Interesting video where they test the kemper and say its missing the first harmonic in the distortion spectrum

  • Very interesting research ... I love KPA, but all can be improved ... we know ...
    I'm very curious if this behaviour is replicated also for clean / edge of breakup profiles ... let us know!

    Can a lower second harmonic bring to more difficult sustain/feedback from the amp?
    Can we check if this behaviour is a general one for all the profiles or not ?

  • I cant watch the video yet as you tube is banned at my work :( I must say people can test all they like but what i hear from the kemper sounds great and very true to the original sound and i'm sure thats why alot of pro bands are now turning to the KPA. My buddy is the guitar tech for the darkness and i'm trying to turn them to the KPA. yesterday they were testing out a Friedman amp and today they are testing the Mesa Lonestar. I told him you can have all these amps on tour with you, saved in a little green box called the KPA. The KPA has (for me) revolutionised the guitar both live and in the studio. I look forward to seeing this video when i'm home and seeing what they come up with

  • Well, there have also been people "complaining" (or just mentioning) that they didn't find the sound completely identical etc etc. MAYBE this could be part of the explanation (please notice I put the "maybe" in capitals in an effort to not be dragged into a discussion regarding this.).

    I think these kinds of experiments are still interesting, and there's no need for us as a community to dismiss it out of hand (although it is certainly fair to discuss it from both sides).

    Now, I haven't looked at the video yet, but regardless I think this kind of analysis with a simplified signal (sine wave) is STILL relevant to look at, even if there's a big difference to a guitar signal.

    If CK himself states that the sound can be improved/more authentic/ (120% more realer, anyone?) by using some of the deeper amp parameters, then as far as I'm concerned: some potentially very important information came out of this simplified test that might be of benefit to the users of the unit.

    I know I'm gonna do some experimenting myself and see how tweaking those controls ACTUALLY affect the signal.

  • Interesting. Thanks for posting the video.

    I'm a huge supporter of Kemper (and I like how it sounds most of the time - and after all that is what matters), but I wouldn't call HOFA's test unprofessional. It was a pretty fair test to be honest. And the results were not minor. Maybe CK can make some tweaks to the internal distortion engines, so they will be able to better match the spectra of other amps? What were CK's main points in defense of the KPA?

    I never called the test "unprofessional" but "sloppy".

    You need a laboratory,experts who know what to do,a lots of time and more so a lots of info of what exactly you are doing with what tool,which parameters under which circumstances.

    And lets be honest.We have nothing of these in this test.

  • What were CK's main points in defense of the KPA?

    CK did not defende the KPA - There is really no need :!: .
    I try to give a translation what he stated.

    Quote in my english with a little help of my friend (Mr. Google): ;)

    The topic is worth a comment :)
    The profile appears succeeded despite short refining
    One hears in the withdrawn volume, however, that the Mesa distortion is very heavy output stage, so scratchy.
    Because you should Tube Shape untwist continue to achieve an equal sounding result, as described in the manual.

    The video is only one of many examples, such as an object that should be evaluated by the ear, is only considered with the eye.
    A software that is used must be set in accordance with expertise and checking
    The men in the video using only the peak hold display of the spectrum.
    This, however, would never show the same result, perhaps only at an extremely high sampling rate of the audio interface.
    However, aurally representation can be represented by an RMS level or energy level. Unfortunately, the men turn the "energy-representation" at 3:59 off.

    I work in developing DSP software in the rarest cases with visual representations of spectra or waveforms as visualizations fooled more often than good.
    I rely rather on my ear.

    An A / B comparison with pure tones is incidentally always look slightly different. When profiling the overtone is equal sounding formed for musical instruments, not for analytical pure tones.

  • I wasnt able to raise the 1st harmonic any higher than what i got with clarity turned up , tube bias and tube shape didnt affect it .
    sorry guys I wasnt trying to start debate , just curious why its different .
    and for the most part i like the kemper sounds . they are very dynamic and sound good , i just struggle to dial in album tones , maybe its me i dont know

  • Thanks for posting CK's translated post.

    To clarify: I'm absolutely not bashing the KPA. I love it for what it is since more than 4 years now. In my opinion for raw amp tones it is better than the competition. But it is not perfect, and tests like this can be useful for pinpointing the units weaknesses. I do not agree that the test was sloppy. Of course it would be possible to perform it better, but the differences were pretty significant, and IMO you cannot say that better equipment and more qualified engineers could make the difference disappear. But prove me wrong. And after all if it sounds good... it sounds good. I agree on this one.


  • @Daniel

    It is all good friend.

    I just dont believe that there are many guys out there who have the knowledge to do such kind of tests.Proof for this thesis;Yes.I already posted the KPA-testing of one of the most famous german studio guitar player in "modern history".And this guy did really "dig in to the issue" of "recording electric guitar" with the best fitting amps,mics,consoles,room,buffers/converters and many more issues.He has even a school for talented musicians to learn "how to hear".He is as "scientific" about electric guitar sound as one guitar player SHOULD be.And many other guys who really tried to dig very deep into "technical issues" just to make their sound better.But the truth is that I dont know any really good musician who has the time for that (Hofa kind of thing).Is anyone of them using this kind of "tests" to decide who good an amplifier can sound;Never met this.Did you;

    It actually reminds me on an occasion I lived in the mid 90s when I was working for a rather serious ( internet back then) music magazin making tests for guitars and amplifiers.We had an "editorial meeting" and some guy made the proposal for "more scientific tests & analyzing" the instruments.The editor asked the guy if he is a scientist or at least a technician.The answer was ofcourse no.Then he asked him if he would like to be the one who would respond to all the angry and furious phone calls from the distributers who sold the stuff from the US/asia in germany/europe..the answer was again "no".The case was closed within a minute. ^^

    I just have the expirience that musicians are "good at what they are doing".And we have a lot to do.Practicing.Writing.Using all the wonderfull technologies real technicians/developers/scientists like Christoph (and his rivals ofcourse) give to us to be even more creative and write better music.Do these guys try to tell us what is wrong with our music;Did Christoph ever called "Muse" to tell him why his songs are not as good as he things they could be;Did Cliff ever called Metallica for this reason;Ofcourse not.

    We shall leave them alone doing their work with all the "spectral analyzers",programmes and test equipment they call their own as long as we have our guitars and amplifiers...I hope Christoph does not come to this thread "to defend" his product since he has a lots of other things to do.OS4.0 for example.I am waiting for these delays.. ;)

    Thats all.