When they come out with drive pedals, they will be models similar to the current ones, but better....they won't be profiles, per se.
Any word on 4.0 yet?
- spikey
- Closed
- Thread is marked as Resolved.
-
-
I don't have the data, but my guess is that the majority of those who bough the KPA bought mainly for the amp modeling and weren't focused on effects.
That rings true for me. I bought the KPA for its amp profiling, not its effects capabilities. That isn't to say they shouldn't try to improve the effects capabilities, but that wouldn't necessarily interest me, personally. -
I'm not saying it won't work, nor would it be welcome but the issue I foresee here is the way that a real drive box interplays with a real amp. I'm not overly fond of the phrase 'snapshot' used to describe profiling but there's something in it that rings true. Profiling a drive pedal won't likely capture the way the knobs on it function individually nor collectively and I'm not entirely sure that it will lead to the results we'd all expect.
In comparison, Line 6 aim to make their models behave entirely like the device being modelled (and I'm not going to go into whether they achieve that or not) with all the inherent quirks and I think that it would be incredibly interesting to see if a profiled drive pedal will be that usable given that it will have been set to sound good into the amp it's feeding. Change the settings on the amp or put the same pedal with the same settings into another amp and it won't be such a tale. So with that profiled drive pedal, you're likely to have to significantly change the settings on it to suit the amp profile being used, moving quickly away from the tones that the real article might be able to produce.
Would that still satisfy Kemper users?
Great post! I for one hadn't thought about such potential pitfalls regarding profiling pedals. Although I'm quite happy with the drive Stomps (am I the only one?), I can see the advantage of having the option to profile your favourite drive pedal, even though architecturally it isn't possible with the current hardware iteration of the KPA. Maybe it would be something to take in to consideration for anytime that Christoph & co. want to go about designing a Kemper II. Solving the problem of how to profile pedals non-statically could also translate to profiling amps and their controls and tone stacks.
For now though, I'm just greatly looking forward to the new firmware, whenever it drops, and getting on with playing around with morphing. I hope that the delays don't follow long after...
-
Although I'm quite happy with the drive Stomps (am I the only one?)
You're not the only one, I'm finding the current drive pedals great for what I want.
I've spent years buying and selling drive pedals, looking for that one which could give me the sound I was after, and I'm REALLY enjoying not doing that any more. On the whole, I can get what I'm looking for with the right amp profile and one or two of the boost pedals for when I want to kick in a little more transparent drive. This is how I used to use valve amps and it works just the same with the Kemper. -
I don't have the data, but my guess is that the majority of those who bough the KPA bought mainly for the amp modeling and weren't focused on effects.If you think of it the other way, you might know what I mean. If the KPA had all these slots for effects and had great effects,but didn't have the profiling capability, as much as I hate to say it, I really doubt that it would have been a viable product. Meaning without profiling the KPA, wouldn't even exist. Again, not because the effects aren't good, but because the effect market is so saturated with very many and good enough contenders.
The last thing that guitarists need are more companies making effects, but no one has good profiling. BIAS are trying and they can catch up soon, so why not focus more on maybe the ability to use Stomp Drives and Distortions profiles at the same time as Amp profile. I know many say it can't be done but I don't believe that. Drive boxes shouldn't require the same horse power as Amp Profiles. How would you like a KPA that let's you play any tube amp, and put any profile of any drive box ever made? I'd like a lot better than getting all the additional reverbs and delays.
I mentioned that I would like to see this feature a long time ago. I class distortion stomps as FX too (not just reverbs and delays) and I am sure a lot of us do. I think we are probably closer to being in agreement about this stuff than you think.
-
Great post! I for one hadn't thought about such potential pitfalls regarding profiling pedals. Although I'm quite happy with the drive Stomps (am I the only one?), I can see the advantage of having the option to profile your favourite drive pedal, even though architecturally it isn't possible with the current hardware iteration of the KPA. Maybe it would be something to take in to consideration for anytime that Christoph & co. want to go about designing a Kemper II. Solving the problem of how to profile pedals non-statically could also translate to profiling amps and their controls and tone stacks.
For now though, I'm just greatly looking forward to the new firmware, whenever it drops, and getting on with playing around with morphing. I hope that the delays don't follow long after...
You know it just dawned on me. Could morphing technology eventually be used to combine 'static' profiles of an amp or drive pedal profiled at different knob positions to make changes on the Kemper tone/gain more accurate to the original equipment?
-
Don't think so, unfortunately... Morphing relates to operate through co ti uous parameter within the same rig. We'd need the rig itself to alredy include the two extremes through which we'd sweep
-
Could morphing technology eventually be used to combine 'static' profiles of an amp or drive pedal profiled at different knob positions to make changes on the Kemper tone/gain more accurate to the original equipment?
No. With all the premises we know about profiling this is not gonna happen. -
You know it just dawned on me. Could morphing technology eventually be used to combine 'static' profiles of an amp or drive pedal profiled at different knob positions to make changes on the Kemper tone/gain more accurate to the original equipment?
Like @viabcroce and @Ingolf said: no, at least not in its current form. Morphing will apply to any parameter that the user can change manually on the Kemper, but not to the profile at the core of the rig.This is actually related to something that I think is unique to the Kemper. Until now (and I see no indication that this will change), the actual profile itself -- the amp clone created through the profiling process, as opposed to the stomps/effects and all kinds of other user-accessible settings associated with a rig -- has always been a kind of immutable "black box". You cannot replicate a profile from scratch, the way you could exactly replicate a patch on many other digital devices by painstakingly entering a list of parameter values; nor can you turn one profile into another, however powerful the user-accessible parameters (Definition, Clarity...) are.
This is one of the most interesting aspects of the Kemper, I think, and the driving force behind the rich and thriving profile packs market. Every AxeFX unit has the potential to be set to exactly the same sound as another unit of the same model, independently, simply by manually entering the required parameters. With the Kemper, on the other hand, each amp profile is unique: if I like your sound, I will have to get hold of the core profile you're using, i.e. the .kipr file itself that was created during the original profiling session involving the actual amp. No amount of tweaking will allow me to stumble upon the exact same sound independently.
To me, this all adds to the mystery and complexity of the device. Every profile I use retains a direct and personal link to the original amp (i.e., the person who made it gave or sold me a copy) and couldn't have come into being without it.
Kind of off-topic, sorry, just something I've been thinking about trying to explain the Kemper to non-users.
-
Quote
You know it just dawned on me. Could morphing technology eventually be used to combine 'static' profiles of an amp or drive pedal profiled at different knob positions to make changes on the Kemper tone/gain more accurate to the original equipment?
Maybe for Kemper II.... As the others say, you'd need to morph between multiple different profiles, something unlikely to be possible with the Kemper. Maybe that's asking profiling to do something beyond it's means and is more in the grounds of modelling.
As I mentioned previously, Line 6 aim to model the gear they model very legitimately (is that the correct word?). Allegedly, everything in the signal path is analysed and modelled so that when complete, the modelled amp/effect behaves just like the original. That's why their AC30 has the tone cut control and the Divided by 13 has dual gain controls for example. Line 6 claim that by doing so, their products will sound and behave just like the original.
For my own use and having come from a Line 6 background, I'm entirely happy with the way the Kemper does it. I don't need to have the Kemper behave like a Vox AC30 if it can sound like one. With different profiles, I can find settings that suit my needs and I can leave the knob fiddling to others and get on and play.
-
Maybe for Kemper II.... As the others say, you'd need to morph between multiple different profiles
That would be great. -
No. With all the premises we know about profiling this is not gonna happen.I think what we are getting in case of morphing could be a proving ground/test for Kemper 2.0 multiprofile morphing.
-
I have taken a given profile, and it was clean to begin with. Then I added gain, effects as desired and when I got it to where I liked the sound, I saved it in my Favorites. It comes up right next to the original profile it was modeled from in Favorites.
Question: when the morphing in 4.0 OS comes through, could I start with the clean version of a given patch, and then use the altered version I created as the "morph-to" part? Or, do I have to stay on the exact same clean profile, and dial what I want in from the beginning all over again?
The actual profile would not be changed, only it's parameters and the effects, which it seems, are allowed for a morph to take place. All I would have to do is turn the Favorites dial to the next profile in line, which is the souped-up version of the clean profile preceding it.
-
Question: when the morphing in 4.0 OS comes through, could I start with the clean version of a given patch, and then use the altered version I created as the "morph-to" part? Or, do I have to stay on the exact same clean profile, and dial what I want in from the beginning all over again?
Gain in a profile is a parameter that can be altered and thus morphed.
-
Question: when the morphing in 4.0 OS comes through, could I start with the clean version of a given patch, and then use the altered version I created as the "morph-to" part? Or, do I have to stay on the exact same clean profile, and dial what I want in from the beginning all over again?
We won't know for sure how everything works in practice until the update appears, but I think you'll have to dial it in again manually.Every rig will have an unmorphed state and a morphed state of its parameters, and morphing will take place between the two, and thus within the same rig.
If you already have the parameters you want to morph to stored in a different rig, you may be able to simplify dialing them in again as the morphed state of the current rig by using the copy/paste and lock features that are already available today. However, I doubt that there will be a dedicated function to "pick up" the settings out of a different rig directly, as that rig would need to be based on the same profile and, with so many variables involved, things could get complicated quickly.
-
From a slightly different perspective, if you go from rig A to rig B exclusively through varying continuous parameters, then you should be able to morph through them. But, you'll have to dial in the edits in the same rig you want to morph.
you can also morph an effect in/out, as long as it's got a Mix parameter to control.
-
Haven't been on in a day or two, but a few things here:
I don't have the data, but my guess is that the majority of those who bough the KPA bought mainly for the amp modeling and weren't focused on effects.
I'm about 50/50 on this one. I had effects I wanted to use with the Kemper - a few overdrive pedals, a wah, and a delay. I've since gotten a reverb as well. I didn't buy the Kemper for the amp modeling/profiling solely, but it was one of the selling points over AxeFX. I was fully expecting the effects to be solid and usable; however, I continue to not use any effects on the Kemper except for the basic modulation effects, compressor, and EQ. I wish it were more complete. With the addition of the newer delays/reverbs, it will become more of a solid unit for me. But I can deal without for now.
Although I'm quite happy with the drive Stomps (am I the only one?)
No, you're not the only one. The stomps are good. But they're far from being comprehensive, particularly lower gain overdrives and super high gain self-oscillating fuzzes. Yeah, you can use shapers to do some crazy fuzz-like stuff, but I shouldn't have to. -
I wish 4.0 will be out just before or during the next week's musicmesse !
I'm really looking forward the news morph & delays feature , and I don't care if it's still in beta since I mainly use my KPA for recording
-
I don't care if it's still in beta since I mainly use my KPA for recording
I'm really looking forward to the new features as well, but as I use mine onstage mostly - I would hate like hell to have an unstable or quirky beta and appreciate that the company wants it's product done right for ALL users.
sambrox wrote:
Although I'm quite happy with the drive Stomps (am I the only one?)I must say I am not very pleased with the drive stomps. I find them kind of harsh and not very usable compared to real physical drive pedals. I compensate for this with different gain settings and I'm quite happy with that.
-
<p>Line 6 just released an editor for the Helix. Not that I want one for the Kemper. But their wheels are turning at a different speed sadly!</p>
