Overall transpose in the input section

  • I would find it very handy if there would be a general transpose function in the input section. When I play with bands in different tunings, I could use this. Currently I only have for this purpose the option to lock the transpose function in one place of the 4 stomp boxes. But since I use a lot of different amps and sounds, the stomp boxes are often already occupied and through the use of the locked transpose function, the sounds then changed - for example, if at a sound exactly at the locked place an EQ or a wah is programmed. With an "overall transpose" function this problem could be avoided.
    Would anyone else feel such a function as practical?

    Play it like you mean it.

  • I do, even tho I would not need it.


    IMO this request falls in the general "not enough slots" issue tho... I've read in the years other people requesting EQs in the Amp section for the same reason for example.


    Having the freedom to place fx everywhere in the 8 slots is the most practical mod/evolution I can think of, this way planning one's own rigs would be easier and more versatile.

  • IMO this request falls in the general "not enough slots" issue tho...

    I disagree. Having the transpose functionality in Input section would be a lot easier (and better). One could just use Transpose IF needed, and all the rigs would remain the same. It would be totally different than Transpose in Stomp A and locked -> All the rigs would lose their stomp A's. In what situation would one use Transpose in any other stomp than A anyway?

  • i think viabcroce has the same opinion as yours. He simply said that idea was already expressed to be a solution to "increase" the number for FX wihout the need to hardware change (limitation to 4 FX slots).

    This. And the problem is, that processing more fx at one time has got a cost, and we do know nothing about the Profiler's number crunching demands Vs. available CPU power.


    One could think, if 9-10 fx could be managed at once they would have already put 9-10 fx buttons on the front panel rather than just 8.
    Let's hope it was just an aesthetic choice :D

  • How do you find the DT transpose feature vis-a-vis the Kemper?


    To be honest I haven't actually tried the Kemper transpose feature yet, maybe I should to get a good comparison. I already had the DT before the Pitch functions were added to the Kemper. I love the DT it tracks very well, I use it often instead of using a capo people are not aware of a difference in sound... they just wonder how I'm playing open chords at the nut end of the neck when they are on capo 5 !


    I also use it alot in place of a secen string ie capo -5. I used to play seven string alot, but not so much now. It's nice to have the option to press a pedal and make your 6 string sound like a 7. The momentry swich on the DT is genius IMHO, I use it quite a bit, ie playing normal 6 string in concert pitch, but every now and then you can chuck a low B chord in there... mixes thinks up a bit...


    I will try the Kemper function in the next few days and see how it compares.

  • To be honest I haven't actually tried the Kemper transpose feature yet, maybe I should to get a good comparison. I already had the DT before the Pitch functions were added to the Kemper. I love the DT it tracks very well, I use it often instead of using a capo people are not aware of a difference in sound... they just wonder how I'm playing open chords at the nut end of the neck when they are on capo 5 !


    I also use it alot in place of a secen string ie capo -5. I used to play seven string alot, but not so much now. It's nice to have the option to press a pedal and make your 6 string sound like a 7. The momentry swich on the DT is genius IMHO, I use it quite a bit, ie playing normal 6 string in concert pitch, but every now and then you can chuck a low B chord in there... mixes thinks up a bit...


    I will try the Kemper function in the next few days and see how it compares.


    Thanks for the inputsgh , javlin7. My interest in one of these devices has piqued. It would be very helpful if you do a thorough comparison of the DT versus the Kemper after A/Bing them for a while. I like the idea of freeing up a slot on my Kemper, but only if the solution is an analog pedal that works better.

  • I use very rarely ALL slots - the problem lies rather in the fact that I would have to rearrange all my rigs to generally eg slot A to get free.

    Play it like you mean it.

  • I use very rarely ALL slots - the problem lies rather in the fact that I would have to rearrange all my rigs to generally eg slot A to get free.


    I have exactly this same problem! would be great to have the transpose in the input section in addition to the one existing in the slot.
    + 1 also for me


    A question: do you think it is the same effect/latency using transpose in the first slots before the amp or after in x or mod position? And in case no, which is preferrable and why? I use transpose mainly in the Mod position for example...

  • I believe (could be wrong) that all of the pitch effects do their note detection wherever they're placed in the chain. The farther along you place them, the harder it'll be for them to work out what you're playing, especially if chords or distortion are involved. Ideally, transpose should be the first thing in your chain.


    I wonder of this correct.
    (But I don't know for sure).
    I'd rather assume pitch detection happens very early in the signal chain regardless of placing the actual effect.
    Who knows this? Can we have a statement from the mothership?