Posts by DamianGreda

  • OS14 / Profiling 2.0 Public Beta Discussion

    Quote from ckemper

    It is of course not a coincidence. We have done prototyping back then and these parameter numbers are simply next in line. You were able to test here, that the algorithm prototype behind that does not belong to the cabinet. And actually it does not match the cabinet profile.

    Anyway, there is a good method to control and emphasize a cabinet resonance and it has always been there for everyone. Position a peak equalizer after the cabinet and tune it to somewhere between 75 and 120 Hz to catch the resonance. Set Q factor to 0.7 or 1.0 or more. Tweak Eq gain to your liking.

    This is of course not the authentic way, but very effective. What we have evaluated back in 13.0.5 was somewhat related to this method.

    CK

    Hi Christoph,

    Thank you so much for stepping in and clarifying this directly. I really appreciate the transparency. It makes perfect sense now that these were prototype parameters from the 13.0.5 evaluation that simply remained in the MIDI structure.

    Also, thank you for sharing that EQ workaround (Peak EQ at 75-120 Hz, Q 0.7-1.0+). I will definitely set that up, and I’m sure the rest of the community will find this tip incredibly useful for dialing in their tones.

    Since you mentioned the method you evaluated wasn't the "authentic way," I have to ask: is there any chance we might see a fully refined, authentic cabinet resonance parameter officially exposed in the UI/Editor in a future update? It’s a feature many of us would absolutely love to have for deep tweaking.

    Thanks again for your time and for building such a great ecosystem!

  • OS14 / Profiling 2.0 Public Beta Discussion

    To help clarify the situation regarding the 'unintended' resonance parameters, there is a simple, objective test we can run.

    Using UI to MIDI (courtesy of the KPA Team), we can clearly see that on MK I devices, the parameters correspond to the following:

    • SYSX: F0 00 20 33 00 00 01 00 0C 0B 28 20 F7 (Resonance) 0C 0B
    • SYSX: F0 00 20 33 00 00 01 00 0C 0C 47 5A F7 (Q factor) 0C 0C

    Anyone can do a quick test to check if these exact same NRPN parameters are being modulated with the new FW on MK II devices. If they are, it logically points to the conclusion that these parameters are not just a coincidence, but are fully functional and actively working under the hood in the new firmware.

    My goal here isn't to stir up trouble, but simply to apply objective, critical thinking to the data in front of us.

    Since the DSP and firmware clearly still support and process these parameters, I would like to make a strong request to the development team: please expose them officially in the Editor. > Giving advanced users direct UI access to Resonance and Q factor would be a huge benefit for sound design. Since the underlying code is already handling them, unlocking them in the editor seems like a natural next step and would be greatly appreciated by the community. Could we get this added in a future update?

  • OS14 / Profiling 2.0 Public Beta Discussion

    I have Cab resonance too on MKI . I wouldn't count on the cab resonance option being added to mkI in the future. . It's more of a business decision than anything else, but that's just my subjective opinion. Hey KPA Team but what about adding payable upgrade for MK I owners ? I think it is good way to get some credits and get out of this situation?

  • MK 2 - Profiling 2.0

    Quote from sailor

    There is a lot of new competition for Kemper since the new profiling was announced in May. IK upgraded to V2 profiling, NDSP also had a major firmware update, Line6 announced and released the Stadium which will have profiling soon, Fractal announced their next product will have profile playback, there are many new profilers like Xrecer, ....

    Kemper is doing things to react to the competition, like the Player and the new profiling, but it's possible all these changes in the competitive landscape since May have caused Kemper to reevaluate their plans and maybe that's the reason for the delay.

    I tend to agree. The whole landscape is shifting, especially now that even the free tools are getting major updates. Everything has changed—and it’s going to keep changing faster and faster.

    It’s tough to compete with tools that suddenly empowered huge numbers of users through prompt‑based workflows. That kind of accessibility changes the game overnight.

    Dedicated hardware solutions still have their niche, but probably not for long. We’re already seeing hardware popping up with open‑source firmware, and that’s going to push things even further.

  • MK 2 - Profiling 2.0

    Quote from nwmusic32

    It's important to the people who dropped thousands of dollars on MK2 units with the promise of 2.0. Kemper literally sold these products on the promise of 2.0 profiling.

    Yes, it's delayed and that can happen. But please do not simply dismiss 2.0 as "not that important".

    Funny when it comes to other Funny thing is, that exact argument used to be everyone’s main weapon when talking about other “game‑changing” technologies. And now suddenly it’s not supposed to matter?

    Either way, I really hope Kemper drops their 2.0 soon and shows something genuinely better — especially since so many people bought the MK2 specifically because of that promised feature.

  • MK 2 - Profiling 2.0

    So they built all this hype… and now we’re stuck in the classic de—… de… de……… de…………… de……………lay. Honestly, if there’s a reason, fine — but it’s hard not to feel like the Kemper team lit the fireworks and then forgot to show up for the show. Momentum was there, excitement was there… delivery, not so much.

  • MK 2 - Profiling 2.0

    Quote from Ruefus

    It isn't an excuse - and not meant to be one. It's their history - and people are behaving as if its a 'new thing'.

    Treating what's been true for years as a slight. Like it or not - to be any other way would be out of character

    'Sinking ship' - really?

    Well Maybe it's because of the hype they're creating. I'm not a fan of that. I have realistic expectations.

  • MK 2 - Profiling 2.0

    To be honest, that's not an excuse. But deep down, I know what it's like. It's not a fairy tale — it's hard work. I understand the KPA team. They have their own goals that we are not aware of. All we can do right now is wait.

  • MK 2 - Profiling 2.0

    In the end I think that Profiling 2.0 is not that important because the tools presented by KPA are unique in a way, and I will definitely keep this device. Whether it's because of the effects or the ability to extract additional parameters such as Pick or clarity. However, if I need tools that more accurately mimic the sound of an amplifier for studio sessions, I can use free ones that do the job perfectly.

  • MK 2 - Profiling 2.0

    In my honest opinion, the KPA team is trying to achieve the best possible outcome with the current hardware architecture, and they certainly don't want to fail at this task. Whether this will be competitive with other solutions is unclear. But I am sure that they just don't want to introduce any problems for users of their equipment on stage during this process. I guess this may be the reason why it is taking so long. They want to make sure it is backwards and forwards compatible.

  • MK 2 - Profiling 2.0

    At this point I’m convinced Kemper is just waiting for our hype to burn itself out.
    They probably thought the recent world‑shaking events would distract us for at least a week… maybe two.

    But nope.
    Civilization can wobble, history can rewrite itself in real time, and this forum is still here like:

    “Yeah yeah, global milestones, whatever — where’s the new MK2 firmware?”

    Kemper HQ must be watching this thinking:
    “Okay… they’re not getting distracted. Plan B?”:P^^8o

  • Sound comparison Kemper models and firmware versions

    Quote from b_ryan

    The Kemper high gain profiles/rigs never sounded good enough. I was never happy. I constantly - for at least the last ten years - been unhappy with the Kempers high gain sounds. High gain for extreme metal. The Player - from the get go - sounds great pretty much no matter what profile/rig/IR I pull up.

    I wouldn't be surprised if your old toaster had a setting issue or corrupted settings.

  • MK 2 - Profiling 2.0

    Quote from lbieber

    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?

    Well, I actually don't agree with this assumption, but I also don't think it captures everything like NAM does. I don't have any knowledge about it. I just have some clues that KPA uses the Hammerstein-Wiener model with some filtering . So it is more of a mathematical approximation than a neural network. But I may be wrong and have no idea if this is true.

  • MK 2 - Profiling 2.0

    Quote from Drjoeljr

    You and I are speaking of two different things. There is recorded sound, analyzing the accuracy of one sound to another, etc. I speak of what the device does while you are using it. There are subtle improvements that the player has (in the form of magic I suppose) that have improved dynamics and feel in response to my guitar. Its there and noticeable. 2.0 profiling will be a tremendous improvement in that regard, from what I have heard Mr. Kemper describe.

    I was playing yesterday after using other gear for a couple of days and I was reminded just how good Kemper is. It is the best of the best on a lot of fronts.

    I don't need to comment on this thread anymore. Some of us who have the new devices and also the OG have repeatedly stated that they are improved, even when using our previous rigs/profiles. For some reason its rubbing peoplethe wrong way with the crazy idea that newer processors improve things. go figure.

    You’d only be able to perceive a difference that others can’t hear in reamping if latency were involved. Otherwise, any improvement in dynamics would show up in the reamp as well. Actually latency is something you can objectively measure when comparing MKI and MKII reamps too.

    To me, what you’re describing sounds highly subjective—science would frame it as a cognitive bias rather than an actual sonic change. There’s nothing to arggument about. We’re all susceptible to these kinds of perceptual errors.