This can't be... what am I doing wrong?

  • Guys, at this point I don't think there's anything wrong with his Kemper. He even posted that he adjusted a couple things and got the exact sound 2 other Kemperites got reamping his track.


    I think the guy just doesn't care for the sound he's getting. Personally, I think he might be more satisfied with a true amp sound by using a guitar cab and disabling the cab sims, which will bring the sound "to the front". But I also think he's probably at his wits end with the Kemper. I would be too if I paid $2k for a sound that didn't inspire me.

  • What speakers are you using to audition the various profiles and what outputs are you using from the Kemper?

    All kinds of references, high end monitor headphones, Event 20/20 near fields, fairly high end audio system Sony ES amp and Klipsch. All ran digital direct, but also tried the analog outs as well. And even take things to cheap reference sources as well since those often reveal new findings. Believe me, I been doing this since some of you guys were in diapers. lol I also have a background in QA test engineering so I know how to troubleshoot something, set up proper test environments and control/eliminate the right variables. Again, why I know when is the right time to contact support.

  • *** SUCCESS!!! (Or at least I think.....) ***


    The Splawn worked! It is too early to say anything definitive, but I have to run out now so wanted to at least report back with a quick update on what happened:


    I kept everything untouched except for swapping out the amp and putting the cable into the input. Other than that, EVERYTHING is identical to the Baron amp that wouldn't profile right.


    First time profiling the Splawn and POW, I could tell already it was much more accurate than with the Baron. Not quite right, but close. So I decided to try the refining procedure and that did it. At least a 95% match. Mind you, I was using monitor headphones and haven't had time to go through a proper test. I want to next record tracks with the amp and the KPA so I can compare just how close the KPA really got and how it transposes on tape. Or disk rather.


    Having said all that, I then moved from Gear 3 (highest gain setting) down to Gear 2 and tried to profile again. This did not work out quite as well. Very close, good for sure, but there is a tiny hint of congestion when hitting the chords. I dialed back the midrange on the KPA by 0.2 and it helped. But I need to look into this further because I'm wondering if mid crunch tones may be a challenging area for the KPA to profile. BTW this is the same type of crunch level the Baron had and which the KPA struggled with (although there's no comparison to the Baron profilng mess)


    So as far as profiling goes, the Baron is the culprit, WHY I have no idea.


    At any rate, I suspect I also may just need to get a feel for profiling, mostly the refining part. I though it would be simple push some buttons and go, just like I thought with loading profiles. But I am now coming to the realization this magic box is going to require it's own set of skills to master?


    I am confounded by why so many of the Marshall type profiles (pre JVM) are so dull. One thing I have learned through all this is that, while I can make adjustments easy enough on the KPA, if you tweak EQ or other specialty settings much beyond a tiny amount you end up with a fake sounding result. That's how you can go from something potentially real sounding to something sounding like it is a cousin of a modeler. It seems getting a good profile that matches what you want with very little post-tweaking required, is a key factor in having something maintain it's realistic sound. Again, I'm too early in to make any solid opinions on things, but it sure seems this is the case so far.


    Another thing I noticed is the KPA is incredibly sensitive to what goes in the front end. Guitar, pickups, cables, etc. For those who have used many different tubes you probably know that some more than others are very sensitive to what is fed into them. However the KPA is as sensitive as any tube amp I've ever played. Which is cool on one hand, but something you have to be aware of as it now impacts EVERY amp you are "virtually" playing.


    More thoughts to share but I have to bolt right now. Be back late tonight....


  • 95% isn't a complete match though, so I'm wondering whether your microphone is colouring your results. Which one are you using? Are you using more than one?


    I hope you're going to post some clips when you come back.


    Refining isn't a necessary step with profiling anymore. The results should usually be relatively accurate without refining.


    I'm not too sure why you think crunch is difficult for the Kemper. There are plenty of good crunch profiles on the rig exchange.


    I haven't heard them described as dull either. In that regard, I think your choice of amp tones must be way out there. And I mean waaaaaayyyyyy out.

  • I'm wondering whether your microphone is colouring your results

    It's all relative, AJ. He's comparing the mic'd signal with the KPA's rendition of the same.


    Refining isn't a necessary step with profiling anymore. The results should usually be relatively accurate without refining.

    I remember someone on the K-Team™ saying that it's not necessary in most cases anymore; this could be one of those instances where it is.


    Cheers bro'.

  • I said 95% only because I haven't had a chance to review fully yet. I was using phones while profiling (although the phones are tremendous for this kind of thing, low-end being the main exception).


    Using a 57 mic for these tests.


    Regarding "Refining isn't a necessary step with profiling anymore. The results should usually be relatively accurate without refining" So how/where did you come up with this notion? :huh: The result was relatively accurate for people who are playing live, or hobbyists or who don't have a discerning ear but it would be noticeable side by side comparison. If I hadn't already erased the non-refined profile I would have made a pair of tracks to share.



    I had a thought on the Baron amp... I'm wondering if rather than lowering the volume (which did not help) maybe the opposite approach may work. I wonder this because The Splawn required only +7dB on return signal, whereas the Baron needed more than twice that. So I'm going to try and raise the volume on the Baron to equal the return signal used when profiling the Splawn and see if maybe the KPA can then profile the Baron properly.

  • So as far as profiling goes, the Baron is the culprit, WHY I have no idea.

    Does anyone have information about amps that can not be profiled properly and why? I'm curious because I have never experienced anything like this. I have profiled tube and solid-state amplifiers ranging from the early 50's to current. With anything from icy cleans to completely saturated distortion sounds I struggle to differentiate the KPA from the real thing. If anything there may be an issue with what I would call "player feedback". But then blind-tests point to that being just a mental thing. With my eyes I'd choose the real thing every time, but without the vision it's a toss.


    A problem with a thread like this is that there are several people chiming in with different advise. With wikpa.org gone there should be more stickies, for example in the "tips and tricks" section, with information about troubleshooting and other procedures.


  • Regarding "Refining isn't a necessary step with profiling anymore. The results should usually be relatively accurate without refining" So how/where did you come up with this notion? :huh: The result was relatively accurate for people who are playing live, or hobbyists or who don't have a discerning ear but it would be noticeable side by side comparison. If I hadn't already erased the non-refined profile I would have made a pair of tracks to share.
    ry and raise the volume on the Baron to equal the return signal used when profiling the Splawn and see if maybe the KPA can then profile the Baron properly.


    This is the information I have from Mothership. Refining is no longer a critical step in the process of profile creation.

  • That's pretty impressive IMHO, Don!


    I mean, point 1 can be fixed by lowering the power-amp gain, which leaves only amps that just happen to have noise gates built in that also just happen to be non-disablable.


    That's some rare air right there. Go you good thing, Kemper. :thumbup:

  • All kinds of references, high end monitor headphones, Event 20/20 near fields, fairly high end audio system Sony ES amp and Klipsch. All ran digital direct, but also tried the analog outs as well. And even take things to cheap reference sources as well since those often reveal new findings. Believe me, I been doing this since some of you guys were in diapers. lol I also have a background in QA test engineering so I know how to troubleshoot something, set up proper test environments and control/eliminate the right variables. Again, why I know when is the right time to contact support.

    My advice is commit to one for a while at least, how about the one that was most enjoyable so far.


    Too many options lead to less satisfactions; there's many research done about this and there's even a book titled "The Paradox of Choice - Why More Is Less " :)

  • This is the information I have from Mothership. Refining is no longer a critical step in the process of profile creation.

    Can you try to recall about what OS this advice came under? Or at least whether it came before or after September of 2016? This might be a potential issue with my KPA - so I need to learn more about this notion of not needing refining. I will ask support when I contact them but obviously this notion of no longer needing refining concerns me because my profile definitely needed it. The 1st passs was ... blurry is the best way I can describe it. When I refined it everything cleared up. On a scale of 1 to 100, I'd say the 1st pass was maybe 85-90 range. Refining brought it somewhere between 95-99. Can't be more specific as I haven't had a chance to properly review the results yet...

  • I remember someone on the K-Team™ saying that it's not necessary in most cases anymore; this could be one of those instances where it is.

    Dude, are you reading my posts at all?


    It's probably redundant now, but I heard no feedback from you on my forced-OS-update suggestion either.

  • @SonicExporer


    I had the same general thoughts on the Kemper for the first few days. Generally a bit dull sounding on a lot of profiles, thin on others, etc.


    What fixed it for my ears since I'm using headphones most of the time is the Space setting in Output. It takes the Kemper from sounding super weaksauce in cans to quite incredible.


    I also have an open box Kemper and it had some Global settings (EQ and Noise Gate in particular) that were screwing things up.


    Basically, resetting everything to factory, setting the Noise Gate for my setup, and taking Space to about 7.5 made tremendous improvements.


    Beyond that it was a logic game. A lot of profiles are less bright and sexy to listen to on their own, but that's because they were made to be part of a mix, not for noodling alone in a room. M. Britt profiles are gorgeous if you play along to music with them and a bit dark if you just play them alone.


    Glad it looks like you're starting to figure out your Profiler.