Posts by Duncan

  • Can't hide the grin I now have a Kemper that sounds like it was meant to.

    After 18 months of ownership and a lot of frustration I finally have what everyone is hearing from their Kemper.

    I'd tried everything I could think of and was looking at other gear in my chain, guitars, cables you name it I tried it,

    I could kick myself now as the first rule of diagnosing any 'computer' is return to factory state. The most obvious thing and I didn't do it. Anyway did the soft button 1 reset on boot and Jeez the difference. My single coiled gtrs which were always the biggest problem/disappointment actually sing, not the brittle sounding tone which would sound like it was split in two with some digital artifact beneath the main note. Each note is now a 'unit' and I can now hear the subtle and not so subtle difference between the amps profiled.

    I can play hard on chords and it "feels" like I'm playing through an amp without the middle frequencies masking the top and bottom, its sheer joy - I could cry at the relief

    I don't know what was futz in the original system state and frankly now I don't care I'm just happy that my issue is finally sorted. :D:D:D

  • Universal WAV-Take for Reamping to compare profiles

    I'd just like to revisit Hals original question of how does he know that there is not some small, or not so small issue, that affects his particular unit.

    I have been investigating something similar and with the kind help of another user I have been re-amping his D.I and then comparing this with the Profiled wet signal for an A/B comparrison. I can tell you now I am hearing a distinct difference. We still have a bit more testing to do but I am fast coming to the conclusion that my unit is not reacting to the profile in the same way as his.

    And pre-empting the suggestions around re-amp sense and clean levels I was careful to ensure there was parity between both units and that the D.I signal was sent at unity via SPDIF.

    Had there being some D.I examples with their resultant profiled audio files available I may just have reached this point that much sooner, as it is I have had the unit for nearly 18 months.

    Once tests are completed with the remote user I will post back with results and if the remote user permits provide links to the D.I and profiled sound for anyone else to test re-amping in their units.

  • Up for a challenge?

    Up for a challenge? I'm trying to understand the album sound in the early(ish) AC/DC production. I've been trying for years to get near the Angus young sound heard on Powerage and it has become my guilty pleasure locked away in the den till all hours.

    here's no Guitar ISO track of Angus from that album but from snippets grabbed here and there I think it was an old plexi Not having the good fortune to have worked with any studio owners I thought why not put the question here. If I can use the Angus intro to Riff Raff it's clear theres more going on than a single mono gtr track and plate reverb, but what is it and can anyone take a stab at describing how they did what they did.

    Also that tone - There's no Guitar ISO track of Angus from that album but from snippets grabbed hereand there the mic choices was a neumann U47 FET but it sounds very slightly scooped? Amp was I understand a 2203, cabs unknown. There doesn't sound like theres much bottom end in the tone yet it doesn't sound all mid and top which makes me think the reverb/delay is adding the lower end body - I'm reaching.

    nyway I'd love to hear any attempts by forum members and any suggestions on post processing.

  • What happens to amp sounds at low vol vs high vol?

    In my limited experience what you are seeking is not really workable. Our hearing is most sensitive to sound in the 1khz -5khz range with 3.5khz being the point where the least sound pressure is needed to be audible.

    If you look at the Fletcher Munson curve you will see the bottom end and over 5khz is least well perceived at lower volumes, the effect becoming more exaggerated the lower the measured SPL.

    Ignoring the issue with headphones which will not of course be affected by the resonances you create in a room (both nulls and peaks) Hi-Fi amps use the 'Loudness' button which bumps the bottom end and the high frequencies. Something similar using the KPA is about the only option I see.

    However bear in mind the difference between say 60db and 70db is a perceived (i.e not measured) doubling in volume and you are still along way off the 90db point where our hearing is most linear and trying to fix that with the crude method above is never going to be that convincing. When I first started using a hand held SPL meter it was something of an eye opener to see just how much that 10db actually means from a listening experience. I'm pretty sure some of that was due to the fact that certain room modes were being excited or nulled out in a non linear fashion as volume changes were made.

    Hope it is of some limited help

  • Adding "room" to a tone

    Haven't tried it myself, but mean to.

    Redwirez offer L & R 'room' and back of cab IR's in their packs so with say 1 full stack printed to trk1 (from spdif out) you could then experiment with printing an additional simultaenous D.I track from an analog output and then re-amp without cab block and add room IR's to that one. Duplicate the D,I track in your DAW to add the additional IR's to create the 3D space and pan as required. Group all track to add any additional subtle global reverb.

    Could be an interesting experiment

  • MBritt Dumble Pack

    With the risk of hi-jacking Kenny's original thread I thought it only fair to Michael that I add a note to this thread (for future readers and potential buyers of the Dumble pack) that my mention of 'post processing' was simply my logic circuit looking at any and ALL variables in my signal path whether I suspect them or not, simple means of elimination. It certainly wasn't intended as a dig at the quality of any of Michael's work in fact of all the commercial profile packs I have his are still my favorites.

    In retrospect it would have been better to have started a generic thread rather than jumping onto one which might imply it was vendor specific.

    If there is still any appetite to look at this D.I issue more, focusing on studio use I will happily start a new thread, if not then peace to all and happy playing.

  • MBritt Dumble Pack

    Definitely an engineering approach and couldn't agree more that the only profiles that will be 'the ones' for the user will be the ones that they can make work for them. Still, there remain plenty of threads, particularly from new users, who are experiencing some of the post pack disappointment when they can't coax the sounds from their own gear to match the glorious examples on the various vendors sites.

    It's perhaps not such an usual human response to question actual hardware issues as well as the player/guitar specific combination, the D.I would certainly settle the users internal debate once and for all.

    I'd much rather be depressed but certain that my own playing is the issue than keep wondering at some post processing of the clips or some non-existent hardware issue either in the kemper or the remaining hardware path. If it turns out to be my playing then I can devote all my energy to improving that rather than futzing around gear in my studio.

  • MBritt Dumble Pack

    I think that's the point I was making. It is currently impossible to simulate the conditions under which the sound clips were made without access to the D.I file from the profilers end. If the A/B with the D.I is a match for the sound examples then the factors you describe are the difference and not some issue with the users signal path - or post processing.

    Of course this would only be possible once the user has purchased the pack and frankly I'm happy with that. Nor would I want more than say 1 D.I file per amp so I wouldn't have thought that would be too much of a chore for the commercial profiler to include in the download.

    This is a much a piece of mind thing than anything else and I'd bet I'm not alone in this view - more surprising to me that the commercial guys don't do this already?

  • MBritt Dumble Pack

    I'm still struggling with this to an extent as well. It could just be that my playing sucks and that I do not get the tone from my hands. I have always thought and repeat here that I think commercial profilers should provide the D.I from the examples so buyers can re-amp and do a proper A/B with the advertised sound examples. This would help users like me who are constantly second guessing themselves say if the issue is the hands or the signal chain or some post processing adding to the final sound examples.

    Anyone else agree?

  • Testing whole signal path

    Doh, don't know why I forgot to add the mixer in the path in my previous post, sorry for confusion. I guess it may of appeared that the rest of my post may have been connected with the isolating the audio interface when really it was intended as a next step if the initial test doesn't throw anything up. I suspect the audio interface might be a sonic red herring so would still be interested to hear from anyone on the likely success of the second phase of tests I mention. I checked with my friend and he still has the C Control and looking at the manual looks like it has 2 pais of balanced 1/4 outputs http://www.manualslib.com/manual/855906/…l?page=7#manual hopefully I can match the levels with some steady riffage and my hand held SPL meter!

  • Testing whole signal path

    Hi,

    I'm thinking:

    Gtr > Kemper Analog out> Reference Amp > Monitors (Alesis MKII passive)
    Gtr> Kemper Analog out > Focusrite Liquid 56 > Reference Amp > Monitors (Alesis MKII passive)

    Keeping all analog should be a fairer test albeit as I say my usual connectivity to the Focusrite is SPDIF.

    I don't think there is anything wrong per se with the Focusrite its more the MixControl software and , for me anyway, its over complicated routing options which leaves me to question whether I have things set up correctly.

    If after this test should both sound identical then I guess I need to look to other areas. Whilst it would be nice to have a second KPA test to run a similar test that would be one expensive exercise. In the alternative I would dearly appreciate anyone who would help me with some audio test files.

    Thinking out loud - and please chime in with any other suggestions…

    i) The profile would of course need to be identical on each system
    ii) The guitar used would need to be as near as is practicable the same (my primary gtrs are a Gibson LP standard with burstbuckers and a USA strat with Texas specials and a USA SG standard with stock pups)
    iii) Sense settings would (per gtr) be set the same
    iv) Same firmware version - I am running the latest non Beta
    v) Parallel processing - off
    vi) Panorama - '0'
    vii) SPDIF or analog Output paramter would be the same

    The test audio file would be a simple riff or chord sequence and as far as possible not strongly influenced by the different players own playing fingerprint. Again just thinking aloud if using a D.I file in addition to the Stack output I guess a rough target db for the D.I with the DAW would be desirable and simiarly then use the same re-amp sense setting to record back to DAW (with a unity setting on the DAW input of course)

    Does this seem like a sound basis for a test?

    As I guess the question might be in peoples minds I would say I have listened direct through headphone out on KPA but I am not experienced enought to say how that headphone experience is translating to standard monitoring. It's certinly not a night and day difference, if it were this would be an easier thing to track down I'm sure but then I find headphones even with a dry mono signal just don't correlate to monitor listening.

  • Testing whole signal path

    Hi guys looking for a way to bypass my audio interface to test help eliminate a perceived issue I am having with my KPA sound.

    I'm having another go at getting to grip with a perceived issue I am having when I compare other naked examples posted here and around YouTube and my own sound. I'm no engineer so I can only describe the difference in terms of shape. My results feel rather more two dimensional and wide but not in the "sounds huge" desirable way, like a balloon that has been stretched too thin across two points rather than a nice fat round unit sitting in the centre of ears. That's probably a crappy description but hopefully it's of some limited value.

    As a way of testing one thing at a time I want to take out my audio interface from the equation. I can and have just manually changed connections at the back of my desk, problem is that take a minute or two and by the time I get back in front of the desk I'm not sure if I'm hearing any difference. What I am aiming for is I suppose is a small mixer that I can just mute or solo two stereo pairs so there is no gap between playing and listening between the direct signal as it comes out of the Stereo main directly into my monitors (they are passive and therefore through a reference amp) and the sound as it comes out the Focusrite Liquid 56.

    I am using SPDIF normally but for the purposes of this listening test I suppose the analog main pair from the KPA should tell me what I need?

    I'll probably have no use for this sub mixer again so obviously don't want to spend the earth, any suggestions on a unit or any other method of achieving this test.

    I seem to recall a mate of mine had an old Samson c control, If he still has it I am wondering whether this might have the connectivity needed for this test.

  • Another song with MBritt profiles

    Really enjoyed the idea behind this project and hats off to you sir on the mix and the rich arrangement. The vocal treatment was I thought particularly well done. Out of interest how many tracks in that session?

    I really liked the final section and the guitars had just the right balance, reminded me a little of Tom Petty. I could see that as a track in itself with another chorus.

    I am more than a little envious of your skills behind the desk.