Sameness in the gain and character across profiles

Quote from fredrikn

especially as you alter the parameters in the profile away from the captured settings.

Let's say that the way the Profiler alters the parameters is consistently the same.
The Gain and the Tones in the Profiler are linear and don't interact with each other like in most amps. Gain alters... gain only, and not tone as well. A tones knob's effect doesn't depend on the other knobs position... and so forth. This is by design.

Of course what I just wrote is not strictly related to what you're discussing, but might be a way to rephrase your initial quest: the Profiler has a "same" way to alter all the profiles' sound. Which doesn't reduce their initial differences tho.

I think of the gain knob as a preamp gain knob. And that would be the same for every amp.

So if someone wanted power amp distortion or more sag, the gain knob isn't the right knob to tweak. Definition and tube shape might be.

They are reading patent wrong and draw false conclusions.

Also, what's been said. Many amps in certain common configurations sound very similar. Most of the tone comes from fingers anyway, unless you use some modeller which makes everything feel like guitar synth.

Quote from Monkey_Man

This smacks of yet another attempt to somehow discredit the Kemper, IMHO.

I'm the person that the OP quoted, and I can assure you it isn't. Why would I discredit a device I own and enjoy? I have no affiliations with any modeling company. I simply have gear that I use as tools. Regardless of how the technology is implemented, my opinion still stands. But that doesn't say I don't love the Kemper. It's sitting here right next to my Axe-Fx and Helix.

Also, you might want to visit the original post on TGP and see the entirety of my quote in context before you jump to the conclusion that I'm trying to discredit the device.

For the record, I'd like to clarify that something is wrong in the quote above; I didn't say anything about discrediting Kemper

Quote from Michael_dk

For the record, I'd like to clarify that something is wrong in the quote above; I didn't say anything about discrediting Kemper

Ah....I see now. The forum software incorrectly attributed you and not Monkey_Man. Sorry about that.

no worries - whomever said it, it's still fair to address it

Quote from Karl_Houseknecht

I'm the person that the OP quoted, and I can assure you it isn't. Why would I discredit a device I own and enjoy? I have no affiliations with any modeling company. I simply have gear that I use as tools. Regardless of how the technology is implemented, my opinion still stands. But that doesn't say I don't love the Kemper. It's sitting here right next to my Axe-Fx and Helix.

Sorry Karl. In retrospect I should've headed on down to the thread and read your entire post.

Hopefully you'll understand that when I saw the comment about there being a "... limited number of reference profiles in the unit to which the source can be compared...", certain flags appeared for me; this aspect of the Kemper, along with CPU speed, output SR and cabinet "IR" size, has been a favourite go-to for many who've sought to "discredit" the unit over the past few years.

Interestingly, I even ran into this one from the GAMF the other day, and it was instructive... and from 2010!

Two words: Overpiced Bullsh**

He doen't say anything why it is different from any other modelling technoligie
He does NOT mention what is the profiling process, or what it does, he only mention that it is incredably complicated
He's saying that it's a secret, but if it is so precious the have to patent it... and everyone can view those.
And they have to protect it by legal means, what if someone reverse engineers it?

"The main DSP is a Freescale DSP (formerly Motorola) running at an equivalent of 400 MHz speed"
So what is it's real speed? And if the process is so complex how it is able to run it on this DSP with 16 times oversampling?
(by the way the new AXE FX has 2 600mhz (real clock speed) CPUs)

And i don't thing that there is any lack in dynamics in current amp modelling, the only lacking field is speaker simulation.

Conclusin: It's just a marketing hype, I don't see anything revolutionary here. It's just as new or good as the POD HD

Thread here:

GuitarAmpModeling.com • View topic - Kemper Modeling Amp

There's no excuse for not properly researching your post, Karl; I'm only asking you to please try to understand that I've seen a whole lot of attempts at discreditation that fall into a small number of categories attack-angle wise. Funny, it may be a little like the limited number of reference models you mentioned, and in my case I tried to profile an amp (you!) that didn't quite fit the "nearest" mold.

Quote from Karl_Houseknecht

Also, you might want to visit the original post on TGP and see the entirety of my quote in context before you jump to the conclusion that I'm trying to discredit the device.

Of course, had I not been lazy, I'd have done precisely this.

Again, sorry for jumping to the conclusion I did, Karl.

Not sure what that other post has to do with mine, but no worries at all, and apology accepted. I just don't like being taken out of context.

FWIW, even with the sameness that I still hear, that doesn't at all mean I don't like the character of the profiler. In fact, it's back on my desk now and I'm enjoying the latest firmware. I think the last time I used it, it was still 1.x firmware. Can't wait to hear the delays and such in 4.0. And the thing just loves my gain pedals in a way that even the Axe-Fx doesn't. It definitely has a spot in my bag of tricks.

The one thing about it that's kind of refreshing is that you can definitely tell it was designed from the perspective of synths rather than traditional guitar gear. It's about shaping the sound in a different way...maybe even an easier way. But the downside of that is you can't just throw together a tone by starting with the exact models of gear that another artist used. It's a totally different workflow, and it requires you have a bunch of profiles on hand to help you get there. Still very cool, though.

Quote from Karl_Houseknecht

Not sure what that other post has to do with mine, but no worries at all, and apology accepted. I just don't like being taken out of context.

I too, but then who does? Of course I didn't realise this was the case based upon the OP.

Thank you for accepting my apology, by the way. The last thing I want to do is ruffle anyone's feathers; my sole purpose in life is to be of service if and where I can. I take it very seriously, arguably too much so, but I'd rather swing this way than the other.

Quote from Karl_Houseknecht

FWIW, even with the sameness that I still hear, that doesn't at all mean I don't like the character of the profiler. In fact, it's back on my desk now and I'm enjoying the latest firmware. I think the last time I used it, it was still 1.x firmware. Can't wait to hear the delays and such in 4.0. And the thing just loves my gain pedals in a way that even the Axe-Fx doesn't. It definitely has a spot in my bag of tricks.

Great to hear man.

Funny, it has a spot in your bag of tricks, and... it is my bag of tricks. I've got nothin' else of note to speak of.

Quote from Karl_Houseknecht

The one thing about it that's kind of refreshing is that you can definitely tell it was designed from the perspective of synths rather than traditional guitar gear. It's about shaping the sound in a different way...maybe even an easier way. But the downside of that is you can't just throw together a tone by starting with the exact models of gear that another artist used. It's a totally different workflow, and it requires you have a bunch of profiles on hand to help you get there. Still very cool, though.

Agreed.

When I think of it 'though, the Clarity, definition, tube, Power Sag, amp compression, pick "level" (or whatever it's called) are logical (and some are arguably brilliant) parameters that someone with a fresh mindset's approach should have come up with regardless of his or her background. In fact I struggle to conceive of more (parameters) that'd have meaningful and musical effects on Profiles' tones and playability. If Christoph hasn't completely nailed it this first time 'round, the proverbial nail must surely be practically all the way in at this point, and I'd expect that if any more (parameters) are added in the future I'd probably find myself slapping my forehead and asking myself why I didn't think of them myself.

The bottom line for me is that this thing was conceived out of necessity, passion and genius, and I can't claim to have been as impressed with any other piece of kit I've purchased in 30 years.

EDIT: Just wanted to thank you again for accepting my humble apology, Karl. Sorry mate.