Room's reverb measurement

I think this is one of the intentions of the space effect. It will be available as a post-stomp with FW 2.3!

I dont know if thats possible,i doubt it actually. however i would have thought that with close mics on speakers during profiling the room effect would be very small anyway. with distance mics its a different story of course.

then you would add the 'analysed' room reverb to the ever present room reverb of your monitoring station.

people tend to play amps louder than equipment over their monitors.
if you have to have that experience, play over a power amp/guitar cab or turn up your monitors to produce the same volume as your amp.

prolonged exposure to such high volume levels is not recommended btw.

Quote from mba

If Kemper's guy don't do it, Cliff chase will do it for sure because he knows a lot about radars.

I'm with you on this mba. I've requested a convolution sampler/reverb for the Kemper a few times, but people don't seem to like the idea, even though it would complete the product IMO and feels like the logical next step in accurately matching the recorded amp's sound.

I guess there are probably technical reasons too, convolution verb is pretty intensive on the old clock cycles, and then you'd need to have a decently flattish speaker and mic to do it (although perhaps the speaker component could be inverted out when calculating hte room's own frequency response).

But lets say for arguments sake that it doesn't do full convolution reverb with all that entails, but as you suggest just applies a pre-eq/frequency modification to the EQ itself, and maybe sets the length and predelay (and just maybe the dampening to try to mimic the falloff curve), then I think it would get you 99% of the way there. I'd love that feature.

Part of the joy of the Kemper for me is that the profiles people make (including mine) DON'T sound like the room they were profiled in

If you profile your own amp, putting a mic at the grille cloth will not sound like your amp does in the room, unless you always have your ear up against the grille cloth. You are used to hearing your amp off axis - your ears are higher, and your body is likely at least a couple of feet away. Your listening position is what defines the fundamental sound you are hearing, unless you are playing in an extremely live room.

Have you tried making a profile by putting a flat response, omni directional mic where your head normally would be? The sound of that profile may, or may not be useful for recording or live gigs, but it will sound more like what you are used to hearing than a close mic profile.

This Rig Exchange profile was made that way:

PaulTS Jubilee Marsh 2553 Marshall Jubile Marshall 2551A 4x12 PaulTS 3.00 / 5.00 December 17, 2012
miked at ear level

The cabinet part of that profile could be used to "roomify" the frequency response of a close mic profile, if the amp is one that would sound OK with a 4x12 celestion cab.

I also posted versions of that rig with two 4x12 cab profiles made by other people - a Tills cab, and a Slash cab. They show how much influence the microphone approach has on the sound.

But, the profile of my Jubilee that sounds and feels the most like my amp in a room to me is one I made by mixing two mics, and using an open back cabinet.

JUBILEE OPEN sm57+C3 Marshall 2553 Jubile Open-Back GK-100 PaulTS 4.00 / 5.00 February 20, 2013
Open-Back GK-100 Cab

I had a 57 relatively close to the speaker, aimed halfway between the edge of the voice coil and the edge of the speaker. The AKG started out a few feet way, about 45 degrees off axis from the front of the cabinet. I played with position and mic mix until I got what I liked. When I use it live with a Bose L1, it sounds, responds and feels like I'm using the amp live. It even can be coaxed into controlled feedback at the same frequencies as the amp, from the same stage positions as the amp does.

This sounds interesting in an ambient Pink Floyd atmospheric kind of approach....but most music I listen to needs to be up front and in yo face. Taking a mic that far back has to have limited applications (albeit interesting)

paults & crankyrayhanky - I think you're imagining large amounts of reverb, or trying to emulate the sound of the amp as you hear it, which is a different thing. You can still hear room with the mic pretty darn close to the speaker with a normal amp when recording it and it's one of the tell's of digital modeling including the Kemper, subtle is what sells and the lack of it is a big thing. When people go to a good studio to record their band they often chose the studio based on the room, how it sounds simply because that characteristic is going to be a part of the recording, amp and all.

That's not to say that everyone needs or wants it, but as an option it would help a great deal in completing the simulation, right now the Kemper sounds good, but as most people notice it's 95% of the way there and it misses something, IMO that something is just the room sound.

Of course if you want to do distant micing then it's more of an issue, I've had a much harder time getting close to a distant mic'd sound with the Kemper (which is a sound I like) than using convolution verbs in a DAW.

Bear in mind that the suggestion is an option for enhancing the reverb or more specifically the "room/space" feature on the Kemper, not a part of the cab or profile. It's a feature that seems to be pretty popular, but not everyone uses it, so it's an option, once again it's not a suggestion for something that becomes a permanent part of the profile e.g. part of the cab that you cannot remove or is intrinsic to a profile.

Quote from Per

but as most people notice it's 95% of the way there and it misses something, IMO that something is just the room sound.

a bold statement that oddly wasn't mentioned by the dozens of pros that tested and still work with the Profiler.

If you encounter a difference, it's most likely due to uneven volume levels between the profile and the amp, or it's because of bleed from the amp next room (should you switch it on standby while playing the profile), or simply because you want it to sound different.

if however this tiny amount of room reverb you mention is so important to you, why not add ~5% of a room reverb?
put it on 100%, tune it to sound similar to what you have in your room, you can even calculate the predelay from your room dimensions if you must , turn down to 0% and slowly increase to the point where you don't really hear the reverb, but where disabling the reverb changes the sound a bit. (like I said, should be ~5%)

using a convolution reverb for a wet signal that is so very low in the mix with the intrument in solo, and even less noticeable in a full mix, seems, uh, obsessive.

I don´t get this "amp in a room" sound thing....

In the studio when recording, reamping, mixing etc. every engineer I know wants bone dry guitar tones. Me too.

Live engineers always beg guitarists to turn that reverb effect down, so they can "grab" the guitar sound and place it in the mix where it belongs. What you hear them say every time is: "we are already in a room here, no need for an additional one...."

And for headphone playing, I do exatly this

Quote from DonPetersen

add ~5% of a room reverb?

and it works like a charm!

my 2 cents

" paults & crankyrayhanky - I think you're imagining large amounts of reverb, or trying to emulate the sound of the amp as you hear it, which is a different thing"

Per,
Agreed - I was suggesting that a room reverb might not be what the original poster needed for the kind of profile sound he wants. Mic placement can be used now, to make a profile with a frequency response that sounds like the amp, as heard from playing position, without including any time-based elements of a room reverb element to the profiling process.

r_u_sirius,
I'm with you - I use dry guitar tones for recording and live, too, unless I'm using it as an effect (like Surf music, etc.).

Quote from mba

http://forum.fractalaudio.com/axe-fx-ii-…feedback-3.html

I don't remember where exactly, but I think I've read an argumentation by Jay Mitchell on TGP that this was not possible using this approach.