FRACTAL and KEMPER LAWSUIT?

[@Georgecostanza91]

God bless HW for doin all the research for subjects (and controversies) that we are all into and giving us a great video on it

[@Musecrafter]

If Fractal wins a lawsuit over this then every amp mfg needs to sue Fractal.

[@SonarHD]

As well as every single company that did modeling before Fractal Audio. What a hypocrite.

[@Cpt_Adama]

As well as every pedal and rack effects companies too.

[@vegastation24]

heres hoping to mr. fractal's downfall, instead of focusing on customers and having actual items in stock, his energy is wasted on this BS

[@wildmilne]

And then fender and Marshall will sue all of them. That would be a fun world.

[@donniedonnie639]

fender borrowed from radios and the first tube guitar amps were radios with a modified input a hundred years ago. almost all other tube amp manufacturers were copies and variations of fenders. no one alive today has invented a tube amp... all is borrowed technology and ideas.

[@dwightludvigson9550]

I worked as a paralegal for 35 years. I worked on a number of patent cases. There are some things you should keep in mind about them. Having a patent doesn't protect you or prevent other companies from infringing on your patent. What it does give you is the right to defend that patent. Let's say company A has a patent on a product. Along comes company B and tries to get a patent for an almost identical product. The patent office rejects company B because a similar patent already exists. That does not preclude company B from producing that product anyway. Company A then has the right to sue company B to defend their patent. It is an important thing to keep in mind when discussing these issues.

[@vaughanmacegan4012]

Does a patent for some sort of technology in the US also apply in Germany (EU) or vice versa? Also does a patent cover some theoretical thing (something that might work) or does it need to be a working product?

[@jchase8223]

Then how does this explain how Red cameras keeps suing other camera companies(and winning) from using their own version of a RAW format? To me that's the best example of an overly broad patent being abused and not understood by the patent office, which shouldn't have been granted in the first place.

[@shorerocks]

@@vaughanmacegan4012 If I remember correctly, you can apply for different territories. It is not necessarily world wide. Dwight might know the answer to this one 🙂 From wikipedia I got this: 'Under the World Trade Organization's (WTO) TRIPS Agreement, patents should be available in WTO member states for any invention, in all fields of technology, provided they are new, involve an inventive step, and are capable of industrial application.[3] Nevertheless, there are variations on what is patentable subject matter from country to country, also among WTO member states.'

[@mechaxofficial5048]

Knowledgeable people are awesome.

[@roberthunt6839]

@@vaughanmacegan4012 Patents only cover one country. I can only find one patent held by Fractal/Chase Clifford: US11164551B2. If Kemper get sued, it would be in the US and there would be no direct legal impact elsewhere. However, if Kemper wanted to carry on offering liquid profiling in the EU/rest of world they would need to make sure it wasn't being downloaded in the US, so they might decide as a business to shut it down entirely. US11164551B2 covers a modeller which: makes an output filter using a high level exponential sine sweep, makes an input filter using a low level exponential sine sweep, then makes a corrective output filter and corrective input filter based on model filters. The patent only applies if Kemper used ALL of those. I don't know enough about how Kemper works to judge that. Patents need to be for a "working" product but they don't need to be for a "good" product, if you see what I mean. If you invented a new method of amp modelling tomorrow, you could get a patent for it, even if it sounded terrible, used loads of electricity, cost billions of dollars, etc.

[@whiteroom2773]

Hi HW, firstly thanks for another excellent video. I've been in the software industry for 25 years and this situation is both familiar and funny to me, because I've seen the same kinds of discussions time and again in relation to IP and copyright, patents and ownership. In general my experience has been that war breaks out for one of two reasons. First (and this is more common in my experience), people often start waving patents around when they feel their primary market is under threat from a product that is infringing upon, or "moving into" their core functional domain. It's obvious right? Fractal "model" amps: a signal is processed by a software approximation of the signal path through various pretend components inside the digital modelling system. Kemper "profile" amps: a complex array of audio signals is sent through a real amp and the output recorded and analysed, producing a sort of frequency profile that can be applied to any subsequent signal in order to simulate what the real amp would do to the signal. Clear difference; and you can argue until the cows come home about the pros and cons of the 2 approaches, and everyone can satisfy themselves that buyers are probably generally making a decision about which to use/buy on the basis of their differences (I personally am lucky enough to own both, and love them both). What happens though when Kemper rocks up at NAMM and says "hey guess what, we are going to model components in 40 amps so that you can apply a more 'realistic' tone stack to the profiles you capture"?? People at Fractal get twitchy because now suddenly they're wondering whether the difference in the minds of their potential users/market demographic is really quite so clear... if I can take an accurate frequency profile, AND apply an accurate signal processing model to that profile, what makes Fractal stand out from the crowd now? Superior realism when tweaking virtual amp settings on the main tone controls? Maybe not. Superior granularity in the level of component control in the models? Very possibly. BUT perhaps to them it's looking like a bit of a gray area now. The second main reason (again only anecdotal, no big cross section here) in my experience why people start shouting copyright infringement is to draw a line in the sand: this is our side, and that's yours. That, I believe is primarily what is happening here, and your very useful and interesting video has further convinced me that is the case, since the wording of those patents is ambigious with regard to the specific details of the amp modelling process, and I'm fairly certain that Fractal know that unless they are willing to force Kemper through the courts, only to discover that the modelling of discrete components in Liquid Profiling is materially different from what Fractal are doing AND at the same time risk being obliged to reveal the guts of the inner workings of their own modelling algorithms, they won't be able to enforce their somewhat limited patent. Final thought, apologies for the TLDR: it's pretty (correction, extremely) difficult to write software this good. I don't think either of these companies are under serious threat from one another or anyone else right now. There are a LOT of guitarists in this world we live in and try to share. Like I say, I own both devices, and the new Kemper features are not going to make me ditch my Fractal, nor are Fractal's fantastic amp models going to stop me preferring some of my profiles for certain things. If it comes to that, I'm not going to ditch my Kemper just because some of the Tonex models are supposedly more accurate. I may be slightly unusual in that regard, but actually I don't think so. If you have something that makes your guitar sound as amazing as the Kemper or the Axe Fx, you don't throw that away lightly. In fact, you hold onto it pretty tightly, especially when you've invested a lot of your own time into customising it for your own particular needs :D

[@paulunderwood1911]

It’s perfectly possible to take a 65 Deluxe Reverb model and turn it into a later model with all the tweaking available to the user in the Fractal units. Not possible with profiling or capturing. Just a correction to what HW said at some point in the video. I’m also confident that the patent infringement is far more technical than what was covered in this video

[@vaughanmacegan4012]

Because if you wanted a later model you would profile it!

[@adamwilcox6405]

I was going to make a similar point. If anything modelling will allow far more flexibility to allow variations because potentially every element is tweakable.

[@vaughanmacegan4012]

And/or you could apply Liquid Profiling!!!

[@Rhuggins]

My patent…since when did emulating the EQ curves of a unit become patented? Plugin companies have been doing this forever

[@RogerBrenon]

EXACTLY

[@mrcoatsworth429]

In such a case, the patent would be how that is done, though. You can totally patent a specific process to make a product.

[@nothing55rk]

A friend of mine works for Mesa Boogie and told me years ago (2012ish) that Randall was seriously thinking about suing Fractal, and that a lot of amp manufactures where talking about suing as well. IRONY....

[@edgoforth9546]

Funny thing is Randall took from Fender and Fender never sued Randall, and Fender was the one who was the one who started what has now become legendary. But everyone wants to sue someone if they let a fart with electrons sticking out of it, "Don't take a slice of my pie" lol, next thing they will be making us smog our assholes!!! lol

[@Cranio76]

@Oaken honestly, amp manufacturers are threatening lawsuits since decades against profilers, but have no legal ground whatsoever (ever seen anyone in court for this?), usually their claims are moot and unpursuable. This is a completely different kind of context.

[@gdhi11]

@@edgoforth9546 Actually, you can't steal a circuit. Patents aren't on the circuit itself, but the function/concept of the circuit. Most of Leo Fender's early designs (which are what were getting ripped off from everybody) were right out of the RCA Tube Engineering Manuals. Simulclass has a patent because of what it does, navigating between A and A/B class amplification inside the same poweramp. I think the threaten to sue would be more akin to a trade-dress suit, where they are suing because Fractal/Line 6 and all of the other modeler companies were claiming that they provided models of real-world hardware that were sonically similar--so in essence the use of Mesa's name in a manual of a model called treadplate could lower sales of actual Mesa products and therefore wind up being a legitimate suit. Patent suits are generally more winnable than trade-dress suits, particularly ones where the trade dress is purely textual and/or auditory. If it's clear they stole the graphic elements that comprise a brand or product, then you MIGHT have a lawsuit--but it can get expensive fast, and still ultimately be decided against you. What Gibson had with all of the recent shape lawsuits was a trade dress/design lawsuit--not a patent lawsuit. That said--it didn't wind up happening, so far as it never ended up in a court filing--so it was either settled before it ever got that far or Randall's attorneys probably advised that it wouldn't go anywhere because prior legal precedent. I regularly hear small amp builders say they'd love to shutdown any of the current modeling/profiling devices as they feel they DO represent their products accurately and that this is effecting their business.

[@donniedonnie639]

Tube amps have been around for 100+ years. That would be like Ford suing any new car company that pops up. Mesa and Randall both borrowed ideas for their products.

[@XiyuYang]

You wanna talk about irony? Randall built the Mesa Boogie brand by repairing and modifying existing Fender topologies, now that's irony. Also, guess which amp "inspired" Mesa Boogie Dual Rec.

[@babahias]

Is there a patent on not being a dick? If not, I would recommend him using this very technique. 🙏

[@Texasbluesalley]

It's a well known fact that the Patent Office is ill equipped to issue patents on complicated technology, which leads to overly broad patents being granted. Patent 3 is so broad it might as well be the ocean. 🤣

[@douglasfrederick127]

This is not true in the slightest.

[@millman82]

The second patent was overly broad and, therefore, unenforceable. It’s why it was abandoned. The third patent corrects the faults of the second. Liquid profiling does appear to begin with digital models of specific amp tone stacks and uses profile captures to adjust the modeled tone stacks. This is exactly what FAS Tone Matching does and what the third patent describes. Therefore, liquid profiling is a direct violation of the third patent.

[@aaronvalure178]

You are absolutely correct ✅

[@loneryouth]

On Fractal units you can change the tonestack of an amplifier model to any other tonestack from any amplifier inside the unit, wich in my understanding is kind of what liquid profiling is. I suppose this is the problem here.

[@Neelo5000]

At that point they might as well claim patent infringement on parametric equalization.

[@loneryouth]

@@Neelo5000 i‘m not defending anyone here since i really understand way too little of all of this. Maybe it‘s not the feature itself but the technology to create it - i don‘t know and probably the rest of us either.

[@rorybninetythree]

I think quite a lot of this is above all of our heads but one thing from all of this is certainly clear: I would much rather have a beer with Mr Kemper than angry Fractal man.

[@jacksmith4460]

The Irony of 2 companies who literally make money from stealing Amp Manufacturers sonic IP, claiming the other stole it's IP, is just hilarious

[@RogerBrenon]

Money and greed create idiocy.

[@XiyuYang]

3:30 If you're dealing with modeling, you're definitely dealing with IR. The difference is how that IR is generated, you can get an IR of a physical counterpart, or you can construct an IR through modeling (hint: convolution is pretty much how digital EQs work too.)

[@mikepol1889]

Fractal just upset that the Kemper keeps adding improvements while fractal always requires you to buy the latest unit for new features.

[@danrao3707]

That’s not true at all! Fractal routinely does a ton of very useful sometimes amazing software updates that covers the FM-3 FM-9 and Axefx3. Not to mention their other hardware such as FC pedals and editing software. They also listen and react to their customers request by making numerous improvements over the years. I’ve owned my Axefx3 for around 3 years. I’ve never needed to buy additional hardware for improvement. Updates just arrive on any random Friday. I’m not trying to sound bias but I don’t think you’ve done your research before making such claims.

[@abheceshabemuskk3531]

@@danrao3707 he is refering to the hardware updates, that outdates your unit leaving it without updates. like the fractal 1 or 2 owners. Your point is very true until axefx 4 appears. In my opinion the kemper hardware, software and tone is outdated, I had it and I hated it for one year. The updates policy for decades of the kemper is nice, but it doesn't improve the very flaw of the unit: the tone/profiling unlike the fractal updates with improved modeling over the years. never tried the axe. Now I am happy with a victory amp and a couple different backup amps.

[@jcout25]

@@abheceshabemuskk3531 If you hated how the kemper sounded, you used it wrong. You can literally make ANY sound you want. Just read the manual, homie.

[@bot-uz9ph]

Nope

[@abheceshabemuskk3531]

@@jcout25 I am sound tech and tried thousands of profiles. tried FRFRs, cabs, power amps, merged, DI profiles. Yes for recording is lets say good enough to never notice it in a mix. But with a cab absolutely any amp was way better than the kemper, for example a meh amp like blackstar 5w compared to its profile or any profile through the same cab with the kemper there was always a lost of texture in the high mids a lack of attack in all freqs, it was a big dissapointment, I studied deeply the manual and all kind of resources. I know its best use is for a line signal with studio monitors wich was the least use i wanted from the kemper, but once I sold the kemper I tried for fun to record my victory pre send out to the daw with an IR and the harmonic texture enjoyment I was missing was there..with the mic even better. I always wondered if my unit was defective in some misterious way. the kemper can sound fantastic but its general tone flaws are well known by the public if you are not a blind member of a cult called kemperites who spit out falacies to justify their happiness with the device and to undermine the unhappiness of others users with it. kzbin.infowAbqQOea_HU?feature=share&t=1331

[@johnnylayton1672]

At first glance, I'd argue a Fractal lawsuit against Kemper intends to uncover more of Kemper's tech -- that winning the lawsuit would be a secondary goal at best.

[@KingKong-mp6gj]

I don't think Fractal has any interest in details of Kemper's tech. They look at profiling as an inferior approach.

[@SHREDTILLDEAD]

​@@KingKong-mp6gjOr it could just be your opinion. If they think its inferior, why see it as threatening to their profits. Couldn't they just come out and explain how its inferior? Wouldn't it make those whom say its inferior , and espouse this opinion render themselves " inferior " if they cannot explain how the product in question is less effective?

[@KingKong-mp6gj]

It is not my opinion but Cliff/Fractal's that physical modeling is superior in achieving an accurate replica of a tube amp's sound compared to the black box approach of profiling and he has written many articles about why that is, you can search it up if you are interested. I agree with his take largely though.

[@YohaiPortal]

Do we know \ have an estimate when we will get to experience the Liquid Profiling? I'm sooo excited to try them all

[@rzk2755]

You have an interesting reasoning for your preference for capturinmg amps instead of modeling them. However, I don't find it too compelling. Nowadays we have access to schematics, photos and tremendous amount of data on the same line of amplifiers from different years. The Axe-Fx got (and still gets) branded throughout the years for being way too complex and offering way too much deep tweaking possibilities for an end user who just wants a great tone. The reason is exactly what you're describing. The Axe-Fx lets you to adjust component values and interactions to the level where you can get from the model of a 1965 Super Reverb to a similarly accurate model of a 1968 Super Reverb with slightly different components. However, if you only care about getting an extremely accurate 60s Super Reverb tone (which is probably 90% of guitarists) you won't have to touch any knobs or values not found on the real amp, or heck, you might not even have to create a preset because chances are there's a fantastic sounding factory preset already built for the amp. Besides, you're missing the point by not really looking into Cliff's approach to modeling. He explained it several times in the FAS forums that he has a corrective mindset. Meaning that for example the Mesa Mark Graphic EQ model purposedly has different tapers from the tapers on the amps for two reasons. Reason #1: the component tolerances that amp manufacturers also "suffer" from. Reason #2: in some cases he considers manufacturers' decisions on pot tapers or values a mistake that doesn't serve the given amp in any way. However, for most of these changes it is explained why and how it is different from the original amp and you can absolutely get in the ballpark with a little different settings. The real takeaway is, however, that we worry and care way too much about accuracy. I firmly believe in "if it sounds good it is good" and I think this is very similar to how audio mixing and mastering engineers work. If you need to boost or cut 12 dbs of highs on a track to make it sit well in the mix, nobody will care about your EQ settings after the song is put together and sounds amazing.

[@scootertb26]

You had me at input filter ❤😂

[@rogerbakke7535]

After watching this video my brain was like “my cats breath smells like cat food” 😂

[@dunxy]

Can confirm, my cats breath does indeed smell like cat food!

[@RogerBrenon]

That's the answer! Cristoff could identify the tech as a cat and everyone would have to leave him alone! LOL

[@KeizerSinbad]

In DSP. The only way to process a signal with an IR is using convolution.

[@repasiv]

abandoned patent: no protection for the inventor, free to use that technology for everyone and can't be patented again And two patents which are very similar can be granted, but in case of a legal battle the one which was applied first and is in valid state counts.

[@TudorAdrian]

I think the patent combined with the fact that Fractal's been allowing users to swap tonestacks around in their modeled amps may be what Cliff would have been thinking about. Anyway, it'll be interesting to see what comes of it.

[@vitaliistep]

Christoph could file a lawsuit against any company which is making tone captures of real amps right now (Fractal, Neural DSP, IK...), but he understands that it's a ridiculous move. Fractal does look bad with such thrust.

[@donniedonnie639]

Tone match (eq match) in software existed long before Kemper came along... they could do the same as far as lawsuits goes. Profiling was Kemper's unique approach, not tone match, although tone match is a big part of what profiling is.

[@vitaliistep]

@@donniedonnie639 tone matching is not simple EQ curve, it's impossible to make an amp model sound similar with just EQ, otherwise anybody would do it. I guess it considers frequency spectrum, harmonics content, phase, dynamics processing (and who knows what else) at different levels. Add to that that everything is interrelated and the processing should happen in "realtime", and that's why there are captures of amps single state for particular settings, and why modelling mostly sounds fake, and why Kemper can sue Fractal, as they are just envy and trying to catch up :)

[@donniedonnie639]

@@vitaliistep tone matching IS an eq curve and you are wrong, just as an impulse response is an eq match. profiling is what you are describing which is also what modeling does at a much finer level. kemper just admitted that profiling wasn't accurate and is trying to give a most requested and important feature that has been absent for their 12 year old system. you are being just a little silly with this competition thing.

[@vitaliistep]

@@donniedonnie639 the so-called liquid profiling will just make it more intuitive and simple in terms of tone shaping for an average guitar player, also the tone stack block will work closer to what it actually is for a particular amp (not like outboard digital EQ it is now) and make profiles more versatile. It doesn't change the capture approach, so nothing about making it more accurate or being the most requested feature as to me. It's subjective, but Kemper is still the most accurate to me among all other devices, many people just don't know how to tweak profiles properly. Also I'm quite sure that it's about competition, otherwise there would be no comments from Fractal, if a crappy outdated device is just having a stupid update. Fractal and Kemper are still 2 major players on this market and it's getting smaller and smaller every year

[@codymcgrew94]

How bout this? F*** Fractal Audio for trying to patent this 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@justmehere6094]

Um, if you want a capture of a 68 Fender, and have one of a 65 Fender, you have to capture the 68 as well. You have a snapshot of that particular amp, at that particular setup. Heck, if you want that particular amp at ny setting you have to capture it 00s of times. At least with modelling, they have a full representation of that particular amp, at any setting. What he was talking about is that 2 individual 65 Reverb's will not sound the same, due to all those things, componant shift etc. So modelling a particular reference 65 Reverb won't sound exactly like every 65 reverb. But then, every 65 reverb will sound different from others as well.,

[@bettsdn]

The sad flailing of someone watching their market share slip away.

[@KA-mf5oz]

In the Interview with TJ Christioph Kemper is mentioning that there is a " a little patent" on that. (7:30). I guess he is not talking about a Fractal patent....

[@sixstringsofsam]

Super amp sim geeky content right here. I’m loving it

[@Onemanband410899]

YUS!

[@CMHobbies]

Fractal just insured I’ll never own a Fractal product.

[@lawrencekashak]

Its common knowledge that a tone stack varies due to potentiometer differences, capacitance differences, and circuit designs that affect the slope of each pot. Matching the curve of 40 combinations is smart eq. Making it easier to dial in, on the fly. Nice. I don't see adjustable tone stack curves as an infringement. It's not for sale. A nice existing user feature update.

[@Jonw8222]

I've been out of the digital guitar world over the last few years, and have only came back in the last six months or so. I have fond memories of the state of where things were.. 5-10 years ago for example.. where I thought there was a pretty clear heirachy in terms of price or quality of the tones you can get from xxxxx product. Things have changed a lot recently. There's been a lot of people saying "modelling is dead" lately and you are one of them. The news in this video is a pretty big sign that you may be right. There's a hint of insecurity or desperation in the tone of that message from Fractal/Cliff.. it doesn't mean that "modelling is dead" but times are certainly changing. In terms of the patent itself.. like everyone I'm no expert but I find this to be absurd. And no I've never owned a Kemper or Axe-FX.. just a neutral observer who cares about good guitar tones. Fractal either has to sue to enforce this patent, or they won't and it's just empty words.. but either way it doesn't look good for them. Will Kemper be intimidated? I hope not, because this custom tone stack thing is a key piece in advancing capture technology into the future.

[@garrysimmons111]

I dunno man. Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems like "Liquid Modeling" is nothing more than making a stompbox model that replicates the tone stack from amp XYZ. Then put that stompbox after the profile to let the user tweak the EQ using controls that behave like amp XYZ and not some generic EQ.

[@taylormesa]

They hypocrisy of Fractal making digital copies of every amp they can find a schematic for, then crying foul over a ‘modeling’ process… this is why I will never buy a fractal product and also why their community is so toxic…

[@BillySoundFarm]

Just FYI, when you read a patent you can skip everything and go right to the claims. At the end of the document it will say, "what is claimed is" and there's a list of claims. Those claims are "the invention", those are the things that the patent holder has an exclusive right to until the expiration of the patent. Everything else is just commentary.

[@flashbak01]

The post was from Cliff and the patent he is referencing is the last patent you posted US11164551B2.

[@mrslate1]

Nice post HW! Very well explained to us guitar players. Im a Kemper guy and use my rig for live gigs. Im more Like what you mentioned regarding modeling vs. profiling. I really hope this doesn’t turn into a thing between KPR and Fractal…

[@Cpt_Adama]

Then are Amplitube and Bias Amp infringements on AxeFX too. I think they have a looooong way to go to prove what seems from the outside as a baseless lawsuit.

[@brpadington]

Cliff knows this isn't true. He is just frustrated and venting as usual.

[@KingKong-mp6gj]

You can call Cliff many things, liar certainly is not a part of it.

[@Cpt_Adama]

@@KingKong-mp6gj Then will call him delusional, because if he truly believes this BS, it will only lead to lawyers making $hit tons of money💰 and him having to raise prices to protect his profits. He will most likely lose this case if he proceeds. He could make better use of that money developing next gen products.

[@brpadington]

@@Cpt_Adama Cliff doesn't even know how this technology works yet he is making this baseless claim.

[@matrix12x]

Also, you have to compare the claims to the potentially infringing product, not the drawings or description. Great video though.

[@titorock21]

Wow, thanks for this great content!

[@TudorAdrian]

If this actually has grounds to go to court, it'll be crazy to watch it unfold.

[@wladibuosi]

When do these updates come out?

[@hawg427]

Great video . Someone I follow on YT that does in depth reviews on gear he purchases and he thought the owner of Fractal was a Butthead.

[@truthfactreality6814]

Your friend is correct

[@alanp6980]

Someone i know from somwhere that told someone...

[@satch4u3]

I seen Cliff's post a couple days ago, and now it appears to be removed.

[@JarekMajewski]

Looks like two completely different things... Fractal is protecting EQ curve matching for input and output to refine the static model, so there is nothing liquid ... but in Kemper they are talking about another model that describes how to dynamically react and modify your static model (profile) as you changing the knobs positions.

[@itsverygreen532]

In patents you can largely ignore the disclosures ... what matters is the claims. Read the claims, that is what counts.

[@jimmpanik3402]

Liquid profiling solved a problem that didn't exist. Having the knob positions line up to the original doesn't matter in the slightest. Having the parameter sweep line up isn't an issue.

[@pedrockjesus]

Tonex pedal will upgrade to the liquid profilling too? I hope

[@ronfrey5327]

CANT STOP LAUGHING THANKS ALOT FOR POSTING.

[@MrSneakyPants]

Everyone can have their own opinions on the legality, but what is described here has been in Axe FX since the AXE FX II Mk 1. However, the new ability to change the dial range on captures of amps is solely Kemper. Edit: I'm speaking on the tone stacking that can be applied to captures.

[@Tanax13]

Does liquid profiling handle special knobs? For instance, my ENGL Savage 120 has a "Tone Balance" knob. Would this be part of the Savage liquid profile model? Or how about switches? Again, my Savage has a Contour switch. Is this modeled?

[@willpotere6665]

Wait, does Gibson own Fractal?

[@sixstringoverdrive6837]

I love this comment.

[@uncleaj87]

Amp Identity theft is not a joke Kemper! Tens of ten’s of manufacturers suffer from it every year! -Dwight 😂

[@ToneJunkieTV]

😂 Gold!

[@uncleaj87]

@@ToneJunkieTV agreed! 😂😂😂

[@karlhouseknecht]

H.W., I'm kinda wondering if Cliff is referring to his Tone Matching feature where you start with a Fractal amp model that is close to the device under test, generate that corrective EQ/Tone Match block, and then can still edit the tone stack, preamp gain, etc of the model afterward. It's similar to liquid profiling...kinda. But I don't think it's a blatant infringement. And Cliff came up with Tone Match LONG after Kemper profiling made its debut. Maybe there's a reason why he pulled his post?

[@sean_miller]

No, he has a new "profiling" tech that he talked about a while back.

[@2550marshall]

What you probably don't understand is, Cliff has been on the forum in the past and a member asked if Fractal would ever add profiling to the Axe Fx. He answered and stated something to the effect of: The companies doing profiling do not do it right (or best). He knows how to do it right (or best) and has a patent for it. If I remember right, I think he also said that modeling is still superior to profiling. I don't know exactly when he said that but I have been a Fractal user and Fractal forum member for a little over 2 years. So, my guess is that it has been since then or maybe I am wrong, and it was an older thread I had read. Also, keep in mind that Cliff's patent is most likely in the USA only. How does that effect Kemper?? If it is an infringement, then maybe Kemper can use the tech but not in the USA??

[@brysonlee3631]

So the key take away here is that Fractal also has something they’re working on to combine profiling and modeling since at least 2021👀. Chances are that all the big players have something up their sleeves.

[@donniedonnie639]

several with profiling tech are out now - neural, tonex, headrush prime and others...

[@brysonlee3631]

@@donniedonnie639 Sure there are, I was speaking of combining profiling and modeling. Kemper and Fractal’s patents would effectively do that.

[@mwc2112]

I think the problem isn't going from point A to point B but rather the *process* and *methodology* (i.e. the technology) for getting there. As far as I know, you can't really stop someone from creating a simulation of something (in this case I assume the tonestack simulation), but you *can* stop someone from ripping off your patented technology to do so. If Cliff has a case and Kemper is indeed using the same process to create their Liquid Profiling that he already has patented then he has every right to defend his intellectual property. As for people saying "if you model something you should get sued" I don't think that's a winnable suit unless you can prove that the *methods* of doing so are the same. Would love for a patent lawyer to chime in here.

[@NedJeffery]

The logical extension for liquid profiling is to profile the amp at multiple settings and then use AI to blend between them. e.g. Do a profile with everything at 2, another profile with everything at 5, another with everthing at 8, and another at your ideal settings. Then combine the 4 models together.

[@brysonlee3631]

It's doable, but if you're looking at an amp with say 5 knobs, at 4 settings each, that is still 1,024 profiles to merge per channel to take into account the different combinations. Better than 100,000 if you did 10 settings I suppose.

[@rossenmladenov5366]

The logical extension IS the liquid profiling - when applying the new tone stack you have to "tell" it what settings the underlying profile was made with - how much gain, bass, middle, treble, presence, cut, bright switch etc. (whatever the particular real amp tone stack has). And then you get to tweak all those to your liking with response being as the real deal. In other words, you would not need profiles of different settings of a particular amp channel anymore. If they use AI or whatever algorithm for this purpose, will be (fittingly to the present subject) surely patented...

[@KingKong-mp6gj]

Me thinks and hopes no one is suing anyone. Both are small companies which need their resources outside the courts. IIRC Cliff has stated on the forums that he thinks patent infringement cases are mostly a waste of time and i suspect Cristoph thinks the same. Best outcome for us is they sort it out via some kind of patent sharing agreement but part of me thinks Cliff could be too arrogant to do that.

[@KingKong-mp6gj]

Also note: To date Cliff has only stated an opinion he holds for true. It's something he likes to do, kinda his persona. Doesn't necessarily mean he intends to sue.

[@aristocaster]

It is sad for Cliff that Kemper was on market years before

[@loneryouth]

Is that true? I think the first Axe FX came out in 2006 and the first Kemper in 2011. Could be wrong tho.

[@RogerBrenon]

@@loneryouth Line 6 should sue Fractal because they came out with amp modeling first. Right? This is all stupid.

[@cshortlife9179]

Amp modelling company steals the sound and response of a real world amp without the permission of the original manufacturer and that's considered fair and fine. Another Amp modelling company copies their method of stealing and that's copyright infringement. Ridiculous.

[@KingKong-mp6gj]

No completely sensible. "Stealing sound" is a ridiculous concept. A well defined method of solving a well defined problem tho is IP and can be patented.

[@masterofreality230]

Idk, it seems like it could be an issue of actually being able to patent a thing or not and Mister Fractal not knowing for sure.

[@brianleecooper1814]

i dont give ( fract ) kempers a great keep up your good work HW

[@orbithesun1]

@7:32 Christoph Kemper says there is a patent on liquid Profile 👉🏻 kzbin.info/www/bejne/p37EqXlji992h6s Question, is it Kemper patent or did Kemper purchase the rights from Fractal (which. I doubt)?

[@edgoforth9546]

Was not Kemper the first ones to offer Profiling in the first place? Before Fractal??

[@orbithesun1]

@@edgoforth9546 the discussion is about the patent , which pertains to the new modeling method for the gain stage, tone stack,etc. on the Kemper. Not overall profiling per say.

[@alienlovesecrets9379]

Cliff and the fractal guys are trolls, maybe?

[@vaughanmacegan4012]

No, that's wrong ... they *are* trolls. Experienced it first hand.

[@johnmeli9478]

you need to look at the patent claims, not the abstract.

[@daveneuer5516]

I think you're getting problematically hung up on a guitarist's understanding the term "model" as distinct from a profile. From a mathematical perspective, they're both models. And I'm also not a patent attorney, but my understanding is that one needn't infringe on every single claim in a patent to infringe. My quick software developer take is that it's very possible Fractal could succeed in an infringement claim, at least prior to appeal.

[@vaughanmacegan4012]

What about NAM and ML would you call that a model as well?

[@daveneuer5516]

@@vaughanmacegan4012 ml literally calls its models models, so yeah

[@KingKong-mp6gj]

Every digital amp simulator generates it's sound using mathematical models in the digital domain. Thats why they are called modelers. KPA is no different, Profiling is just a marketing term used by Kemper to distinct themselves and their approach just like tennessee whiskey is a different name for sth. which essentially is bourbon.

[@thewaldfe9763]

To me the second and third patent so sounds like they use modelling to create a model that is 'close enough' and than use profiling to make the model more correct. So basically using Kemper technology to improve the (more versatile) modeling approach? Anyway, it would kind of be the opposite of what Kemper describes Liquid Profiling, which is improving the tone stack controls of their profiles by applying different profiled tonestacks rather than a generic one. 🤔

[@shadowm3ld]

Hmmm funny… never knew Fractal as anything but a modeling unit… I guess the next Fractal unit was gonna be called FM9-LP? 😅

[@LukeTilley]

Liquid profiling is modeling. The point is essentially to add a modeled tone stack to a Kemper profile so you could for example, have a proper top boost tone stack on an ac30 profile instead of the basic Kemper eq which doesn't necessarily respond like the amp would

[@vaughanmacegan4012]

Nah, it will be called the Axe FX 4 Ultra XL Turbo Supercharged Profiller and will cost $100,000 USD.

[@geoffreymerrifield5666]

@@vaughanmacegan4012 Literally laughed out loud! Nailed it.

[@KingKong-mp6gj]

If Fractal operated like Kemper they would still only sell the AxeFX standard from 2007 for the price of the Axe3. And it would still sound better than a KPA😜

[@radfury23g32]

Kind of a bummer that they would patent amp simulation with such generic terms / processes. I hope this doesn't hinder the future of amp modeling

[@TannerTbonePape]

I sware the abstract patent is saying the same thing 5 or 6 times just slight different :)

[@David-ry9ly]

I don't really care so long as the amp makers do not sue the profiler and modeling makers. Because I can't afford to buy multiple real amps that cost 3k each.

[@markinthemix6055]

So is Fractal going to ho the way of Gibson? Very disturbing. If Fractal and Cliff pursues this lamé lawsuit, a huge host of tone and model referenced amp companies may come calling.

[@XiyuYang]

Also I think Fractal won't pursue this, but it does look bad for them. On the other hand, the whole liquid profiling thing doesn't appeal much to me either, what it sounds like is they added a modeling component on top of profiling - essentially trying to "guess" the parameters inside a black box, they may get in the ballpark but I seriously doubt it will be accurate.

[@jamesearl389]

The jury is in. It’s accurate.

[@ShreddingFinn]

Is it really revolutionary? Or is it at best a marginal improvement, subjectively speaking, to the existing profiles? Modelling has been good enough for some time.

[@geezberry8889]

fractal gettin irritable. QC, Kemper, ToneX eating into their business

[@vaughanmacegan4012]

And then NAM coming alone eating into everyone's business and doing it for free.

[@midnightwind8067]

So. When are these updates going to drop? You say you put your hands on it, so let’s see it. My sales rep told me they have been promising this for years now.

[@darwinsaye]

To me, Kemper adding a modelling aspect to their profiling gear to make the tone stacks behave more like the real amp’s tone stack, indicates an admission that the capture process is not as good as modelling. I’ve been critical of the “snapshot” method of simulating amps since day one. But I suppose, there are a lot of people out there who only have one setting and sound they ever use from any amp, so they would be would be satisfied by static profiling. I think the modelled tone stacks are a move in the right direction for Kemper, but they need to do the same thing now for gain/preamp/volume controls. The combination of using multiple captures, one clean, one low gain, one high gain or cranked, and then pairing that with gain controls that are *modelled* after the behaviour of the real amps gain controls behaviour like the new liquid tone stacks are, might finally get digital amp technology where it needs to be.

[@RogerBrenon]

The capture process has nothing to do with FX, which is always a separate entity in a chain.

[@darwinsaye]

@@RogerBrenon Nowhere at all in my comment was I talking about FX.

[@RogerBrenon]

@@darwinsaye The tonestack talked about here is an EQ EFFECT. It's modeling EQ curves. That's all this is.

[@darwinsaye]

@@RogerBrenon I don’t know what you are not getting in my original comment. I was not talking about capturing EQ stacks (or *Fx* if you prefer). I was saying that modelling each specific amp’s EQ stack on how the actual EQ stack of that real amp that was captured, is a big improvement over modelling a “general tone stack” and using that for all the different amp captures. Not talking about capturing FX or tone stacks.

[@tonyg6158]

It must be true we never got liquid profiling in the upgrade. As a matter of fact the upgrade was a disappointment. Usb audio without proprietary driver. All this hype for nothing.

[@jayh.8676]

Say filter one more time! I double dare you!

[@SonarHD]

And this is why I’ll NEVER own a Fractal product. This is not the first time, nor will it be the last, Cliff has behaved like a child complaining about the Kemper stealing from him. He can’t stand that Kemper is always a few steps ahead of him, and it’s probably a more successful product. Otherwise I don’t think he would be complaining about it. Cliff is a child trapped in a grownups body which, given the current social trend, he should identify as lol. And btw, him complaining about Kemper stealing from him is not the only reason I boycotted Fractal Audio products. It’s also his inflated ego, as well as a private interaction I had with him long ago where he demonstrated more of his immature/insecure qualities 👎.

[@brianjones8432]

Look, I get it, you're probably a big Kemper fan and all, but the Fractal is a FAR superior unit.....lol

[@SonarHD]

@@brianjones8432 Use whatever floats your boat. Mine will never be a Fractal, that’s all. Thankfully there are a TON of equally good options out there. If you don’t think so, then I wonder who is the fanboy here.

[@brianjones8432]

@@SonarHD "TON of equally good options out there" No..... There are a ton of similar products of varying quality out there. For example, the Kemper, even on it's best day, doesn't hold a candle to the FX stack in the Fractal. IMHO it doesn't hold a candle to the modeling of the Fractal either. Hell, even the Quad Cortex puts Kemper to shame in the capture department. There are HUGE differences in these products, they're not "equally good" at all....lol

[@edgoforth9546]

Yea, my Fractal Ultra became unsupported after 2 years, but my Kemper Stage is still going after 3 years and still supported, Kemper knows and works to keep his customers happy, that's why he gives us FREE updates and we can still keep the one we bought with out having to update to a completely new model! I love that about Kemper, they are not throw away disposable units like all the rest!

[@SonarHD]

@@brianjones8432 Fractal is so good and confident about their products that the owner of the company worries about Kemper infringing on his patent (and like I said, it’s not the first time either) 😂😭😂.

[@OzziePete1]

If Fractal truly believes they have a valid patent which has been breached, then go for it. I'm sure Kemper has a decent lawyer or two to deal with the challenge. I am sure that the Kemper team has been R&D'ing this Liquid Profiling feature for some time. I'd say that there may have been times, in research, when it was asked if they were stepping on someone else's toes legally & sought legal advice. If a Court Case happens, it won't change my view on either Fractal or Kemper no matter what the result.

[@iasomiero]

It is probably the tone matching patent. Kemper probably did it first and I imagine they didn't file a patent because they wanted to keep the tech secret. Fractal figured out what's going on and filed a patent...

[@sean_miller]

It's definitely not that. Kemper does in fact have patents on their Profiling tech and has for years.

[@markjohnson1020]

Fritos are still delicious.

[@blankinfinitystudios]

if fractal is profiling anything they are infringing on Kemper's patent and if they aren't then Kemper isn't infringing on anyone's patent. I'll wait for the lawsuit against fractal form line6 first.

[@DeanBothaMusic]

I feel Kemper is only making Fractal nervous because they will be dethroned by Kemper and they know it. The "outdated" Kemper will once again be ahead of the rest (at no extra cost to their current users, how fantastic is that?). Jealousy is not a good look. Instead Fractal should consider a new cheaper model that some folks could actually afford and work on constantly updating their ecosystem with quality of life updates.

[@KingKong-mp6gj]

A coper's pipe dream.

[@EnricoDellAquila]

looks like Fractal is protecting a "tuning process", while Kemper seems an application of "different behaving" tone filters , but all pre-existing, and without any auto-adjustment process...

[@edgoforth9546]

either way, I don't think Kemper is copying Fractal, so its rather moot...

[@EzraMF]

None of this will matter when open source amp modelers become more “mainstream”

[@NO-TALK-GuitarPlugin]

And then neural network NAM came and blowing all those marketing crap 😂

[@milankotevski1663]

Yeah, Kemper and Fractal owners are deluding themselves that they have some amazing magical boxes, when in reality they don't sound any better than the NAM, a freakin' 0$ plugin.

[@ChrisMadson]

Yeah, but I can’t bring the NAM to a gig and step on it with my foot

[@epmmb]

​@@ChrisMadson ...Yet

[@ChrisMadson]

Very true! And I’ll be interested to see what happens with that

[@bot-uz9ph]

@@ChrisMadson I can :)

[@MilkoOfficialChannel]

He kiddin? And what is his patent gonna profile, no brand gear?

[@fairenoughthenwhat]

Companies attempting to digitally emulate classic analogue amps bickering over whether or not their respective methods too closely emulate each other. Capitalism at its finest.

[@giambibollareal]

Now that OS 9 is , but without liquid profiling feature, this video makes me think twice...

[@wildmilne]

The irony of complaining someone is copying your process of copying something.

[@BobbyCulpepper.srv3fender]

Kemper should hire Ed Sheeran as an expert witness

[@sleyeminizo275]

Now that's funny!😂

[@jazz_grooves]

Look at all those beautiful vintage amps in the background sitting there doing nothing! What a shame.

[@douglasfrederick127]

Hi Cliff. I know you’re reading this. 😂

[@warrioroflight2781]

Wasn't it great times, when we just cared about music ..... ?

[@edgoforth9546]

Yea, seems everyone wants to argue about these devices, in the old days if you had a Fender, Marshall or Boogie, Vox, Hiwatt, whatever, people would perform and people would listen and go, cool tone, today people are getting more into arguing about trivial bullshit, My dicks bigger than yours, but do you even know how to use it??? Well I've had my Kemper Stage for 3 years, and at first I though it was a mistake and there was not much info on how to dial in a sound, 3 years later I'm happy and can dial in pretty much whatever I want, sure the technologu may be 10+ years old but tube amps are way old technology and are still being used today, my old Ford truck may not be new or pretty but gets me where Im going! :D Seems today, people gotta have the latest greatest but cant play a damn bit better with the new shit!

[@warrioroflight2781]

@@edgoforth9546 thx a lot ...... soooooo well said 🙏, btw my Dodge Charger is 15yrs old, nothing fancy, but just worksfine, every single day ❤️

[@edwardgoforth5618]

@@warrioroflight2781 it's what ever works and gets you where need to go, right? 😁💜🎸🥁💿

[@drconflict629]

Musicians have been obsessed with gear for a very long time. Don't pretend this is a new thing lol.

[@donniedonnie639]

So you are saying Kemper profiling was never accurate in the first place?

[@ToneJunkieTV]

Am I? The generic EQ values are not accurate to any amp they are just what kemper thought sounded good.

[@loneryouth]

Not profiling in general but yeah, the EQ section is not accurate, since it behaves all the same for any profile. Same for ToneX.

[@moroboshidan7960]

I just can say the patents are ridiculous.

[@RichyB111]

HW gonna be sitting on the Grand Jury Stand Esplaining !

[@ToneJunkieTV]

😂

[@yaniv-nos-tubes]

fake digital amps against fake digital amps.