Guys guys guys. I never said it was "fake" or they were being dishonest. Please re-read my post before writing "silly" comments.
Andertons video: Kemper vs tube amp blind test
- mattt67
- Thread is marked as Resolved.
-
-
the real give away is when you go into high gain chug territory, you're able to tell the difference a bit then.
-
Not saying they are being dishonest with their opinions but it seems like a big commercial. Taking a product you sell and making it seem as though it's the best thing since sliced bread. Don't get me wrong , I love my Kemper, but this is an advertisment to sell more Kempers at Andertons.
Anyone who has a Kemper knows its shortcomings. Give Chappers a Kemper for a week, redo this test, the results might be different. IMHO
You're wrong.
Andertons have been selling Kempers for 4 years, they don't need to advertise it or do a Kemper commercial, they also sell the Helix and a thousand other products.
-
Guys guys guys. I never said it was "fake" or they were being dishonest. Please re-read my post before writing "silly" comments.
Actually that's exactly what you said.
They tell us why they're doing the video, Chappers is going on a tour and doesn't want to carry all his gear and pay the shipping costs, so the video is to Profile his amps and see if the Kemper will be a good alternative.
-
-
the real give away is when you go into high gain chug territory, you're able to tell the difference a bit then.
Andy Sneap couldn't a couple of years ago. Maybe he can now. -
As @sinmix would say "Do not watch this thread" done.
Hhhahaha copied from my FB post
"Its all about Real miced cab, not used amp :p all higain amps sound very similiar - the key is Good miced cab and good cab
Inside Kemper still same programable ampsim trying to recreate many of
diff amps sound what do next? just create cab IR (80% guitar tone coming
from miced cab) For me Kemper still sounds too "static" in low end.
Compared clean and crunch tones on this video is just funny
also in the room with real cab. many of chinesse mics sounds also very
close to U87 when you record raw track, the problem start when you try
to mix this track - live or in studio, how tracks react on eq on
boosting some high freq how react on comp etc... how finally fit in the
mix in the studio or live gig... But Yes compared raw real amp vs kemper
profile i can say spot on, kemper sound better than real - not the
point."Sorry for my english
kill Me, Hate Me, i dont care i dont Have store with gear like Andertons, yes i have a store with profiles but... you know my opinion, always trying to do best what i can with kemper thats all.Stay Metal!
-
For me I thoroughly enjoyed the video and believe those were their genuine reactions.
I do however feel that on the silver the real amp sounded to my ears better and less linear with the volume dialed back on the guitar, it's low crunch to clean had a lot of warmth of tone and plummyness that I didn't detect from the Kemper.
At high gain I kinda also feel it's a shame Rob wasn't able to demonstrate that nice natural feedback with the Kemper which so easily came to the real amp both with open strings and when fretting and bending that note. What was interesting about that was how the Kemper just perfectly sustained forever, while the real amp went into harmonic territory. Thing is I know that the Kemper will feed back perfectly well so I'm not sure what went on there.
-
AFAIK apart from the low frequency compensation a while ago nothing has changed.
The only difference is that people now understand better what the Profiler does.
Playing through a real cab helped a great deal as well, especially for the more conservative Mr. Chapman.
My thoughts exactly, Ingolf.The Captain made what would normally be the reasonable assumption that ongoing software updates have seen the accuracy of Profiles improve. This would be true for most devices, but obviously not in the case of our beloved Kempers.
As I said in the other thread on this, this is my fave Andertons video 'cause Chappers, and to a lesser extent, The Captain, have been Kemper sceptics since that studio video they made a while back. Chappers, since that day, has been adamant that he can always tell when he's playing a Kemper. Now, even using profiles of his own amps, he can't.
Endorsements don't come along more emphatically than this IMHO - dyed-in-the-wool sceptic to 100% convert; that takes some doing, and the Kemper was up to it.
-
Of course it was a commercial, but I also think they guys were honest in their reactions. The things they said were spot on for what people expect. They heard tiny differences that they then ascribed to the wrong things, based on their incorrect expectations.
-
The Captain made what would normally be the reasonable assumption that ongoing software updates have seen the accuracy of Profiles improve.
@Monkey_Man @Ingolf I would actually contend that many things have changed over the past several years that now contributes to a better overall sound from our beloved Profiler.
I know for certain that my current Kemper profiles sound way better than the ones I was using a couple of years ago for a bunch of reasons.
One thing for sure is the very process of creating and refining profiles has become better understood and improved by all in the community. People like Andy (TAF), Michael (M Britt), and Guidorist have commented on how their profiles are getting better and better due to improvements in the software, better techniques in the studio, better understanding of the refining process and how best to do it. No question in my mind that the profiles themselves have in many cases gotten way better.
Also on the software end some very real improvements to the sound has happened with the 3.0 software and the better separation of cab and amp. Also the Pure Cabinet stuff added something from my perspective. There was also changes to the low end response that was mentioned already. There were also other refinements I am sure along the way. But for sure what I hear today is better and more accurate than what I heard 2-3 years ago.
-
Most of my blah is in the other thread, but just to add to that great post above. At the start of the video he makes it clear that he only wanted a Kemper for touring and would use his real amps for studio or recording..to me thats not only an unfair bias on the the kemper, but a silly statement when he should test it out first before making such plans.
How does he know the Kemper would not perform in his studio recording...
I only watch those 2 for ENTERTAINMENT..blah.Ash
-
Display More
@Monkey_Man @Ingolf I would actually contend that many things have changed over the past several years that now contributes to a better overall sound from our beloved Profiler.
I know for certain that my current Kemper profiles sound way better than the ones I was using a couple of years ago for a bunch of reasons.
One thing for sure is the very process of creating and refining profiles has become better understood and improved by all in the community. People like Andy (TAF), Michael (M Britt), and Guidorist have commented on how their profiles are getting better and better due to improvements in the software, better techniques in the studio, better understanding of the refining process and how best to do it. No question in my mind that the profiles themselves have in many cases gotten way better.
Also on the software end some very real improvements to the sound has happened with the 3.0 software and the better separation of cab and amp. Also the Pure Cabinet stuff added something from my perspective. There was also changes to the low end response that was mentioned already. There were also other refinements I am sure along the way. But for sure what I hear today is better and more accurate than what I heard 2-3 years ago.
Fantastic points, mwinter77! You've got me convinced.The low-end enhancement thing was "always-on" back when Chappers first tested the unit AFAIK, and now it's off, so there'd have been less "artificial weight" this time 'round. According to Kemper, less work is necessary now in refining, even to the extent that in many cases it can be skipped altogether. This would've helped guarantee that the two fellas who profiled Chappers' amps at Andertons for the test would've been able to more-accurately capture said amps than otherwise might've been the case a few years ago.
EDIT: Sam just informed me that a Studio Profile was created and the cab turned off, so the separation algorithm came into play too, a further vindication of what you're saying.
Nevertheless, none of us knows exactly what's been going on with under-the-hood tweaks, but I reckon, especially considering the great points you raised, it does seem as if the Profiling engine itself might have also been enhanced in some way/s or another. IIRC, the powers that be have stated here on the forum that this isn't the case, FWIMBW, but I don't know now...
-
I thought the reactions were honest, but definitely coloured by the fact that the volume of the Kemper was way too loud at the beginning of the test. This would always bring a favourable result for the louder amp. Anyway, I don't need the Andertons video to tell me how good and useful a tool my Kemper is and it has even inspired me to play more often.
-
...they used a DI Profile, so cab separation wasn't necessary, which of course also means that Pure Cab™ wouldn't have been used.
Actually, Rebea (spelling?) wrote on facebook that they created Studio profiles and just switched the Cab off. Further proof that CabDriver isn't as shabby an algorithm as people would have you believe...
-
Actually, Rebea (spelling?) wrote on facebook that they created Studio profiles and just switched the Cab off. Further proof that CabDriver isn't as shabby an algorithm as people would have you believe...
Seriously? That's amazing, Sam!Geez... this thing never ceases to amaze me. Thank you, mate.
I thought the reactions were honest, but definitely coloured by the fact that the volume of the Kemper was way too loud at the beginning of the test. This would always bring a favourable result for the louder amp. Anyway, I don't need the Andertons video to tell me how good and useful a tool my Kemper is and it has even inspired me to play more often.
Interestingly, karlic, Chappers asked how many watts the powered Kemper was after the huge volume increase, and seemed surprised that it was 600, so if anything, you'd expect him to have been inclined to guess that it was the Kemper that he'd just heard... and yet, he didn't - he guessed it was the amp at 9:45! -
Further proof that CabDriver isn't as shabby an algorithm as people would have you believe...
This is what I''ve been saying for years.
-
Had been looking forward to this video for a few weeks since the captain mentioned it on that pedal show. It did not dissapoint, I loved seeing them getting both amps wrong and believe the reactions were genuine. I did expect the 2 kemper and amp tomes to sound different, I suspect if they had profiled the amps using a di box then the difference would have been less obvious. Both tones sounded good but the kemper had more dynamic than the real amps imo.
-
Ugh, comparisons... What is the point in these? I have a Diezel Herbert, sometimes I play it and it sounds better than the Kemper, then the next day, the Kemper sounds better. Nothing has changed except the day... Or maybe the wax in my head?! Washing my hands made my playing brighter? poltergeist moving my speaker cabs slightly?! I vote for the latter. Its the only plausible explanation.
-
">
Ugh, comparisons... What is the point in these?
One Kemper is a lot cheaper to tour with than two heads and a bunch of effects, so there's that.
