Kemper Amps Forum

Quoted from "Armin"

When I captured some IR's (from acoustic guitar body's) I found that some part of the IR was stored into the cabinet block and another into the Amp block - both together sounded fine.

It is different: When you do a clean profile - as you did - the amp is still in the signal flow, coloring the signal. But both together fit, as you stated.

Christoph Kemper

Quoted from "ckemper"

Has one of you had the chance to make a real judgement about different IR sizes?
The real comparison of IR sizes can only be done by listening to two IR's that are supposed to create the same frequency responce, but have different sizes.

Experience anyone?

I wouldn't expect it to sound any different unless there are significant spikes in the original between the frequencies sampled at the lower resolution. It's like saying that an EQ with more points will sound better/tighter in the bass, or that using less points on an EQ results in lower quality. Most people manage with between 3 and 5 points in their EQing most of the time and leave the rest up to the q interpolation.

Unless that is the IR convolution algorithm involves reconstruction of the original sound using the inverse Fourier transform, in which case I could see how compiling using a less fine grading of sine waves could result in a poorer quality rendition, but that's not the case is it Cristoph? Anyhow, I thought the Kemper doesn't use IR's but instead uses cab modeling which is "profiled" to set it's parameters like the rest of the amp, or am I wrong?

Quoted from "ckemper"

...

Has one of you had the chance to make a real judgement about different IR sizes?
The real comparison of IR sizes can only be done by listening to two IR's that are supposed to create the same frequency responce, but have different sizes.

Experience anyone?

With the old AxeFx we could switch between 512 and 1024 tabs - with the AxeFx II between 1024 and 2048.

512/1024 makes a difference - 1024/2048 not so much.

Quoted from "ckemper"

Has one of you had the chance to make a real judgement about different IR sizes?
The real comparison of IR sizes can only be done by listening to two IR's that are supposed to create the same frequency responce, but have different sizes.

Experience anyone?

Yes, everybody who owns an Axe-Fx Standard or Ultra can experience the difference by switching between mono high resolution (1024) and stereo low resolution (512).

Then, as i stated, you can make this little experience (high resolution ie 1024 appears with firmware 6.0) :


"And 1024 is the right count.
If you go back to the firmware 5.26 with your standard or Ultra, you will be able to hear the first part and the second part of a 1024 tap IR, because it is cut in 2 users IRs. The last 512 part has an influence but it is small.
After that you will have the room reverb.

Cliff stated that the 2048 IRs were added in order to use 2x1024 IRs in the same cab block (stereo) which make sense.
So i would say, 1024 taps with 48khz is the right count."

Hope it helps.

Quoted from "ckemper"

Has one of you had the chance to make a real judgement about different IR sizes?
The real comparison of IR sizes can only be done by listening to two IR's that are supposed to create the same frequency responce, but have different sizes.

Experience anyone?

Yes. As other people here, I own an AxeFX Ultra. It's biggest flaw has always been the IR size/cab block. I've been working with IR's since 2002 (mostly rooms back then), and every time I A/B the "high resolution" 1024 point IR (23ms) in the AxeFX with my original (ten times larger) it's so inferior. It's mostly nuances of course but still, getting the nuances right is the last piece of the puzzle, right?

How's that for a first post?

more and more familiar names - welcome :-)

Quoted from "Clawfinger"

Quoted from "ckemper"

Has one of you had the chance to make a real judgement about different IR sizes?
The real comparison of IR sizes can only be done by listening to two IR's that are supposed to create the same frequency responce, but have different sizes.

Experience anyone?

Yes. As other people here, I own an AxeFX Ultra. It's biggest flaw has always been the IR size/cab block. I've been working with IR's since 2002 (mostly rooms back then), and every time I A/B the "high resolution" 1024 point IR (23ms) in the AxeFX with my original (ten times larger) it's so inferior. It's mostly nuances of course but still, getting the nuances right is the last piece of the puzzle, right?

How's that for a first post?

♪ when i grow up there will ♪ .. welcome aboard

Quoted from "ChrisBeaver"

♪ when i grow up there will ♪ .. welcome aboard

Thank you.

Quoted from "Clawfinger"

Quoted from "ChrisBeaver"

♪ when i grow up there will ♪ .. welcome aboard

Thank you.

Welcome... Man, how i partied to your stuff back then