This is actually something I happened to think of myself.
I've also been asking myself why this should be, and IMO the reason could lay in the fact that the KPA has entered the market having the Axe as its main competitor (in the musicians' eye); hence the instinct to want it comparable.
But I think that Eng. Kemper has always imagined his new creature as simple as possible, and TBH I believe this will be his guideline for the future. I mean, I think the goal is not to take the KPA to compete with the Axe.
I'm sure the KPA will evolve in the time, but I bet it will never have the complexity of the Axe.
Excellent post. I do wonder what the feeling and perspective would be had the Axe not been around and set such a high bar. The Axe seems to be really the first box to "do it all" at the professional level. Yes, you had pod's, rp's, gnu's and the like before but there was really only the Axe before at this level. So is it fair to compare a product that has been out for a few months against a product that costs more and has been out for five years? That is up to you.
But the unfortunate truth is that you can buy the Axe and get all of the years of back development for free. That's just the advantage of being out in the market first. For better or for worse, it is the gold standard and the KPA competes with it on various levels. Now, Kemper may choose to compete on purely a tone or on ease of use or on price, but it's hard to say it's not in competition in some way. There is nothing that says that the KPA must compete on FX, but if it does not, you can vote with your dollars and buy another product.