Posts by lbieber

    I almost always bring a guitar with me when I travel for work or pleasure. The exception is when it is multi stop travel. In and out of multiple airports is too much hassle. I have rented guitars at my destination as well. Most of my playing time is on an unplugged electric. I don't need to plug it in except for a gig and some performance setups at home. I've played long enought that I know what will happen when I do plug in. I don't need any more experience on the amp/effects side. I focus on simply playing the instrument.

    I always take a a bolt-on neck guitar (tele or strat) in a soft sided gig bag. I take guitars that I am not worried about getting dinged and these can take a beating. Gibsons or guitars with angled headstock are a non-starter for travel for me. I never check the guitar and the soft sided bag makes for a convincing argument that it can't be checked. Guitar mostly ends up in the overhead. I have to watch and make sure that some other traveler doesn't try to jam their luggage on top of it. So, I have to defend it. Sometimes, a nice attendant will find a safe place to stash it as well. Always appreciated when that happens.

    It is always worth the effort for me. Some wake up with coffee, I wake up with the guitar. I wind down every evening with a guitar as well.

    I developed a 1GHz system back in the early 90s. Circuit and PCB design on two layers. I am sure I could have used a 4 layer board and achieved failure through bad design. Sorry, but your comment that 4 is better than 2 is plainly false. We can talk about current stearing, impedance control and matching EMC, and many other electrical concepts, but many specs can be achieved on 2 or even single layer boards. It is very dependent on the design and target specs. My only reason for commenting is to avoid the situation where others readers get the mistaken impression that more layers is always better. You are trying to make a one size fits all statement that simply isn't true.

    I have not evaluated how factual the claims made by the OP are, but his description seems to be well thought out and detailed. In my view the only comment that doesn't make technical sense is the 2 layer vs 4 layer argument. A well designed 2 layer board can be every bit as good as a 4 layer board. FULL STOP.

    Otherwise, I don't see how the word count matters. That comment appears to made on emotions. I also don't see him crapping all over anything. Also seems to made on emotions. Facts are facts. A set of facts that one doesn't like doesn't warrant word count and 'crapping all over" comments. It seems childish to be honest. Dispute the facts, accept them, or ignore them.

    I don't see how the know-it-all comment applies in any significant way. If the design has violated the spec and is implemented in a way that is not robust, then we all should be aware.

    In my view, Kemper should respond to the comments by the OP and explain with technical details. Silence on Kemper's part seems to sway the validity of the OP's comments in his favor. This is easily resolved with a technical discussion.

    I have compared profiles through many different monitors against the real amps. I don't notice any difference when the volumes are equal and the monitor is capable of moving the same amount of air as the guitar speakers. This also requires the profile to be adjusted to handle the ill effects that can result from tweeters.

    I suspect that many Kemper users are trying to play live guitar through studio monitors. This is never going to sound equivalent to playing live guitar through a guitar speaker. I am guessing that this is why amp in the room is even a thing. A good PA monitor and properly adjusted profile results in the exact same sound as the real amp and speaker in my experience. For me, a good speaker is critical to getting a good live sound out of the Kemper.

    There are A LOT of threads about this. First, I would note that your monitors have a 5" woofer. A 12" speaker has about 133in^2 of area while your 5" speaker has less than 20in^2. Can you reasonably expect those two things to ever be alike? This is ignoring all the other 'issues'. Second, what is the amp in the room sound? I would like hear what you think it is and how your 5" woofer can achieve it. I get excellent results from a good PA monitor. I have tried many PA monitors with 12" woofers and 1" tweeters with wildly mixed results. Monitors are not created equal. I use high cut, low cut, and tweak many of the amp parameters to get the profile right for the monitors that I use. Definition, treble, presence, clarity, compression also have to be adjusted to get what I consider a good guitar sound. In general, the tweeter presents the main problem. Many of the treble frequencies that a tweeter can reproduce are not valid in terms of good guitar tone. The trick is to adjust the profile so that the tweeter is not producing non-guitar frequencies. Many Kemper profiles generate unnatural high frequency that has to be filtered out. Once you have a 'real' monitor, the trick is to get the highs correct for the tweeter. In the end, I don't believe there is an 'amp in the room sound', but rather a big difference can exist given the monitor that you are using. This is my opinion and your mileage may vary.

    Yes, you can assign multiple slots to a footswitch.

    This is a welcome addition and the functional implementation makes perfect sense to me, although the GUI is a waste of space. I'll take what I can get. ;) You could argue that the slots should be assigned to switch or that the switch should be assigned to the slot. This is a coin flip for me.

    Thanks Kemper.

    The claim is that using a light bulb in this way is 'absolutely novel and ingenious'. I disagree with that statement. This is just another way to accomplish attenuation and has been accomplished with many different circuit designs over the decades. There is nothing that special or interesting going on. Chokes, resistors, VVR, load boxes, etc... have been used to accomplish similar results with varying degrees of success. The main goal of these types of circuits is to keep the drive and base tone of the amp while reducing the volume. The Kemper is VERY good at this all by itself. Knowing the topology of the amp would be the best way to choose a profile that is close. Without it, you already have good recommendations.


    And remember that using both is not additive, only subtractive, so if you shelve everything from 7k up on the cab and then shelve off 8k and up on the output, you're still only passing up to 7k. Lowest number wins. Visa versa, if you shelve 8k on the cab and 7k on the output, you're still only passing 7k.

    Yes in your example 7k is the lowest corner frequency. The simple view is what you describe, but there is a complex set of interactions above 7K. It is not as if the 8k shelf wasn't there. In fact, linear, time invariant filters are additive in the strict sense of the word. So, the rolloff is steeper and the phase and group delay is more complex.

    Your statement is conflicted. How can it both be the accurate tone and have overlays. BTW, pieces of of the original guitar track will be removed and overlayed onto other tracks. Only a perfect separate will guarantee full accuracy and that is not possible. So, only the original, isolated recorded track is fully accurate. And if you listen to it on utube, it is further degraded, but that is an other discussion.

    Any track from separator software is not exactly what was recorded and will therefore not fully represent the original recording. By the way, this is not debatable. It is a fact.

    My understanding is the Kemper filters work in series as mentioned. There is no 'overiding' as they all are working at the same time. I hate to say it, but you ulimately have to use your ears. How filters interact is mathematically challenging for most and nearly impossible to describe with words. It is quite involved if you want a full understanding. It may be helpful to assume the lowest hi cut frequency will be the most dominant in limiting the high range. Similarly, the highest low cut frequency will be the most dominant in limiting the low range. Beyond that there is a complex set of interactions regarding magnitude, phase and group delay among others.

    Great thanks. Is ripx the best way to do this then? I see it’s £100 approx. I have Logic Pro I’m assuming you can’t isolate a track from heY

    There are many tools to separate instruments. I use Gaudio Studio, it's free and works well. But none of these are good enough to completely separate the guitar track into it's original form. It is not possible and there are errors. Unless the isolated track came from original studio track, it will not be a fully accurate representation of the original guitar sound. I would be careful with assuming that the separated track represents the original tone.