Work Flow Help

  • Hey there,


    I’ve had my Kemper about a month now, and enjoyed every minute of it. However I have a work flow problem with it (maybe you power users can help me out). Here is how it usually goes. Say I want to play Wipe Out by The Ventures. So I sit down at the Kemper w/ my Strat and dial up an amp that gets me in the ball park. Something vintage clean to crunch. (Ventures used Fenders and Mosrite amps). There are lots of similar amps to choose from. Good. The only problem is the cab it comes with doesn’t provide the tone I'm looking for (despite twiddling the available knobs in the amp/eq/cab). So I need to find a cab that when paired with the amp has the surf sound that I hear in my mind. Ignore the obvious delay/reverb for now. This cab choice is much harder for me than finding the amp because there are so many more parameters (basically I want the whole stack spectrum to be close). This is where things break down.


    One way could be to lock all but the eq and cab slots and walk through my 700 or so rigs playing a riff and seeing if it sounds good with the amp I chose (hugely time consuming). Another way might be to use Tills cabs (a smaller and more parametric search) but again this is time consuming, and his collection (although great) is only based off a few cabs, so they tend to fall into a number of discrete families of tones. Yet a third method would be start one of those previous searches, and when I get close, use the 4 eq knobs in the eq section to tweak it, but I find that to be not enough control to usually get me where I want to be. So I could add another eq in the x slot or mod slot, but you can see now I’m just adding more and more band aids to this problem, and consuming more and more time when all I wanted to do is play the song with a fairly close tone. What bugs me about this is I can actually see the frequency content I want in my mind. I know roughly where I want the peaks and valleys and I want to quickly select a cab (or really amp/eq/cab combination) that represents this.


    So I’m open to suggestions.


    I had thought about injecting a sine sweep or white noise into each cab on my KPA and capturing the output so I could graph each cabs frequency response. But then I have the problem of how do I rapidly scan through 700 or so plots when I have a sound in mind.


    I could organize the data in different ways… Boomy to bright might be good, or maybe how mid scooped (or not) they are, etc. But then I have the problem of locating the one I want to try, quickly, and then if that doesn’t work, look for another one that that has a similar response (but may be far away on the browse knob), again not a good solution.


    Another possibility would be to analyze all 700 or so, but only keep 10 or 20 cabs as presets that cover the widest and diverse amount of usable tones (auditioning 10 or 20 when tone searching is not bad). Then fill in the gaps with eq tweaks.


    Does anybody have some good suggestions? How do you guys accomplish this? Thanks in advance.


    dB

  • i dont think there is a quick solution,at some stage everyone has to bite the bullet and just work through the cabs to find the ones that are in the ballpark soundwise. save the possibles and then narrow it done some more. i cant see any shortcut method,sorry. of course once you have your fave cabs saved you wont ever need to work through so many again.........until you decide you want a whole different sound...dammit ! :)

  • I really think you embarked in a tough task my friend.
    While I agree it's funny to explore all the Profiler's sonic capabilities, if this becomes mandatory for getting satisfactory tones it defeat the purpose and the premise (easiness of use, no-dial ready tones etc.)


    OTOH, the Profiler's tweaking possibilities are vast, but not comparable to a high-end modeller's ones (which is designed for tweakability). The KPA is not aimed at sculpturing a tone, IMO, but rather at reproducing real rigs' sound.
    For how you introduced your quest, it seems to me that a modeller would better fit your needs.


    Still, the Profiler is an amazing piece of gear. It seems that you're fighting against it more than you're enjoying it.
    If you want to make it up with it, I'd change my approach.
    What about forgetting the amps' brand, ordering your rigs by gain, starting from the first you find interesting and just playing with your guitar knobs? When you arrive at a higher gain territory you'll see that most profiles clean beautifully and might match your expectations.


    Also, remember to check sounds at the level at which you're going to use them, otherwise your perception of tone would be fooled.
    Last but not least, are you going to use the sounds to record or to perform (and home/stage?)? Try to find yourself in the closest conditions to the real performance while chasing your tones.


    Hope that this change in perspective will give you more enjoyment and less fatigue :)

  • Well, this all sounds like a dreaded rabbit hole constellation to me.


    With the amount of alreadyavailable rigs you have to determine very clearly what you're looking for.
    An example: You mention you want to play some Ventures and that they (among others) played Fender amps.
    The 1st problem is: there is a huge variety of totally different Fender amps.
    Personally I would estimate they played some blackface amps like the twin or the dual showman.
    I would start to look after profiles of these.


    When you like a profile only partially I would go on.
    I would never start to swap the cabs in this situation.
    Why?
    Because the result is totally unpredictable.
    By pairing the amp with another cab you put 'some other DNA into the amp'.
    Pair a Marshall cab with a Fender Twin. You will marshallize the twin, so to speak.
    I don't say that there isn't the possibility to get awesome results by doing this, and in fact when you're experimenting and only fool around it's a cool way to go, but not when you want to be very specific.
    IMO.


    My best advice is: Limit yourself. Determine which amp(s) and look for specific profiles.
    if a profile isn't totally there yet: Tweak it. Definition, sagging etc.
    The amp parameters are your friend. See what you can do. If that doesn't work out, check the next profile.
    actually it's not very difficult.
    Build from limitations.
    And don't pair x amps with y cabs.
    ;)

  • One thing I've started to do that helps me in this process is to record a loop into something like a JamMan and use that for the input to the KPA, in that way I can cycle through rigs, cabs etc without having to keep playing the guitar.

  • you might have more success finding an IR that's kinda close and profiling it with some DAW EQ to get it even closer. Or use a match EQ on the DAW and profile that, save it as a cab and try it out.


    i'd give more details but i haven't actually tried this yet, hehe.

  • Thank you both for responding. Your suggestions give me much to think about. You are right viabcroce, sound sculpting is what I would like to do. That is the exact word for it, and I know that this goes against the grain of the profiler concept. However, I don’t really feel the need to build a tone from the ground up (like a full on modeler), since so many really great profile are out there already. I just want to be able to find the best profile to start with and tweak them efficiently. If I follow your advice Ingolf, and keep the cabs linked with the amps, I don’t see enough knobs (both on guitar or KPA stack) to get the tones I seek. Maybe I don’t have enough experience with it yet. I play several hours a day (although this is just a hobby for me – not my profession) and I really try to focus on playing rather than tweaking so I may still be a little green on what the KPA controls can really do for me. I will take that as an action to work on this week.


    I guess what I’m struggling with is how to efficiently find the tones I seek, as opposed to just pseudo-randomly trying different profiles in hopes that it will give me what I seek. Note: I make this sound worse than it really is because I do know what different amps sound like and I do know what specific gear various artists used, and I have my collection organized by gain (thanks to Maurizio for the start there). So the choices I make are educated guesses and not really random.


    Thanks again, you’ve given me a lot to contemplate.


    Oh, while I was writing this I see Gizmo and meambobbo have added some good advice, yes I will try the loop idea. I use my tablet (with guitar apps like slow downers, metronomes, etc) on the Aux input line so I can easily record my guitar and loop for browsing. Good suggestion! And about the IRs Yes, I had thought about that too, but doesn’t that then disable the cab slot? (or more accuratelu replace it?) I believe I read that the IRs results were not as good as the profiled cabs, so I would like adjust the cab profiles rather than build or eq match IRs, but I will give that a try one of these days too. Thanks . Great conversation!

  • [color=#000000][font='Calibri']You are right viabcroce, sound sculpting is what I would like to do. That is the exact word for it, and I know that this goes against the grain of the profiler concept.


    not at all.
    with a tube amp, a decent cabinet and a mic you can sculpt tone all day long and profile the results.


    I find it amusing that profiling an DAW based system or the ever popular 'tone-matching' get mentioned before 'move the mic'. ;)


    the most important thing is to have the tone you're chasing 'in your head' - you seem to have that - great!
    set your amp along those lines, than take great care positioning the mic (using a looper and isolating headphones works really well).

  • I would add some more to the discussion.


    You may be experiencing a kind of "deceived expectations" moment now. It has happened to me several times (also in situations not related to making music) to be unhappy with something just because I was expecting something on my own. When this happens, rather than selling/complaining/criticizing like I used to do some years ago, now I just cool down, wait some time, do something else... and go back to the thing with a fresher mind and a more open approach.


    When I first used the Profiler I was kind of disappointed because I was expecting something... different (really don't know what); then I started listening.


    Not sure to which extent this applies to your case, it's just a thought of course. But chances are, if you start considering the Profiler like a very versatile instrument in itself rather than something that has to sound "like something else", you might find how beautifully organic and "real" its tones are, and discover new sonic-colour possibilities with which you can make credible music. Like a new guitar with its personality and character.


    Don't get me wrong, there's a universe to tweak in the Profiler if you want. Holding the Amplifier, EQ, or Cabinet buttons you'll expose pages of parameters. And adding an EQ and a compressor before and after the amp will give you billions combinations. But it's easy to get lost. Apart from the pleasure of exploring and playing with the parameters in itself, complex control sets are mostly useful when one knows exactly what they need: you hear a sound, and immediately realize that it's lacking in the 2 kHz region and too dynamic to fit your needs; then use the proper tools to correct it. But if you can't give a name to what you don't like (or to what you're pursuing), then it's really going to be the deepest rabbit hole. At which stage, you're only left with the option of systematically try each and every combination in the hope to find "that" tone.


    Again, it's just a thought, but if you start listening to what the Profiler can offer you, you'll find it can really inspire your music.
    It takes just a bit of time devoted to play and get to know it.


    PS: Hope it did not come up in the wrong way :)

  • one of the things that scared me the most about the KPA was whether I would be able to sculpt profiles or if it'd make them sound "off" or "fake". i can tell you that i have done a lot of tone sculpting and the answer is that the KPA behaves as the real amp would. changing cabinet profiles, pre-EQ'ing or using the modeled stomps as OD's, even tweaking the amp profile's deep-edit parameters all work wonders. of course, extreme settings or changes will sound a bit weird or fake (just as they would on a real amp).


    drop the stigmas. they'll only lead to biases that will fail any double-blind test. you have no guarantee that you're going to prefer a zero-tweaked profile vs a rather customized one.


    of course it's always best to capture the nuances of the real gear, by getting good profiles of the real gear. you can't really dial in such nuances. but you can certainly enhance them.


    as for the IR suggestion, I wasn't saying necessarily to use Cab Maker. You could simply profile the IR + match EQ from your DAW as a complete new profile, then save the cabinet portion as a cabinet preset. Not as good as profiling a real cab, but it should get you closer to the sound you wanted.

  • I think it is really about limiting your options. Maybe trying a more structured approach might help:
    - Note down the kind of sounds you have in your head
    - Limit your choices to a maximum of 5 options
    - Research the real amps from selected players
    - Start working with one amp/sound per day only
    - Do not add effects in the beginning
    - Safe a maximum of 3 variations per sound and play with them for some days or weeks


    Imho swichting to fast between too different models/sounds doesn't help, when you are on a quest.


  • This! ;)

  • Well, thank you all again for your great words of wisdom. Just to clarify, I don’t want it to sound like I have buyer’s remorse. I love the tones I get out of this thing. Many is the time I’ll sit down with this box intending to practice a new song, only to get distracted by a profile that I think sounds great and I end up noodling away an hour just exploring how that profile sounds in different contexts. I don’t consider this a bad thing. I’m just trying to maximize the utility of this amp when I am really serious about finding a specific sound.


    Don, yes, I agree about mic position as it relates to sound sculpting. However, I’m not really using the KPA as a profiler for my own amps. The tube amps I own are ok, but I really bought this to have access to the hundreds (maybe thousands now) of other users fabulous amp profiles, and I can’t really control the mic placement on those (unless they include profiles of a variety of mic options).


    Viabcroce, thanks again for your insight, no your post didn’t come out in a wrong way; I appreciate all the ideas you put forth.


    meambobbo, I am continually amazed at how amp-like this machine is. I’ve even put some of my own analog stomps in front of it and it reacts like I would expect (I have tried this before on other digital solutions but never had very good results). So I agree with you on that, not sure what stigmas you refer to, perhaps that one should not be scared of eq-ing or swapping cabs. I am totally open to any ideas that will help me zero in on the tones I seek. BTW, I’m a techno geek, so I’ve tried just about every digital solution there is from the early days of digial stomps, to pedal boards, to vst/daws to the latest stand-alone boxes like the Kemper, so I’ve got a bit of history (and a big closet of junk, lol). I hear you on the fake thing. I think that’s actually one of the strong points of the KPA is that where it does expand the possibilities beyond analog counterparts, it does so musically. I can’t tell you how many times over the years, I’ve run into that patch that sounds like the soundtrack to the 1950s movie “Forbidden Planet”. I just don’t need that in a guitar amp. LOL Anyway, I’ll keep poking at all the possible controls and maybe in time I’ll get to the point where when a buddy comes over and says “Hey, set me up with a “Crazy Train” tone, I’ll be able to dial one up in in less than a minute.


    webdiver, great idea. That’s sort of what I’m doing today, except for that last line. When I do manage to get a tone I like, I’ll save it and I do try to craft a new one every day or two. Then when I start in on my practice time I’ll play some of these and others that I still haven’t quite found a good tone for, and that will help me decide which tone I want to work on next time (refinement of an existing tone, or creation of a new one). Note; when I say it doesn’t have a good tone, that just mean that it doesn’t sound the way I want it to, not that it isn’t great in it’s own right. Another good point several of you have made is to limit the choices. I’ll try this, even though I find this counter to trying to understand all the possibilities.


    Thanks again for the help. I really do apreciate it.

  • Maybe I just can,t find them either. But I think there are not many or any authentic surf amps here yet.
    You can tweak all day but until someone profiles a nice white piggy back bandmaster or Bassman w 2 x12
    Ceramic Oxfords we won,t have that sound.
    Keep in mind Tommy Tedesco cut many of those tracks and who knows, some of it might have been direct to the board, like Claptons early stuff.
    Try finding live versions of some concerts to really hear what those surf sounds were.
    A real vintage Fender rev,b unit between your guitar and the Kemper will help too.

  • Hi OC


    You got me thinking, so I scanned through the rig exchange and there are a couple Dual Showman profiles done by a fellow named Simon B, so I may try those out for a Dick Dale type surf tone. I hear you on the reverb too. It's funny, a lot of those old live recordings have so much reverb on them that you hear an audible ping when the players dig in. I guess some would call that an artifact - some would call that character. 8)

  • I dived into recording with the Kemper over the past few days and I'll tell you this, man: the context in which you're hearing the sound can be critical. By that, I mean the guitar tone might sound like what you had in mind, but when you add some bass and drums, things can suddenly sound jarringly different from what you thought they would in the mix.


    Here's how I would structure your workflow:
    1) Pick amplifier, take it as close as you can go to the sound on the recording
    2) Play song, record the DI track
    3) Add bass, drums, vox, etc. "Wipeout!"
    4) Playing back the whole mix and reamping using SPDIF, audition sounds once more. It's also easier to tweak when the whole thing is playing back to you.
    5) Commit to sound, record reamped track.


    You should be good to go this way. Best of luck!


  • This is a really good approach, cause it has 2 major advantages:


    1. Hear your tone in the musical context. Juding a good tone for a mix is quite a challenge if you listen to it "solo"...
    2. Separate the performance (playing the part) from finding the tone. Once you are done with playing, your are way more relaxed and have your hands free in order to tweak the profiles while the track is playing.