You're right as well. each has its own approach with things. I really love to see every thing I use (even if virtual). however with midi implementations have never managed to make friends. So, when I saw the opportunity to build my chain Stomps as I would with real gear, I thought, "I wont it!" 
The Kemper Foot Controller: A Proposal
- ckemper
- Closed
-
-
Any news on the footcontroller...
I'm thinking of buying a ground control pro, but would wait if the Kemper version is coming anytime soon. So if any of the Kemper guys could give us some idea on time-frame it would be much appreciated
....---> [Blocked Image: http://www.topdoginternetmarketing.com/temp/ace_kpa_fs.png]
-
i would buy one if the price is right,& available soon..
-
The original version rules
-I dont want to do dancing in a upper lines. It is wise to have all the buttons so near as possible and tuner is what you use only now and then.
Bank buttons also where they are, please.
RJ45 network cable should absolutely be rugged and with Neutrik connectors. -
i would buy one if the price is right,& available soon..
I will not buy it - I think it is much more reasonable to have a read only version in a floorboard enclosure. I don't want to schlepp a KPA plus a foot controller in my suitcase. You do your profiles and editing at home in the big KPA and then you travel to the gigs with a slim and lightweight floorboard read-only Kemp. That makes sense, right?
-
I will not buy it - I think it is much more reasonable to have a read only version in a floorboard enclosure. I don't want to schlepp a KPA plus a foot controller in my suitcase. You do your profiles and editing at home in the big KPA and then you travel to the gigs with a slim and lightweight floorboard read-only Kemp. That makes sense, right?
A floorboard version isnt a bad idea (not that im that interested in one personally) , a read only version is probably pointless though since it will probably cost the same since it is likely to be little difference in the hardware.
-
a read only version is probably pointless though since it will probably cost the same since it is likely to be little difference in the hardware
1) Who knows what it would cost?
2) If you add into the equation the overweigth fees you pay to the airlines, the balance will be different. A floorboard version is definitively much more practical on the road, than a table version + foot controller. When you travel you don't do profiling. And at home, when you profile and edit these profiles, you don't need a foot controller. -
very true, but there are different crowds...
a, kpa is nice, but i need big rack poweramps, wireless, other multi-fx and a refrigerator and therefor i need: rackversion.
b, kpa is nice, but i go to guitar cab, so the built in poweramp is what i need.
c, kpa is nice, but i play fr-wedges and so the head design doesn't make much sense, i want a floorversion and i'm good to go.
(when looper and pitch fx finally arrive... )EDIT
d, kpa is nice, but i want to keep my pedalboard-setup, and just want to add a tiny kpa-pedal for my needs. this however would propably roughly fall in category c (the small one), since it's also small and and somehow you still need to change rigs, and even if you just add a midi-mouse or sth. similar, it adds up to the same footprint...
so, concerning the everlasting floorboard layout discussion: maybe this could be a compromise: big one for big players, and small and "integrated" one for the travelling fellas... btw: hold tap for looper, tap & IV for tuner.
[Blocked Image: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/8557148/fotos/_transfer/temporary/KFP_vs_KFC.jpg]
-
1) Who knows what it would cost?
2) If you add into the equation the overweigth fees you pay to the airlines, the balance will be different. A floorboard version is definitively much more practical on the road, than a table version + foot controller. When you travel you don't do profiling. And at home, when you profile and edit these profiles, you don't need a foot controller.
1) Only Kemper can really answer that of course, but it is my professional guess after working as a product manager in electronics and for a total of 25 years in the electronic business that the hardware difference between a read only version and a profiler is the mic input circuit for the profiling that would be the difference which probably costs next to nothing, you will pretty much need everything else.2) Again im not saying that its a bad idea with a floor model quite the contrary if you read my previous post. I hope you will get your floor model as well.
-
I've seen the question about a "Kemper play only" unit answered several times and it would cost almost the same as the available profiling unit to manufacture. So there is no money to be made with a "kemper play only" unit.
All in one floor units are great for some players. I prefer to have a low cost foot controller on the floor that can be easily replaced if it's damaged. Then the expensive main unit can be kept safe away from the floor, not risking any damage.
-
it would cost almost the same as the available profiling unit to manufacture.
A floorboard version is not meant to be a cheaper alternative. It is about saving weight and volume in your suitcase. And I am almost certain that in a few years it will be on offer, once the development of the table version has reached a mature state.
-
A floorboard version is not meant to be a cheaper alternative. It is about saving weight and volume in your suitcase. And I am almost certain that in a few years it will be on offer, once the development of the table version has reached a mature state.
I believe what you quoted was regarding a read only version and not the floorboard version you suggested.I've seen the question about a "Kemper play only" unit answered several times and it would cost almost the same as the available profiling unit to manufacture. So there is no money to be made with a "kemper play only" unit.
. -
Weighing in late here, but I've been busy gigging with my Kemper
. I'm desperate for the controller, but a few NB points for me (after having toured the KPA for two months straight with midi moose and FS-6):Rigs at the bottom!
If the tap function is not on the bottom row, don't bother putting it in. No-one will be able to use it accurately in a gig situation in the middle or top row. The external momentary would be a logical fix to keep the width down.
That screen everyone keeps talking about - the brighter and more legible in sunlight, the better. Recessed would be good.
One other thing - bank button should arm the next bank, but you need to activate with rig. I often select a different solo sound for a particular song from a different bank. I set up the bank during the rhythm part (sometimes 4 or 5 banks away), then select the rig for my solo a split second before playing it - very important for me.
Now where can I buy one?
-
Tap function:
agreed- please put on the bottom row !! -
Now where can I buy one?
ASAA (As Soon As Available) you can bet that Lance is going to call all his customers!
-
Rigs at the bottom!
If the tap function is not on the bottom row, don't bother putting it in. No-one will be able to use it accurately in a gig situation in the middle or top row. The external momentary would be a logical fix to keep the width down.
Sounds like you and I are on the same page....
------------> [Blocked Image: http://www.topdoginternetmarketing.com/temp/ace_kpa_fs.png]
-
Sounds like you and I are on the same page....
------------> [Blocked Image: http://www.topdoginternetmarketing.com/temp/ace_kpa_fs.png]
Maybe im old school, but i have never in my life in 30 years of playing guitar used tap tempo, so im tending to agree with this even though i think that the tap input like the other Exp inputs should be a universal switch/expression input so that you could use it for anything you want.
Being accustomed to ordinary midi controllers i would also say that i would personally prefer that the switches could be programmed in a more universal way, maybe someone would prefer having tap tempo on one of the stomp switches instead for example or having a rig/patch on a stomp switch.
-
is there any deadline for the kemperfootswitch?
please give us more infos
thanks
vjclaus
-
Quote
Being accustomed to ordinary midi controllers i would also say that i would personally prefer that the switches could be programmed in a more universal way, maybe someone would prefer having tap tempo on one of the stomp switches instead for example or having a rig/patch on a stomp switch.
I was just thinking the same thing. There needs to be at least one switch (or better still all of them) that sends a generic MIDI CC# so that it can be re-purposed by reconfiguring the amp. There will always be something that's important to one player and not another. (Example: I'd sometimes want a rotary fast/slow switch, and should be able to swap out sompbox IV for that purpose if I need to.)
-
I was just thinking the same thing. There needs to be at least one switch (or better still all of them) that sends a generic MIDI CC# so that it can be re-purposed by reconfiguring the amp. There will always be something that's important to one player and not another. (Example: I'd sometimes want a rotary fast/slow switch, and should be able to swap out sompbox IV for that purpose if I need to.)
Yeah having possibilities can never be a bad thing if you know how to implement them, i understand that CK want the KPA and controler to be simple to use, but by choosing to go that route you may loose half or so of your customerbase who wants more possibilities, i may be one of those myself since i dont yet own a KPA.
My suggestion for both the KPA and the controller is to have a choice of either running it in a simple standard (default) mode or an advanced mode, or you can have some advanced menues that you dont have to use unless you want to assign other midi CC# /switches of the controller than the default ones or things like that with a possibility to easily go back to stored default settings in case you are in over your head.
