Lol, no one NEEDS a quad chorus

I respectfully disagree, Fiz. I see nothing wrong with discussing the power of the processor inside a unit and comparing them. If one unit, for instance, has more processor power you could assume it has more room for growth. I mean say you have two similar computers. They both have the same quality software on them(which would be algorithms in modeler talk). So given that they run similar, how would you decide which to buy? Wouldn't you look at the internal hardware to see how much room for growth there is? Modelers ARE computers, so I believe this applies.

Potentially, I can see your point. However, outside of the Fractal products, firmware updates rarely bring "better sound" to a product, rather just new features. Well within the boundaries of the original complications.

I guess what I'm saying is with two devices, such as the Axe FX II and the Kemper, the technology driving them is irrelevant, it's the sound that matters.

If you are to take a very unbiased approach to tonal comparison between the two, most, if not all users would agree they provide the user and listener a very accurate and alike representation of most amplifiers on the market.

However, the Kemper does so with much less complicated hardware.

That's where the discussion becomes fuzzy.

If two devices provide the same sound, yet one requires three or four times the processing power to do so, you have to stop and ask yourself just how important the speed of the hardware really is?

...the Eleven Rack is a good wild card in this discussion, a VERY "slow" computer when compared to either of those devices, but in many situations, can sound equally as good.

That is why my opinion that a discussion of features, not hardware, is what matters most.

I agree that discussion of features matter most. But just because that is so doesn't make the hardware discussion irrelevant. And being that features are the most important aspect to discuss, wouldn't discussing the future for more features be something important as well? I agree, that outside of Fractal, updates rarely bring "better sound" to a product. Even if that is so, you can't discuss Fractal's future for updates without discussing the competitor in the same manor. And even if it has nothing to do with "better sound" , it is still very important. I mean look at the GSP 1101. They added IR loading, that is huge. Look at Kemper. They just added pitch FX and are working on something called Performance mode. Those have nothing to do with "better sound." Look at the Eleven Rack. They are selling so cheap because there is no support for them. I know that is because Avid isn't supporting them and has nothing to do with Hardware limits, but the same still applies, that people want something that is going to be updated and supported. How do you know if there is room for growth without discussing the hardware side of things? Do you not understand where I am coming from?

Oh totally, I don't disagree that hardware could be discussed, but it seems the discussion of specific hardware should remain exclusive to the conversation of any given device. Rather than used in a comparative way for little less than bragging rights in a pissing contest.

That's the key, to say "Product A is better than Product B because Product A has is more memory!" or you fill in the blank is an impossible way to compare two devices.

I think the internet breeds this conversation all too often, the concept that one device must be the best in more areas than not, compared to the rest... it's ridiculous.

If you're worried about the future of any given hardware, just remember, there used to be an Axe FX I, now there's an Axe FX II, and guess what, eventually there will be an Axe FX III and Axe FX IIII. Same with Kempers, Kemper II, then III, then IIII... so on and so on.

If they can make money, they will make products. So the potential future hardware capability of any given device is another poor method for purchasing decisions.

NONE of this gear is gonna make a shit player sound awesome.. PERIOD.. I can load a rack up with practically any and everything.. build an entire rig for someone.. but if the can't play.. and if their ear is lacking/they have no idea of what they're looking for/desiring in a tone.. it means nada.. nothing.. wouldn't matter if it was any of this stuff or a Rockman.
Music that has changed and influenced the world has been made on gear a LOT crappier than anything probably all of us have.

Exactly... it's interesting to me when you visit a forum for axe fx, or kemper users, or even this forum at times, and people are ragging on the hardware involved.

This forum included, I've seen people with an Eleven Rack, sell it off, bitch non stop about it being "not good enough", only to replace it with an Axe FX II, costing $1500 more... post a video or audio clip of them playing their new "rig", only to be blown away by how crappy they actually sound.

One of the constant problems is so many chase a tone they can't create, because they simply don't have the skill yet to make their guitar sound good.

It's harsh, but it's reality.

There are member of this forum, the fractal forum, the kemper forum, etc. that own incredibly complicated pieces of equipment, yet still sound like shit.

You give those same tools to an experienced player and they could use it to record a full studio level album.

Someone else put it best a while ago "If you can't get the sound you're looking for out of this device, you don't know how to play guitar."

PERIOD.