There it is...(modelling/profiling content)

[rupe]

This subject was brought up in one the small number of Kemper threads on this forum. Now it's being discussed by a person of significance in the guitar industry

http://www.premierguitar.com/Magazine/Issue/2013/Mar/Private_Domain_The_Sound_Ethics_Laboratory.aspx

 

[Heritage Softail]

I want a Kemper. But deep down it is stealing others work. Ethical issue.

It is designed to copy.

Copy machines have copyright warnings.

 

[Fenderoid]

Great post.One thing is clear in my head.If strong ethics were applied to music or any other industry , only a handful of things would be 'legal'.More or less it reminds the mp3 situation allover .

 

[tweed]

Oh man...

 

[mentoneman]

it does raise a conundrum doesn't it.

would be really interesting to imagine a way to "tag" a manufacturers specific tone "dna", not unlike how the app shazam "listens" to a song playing on the radio, from your iphone mic, and determines exactly what song it is via acoustic fingerprinting.

in this way a builder can similarly attempt to protect a tone that is uniquely theirs, and hopefully apply a licensing fee to those who attempt to copy those tones via profiling, modelling---you figure if kemper can profile an amp, and name that profile "recto" for example, it can also register that amp to a database and tag it absolutely as mesa boogie's intellectual property, so like itunes, purchase the tone for a nominal price, instead of this napster like free for all clone frenzy.

i spoke to a chemist on a flight once who was responsible for molecularly tagging every day household food items like coca cola, hershey's chocolate, etc, through the use of nanotechnology, writing a unique yet benign molecular id strand into the product, in order to protect the proprietary formulas from product piracy and illegal imitators who are unable to reproduce those molecular signatures.

 

[Atropos_Project]

Interesting.

It makes me wonder if a company like Toontrack pays various drum companies for using their names in the samples.

 

[rupe]

I just can't see how it would ever be possible without some sort of corrupt lobbying or payoffs. It's been discussed ad nauseum how two players plugging into the same amp will typically sound different. How do you account for the impact of different guitars, pickups, pick hand attack, fret hand touch, tube type, tube brand, tube age, etc?

Add to that the fact that given everything equal, two of the exact same amp model won't necessarily sound the same. It seems highly unrealistic to me that it could ever fly.

I recall when Harley Davidson tried to trademark the sound of their bikes...that didn't work out so well for them.

 

[crankyrayhanky]

I want a Kemper. But deep down it is stealing others work. Ethical issue.

It is designed to copy.

Copy machines have copyright warnings.

• I profile my own amps
  I buy profiles
  I download free profiles from users who expressly allow it

Go as deep as you want, no ethical issues here.
You could make a case for Ozone eq matching or similar devices, but with KPA it's non existant

 

[PBGas]

It still isn't the real thing. It may sound damn close if not identical to it but it still isn't. I realize what they are explaining here. Does make you stop and think though. Every single company that has modelled gear from mic models, to consoles to eq plug ins, would have to be brought under the same umbrella. You even have some companies allowing their names to be used on the gear as a licence.

Very complicated.

 

[Fenderoid]

I guess someone could also say that PRS 'sampled' a Les Paul

 

[Heritage Softail]

It is a copy. It is marketed as a device to copy amps.

 

[crankyrayhanky]

There's no jargon that includes "copy"
Instead, descriptors include "to capture the sonic DNA"
Essentially the same as what happens when you put a mic on a cabinet and hit record, you are capturing a sound.

and of course any debate that is musician vs Coporate legality, I tend to side with the creative artists.

 

[BYTOR]

The main goal for any modeler or profiler is to copy as best they can the iconic tones from certain tube amps. This also includes the tones from popular effects pedals. They not only financially benefit from the tones but also from the name brand recognition of the amps that has taken years & tons of money to develop.

They protect themselves by slightly changing the names of the amps, but everyone knows what they really are.

I have no problem with this, but to deny that the "goal" is to 100% copy someones work for financial gain without any compensation to the creators of the tones/name brands is bullshit.

 

[MichaelG]

I want a Kemper. But deep down it is stealing others work. Ethical issue.

It is designed to copy.

Copy machines have copyright warnings.

• I profile my own amps
  I buy profiles
  I download free profiles from users who expressly allow it

Go as deep as you want, no ethical issues here.
You could make a case for Ozone eq matching or similar devices, but with KPA it's non existant

There is definitely an ethical issue here. You obtain a profile of an amp whose sound that you love and want to record or play live with... lets say its a VHT 50/CL. Now that you have the sound, unless you are cash-rich you now have very little motivation to run out and buy a 50/CL. This deprives the manufacturer (in this case VHT) from the revenue of selling an amp.

It is not an ethical issue if you own your amps, profile them and then record with or carry those profiles around with you for live use. Distributing those profiles to other people does cross the ethical line IMHO.

This particular digitization issue is very akin to buying a CD, ripping it and then distributing the MP3s to the world at large to enjoy without the royalties going to the label and musician.

Make no mistake... the AXE and Kemper WILL affect the bottom line of amp builders/manufacturers. I just can't see how it wouldn't... if anyone can rationally explain how it won't I'm all-ears...

My 2cents/YMMV/all IMHO etc.....

 

[Mudder]

How would any instrument company avoid "copying"? Lets say I run a piano company. How many people hear a song and say, oh that's a Baldwin or Kurzweil or Steinway? The tone itself isn't copyright-able, especially since there are so many clones. If a company can't keep amp cloners from building (like Fender and the litany of tweed clones) then how could the sound itself be kept secure?

You also start to need to demonstrate damages. Just because I have a Kemper someone needs to show how it hurts them beyond being free market competition before there can be anything like an injunction awarded.

 

[Bob Savage]

i spoke to a chemist on a flight once who was responsible for molecularly tagging every day household food items like coca cola, hershey's chocolate, etc, through the use of nanotechnology, writing a unique yet benign molecular id strand into the product, in order to protect the proprietary formulas from product piracy and illegal imitators who are unable to reproduce those molecular signatures.

Oh man, I KNEW I tasted something different in Coke! I'm on ebay now looking for NOS.

 

[gibson5413]

I can see both sides of the ethical argument. I admit it kind of sucks that some will buy an amp copy it and sell. I am not going to argue my position because it is just my opinion. Someone like Steve who spends a ton of time in development and QA processes and builds the Cherry Bomb. If someone posts a killer profile or patch it kills potential buyers who think to themselves "It may not be the real thing but it is good enough for me".

On the other hand, there are a ton of killer vintage and out of production amps that some will never get play let alone own (some who would be willing to purchase). The fact that the lucky few profile and share is fantastic.

I am not going to vilify either camp.

 

[Heritage Softail]

Look at it this way...

Jenna Jamison can't copyright a blowjob, but she can copyright a flic of her giving one.

Kemper is doing the equivalent of filming a film of Jenna chugging dugan...

Call it what you want.

That said, I want one bad. Just not sure Jenna is wiling to do it....

 

[Ventura]

That said, I want one bad. Just not sure Jenna is wiling to do it....

On a more serious note...

I like your prose above about "copy machines have copyright warning affixed to them". Good point.

I like the question above as to whether or not toontrack pays for manufacturers of drums - no - I doubt they do, but they do pay the players who they sample, and those players are sponsored by the brands they play, so it works out in the end.

The essence of this is whether or not amp manufacturers fear for their financial well being with his most recent, and extremely advanced, technological advent of digital modeling.

Cliff Chase just bought a Dumble in order to get it coded to the Axe-FX II.

Does a modeler/profiler sound like an amb & cab in the room? There have been discussions that - no - a modeler profiler sounds like a mic'd cab being driven by a head; it doesn't have that 3D room filling effect that the actual amp/cab do in the room.

So - if the amp manufacturers start to feel like sales are dwindling due to the increase in digital modelers and the like, then yes, they'll go after it to seek financial compensation, or, deny their wares to be modeled/profiled therefore attempting to force the player into "buying" the real thing. Because ultimately, this is about money. Where the grey area exists will be the very argument that the fanbois of - for instance - Fractal uphold so dearly. "It sounds more realer than the real thing". Okay, so if it sounds more realer than the real thing, than it doesn't sound exactly like the real thing. Or perhaps it's slightly less real sounding than the real thing, in which case, they're in the clear too. But where this can get convoluted is from the perspective of "if a tree falls in the forest" question. So, if Bob, Pete, me and Susan all hear differently, then what's to say the model/profile of the amp is actually sounding like the actual amp? Things that are "tangible" are typically patentable. Sound - thus far - is not tangible. We can't see it or compare it physically to others. I think this is where the arguments will go sideways on both sides of the fence. Oh, what about "tone is in the fingers"? Hmmmmm...

I'm going to say - if it's hurtin' the bottom line of the amp manufacturers, than there will be action taken. What that action consists of will be very interesting; as there'll have to be a "process" to "prove". During the gestation of this "process" to "prove", nothing is stopping FAS from renaming all their amps to more generic names, and no one can stop KPA users from "profiling their own amps, or amps of family and friends".

It's funky. Could be interesting for sure.

Mo

 

[mentoneman]

on the flipside, everything is basically a derivative of fender clean, marshall crunch (which is kind of bassman->jtm45->evolution)
and vox chime

so do the modern guys pay fender, marshall and vox for adapting their product's tones and sounds from the original parent products?

in that light, the concept of what is proprietary or who truly owns or invented what becomes very foggy, and kemper and fractal then just become new guys who are carrying on the "tradition".