Kemper Amps Forum

Quoted from "mbenigni"

Still wish we could get everyone to agree on this or some other naming convention, so that new profiles would fly in and play nicely by default.

Thats a great idea. +1

Quoted from "Steeldom"

Thats a great idea. +1

So let's keep bouncing this thread. I want everyone to try Maurizio's backup and see for themselves what a big difference it makes!

Guys, sorry to be the party booper, but you do understand that even if the idea for consistent naming is good, there's no way to control how many people name their profiles, there are many who are not forum members, and many other different reasons (e.g some use their initials before the profile name, others use special characters, e.t.c)?

Agree with Stelio, I'm on the process to cancel all what i don't use (regardless how good it is) and I name the rigs in a way that I can remeber it. Not necessarily good for other people but for me.

Quoted from "Stemast"

Guys, sorry to be the party booper, but you do understand that even if the idea for consistent naming is good, there's no way to control how many people name their profiles, there are many who are not forum members, and many other different reasons (e.g some use their initials before the profile name, others use special characters, e.t.c)?

Well, of course there's no way to enforce a naming convention, and I wouldn't presume to tell anyone else how to use their equipment anyway. (Plus there will always be exceptional cases where a profile defies any given naming convention.) That said, I still say we could only benefit by establishing some "best practices" for those in the know. It couldn't do any harm, and it would improve at least some profiles considerably.

In the interim, I'm hoping for some words of wisdom from Maurizio, as to how best to improve the names/ tags/ storage of existing profiles. He obviously has a LOT of experience by now.

"Best practice" for someone is most probably different to someone else.
I cannot (and don't want to) imagine specific naming instructions, is like going back many-many years when we couldn't change the preset names or when we had 4-6 spaces to input a name and we were struggling to understand what preset was it (damn, I almost gave up my age ).

Please don't misunderstand me, I just believe that an approach like that is a little old fashioned.

Quoted from "Stemast"

"Best practice" for someone is most probably different to someone else.
I cannot (and don't want to) imagine specific naming instructions, is like going back many-many years when we couldn't change the preset names or when we had 4-6 spaces to input a name and we were struggling to understand what preset was it (damn, I almost gave up my age ).

Please don't misunderstand me, I just believe that an approach like that is a little old fashioned.

Well, not for nothing, but you've kind of overshot the mark and put some words in my mouth here. It doesn't need to be as bleak as all of that!

I do agree with you 100% about the necessity of naming conventions being a little old fashion, but that's basically where we're at in the absence of better on-amp sorting and searching options. I tried to wish it away for weeks, but before Maurizio showed up, I was flailing with 1500 profiles named more or less randomly.

Having said that, good naming conventions needn't be anything too involved or cryptic or restrictive, and it doesn't have to be a requirement for every profile either.

Perhaps there would be no consensus regarding a single, ideal set of best practices, but with a little applied common sense and - at worse - a little compromise, a few obvious things do begin to surface. For instance, things really come into focus when browsing hundreds of profiles as soon as you can rely on rig names beginning with the amp manufacturer. For a specific user's library and application there may be better naming schemes, e.g. songs in your band's set list, a studio's clients' projects, etc, but for general users sharing profiles of amps, the amp manufacturer is a no-brainer. There isn't sufficient commonality in terms of model name or year for that to be a helpful browsing scheme (in absence of mfr). Grouping all of your Bassmans just doesn't make as much sense as grouping all of your Fenders for example.

So it's nothing as crazy as not being able to change preset names, or limited characters (except to the extent that profile names are limited in length already); it's mainly just a matter of starting a profile with a mfr's name, and thereafter including (at minimum) a model name and (as length permits) whatever other items best define the profile, e.g. channel/ voicing, year, etc.

I have to ask, have you actually tried Maurizio's backup for yourself? It takes 10 minutes to backup, restore his file, and check it out for yourself. If nothing else, it would keep this discussion on track.

Beyond that, sure, different strokes. I know the reality is that there are already 2000+ profiles in circulation, and it will probably be up to each of us to get them named/ tagged to our own individual satisfaction. But are you really happy with the way profiles are named now? Just one example you gave: some members using their initials before rig names... that's fine on your own amp, but it makes no sense whatsoever for a rig name you intend to share; that's what the author tag is for. In other words, there are a hundred ways I might want to name my own content, but there are sensible ways to name content I intend to share.

Quoted from "mbenigni"

Quoted from "Stemast"

"Best practice" for someone is most probably different to someone else.
I cannot (and don't want to) imagine specific naming instructions, is like going back many-many years when we couldn't change the preset names or when we had 4-6 spaces to input a name and we were struggling to understand what preset was it (damn, I almost gave up my age ).

Please don't misunderstand me, I just believe that an approach like that is a little old fashioned.

Well, not for nothing, but you've kind of overshot the mark and put some words in my mouth here. It doesn't need to be as bleak as all of that!

I do agree with you 100% about the necessity of naming conventions being a little old fashion, but that's basically where we're at in the absence of better on-amp sorting and searching options. I tried to wish it away for weeks, but before Maurizio showed up, I was flailing with 1500 profiles named more or less randomly.

Having said that, good naming conventions needn't be anything too involved or cryptic or restrictive, and it doesn't have to be a requirement for every profile either.

Perhaps there would be no consensus regarding a single, ideal set of best practices, but with a little applied common sense and - at worse - a little compromise, a few obvious things do begin to surface. For instance, things really come into focus when browsing hundreds of profiles as soon as you can rely on rig names beginning with the amp manufacturer. For a specific user's library and application there may be better naming schemes, e.g. songs in your band's set list, a studio's clients' projects, etc, but for general users sharing profiles of amps, the amp manufacturer is a no-brainer. There isn't sufficient commonality in terms of model name or year for that to be a helpful browsing scheme (in absence of mfr). Grouping all of your Bassmans just doesn't make as much sense as grouping all of your Fenders for example.

So it's nothing as crazy as not being able to change preset names, or limited characters (except to the extent that profile names are limited in length already); it's mainly just a matter of starting a profile with a mfr's name, and thereafter including (at minimum) a model name and (as length permits) whatever other items best define the profile, e.g. channel/ voicing, year, etc.

I have to ask, have you actually tried Maurizio's backup for yourself? It takes 10 minutes to backup, restore his file, and check it out for yourself. If nothing else, it would keep this discussion on track.

Beyond that, sure, different strokes. I know the reality is that there are already 2000+ profiles in circulation, and it will probably be up to each of us to get them named/ tagged to our own individual satisfaction. But are you really happy with the way profiles are named now? Just one example you gave: some members using their initials before rig names... that's fine on your own amp, but it makes no sense whatsoever for a rig name you intend to share; that's what the author tag is for. In other words, there are a hundred ways I might want to name my own content, but there are sensible ways to name content I intend to share.

You are a fully grown man of many words, i am a fully grown man of few.
I am happy and I am able to find my way and use the rigs as they are provided by the "profilers", either I am using Andy's (=A xxxx) or David's (DP xxx) or Mats' (MN xxxx) or any other random rig pack or individual rig. Simple as that. If for any reason I want to rename a one or even a few, I do it manually, in the same 10 minutes it would take me to backup, edit and restore the file.

What works for you, doesn't necessarily work for me.
And to set the record straight, all efforts to make our lives with the KPA easier are welcome and I am sure we are all glad and appreciate that someone, and in this case Maurizio, is spending time on this. Only good things can come out of such efforts.

Quoted from "Stemast"

Quoted from "mbenigni"

You are a fully grown man of many words, i am a fully grown man of few.
I am happy and I am able to find my way and use the rigs as they are provided by the "profilers", either I am using Andy's (=A xxxx) or David's (DP xxx) or Mats' (MN xxxx) or any other random rig pack or individual rig. Simple as that. If for any reason I want to rename a one or even a few, I do it manually, in the same 10 minutes it would take me to backup, edit and restore the file.

What works for you, doesn't necessarily work for me.
And to set the record straight, all efforts to make our lives with the KPA easier are welcome and I am sure we are all glad and appreciate that someone, and in this case Maurizio, is spending time on this. Only good things can come out of such efforts.

Fair enough, and no question I can be verbose when I want to be clearly understood.

To each his own, and Stemast if you're already satisfied then done deal. For the rest, minimal investment to check this out and see for yourself whether it helps, is all I'm saying. And indeed, all I ever meant to say in the first place.