Posts by drew_fx

Cool, that sounds like a doddle!!

Another question. I've got a vague understanding that with the powered kemper you can send signals to FOH and a guitar-cab at the same time, and control their independent levels. How exactly does this work? Do you use the master volume for FOH sound, and the rig volume for the guitar cab? Does that mean you have to setup your patches at a gigging volume to get the best levels?

cheers guys! It certainly seems faster. I don't remember it being that fast with my FCB1010, but I'm gonna go Remote anyways.

Yello!!

I had a Kemper in September 2015. As far as I remember I was unhappy with the switching times, but I've turned a lot of tricks and smoked a lot of weed and crack cocaine since then, so my memory isn't what it once was.

Can anyone confirm what the rig switching time is currently like, and does it differ from foot controller to foot controller??

thinking about picking up the Powerhead + Remote set from Thomann once they get delivery from their supplier.

Wanna buy a used Powerhead. Any in the UK for sale?

No problem! Have done so.

Heya Christophe - bump, just in case you missed it!

Okay, here is a zip: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/630473/KemperPalmMuteTests.zip?dl

Included is Set A, B, C, D, and E. I should mention that with all of these tests, the guitar is coming from a looping pedal, to ensure no performance variation.

Set E:
Reference - The reference amp.
Before Refining - the profile captured with no refinement.
After Refining - the profile after refining.
RefinementGuitar - what I played during the refinement stage.

I am happy to accept that I am doing something wrong. But every profile turns out exactly the same - slightly less gain or saturation (I can hear this in all of the clips) and the low-end doesn't sound quite right.

Could there be a problem with my unit not being initialized correctly perhaps? Maybe I need to do a factory reset and re-install the latest firmware?

Quote from ckemper

I have listened to the clips straight from the browser. I haven't found a way to save them from your Google Drive.

Okay, I will provide a zip file instead. Apologies.

Quote

I am not putting it down to level differences. But it is simply impossible to tell what the exact differences are if two clips that don't have the same original volume.

My mistake.

Quote

Did you change the volume of the clips after recording?

I only normalized the clips. I didn't try to match them by ear, I got the peaks to the same level.

Give me a few minutes, I'll zip everything up and send it to you. Including a new set (Set E) which I've just done tonight.

I will do another one very soon then and post here. But I am disappointed that you're putting this all down to level differences. The level differences in these clips are not that big, and because of the extra low-end that the Kemper is putting in, if you compare via RMS measurements, the Kemper is always going to seem louder because of the extra low-end energy.

Take set D. Which is a looped palm-mute. If you level match just using your ears in a DAW, the tonal differences are really obvious. And again... I'm not necessarily blaming the Kemper. I just need help to figure out what I'm doing wrong.

I will post more clips this week.

Sorry, I thought I added set C and D - must've missed that. They've been added now. You should be able to compensate the differences in level (which are very slight) in a DAW. Once you do that, you'll see that the low-end isn't entirely correct.

I don't doubt that it's me doing something wrong. But I'm really not sure what, and could really use some tips.

Cheers Christophe!

Quote from ckemper

Sure I can.

I wonder why the recording of the reference amp and the profile have different volumes.
Did you A/B compare and record both through the profiler, as recommended?

Indeed I did. The volumes are slightly different, true. But I don't think that is causing this issue - you can throw them into any DAW and match the peak volumes, and you'll hear that the Kemper has this low-end resonance that isn't really there in the original reference.

Everything was recorded through the Kemper, with no post-processing. I've had this similar result in two different places as well, so I don't believe it's my room.

Is there anything you want me to try changing?

To me, it sounds like the pre-refined clips are closer. So maybe it is down to what I'm doing during the refinement stage. What is the most ideal stuff to play during the refinement stage?

Quote from ckemper

Is a distortion pedal (e.g. Tube Screamer) involved in the profiling?

No sir! Can you hear the difference in low-end?

Quote from DanielRigler

I quickly googled the head, and it seems it has some pretty nontraditional stuff inside (dynamic sense tech for example). Maybe it is noticeably different from a traditional tube design, and this is why the KPA has a hard time copying it. Just a guess.

EDIT: Oh okay, I see you have tried other amps too. My bad.

Interesting point actually. It's been a while since I tried to profile another head, and I may be misremembering. Let me give it a go and update you later.

Quote

Have you also tried to do a refining process where you only concentrate on palm mutes on the lowest string? Might fuck up the higher notes, but maybe it worth a try.

I will try it and post clips.

I should add, I don't think any of these tones sound bad. Just different.

Hey guys,

Let me preface this: I am not here to troll, defame, or denigrate the profiler in anyway. As a tool, it's just amazing and I do really love it.

Having said that, there is a long standing issue that I am having with it, going all the way back to firmware 2.6 at least. So either I'm doing something wrong (my preferred outcome!) or the Kemper could do with a little more accuracy in this area - and it's to do with palm mute frequency response. Generally I am happy when playing clean tones, and I cannot really distinguish between the reference amp and the profile. But when it comes to palm muted metal or hard-rock passages, I can very often tell the difference, even if I cannot specifically pick the Kemper.

The amp is a Fryette Sig X, but I've had the same experience with other amps, namely a Diezel D-Moll and a Laney VH100R. The cab is an Egnater Tourmaster 4x12 with v30's. So it's not amp specific. I've used the same guitar in all cases, which is a Orville Les Paul Custom with Seymour Duncan Distortions set - the SH6's.
I've done some recordings that I want to walk you through:

Set A:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=…Wjg&usp=sharing

ReferenceAmp.wav - Recording of the reference amp.
PreRefine.wav - the profile before any refining has been done.
PostRefine_3Minutes playing.wav - I wanted to see if the length of the refine period made much difference. It didn't seem to.

Set B:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=…elE&usp=sharing

ReferenceAmp.wav - Recording of the reference amp.
PreRefine.wav - the profile before any refining has been done.
PostRefine_SameSettings.wav - Leaving the amp at the same settings, I refined the profile.
PostRefine_LowerDepth.wav - I then used the undo feature to remove the refinements. I then turned the poweramp depth down on the amp to reduce the low-end coming from the cab, and then did another refine stage.

Set C:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=…LVk&usp=sharing
ReferenceAmp.wav - Recording of the reference amp.
PreRefine.wav - the profile before any refining has been done.
PostRefine_LowChords.wav - Previous refinements used all strings and a variety of chords. This one just used basic powerchords on the lowest three strings.

Set D:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=…NDA&usp=sharing
ReferenceAmp_PalmLoops.wav - A looped snippet of the reference amp.
PreRefine_PalmLoops.wav - A looped snippet of the profile before any refining has been done.
PostRefine_PalmLoops.wav - A looped snippet of the profile after refining.

In all four cases as you can hear, the nature of the low-end response (particularly when playing palm mutes) is not that accurate to the real amp. I am wondering whether I am doing something wrong, or if the Profiler just isn't supposed to be this accurate? I am struggling to believe that though, because the likes of LasseLammert seem to have gotten much closer than I can.

Is it to do with gain-staging perhaps? I don't see how, but it could. I have an SM57beta in front of the speaker and about two inches away from the grille cloth. It's then plugged straight into the Kemper. Nothing special going on here. I have an acoustically treated room, so room reflections shouldn't really be causing this.

To me it sounds like all of the pre-refine clips are much closer in the low end, but the gain amount and the high-end frequency response is quite different. So some amount of refining is needed, but maybe I am doing it wrong??

Any tips on how I can get closer folks??

Quote from Danger

Ok I feel somewhat required to say that I have heard countless fine tube amps that sounded like crap! Not the amps fault. Mostly due to the wrong adjustments or the wrong amp for the music style. So I'm confused a bit why everyone seems to compare a Kemper to a tube amp? It should be noted that many of the models that are for sale or trade don't sound all that good to some. They were mostly images of a tube amp and cab that were done poorly, never the less they sound crappy.
So it boils down to intended use, how you personally like to interact with the instrument and ultimately how it sounds to you. I think there is plenty of room for all of the tools in the workshop and limiting yourself to one amp or cab is never in your best interest.

I agree with you generally speaking. But once you find a formula that works perfectly for you and your music, it's very hard to move away from it.

For some guys that is a Kemper and a Kemper Remote. For other guys it is a Kemper, a FCB1010, and an Eventide H9 in the effects loop. For other guys it's a Kemper plus an Axe FX.

For me the benchmark for my own playing, music, and tonal needs is a VHT/Fryette Sig X and a 4x12 cabinet with V30's. I don't like FRFR solutions, and playing through studio monitors is not the same. To me it's a compromise, and I'll do it. But my ultimate preference is for the above.

And I'm lucky enough that I can perform, rehearse, and record with my VHT Sig X and my Egnater Tourmaster cab. I'm actually on my 2nd VHT Sig X amp, because I stupidly sold my first one. I spent 4 months hunting one down, because here in the UK they're extremely rare to come across on the 2nd hand market. Here is the kicker... I actually SOLD MY AXE FX II TO FUND IT!!

That is correct. I sold my Axe FX II - with all of it's bells and whistles - to fund a purchase of a 3 channel valve amp, with very definite limitations on the tones that it can give me.

This is how I recorded our upcoming third album:
https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfa1/t…077490947_o.jpg

Plenty of options there!

I also had the Kemper available for profiling and for some overdubs:
https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfa1/t…008459118_o.jpg

These are the pedals I've currently got available to use:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/630473/101_FUJI/PedalSources.jpg

As you can see.. effects are pretty important to me, with the nature of the music I write. So something like the Helix that can potentially work in tandem with my favourite benchmark rig, is obviously very appealing. The Kemper cannot really compete with that as a standalone device.

So whilst I do love the Kemper, it isn't an option for me as a live performance rig, a rehearsal rig, or a self-contained writing rig. I've really just been using it for late night rehearsal on headphones, overdubs for recording, and general guitar playing whenever I haven't had access to my full rig.

Despite what guenterhaas keeps inferring (here and in the really annoying private messages he has sent me) there are lots of scenarios where I use the Kemper. It shouldn't even be necessary to go into this much detail to be honest. But some people cannot stomach the fact that someone might consider (merely CONSIDER) selling the Kemper to fund another gear purchase.

Finally let me just say that for me - again... FOR ME - the Kemper cannot quite replace a real valve amp.

Quote from guenterhaas

I was just wondering that somebody bought an expensive KPA only for headphone-playing at night. To get a real picture of the KPA you need to play via studio-monitors or FRFR-cabs. To compare KPA vs. Helix via headphones doesn't make any sense at all.

If you want to buy a Helix and sell the KPA go on, we live in a free country and I don't see any police here. For sure the Helix might be a good choice for you, if you're looking for a floor-one-piece-solution and if you don't need authentic amp-tones. The strength of the KPA is the perfect reproduction of real tube-amps (tone and feel) and that you can profile your own and any other amps.

Dude... you are you just being argumentative for the sake of it. Let it go.

I have studio monitors. In fact I have two studio setups - one at home, and one at the office. I have access to racks of high-quality outboard, I have three valve amps at home and two 4x12 cabs. Trust me.. I'm not lacking gear at all.

I bought the Kemper for recording. I even used the Kemper to replace some bad guitar tracks just last night. Make no mistake, I am not disliking the Kemper at all.

But sometimes needs change. You should probably consider this when you decide to attack someone on a forum because of their personal decisions with their gear.

I already said with the Helix, I am looking to use it with a real valve amp. I'm not looking for an all-in-one solution. I am looking for something that is versatile to fit several scenarios.

I'm not a troll, and I have an opinion that is just as valid as yours.

Look at the facts:

The Helix can act as a command centre for your entire live rig. It can also act as an effects unit for your voice as well as your guitar. It can do amp modelling, so if you want to plug directly into the front of house you can. But it can also do 4-cable method and midi switching with your valve amplifier if you wish (that's the route I am thinking about taking!) so even if you're not a modelling guy, you can still utilise it.

The Kemper is great. It really is. I've had a lot of success and fun with it. But it isn't a one stop solution, and for the problems I need to solve, it doesn't really attempt to do it. You can see they're trying to do so with the remote, but as I've got a brilliant amp which I am able to use for 9 out of 10 situations, the Kemper doesn't really get a look in.

I don't feel my comment was off-topic at all. I was attempting to counter the general perception that the tones coming from the Helix so far weren't good - I thought they were pretty decent. I didn't slag off anyone's gear, I didn't slag off anyone's idea of tone, and I didn't slag off the Kemper. I just gave my own reasons for being interested in the Helix.

Given that the Kemper is a high-value item that I own, that I'm not using to it's full potential, why wouldn't I consider flogging it in order to get something that I will use to it's full potential?

I'm not a troll. Stop being so defensive. You're as bad as the Fractal fanbois.

It sounds great to me. I'm probably going to sell my Kemper and get a Helix, because I still mostly use a real amp for recording and live performance. I only use the Kemper for late night headphone playing.

And I could really do with the live workflow side of things with the Helix. It's much more versatile than the Kemper imho, even *if* the amp modelling isn't quite as good - which no one can say for sure right now, but my gut feel is that it isn't true.

Imho, I think the effects side of things should be prioritized in the next round of firmware development.

- Reverse delay
- Freely assignable delay and reverb to any slot