Refining should not take more than a minute, as seen in the Guido Bungenstock videos. We might replace in the future, still.
I requested a feature which received some traction awhile back. It'd be nice if we could reject the refining process and start back at the captured profile, to either refine again or save the original. I've gotten gun-shy about refining because I tend to be disappointed with the results.
and that you cannot just assign them to any parameter that you want; you have to assign the expression pedal to the morph functionality, and then set the morph functionality up to change the parameters you want.
This is distinctly different from having freely assignable expression pedals to parameters, and in some ways is easier to use and understand, but is also not quite as flexible.
Ah, but this is actually only true if you use the Remote as a floor controller. I mean everyone has been demanding an automatic double tracker with the Kemper, I have already got one with midi.
Basically, you can do anything with the Kemper that you can do with any other floor processor as far as assignments. You can even control things like the amp controls and panorama.
In my experience every amp requires different timing for when to end the refining process. My 5153 for instance profiled accurately with just 7 seconds of refining, any longer and say hello to the dreaded bloated low end, any shorter and the lows haven't filled out yet. My 6505 required around 15 seconds, my custom JCM 800 just over 20 seconds.
This might be an unnecessary or even wrong approach with the likes of a Fender Twin but with high gain amps pumping out a chunky low end through an oversized Mesa cab it is essential to time it just right. I also palm mute only as playing a variety of chords seems to keep the Kemper guessing, I feed it consistent palm mutes only and listen for the moment the Kemper latches on and nails it.
These methods for me, result in 99% perfect profiles when playing solo and 100% indistinguishable from the real amps in a mix.
I requested a feature which received some traction awhile back. It'd be nice if we could reject the refining process and start back at the captured profile, to either refine again or save the original. I've gotten gun-shy about refining because I tend to be disappointed with the results.
That makes so much practical sense, that, to be honest, I am not sure why this feature has not been already implemented. In fact, it seems like such a “no-brainer” that I have to wonder if there is some constraint or limitation pertaining to the specific amount/address/pool of non-volatile memory that the KPA has access to, when operating in Profiler Mode. Of course, this is pure speculation on my part. The more likely explanation is that this feature request either slipped the cracks, or is not considered a useful option.
I talked to Jarrod (ToneWars) a little while ago about his new video do over. He’s pretty humbled by the explanations he received about refining and pure cab.
I watched his video and their is a big difference
I talked to Jarrod (ToneWars) a little while ago about his new video do over. He’s pretty humbled by the explanations he received about refining and pure cab.
I watched his video and their is a big difference
Jarrod is a class act. His humble and honest explanation, as well as mature openness to constructive criticism is a gosh darn breath of fresh air in this otherwise toxic wasteland of social media narcissists and "influencers" . Where does he get off, acting so adult, humble and charitable. 
The video Jarrod did was interesting. Oddly the Kemper profile was not as accurate, and that is rare indeed.
I think he refined a little too long. But he is trying to be accurate.. and he was actually much more impressed with his Kemper
I think he refined a little too long. But he is trying to be accurate.. and he was actually much more impressed with his Kemper
The end result was not ideal and I believe it could be tweaked quite easily to match the amp. But at least it was not miles away like in first video - the character of the amp was captured correctly, unlike in first video. I think his video makes it very apparent what are users struggles and expectations from these kinds of devices - too many options makes profiling harder, error prone and feels like "work", not "magic". QC showed that this process can be much simpler and KPA should have an easier, more automated way to profile, IMHO. Jarrod did great job with this video.
couldn’t agree more
Ah, but this is actually only true if you use the Remote as a floor controller. I mean everyone has been demanding an automatic double tracker with the Kemper, I have already got one with midi.
Basically, you can do anything with the Kemper that you can do with any other floor processor as far as assignments. You can even control things like the amp controls and panorama.
Fine. But as I keep saying, it's all about workflow. The assign midi CC's to everything workflow isn't what I want either. I've been pretty clear about why I subjectively prefer the way the Helix works over the Kemper. It's complex enough to offer me a lot of choices, without requiring me to remember a ton of midi CC's and set up complex mappings. I can just grab a knob and twist it on the Helix, and get the variety I need.
I like the Kemper + Remote combination, because they're easy to use. They're just not as flexible as the Helix. Going into midi land is going too far the other way. I think the Helix is the Goldilocks of the three approaches.
QC is closer to the Helix experience too.
Fine. But as I keep saying, it's all about workflow. The assign midi CC's to everything workflow isn't what I want either. I've been pretty clear about why I subjectively prefer the way the Helix works over the Kemper. It's complex enough to offer me a lot of choices, without requiring me to remember a ton of midi CC's and set up complex mappings. I can just grab a knob and twist it on the Helix, and get the variety I need.
I like the Kemper + Remote combination, because they're easy to use. They're just not as flexible as the Helix. Going into midi land is going too far the other way. I think the Helix is the Goldilocks of the three approaches.
QC is closer to the Helix experience too.
I see your point of view and understand. For live applications, the Kemper just seems to have thought through how a real gig would need to be controlled. Having morph change multiple parameters at different rates through a single foot controller input as well as having a timed transition via a single button press simply "works" in a live setting where "reaching down to turn a knob or knobs" does not.
Clearly there are 2 different usage models (live vs bedroom) that require different work-flows for optimal user experiences.
I see your point of view and understand. For live applications, the Kemper just seems to have thought through how a real gig would need to be controlled. Having morph change multiple parameters at different rates through a single foot controller input as well as having a timed transition via a single button press simply "works" in a live setting where "reaching down to turn a knob or knobs" does not.
Clearly there are 2 different usage models (live vs bedroom) that require different work-flows for optimal user experiences.
Everyone's gigs are different. We don't all do the same things. I know a guy who uses the Axe FX II still, because it allows him to do amp morphing and effects morphing on a level that no other device gets him. He tried the Kemper and couldn't make it work.
So I'm speaking from a live perspective here mostly; in a writing scenario, I'm happy to put up with most approaches.
But for our live shows, I need slightly more flexibility than the Kemper+Remote, but I also need my setup to be simple and easy to put together. So a dedicated midi controller where I manually map all of the CC's to everything I want is a little too involved.
Basically, morph is cool. I just wish I had more of them. Four morph parameters that I could assign to four expression pedals would probably do it; even though I only need 3 for most songs.
The Kemper has ease of use down pat, but at the expense of flexibility and complexity. I have a Boss ES5 too, but it goes the other way; lot of complexity and flexibility, not easy to setup and actually not that trustworthy in a gigging situation. Likewise with the Morningstar midi controller I used to have.
The Helix strikes the right balance between flexibility, complexity, and ease of use - when it comes to this control/performance aspect.
I think the QC might be good for this too. Will have to wait and see.
this was a slightly annoying video for me, and sums up what I meant about Junkies stuff. It’s sold as a vid specifically on the QC as that’s a hot topic, he mentions Tricks ie eq tricks to make it perfect for any user, but then goes onto basic low cut standard moves that anyone does with any modeller / profiler.
It could just be me, but I get frustrated with you tubers who use these gimmicks to get views. The info isn’t bad in the vid, but it isn’t really specific to the QC and it isn’t a ‘trick’.
When TJ gets long winded or gets into overhype, I just quit watching. No need to complain about it. Sometimes he appeals to my guitar nerdery, and I've learned some things a long the way.
I do wish he would share more thoughts on Kemper vs QC, but I understand that is a slippery slope. He intends to market for QC obviously.
I am curious and like to see and hear and try new things and there have never been better times to be a guitarist than today. But I don't get it why so many get hooked up and care about all these compare videos like they're going to give the viewer the right answer to tell them this is the right stuff. No matter if its kemper vs qc, guitar brand against guitar brand, pickups vs pickups etc etc. I want to try something myself and build my opinion on my first hand experience if I like something or not. I guess it has to do with age too. I'm too old to care about others opnion and oboy does it feel good.
It would be great to give all these new products a spin. Personally, I don't have the time or money to spend on such ventures.
I also have never owned or played most of the stuff that my Kemper profiles and models.
I am planning on adding a Kemper stage for playing out and keeping my 8 year old toaster on the desk.
I find the QC intriguing just as I once found the Kemper intriguing. I pulled the trigger based on information from many sources including this forum.
All said, I'm still getting the stage, but I'm curious what people think of the QC. I won't be buying both.
One thing I don't like about the Kemper is that I can't have2amps at the sometime. I ordered the Quad Cortex just because you can play with more than one amp which is something I do when I record most of the time. I hope they'll add more effects though. I had the Axe Fx 2 which is probably the best when it comes to effects and controlling many parameters via MIDI, but I wanted to be able to profile my amps. I guess we'll see.
ToneWars just did a blind shootout and Kemper smoked the QC on tone and feel
Granted it was with 3 Metal guitarist, but it was pretty definitive
The replay will be up soon. It’s long but well worth a watch
