy access to all features within the KPA, including looper functions, one button programmability for multiple stomp access, decreased lag time between performance patches, etc. So, the remote would be a no brainer for anyone seeking simplicity. On the other hand, for those owning a KPA, but decline purchasing the Remote, can access the looper function, via midi, just as they can also access multiple stomp on/off functionality, with a non Kemper foot controller, using midi, and some hard work. So, without the Remote, one can access everything in the Kemper, BUT, the Remote makes access super simple. Everybody's happy, and no KPA owner feels cheated.

I think MIDI activation of the Looper function is a good idea but I can see that the CAT 5 solution is going to be tighter timing wise.

DIN MIDI is 31.5 kbits/sec and CC messages are 3 bytes long (if I recall correctly) and have to be sent and received serially before the message content can be registered at the receiving end.Even if there were no other latency in registering the button press in the remote or buffering of the incoming data at the Kemper end, those 24 bits are going to take a bit less than 1 msec to convey a message to the KPA. Realistically - the delay between button click and action in the KPA is more likely to be more than double that so, for accurate timing, it seems far from ideal. Even 100 Mbit ethernet is of the order of1000 times faster.

Quote from Antipodes

I think MIDI activation of the Looper function is a good idea but I can see that the CAT 5 solution is going to be tighter timing wise.

Tighter yes, but we are talking fractions of a millisecond here.

Quote from Antipodes

DIN MIDI is 31.5 kbits/sec and CC messages are 3 bytes long (if I recall correctly) and have to be sent and received serially before the message content can be registered at the receiving end. Even if there were no other latency in registering the button press in the remote or buffering of the incoming data at the Kemper end, those 24 bits are going to take a bit less than 1 msec to convey a message to the KPA. Realistically - the delay between button click and action in the KPA is more likely to be more than double that so, for accurate timing, it seems far from ideal. Even 100 Mbit ethernet is of the order of1000 times faster.

Even at quadruple that (4ms), it's imperceptible.

A super-sensitive user doesn't notice latency until it reaches 25-30 msec, and most people don't even notice a 50ms latency. Hell, the hardware debounce circuitry in any device with switches is going to take AT LEAST 5ms (average is closer to 10-20ms) to accurately register the click depending on the method they use and how good the switches are.

I was reading a post last month where a user was questioning the latency of the footswitches in their pedal switcher (can't remember which one, but it was one of the popular ones) and the manufacturer documented it at 33ms.