Higher resolution IRs

  • Ok, so I didn't know the current specs of the IRs in the KPA but I'm guessing that they are pretty low resolution compared to the AxeFX II (512 point or less). The reason I say this is down to the energy, especially in the low-end, of the tones in the KPA.


    Don't get me wrong, it does sound great as is but I think that there could be a real potential to improve the energy of the profiles by increasing the IR resolution.


    Just a thought but it could be a serious improvement to what is already an awesome product.


    Cheers


    Spence

  • AFAIK the KPA doesn't use IR's................ :huh:

    "Music is enough for a lifetime, but a lifetime is not enough for music" Serghei Rachmaninoff


  • I thought (incorrectly presumed) it used an impulse as part of the profile to recreate the cab. If not then I guess this request is null and void, if it does then it would be cool. Either way it sounds great :)


    Spence

  • The creator of the AxeFX certainly thinks that they are using IRs in the KPA, obviously I have no idea either way, all I know is that when the AxeFX increased the IR length things sounded more realistic in the low-end.


    for reference...


    Fractal Link


    Spence

  • If all what they say there is true it means the KPA must sound lot worser then we all hear....magic?
    ;)

    "Music is enough for a lifetime, but a lifetime is not enough for music" Serghei Rachmaninoff


  • You can get a ton of low end energy in the KPA depending on the mic's you use when you make a profile and of course the amp settings. However, for guitar you don't want a ton of low end energy....it would never sit in the mix if you did !

  • You can get a ton of low end energy in the KPA depending on the mic's you use when you make a profile and of course the amp settings. However, for guitar you don't want a ton of low end energy....it would never sit in the mix if you did !


    Ok so maybe I didn't phrase this properly, it's not about the energy it's about how tight the low end is. I know you can get lots of low end (or not) from the Kemper as you desire this is about the clarity of the low end.


    Either way I really enjoy the tone I am getting from the KPA and always look forward to playing on it :)


    Spence

  • The tightness in the low-end is down to the type of amp that you have profiled really. Vintage amps have a very loose low end but modern amps have a very tight crisp low end...and of course you can adjust your profile from anywhere between vintage and modern. I suppose it depends a lot on your playing preferences and music style...I like a vintage sounding looseness in the low end because I like vintage rock/blues music. I'm not too keen on speed metal guitars circa 1990's onwards. It's whatever is good for you in the end, no-one is right and no-one is wrong.

  • If all what they say there is true it means the KPA must sound lot worser then we all hear....magic?
    ;)

    The reason they're talking over "there" is because they're worried....psychology 101.


    Rafael Nadal has far bigger muscles than Novak Djokovic, but who won the match?


    It's not 'magic', it's Mr Kempers algorithm.

  • I really wouldn't worry about any technical stuff that's spouted elsewhere because no one but Kemper knows the answer of how the cabs work for sure. The cabs are one of the things that hit me straight away with the kemper they sound great. Ive not heard anyone yet say they prefer redwire/axe or any other cabs to the kemper ones yet and in my own tests i prefer the kemper cabs to my redwire ir's. Although that is just my personal preference and nothing more there was no noticeable bottom end missing in comparisons. The bottom end for me sounds really good there's no need to be using a para eq to tame them like some other products Need which i see as a good thing.


    Bottom line is ,,, if it sounds good it is good and anything else is just waffle.

  • L6 Vetta was below 80 tabs - and worked as well - I created some additional speaker and microphone filters for the Vetta - and they sounded fine.
    All this was 2004:
    http://www.soundside.de/shop/V…20on%20the%20DI%20Upgrade



    256 points - if the value is really the number of tabs in the KPA speaker sim - is not very much - but we don't want to capture the room - only the speaker.


    In this case could the Cab block alter frequencies down to 172Hz - all below will pass thru but unaltered by the cab block. - it's not true that low frequencies are cut of or whatever.


    When I captured some IR's (from acoustic guitar body's) I found that some part of the IR was stored into the cabinet block and another into the Amp block - both together sounded fine.


    btw. the AxeFx started with 512 tabs - but use 48Khz sample frequency.


    2007 was all this discussed here:
    http://www.setbb.com/axefx/viewtopic.php?mforum=axefx&t=1706


    If you read that thread then you can find that Cliff stated that 512points are fine - "1024 do not sound any different".
    The AxeFx II has 2048 points - that was discussed very controversial between Cliff and Jay later - and ended in Jay being banned from the Factal forum ....


    btw. I don't care about the number of IR points - as long as it sounds right :rolleyes::D

    (All trademarks are trademarks of their respective owners, which are in no way associated or affiliated with soundside.de)


    Great Profiles --> soundside.de

    Edited 8 times, last by Armin ().

  • And 1024 is the right count.
    If you go back to the firmware 5.26 with your standard or Ultra, you will be able to hear the first part and the second part of a 1024 tap IR, because it is cut in 2 users IRs. The last 512 part has an influence but it is small.
    After that you will have the room reverb.


    Cliff stated that the 2048 IRs were added in order to use 2x1024 IRs in the same cab block (stereo) which make sense.
    So i would say, 1024 taps with 48khz is the right count.

  • Yes, you are right - but the Kemper people mentioned in another thread that the KPA does NOT use any IR's at all - not in the amp block and not in the cab block.


    So there is no need to increase anything.


    (Check the 'KPA = Old tech?' thread for more about this)

    (All trademarks are trademarks of their respective owners, which are in no way associated or affiliated with soundside.de)


    Great Profiles --> soundside.de

  • Yes, you are right - but the Kemper people mentioned in another thread that the KPA does NOT use any IR's at all - not in the amp block and not in the cab block.


    So there is no need to increase anything.


    (Check the 'KPA = Old tech?' thread for more about this)


    Agreed, I started this thread before CK gave us this info. I could be closed really as it's not relevant.


    Spence

  • Yes, you are right - but the Kemper people mentioned in another thread that the KPA does NOT use any IR's at all - not in the amp block and not in the cab block.


    So there is no need to increase anything.


    Isn't it also possible that it uses IR's but called something else..? :) Like they use "Profiling" instead of Modeling ? :)
    Of course no one can blame Kemper for not giving away it's secrets..

  • Isn't it also possible that it uses IR's but called something else..? :) Like they use "Profiling" instead of Modeling ? :)
    Of course no one can blame Kemper for not giving away it's secrets..


    Im no expert but I understand Kemper using the word profiling instead of modelling as it uses a very different approach to all other modellers, and profiling describes the process better.
    Christoph has gone to great pains on a few occasions to state categorically they are not IRs without trying to give the game away too much as to how they work.
    The only person who has actually tried to say they were (and even went on to say they were inferior ones) was the ceo and designer of another top end modeller . That person has also tried to tell his 'fans' that the KPA sounds flat when in a side to side comparison with his offering. (B*llocks! I ran both together for almost 2 weeks. Sent the other one back)
    'Nuff said....

  • Truth is it makes no difference at all to me how the sound is created, IR's no IR's, modeling, profiling etc, it's all the same to me.. :) Only interested in the final result, the sound coming out of the speakers, my plans for the KPA are mostly for studio, I'm not replacing anything, so I'll get my chance to hear how it sounds thru studio speakers as well as going thru a very decent quality PA, obviously since I own an Axe II I'll do my own comparisons, but I'm looking for something to add, not a replacement, assuming I enjoy playing it will be another option to have for sounds, and after the KPA a Carol Ann amp is on the list after playing one this weekend.. :)


  • Has one of you had the chance to make a real judgement about different IR sizes?
    The real comparison of IR sizes can only be done by listening to two IR's that are supposed to create the same frequency responce, but have different sizes.


    Experience anyone?