Posts by RDM

I don't think either video states which OS the MK1 is using. Is it 13 or 14?

Quote from thisamplifierisloud

There is an interesting comparison at youtube

External Content www.youtube.com

Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.

Display all external content

Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

Bert plays the 2.0 profile on a MK1 Kemper on OS 13 and on a MK2 Kemper on OS14. However, I guess a lot of us are still MK1 users but have updated to OS14, so it would have been good to have heard the 2.0 on a MK1 Kemper on OS 14 for a full comparison of scenarios.

Quote from RickWillits

External Content soundcloud.com

Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.

Display all external content

Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

This is recent Matt Fig V2 Liquid profile of the Jose amp from rig manager. using the factory default output.

Does that sound correct? It is very bright and hairy. I that the inteded starting point for 2.0 Liquid Profiles?

I am on Mk1 Stage and Ableton 11.

I don't know what the amp is meant to sound like, so can't help you there; however, I'm sure the initial advice re: Liquid Profiles was for people to profile with the gain at max and the tone controls at midway.

This would be the baseline LP from which you can then tweak the gain and tone settings to find the sound you want. Some vendors provide the tweaked versions (including added effects) and some provide the tweaked versions and the baseline.

Note: the baseline LP might not sound all that great but it's meant (I think) to be the best way to profile the amp to capture it correctly for LP purposes. Also, there might be a few basslines in a pack if the vendor used different cabs, mics etc.

Is the profile you were playing the baseline with gain at max? If so, perhaps you need to tweak it to find the amp's sweetspot(s).

Quote from Finally

I took the leap today and so far I'm extremely happy!

• RM and profiler upgraded without a hitch (Windows 10 Pro)
• No change in my existing profiles that I can detect (haven't recorded and A/B)
• Levels between the new MK2 profiles and the MK1 seem about right
• Using Deluxe Reverb, Matchless and Marshall Silver Jubilee MK2 profiles from TJ, these sounds are just great!
• Going to copy my existing performances and recreate them with MK2 profiles

Thanks Kemper team!

Are you using a MK1 Kemper or a MK2?

Quote from Ibot39

This was asked explicitly multiple times across different threads… without any response until now. It's extremely important and needs to be clearly communicated if 2.0 profiles are NOT played back correctly (in lower resolution of course) on MK1 with OS 13.

Yes, I asked (on a separate thread) specifically whether the Kemper Team were advising MK1 users to upgrade to 14.0 if we wanted to use 2.0 profiles. I also asked whether the fact the new cabinet controls that appear in 13.0 for 2.0 profiles on MK1 Kempers were causing a problem, i.e. if they weren't supposed to be there and they don't work as they do on 2.0 profiles on MK2 Kempers, are the baseline settings of the new cabinet controls just random and hence effecting the sound.

. . . I didn't get a response.

Quote from Ibot39

Latest Release OS 13.0.5.61298

Ibot39 you've been clear about your set up and I think it would help if everyone made it clear what the combination of the following three variables is to ensure everyone is comparing the same thing:

• MK1 or MK 2 Kemper
• 13 or 14 OS
• Classic (1.0) or 2.0 Profile

You are hearing a problem with 2.0 profiles on a MK1 using OS 13. What does the same 2.0 profile sound like on your MK1 Kemper using OS 14?

I think you are keen to stay on OS 13 as the two extra cabinet controls (albeit not functioning as per the same controls on a MK 2 using OS 14 based on the explanation provided by the Kemper team) will be gone if you update to 14.0; however, you can always go back to 13.0 after you've tested 14.0.

What OS are you using, 13 or 14? Are you using the same OS on both the MK1 and the MK2?

Quote from RDM

Hi Burkhard,

These 'ghost parameters' are active though aren't they, as you can't switch them off in the cabinet? If so, and if they "do not belong to the cabinet and thus don't match the profile, plus have technical limitations", are they potentially impacting the sound of a 2.0 profile on a MK1 Kemper, or is the starting position of each setting correct for the profiled amp setting?

Edit: If these controls are active but negatively affecting the sound, is your advice to MK1 users who want to use 2.0 profiles to upgrade to 14.0?

And for any MK2 owner wanting to chip in with "Just buy a MK2 and update to 14 for heaven's sake!", please note:

• I may very well upgrade.
• I'm not annoyed at technical obsolescence, having owned my Kemper since 2013; although, I like the look of my Green MK1 and casting it aside does seem a bit of a waste.
• I'm not accusing Kemper of choking 2.0 functionality on MK1 Kempers in order to force MK1 owners to upgrade to get the best out of 2.0.
• I'm simply asking questions relating to 2.0 use on a MK1 Kemper (and at the moment I bet there are a lot of MK1 users who have not upgraded to MK2) to understand whether to start using 2.0 profiles now or wait until I own a Mk2.

Hi Kemper Team,

I noticed my post was closed for editing but no response given to my query. I don't want to edit my post so not a problem; although, I'm not sure why it was closed; however, I would like a response to my query:

These 'ghost parameters' are active though aren't they, as you can't switch them off in the cabinet? If so, and if they "do not belong to the cabinet and thus don't match the profile, plus have technical limitations", are they potentially impacting the sound of a 2.0 profile on a MK1 Kemper, or is the starting position of each setting correct for the profiled amp setting?

If these controls are active but negatively affecting the sound, is your advice to MK1 users who want to use 2.0 profiles to upgrade to 14.0?

Quote from Burkhard

MK1 units play back 2.0 PROFILEs in standard quality, independent of the firmware version. You could verify this via A/B tests.

The Cabinet Resonance that you found in these older software versions dates back from our first prototyping and research to create a faithful adjustable resonance. These parameters definitely sound attractive, but they do not belong to the cabinet and thus don’t match the PROFILE plus have technical limitations. For example: they impact the MONITOR OUT even while Monitor Cab. Off is activated (so no cabinet), resulting in a possible boomy sound which was not intended to be released.

Sorry, for these accidental ghost parameters!

Hi Burkhard,

These 'ghost parameters' are active though aren't they, as you can't switch them off in the cabinet? If so, and if they "do not belong to the cabinet and thus don't match the profile, plus have technical limitations", are they potentially impacting the sound of a 2.0 profile on a MK1 Kemper, or is the starting position of each setting correct for the profiled amp setting?

Edit: If these controls are active but negatively affecting the sound, is your advice to MK1 users who want to use 2.0 profiles to upgrade to 14.0?

And for any MK2 owner wanting to chip in with "Just buy a MK2 and update to 14 for heaven's sake!", please note:

• I may very well upgrade.
• I'm not annoyed at technical obsolescence, having owned my Kemper since 2013; although, I like the look of my Green MK1 and casting it aside does seem a bit of a waste.
• I'm not accusing Kemper of choking 2.0 functionality on MK1 Kempers in order to force MK1 owners to upgrade to get the best out of 2.0.
• I'm simply asking questions relating to 2.0 use on a MK1 Kemper (and at the moment I bet there are a lot of MK1 users who have not upgraded to MK2) to understand whether to start using 2.0 profiles now or wait until I own a Mk2.

Quote from Ibot39

What about the report about 2.0 profiles sounding noticeably thinner on Mk1 units? Is this a bug? Is it related to maybe how the resonance parameters get translated to 2.0 profiles running in standard quality on Mk1?

Why is it not possible to make Resonance paramters availabe on Mk1 units?

I like the "accidental ghost parameters" very much! Sounds awesome and can make thin profiles thick and resonant

So when not updating from now on, I can use the ghost parameters on every 2.0 profile?

Display More

Hi Burkhard - it would be useful to hear your thoughts on why the guy in this clip got the results he did:

If the link doesn't work, Ibot39 included it earlier in this thread.

Quote from Drjoeljr

Silly conspiracy theories. I don't know what that youtuber did, but I am telling you that Profiles made with 2.0, compared to the same amp, same mic, same cab, profiled on a MK1 - is miles away in dynamics and responsiveness. The most minor tweaks on the 2.0 amp/cab has a way more noticeable effect on the parameter you are adjusting.

When it is already great(MK1) - it can only become incrementally greater (MK2). There is definitely more clarity, and I said it before - MK1 profiles played on MK2 gear sound better. There are noticeably more dynamics - and the experience of playing them is more satisfying. I stand by it.

I don't care about how a person can't hear the difference in a mix, or the audience can't tell the difference, etc. the simple fact is that MK2 and Profiling 2.0 are improvements on both counts. End of.

You don't specifically cover the use case I was asking about, which is:

Does a 2.0 profile played on a MK1 Kemper sound better than the classic profile of the same amp at the same settings also played on a MK1?

I'm not asking if 2.0 sounds better than classic when both are played on a MK2 Kemper.

I'm not asking if a classic profile played on a MK2 Kemper sounds better than it does on a MK1 Kemper.

Luckily, I don't have to rely on you eventually answering my question as Burkhard has provided the following response:

MK1 units play back 2.0 PROFILEs in standard quality, independent of the firmware version

Re: the Resonance and Q functionality showing in MK1 Kempers still on Release 13 - naturally my interest was piqued; however, I didn't fan any flames of conspiracy. Their appearance definitely warranted a question being raised by Ibot39 and, again, Burkhard has now explained their appearance.

Quote from goldensheaf

This has been talked about a thousand times here and on the youtubes. Why do people go in circles an just repeat the same questions?. 2 mins on here an you will find your awnsers. Sorry to sound like a P but ya know. The 2.0 profiles sound better on an mark 1 than classic profiles, but not as good as on a mark 2 unit as intended. Kemper tippy toes around this some reason but from what others are saying, an what I have pl;ayed myself, the mid hump is gone.

"Talked about" is one thing . . . the beta has only just been released and the guy in the clip was doing comparisons and was going to do the comparison I mentioned and hearing the difference (even via YouTube) is better than all the previous conjecture.

Has Kemper actually said "A 2.0 profile on a MK1 sounds better than the classic profile of the same amp at the same settings on a MK1"?

Based on your own timing, you've got 2 mins to respond with a copy and paste statement from Kemper to stop me going around in circles. It's 13:04 here in Blighty . . . crack on.

Quote from Ibot39

As you have maybe read, on my Mk1 unit that I have not updated, I somehow have access to the new resonance feature (even if this is not intended by Kemper). With this feautre you can easily adjust to make the 2.0 profile on the Mk1 unit sound right and full. Maybe there is a bug, with 2.0 profiles played back on Mk1 units (without the Resonance feature active) ?

Strange - the new functionality doesn't show on my MK1 (OS 13 not 14) when I load one of Thomas Dill's new 2.0 profiles using Rig Manager. EDIT - the functionality is now showing. However, I haven't tried to see how well it works.

Quote from Ibot39

External Content youtu.be

Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.

Display all external content

Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

In this video the guy says (and shows), that the 2.0 profiles sound thinner and not that good on Mk1 units than a classic profile. To be clear, on Mk2 the 2.0 sounds better.

So I don't want to discuss the video sound here, but ask:
Has someone made the same experience? Or is it amp dependent?
Because that would mean, for Mk1 users the Mk1 profiles will still be the best solution?

Display More

I watched this last night and did think that the 2.0 profile sounded better on the MK2 Kemper than the MK1 Kemper (and not just because of the visual filters he used to differentiate between the two) . I commented to ask whether a 2.0 profile on a MK1 Kemper sounds better or worse than a classic profile of the same amp (same settings) on the MK1. I want to know because I don't want to buy 2.0 profiles whilst I still have a MK1 Kemper if they're going to sound worse than sticking with classic.

I know 'what good means' can be subjective, but there was night and day difference between the 2.0 profile on the MK2 and MK1 Kempers. The guy could have cocked something up during his comparison but assuming he knows what he's doing, I'd like to know whether to go 2.0 profiles on MK1, or stick with classic.

I'm also interested to know more about 2.0 functionality working on MK1 as long as you don't upgrade to 14.0 . . . hmmmmm.

Also, usually you can update to the latest version from a version older than n-1, so you can skip a few updates if nothing doing for MK 1 and then update when you see something that tickles your fancy.

Perhaps someone should check to see if Ingolf has jetted off on holiday - that might be a sign that Private Beta at least is done and dusted . . . or it might mean there's a delay to its start!!!

Quote from Wheresthedug

I wouldn’t even bother with a signal splitter or any additional gear. Just run a cable from Kemper A Direct Out to Kemper B Front Input. Set the Output Source for Kemper to DI Analog and you are good to go.

Hopefully not straying too far off topic, as we are still talking about using the Mk 2 Profiler and a number of people might be thinking of using their MK1 and MK 2 together, at least just to see what it sounds like . . .

Thanks WTD, so,

Cable from Kemper A Direct Out to Kemper B Front Input. Set the Output Source for Kemper A to DI Analog

This daisy chains the Profilers and feeds the DI signal to both - is there any issue with digital lag? What cable is required?

Also, I use S/PDIF to connect my MK 1 to my Focusrite and my studio monitors are connected to the Focusrite. I assume I would now have two S/PDIF cables (one from each Profiler) that I need to connect to my Focusrite; however, it only has one S/PDIF in. What's the best way to connect to my Focusrite?

I'm not sure what a second hand Mk 1 Head will fetch when the new profiling is available with the MK 2, so if I got a MK 2, I might keep the MK 1 for old time's sake.

However, rather than it cluttering up the place, I'd be tempted to see what two Profilers sound like running different profiles. Johnny Marr used to have a Fender Deluxe Reverb and a Roland Jazz Chorus on at the same time.

Is there a cabling schematic available showing how to set up one guitar and two Profilers? I currently have my Mk 1 Head going into a Focusrite audio interface and I use Pro Tools.

It's not goodbye, it's au revoir . . . or should that be auf wiedersehen? That's my O' Level French and German used up right there.

Quote from JoePVblue

Did they say: “you can’t pay to upgrade existing stuff.”?

Hi Joe, Kemper added to their original statement this morning with the following:

"I wouldn't be very optimistic about that. Right now there are technical reasons for that and I can't imagine that this will change"

So, at the moment. there's no technical upgrade to pay for and Kemper doesn't expect there to be one.