No experience with the Malmsteen profiles but I had a similar experience with their Gilmour profiles. Simply horrible...
Posts by lbieber
-
-
The handling/delay of the profiling improvement is one of few issues for me. Interface to the physical unit is not ideal. I've never been a fan of the number of buttons or the screen. Rig manager helps me to work around some of that. The myriad of non-standard controls creates what I consider to be feature bloat. Some are enamoured with it, but I'm not. The implementation of the compressor is silly. Reinventing compressor nomenclature was a big mistake IMO. Graphic equalizer without graphics is somehow laughable. The drives and fuzzes aren't usable at all for me. In the end, I can get some great tones but there are other options in the market that have better interfaces, more standardized approaches, are easier to use and basically sound just as good. I have a Tone Master Pro on the way. It seems to have many advantages over the Kemper FOR ME. Once I have time with it to verify positively, my toaster will be moved on. Just my 2 cents.
-
As I understand it....
The KPA already has multiple amp models. When you profile, the KPA chooses from its amp models to find the best match. That why liquid profiling works so well. You're adjusting a predefined amp model, just like you would with a Helix or an AxeFX. I've seen estimates of the number of amp models in KPA ranging from 8 to 12.
That's why the KPA doesn't work so well for profiling drive pedals. It matches to its inventory of amp models, not pedal models. Also, that's why some amps profile better than others, since profiling depends on finding a good match among its models for the amp you're profiling. That's also why, presumably, Kemper recommends against including compressors and distortion pedals in your signal chain when profiling.
However, I'm sure your larger point is correct. It's likely the new profiling is a refinement of the existing profiling process, for example using a higher sample rate, rather than a completely new design.
I'm surprised that this post hasn't gotten any responses. I have heard contradictory narratives regarding Kemper using predefined amp models vs doing 'full' profiling such as NAM. I don't know the answer and wonder how others seem to have facts about this?
-
I have experienced issues with saving similar to what you describe. In my situation, it seems to occur after the head has been connected to RM for extended periods. In this case, the ability to save performance changes is non-functional until I restart the head. In this situation, RM occasionally crashes and leaves the task running in Windows. At this point I have to kill the process via task manager in order to run RM. I simply restart the head and RM before I start making edits. This has become an 'normal' procedure for me.
-
Totally agree but I just think this is the "new" paradigm...with Valve amps there was no choice and we got used to it. I still love playing live and loud but...I also know I risk my ears everytime...
In ears aren't without risk. I say that not in relation to high volume, but for another not so well known reason. Most IEMs effectively plug the ear and create a trapped air space between the ear drum and the IEM. This trapped air pushes and pulls on your eardrum in a way that is not natural and potentially harmful. It is worse at higher volumes but happens at low volume as well. Something worth considering.
-
In my experience you can definitely get things tweaked to a pretty good level of accuracy, but it is likely you will need to make changes based on the PA and venue. Keep in mind that stage monitors can vary a lot and so may, or may not, be well matched to the PA. It is worth having a high quality stage monitor to tweak with at home. Stage monitors can vary a lot so YMMV. A good stage monitor is more likely to match a good PA. I don't experience significant issues with standing waves with a well eq'd guitar. To much low frequency content doesn't result in a good guitar tone anyway. It is more likely to happen with a bass guitar, kick drum, and keyboard. Tweaters are the enemy of good guitar tone which is why many struggle with PA/FRFR speakers. The 'standard' close micing of a guitar cab with an SM57 almost always results in too much high frequency through the PA. This is why the treble knob needs to be turned all the way down on most mixing boards. The analogous thing happens with the Kemper and FRFR speakers. Guitar cabs don't reproduce much high frequency and you don't want the FRFR to do that either. I use hi cut, along with presence and treble adjustments to reduce the contribution of the tweater. These adjustments work well when then FRFR is a good match to the PA.
You do have to tweak at volume just as you have to with any 'real' guitar amp. The amp and the speakers react differently across the volume range. And yes, you ideally want a good soundman regardless of what guitar gear you use.
If you use FRFR, make sure to the the cab sim on just as you will in the PA send
-
I was specifically commenting on the Kemper drive and fuzz. I don't find the drive satisfying. Not my cup of tea I suppose. As I mentioned, I morph the gain and sometimes the eq. The pure boost works but it is a volume control to my ear. I simply use morphing of the gain or the rig volume instead of giving up a slot to the boost.
-
Given I’ve been able to match my King of Tone using the Kemper Drive to the point I guess wrong as much as I do right?
There have been several posts alluding to the fact that I simply haven't dialed in the Kemper OD to achieve the full transparency that it offers. That certainly may be the case. In the spirit of learning how to operate the OD better, I would very much appreciate it if anyone would share their transparent settings. Ruefus, I would particularly appreciate your KoT settings. Thanks in advance.
-
A dirt pedal will always be just another gain stage, please don't mystify a simple tool.
Again, you use the word 'pedal' twice, while complaining the Kemper Drive sounds like a pedal.
A dirt pedal is not just another gain stage. Sorry, but that statement couldn't be more incorrect. Characteristics like input/output impedance, non-linear operation, frequency response, type of saturation, slew rate, dynamic range, biasing, etc...are all fundamental to how any 'gain' stage sounds and feels. I am not mystifying anything, but I think you are oversimplying what you call a simple tool. Show me any two gain stage schematics and I'll explain to you why they are not the same. BTW, most OD pedals have multiple gain stages in series.
The Kemper drive sounds like a non-transparent OD in every combination of settings that I have tried. As one example, the Nobels ODR-1 is a very transparent OD that offers great feel which is why it has become so popular in Nashville and the rest of the world.
-
that kinda is the point?
It might be the point for you and others. Sound is subjective, so there is that.
Many, I would suggest most, judge OD pedals by how closely they feel and sound like an amplifier turned up, but without all the volume that tends to follow. That has been the gold standard for many users and pedal manufacturers. I'm surprised by your comment. It seems you missed the message?
Many pedals color the sound and change the feel - some like that too.
-
To provide some counterpoint, I'm not a fan of the Kemper drive and fuzz. The drive always sounds like a pedal to me and is not useful as a result. I have a toaster and the fuzz never cleans up using the guitar's volume knob. The great thing about the Kemper is I can use morphing to accomplish what I want in place of the drive to change the amp gain and eq. Unfortunately, there is no Kemper based workaround for fuzz and I have to use an external pedal.
-
Backing tracks, click tracks, etc...are the antithesis of a live performance IMO. So many touring bands are using prerecorded material - even vocals. It all seems deceptive or phony or manufactured and not what live performance is intended to be. How about you just use the original Bruno Mars(or whoever) studio track and play it to the crowd while you all stand there and fake it?!?
I would much rather hear a live band perform a song with some artistry and interpretation. Prerecorded tracks are not far from karaoke and one of the reasons why many bars hire in karaoke rather than a live band. I'll get off my soapbox now.
-
Silly question, does it all sound fine prior to selecting Morph ( the double switch press) or just worse?
You can find some weird interactions on some profiles, where some frequencies get accentuated, and not always obviously.
Personally I'd try another profile and also look at how you are monitoring i.e. do you get it via studio monitors and headphones?
The monitoring aspect of it is a good point and worth investigating. IME, plugging many different tube amps into the same speaker cab can result in similar odd results. Speakers can definitely contribute related to how the voice coil and cone respond. Cone cry is one behavior that I have noticed inconsistncies with. I've hear speakers that do this with one tube and not another.
-
Nice tight rhythm! Love the machine gun fire. I would have never guessed it was a JTM. Just goes to show the wide range that an amp and player can cover.
-
What I find humorous is that prior to this, a number of us were vocal in asking for improved Profiling.
Now that we’re getting it, a number of us are vocal in saying it’s unnecessary.
That’s funny.
Why is that funny? It is completely expected, at least by me. It would be ironic, hypocritical(maybe funny?) if the same individuals were vocalizing both.
I am in the unnecessary camp. I personally see no significant benefit in 'improved' profiling and will stay with my Toaster for the foreseeable future. One of the major, unexpected side effects of the Kemper is that it removed GAS. I think this is true for many others as well. The Mk2 seems to be turning the GAS back on for many. I will continue to focus on playing rather than diverting to the GAS impulse.
-
lbieber I said: back to topic please.
I only saw your command after I posted
-
... Lets just say that you use an analog filter to TOTALLY trim off anything over 20Khz so the higher frequencies aren't even being sampled. FYI, any 2nd year EE could do this easily.
I don't particularly enjoy correcting this comment, but since you failed to fully understand the course material...
Please elaborate on the design of the analog filter that can TOTALLY trim off anything over 20kHz. That filter, a brick wall, only theoretically exists and cannot be implemented unless you have infinite time. So no, what you propose can't be done by you, any 2nd year EE, or anyone else for that matter.As others have alluded to, any non-linear process will create sum and difference frequencies. These cannot simple be handled by a high sample rate and will alias. Your assertion regarding Nyquist is true in very limited cases, most of which don't occur in real world audio.
This is a good example of how falsehoods get propagated. Dunning-Kruger is real.
-
I'm trying to be polite
- I think we are all taking about aliasing that would be a problem to what we do (making music, recording things). Let's not get super academic about it please.I simply interpreted your words as they were written. It would have been impolite of me to reinterpret them to mean something else.
There is a lot of grey area in interpreting what is a problem in this case. For the record, the level of aliasing in the Kemper is not an issue for me. Thanks for clarifying as the original wording was potentially misleading. Hindsight is 20/20 but something like "the Kemper team carefully analyzed and designed the system to minimize all sampling artifacts" would have been a clear statement on this topic. If it is indeed accurate. -
Please provide some evidence for your statement. You seem to believe that "From what we know there is no aliasing" is a problem. Why? Do you figure the Kemper engineers don't understand Aliasing and the Nyquist frequency (and sample rate)?
I believe that there is PLENTY of supposed proof of aliasing, and none of it holds up to scrutiny. There are certainly artifacts that can be created by DSP, but I think that MANY people cry "Aliasing" anytime they hear anything they think they don't like.
That statement, as it is written, is problematic. Aliasing exists to some extent in every sampled system. The designer can take steps to minimize it. Can it be completely addressed so that there is zero aliasing? At best, it can be improved, but never completely removed. There are always artifacts related to digital sampling. Good design tries to minimize the effects. So yes, 'no aliasing' is not an accurate statement. And never on our radar requires at least some further clarification.
-
What we still haven’t seen is evidence this ‘issue’ exists.
Lots of hand wringing, gnashing of teeth, jaw-flapping and tense words…..but no evidence beyond second-hand claims (at best) that this was ‘known’.
I’m happy, ready and waiting to be put in my place.
So far we’ve argued semantics more than anything.
I don't know where your statement 'hand wringing, gnashing of teeth, jaw-flapping and tense words' comes from or what you are trying to apply it to. My comment regarding the design of a sampled system is fully accurate.
... I doubt that Team KPA did not check this during the device design and testing process.
I would have probably agreed with you until G-String made his 'from what we know' and not on our radar statements. Either those statements are incorrect or Kemper didn't address the issue. So, let's see if the statement is changed.
