New Kemper Owner- Not too impressed, useable

For me profiling my amp(s) worked great. Problem is, I EQ'd the profiles to death and voiced it deeply to my main stage guitar including Compressors and Wahs etc. In result the profile(s) of my amp(s) now sound nothing like my amp but fits better in the mix as my amp would have ever done ... so what, for me it's a tool which makes a lot of things easier. It's another "amp" with lots of possibilities for me.

It is what it is. And worth every penny when bought used. I think you can get a better sound of a real amp. When everyone (engineer, you, ...) and everything (gear, PA) fits. This is not the case in 95% of the occasions in my experience.

For reamping and home-guitar-tracking as well as live performances (regarding flexibility and usability) it's unbeaten imo.

Quote from fourstrk

For me profiling my amp(s) worked great. Problem is, I EQ'd the profiles to death and voiced it deeply to my main stage guitar including Compressors and Wahs etc. In result the profile(s) of my amp(s) now sound nothing like my amp but fits better in the mix as my amp would have ever done ... so what, for me it's a tool which makes a lot of things easier. It's another "amp" with lots of possibilities for me.

It is what it is. And worth every penny when bought used. I think you can get a better sound of a real amp. When everyone (engineer, you, ...) and everything (gear, PA) fits. This is not the case in 95% of the occasions in my experience.

For reamping and home-guitar-tracking as well as live performances (regarding flexibility and usability) it's unbeaten imo.

Hi fourstrk,

Just curious...
Didn't you save a copy of your original profiles before making EQ changes? A good habit would be to save and name your profiles with a standard naming convention, and then to save ("store as") any subsequent "tweaked" versions under a filename that simply appends a modifier to original name.

As an example, you might save an original profile as follows:
"Fourstrk [amp name] ver 0"
with the zero signifying it is your original, base profile.
Then, any EQ, gain, effect tweaks, etc., you make to this original profile, you simply save (store as) using the same filename convention, but with minor change at the end of filename, for example:
"Fourstrk [amp name] ver 1a"
-or-
"Fourstrk [amp name] ver 1b"
-or-
"Fourstrk [amp name] ver 2a"

You get the idea.

Cheers,
John

Is OP the new SonicExporer?

Quote from SonicExporer

.......I never said in a broad context the POD was better than KPA (or vice-versa). What I did say IIRC is that I can get some better tones with a POD 2.0 in the signal chain which the KPA can not simply achieve based on everything I've heard and tried (which is a lot). Namely clarity and the proper upper midrange found in Marshall sytyle amps. A good analog pedal in front of the right settings on a POD 2.0 will get superior tones for certain styles, and especially on solo tones, rather than the raspy, congested gain structure the KPA will too often impose. ......
...........

Sonic

OK, you never used the word better, but you used the word superior LOL. Thanks for the comic relief, it's very hot today in New York and I can use a laugh. I mean that with all the sincerity with a big smile in my face as my growing belly jiggles with the hearty laughter because I know your joking, I just can't believe or understand why others don't get your sense of humor.

well stephen wilson also used the pod and got a cool mix ... but for me the pod is too static, maybe as a pedal platform it works out

but yeah try the body rez from tc with the kemper ... imo it works wonders

it fixes the problem of the less compression and stiffer sound very well imo also the low mids get the pressure they need ...

Well if we're going back in time to the year 2000, then the J-Station completely by Johnson amplification blew the POD 2.0 out of the water and sounded way better, had 44.1 sampling rate instead of 32 Sampling rate.
EDIT: and if you think the Helix Effects are any better than any of the Digitech RP, don't be shocked to find out that anything from RP series from the 20ths century will sound better including reverbs, delays and modulations.

I believe the Pod 2.x had 44.1Khz sampling rate as well?

Thanks to everyone for helping new users!
I will summarize many aspects that have been mentioned in this thread.

There is a number of users struggling with the sound of the Profiler, which is natural.
Guitarists that are new to digital guitar amps in general, can easily be negatively surprized by the variety of sound of a mic’ed amp. Even if you have decades of experience, you might not have sat on the engineers chair and have closely listened to mic’ed guitar amps on a regular basis.
It is not a good recommendation to listen by headphone first.
Mic’ed guitar amps regulary sound thinner, brighter and phasier than the amp in the room. But this is what has been recorded and PA’ed since decades.
The profiles that you are listening to were all made by professional guitarists and producers. Only a few were made by our company, as we rely on the genius of creative people around the world. They have good reasons to have created their profiles the way you listen to it now.
It is a good idea to make your own profiles to test the ability of profiling.
On the other hand it could be helpful to post an audio clip of a Profile that you don’t like or dig.

We have three forum members doubting the quality of the profiling itself, in detail.
The start was a video of Dimi84 showing an A/B comparison. The result sounded „congested“, exactly like he concluded. On this comparison the power section of the tube amp was distorting along with the pre-amp. Profiling will fail if more than one amp stage is significantly distorting.
Further A/B comparisons did not reveal this specific effect, in our ears.
However, we can not rule out that a handful of specific guitar amps do not give satisfying results when profiled. One example is the Marshall JMP 1. We had to do further investigations with the specific tube amps in question. It is proven still, that sought after tube amps (classics) don’t make problems.

The core of the Profiling algorithm has not been changed in the almost 6 years since the Profiler is on the market. During this time, we haven't got earlier messages of profiles coming out congested or raspy. On the other hand we have an increasing number of pro’s replacing their tube amps on stage or in the studio, by making their own profiles or using stock or third party profiles. See our Facebook site for the latest stories. While we have our eyes open constantly, we have no reason to question our Profiling ATM.

Quote from ckemper

Profiling will fail if more than one amp stage is significantly distorting

hmm well maybe you have seen my topic ... that is what i meant by "if the power amp distorts to much it stops working well"
that is why i see the spot right before the power amps distorts to much as a sweetspot because it has already a bit of the compression and warmth of the poweramp

is there a way for you to offer the effects of poweramp distortion in the kemper, i tried my best with the sag and tube settings and so on but
that fullness or cream of a really distorting power amp is somehow lost ... i work around it with some pedals and in the daw but yeah it would be great
to have these two things under the hood, preamp and poweramp distortion ... because many classic tones rely on a amp that is totally on 10
...maybe a adding of just a built in poweramp saturation wolud make the kemper get rid of that problem and would be a benefit for every time when i profile just a preamp or pedal

while i think the profiling it self is easy to learn ther are some things to consider to make the best out of the kemper imo

BUT the most important thing is when playing a real amp you hear a amp and the speaker in a room that immediatly makes a
different impression then the miced signal on a more quieter speaker with a tweeter ... imo the kemper sounded best on my tannoy precision speakers or on my avantone
because if the highs of the signal are not in the center of a speaker but the tweeter is on top of the speaker that makes the highs always more come forward so now on my
genelec 8050 speaker i oftern think too "man that is a lot of fizz ... but that is ONLY the speaker construction because rivera built a guitar combo and i had the same feeling there wit hdistorted amps ...
so yeah ... i always cut now 4k ... and/or use the tc body rez because thet also gets rid of 4k and compresses in a nice way

Quote from Bommel

BUT the most important thing is when playing a real amp you hear a amp and the speaker in a room that immediatly makes a
different impression then the miced signal on a more quieter speaker with a tweeter ... imo the kemper sounded best on my tannoy precision speakers or on my avantone
because if the highs of the signal are not in the center of a speaker but the tweeter is on top of the speaker that makes the highs always more come forward so now on my
genelec 8050 speaker i oftern think too "man that is a lot of fizz ... but that is ONLY the speaker construction because rivera built a guitar combo and i had the same feeling there wit hdistorted amps ...
so yeah ... i always cut now 4k ... and/or use the tc body rez because thet also gets rid of 4k and compresses in a nice way

That is exactly why I am a big proponent of using a coaxial-based FRFR solution. I can't stand the localization and beaming of a separately mounted tweeter, as occurs with a traditional 2-way monitor. I may just be overly sensitive to it...but these types of monitors just sound too "hi-fi" for my ears.

@Tritium I use the StudioEQ stomp - so the original profile is still there. Nevertheless, I got the original profiles done and other ones which are named blablabla w/ FX.

In fact, for live purposes my sounds do not vary this much.

Quote from Bommel

that is why i see the spot right before the power amps distorts to much as a sweetspot because it has already a bit of the compression and warmth of the poweramp

is there a way for you to offer the effects of poweramp distortion in the kemper, i tried my best with the sag and tube settings and so on but
that fullness or cream of a really distorting power amp is somehow lost ... i work around it with some pedals and in the daw but yeah it would be great
to have these two things under the hood, preamp and poweramp distortion ... because many classic tones rely on a amp that is totally on 10
...maybe a adding of just a built in poweramp saturation wolud make the kemper get rid of that problem and would be a benefit for every time when i profile just a preamp or pedal

while i think the profiling it self is easy to learn ther are some things to consider to make the best out of the kemper imo

BUT the most important thing is when playing a real amp you hear a amp and the speaker in a room that immediatly makes a
different impression then the miced signal on a more quieter speaker with a tweeter ... imo the kemper sounded best on my tannoy precision speakers or on my avantone
because if the highs of the signal are not in the center of a speaker but the tweeter is on top of the speaker that makes the highs always more come forward so now on my
genelec 8050 speaker i oftern think too "man that is a lot of fizz ... but that is ONLY the speaker construction because rivera built a guitar combo and i had the same feeling there wit hdistorted amps ...
so yeah ... i always cut now 4k ... and/or use the tc body rez because thet also gets rid of 4k and compresses in a nice way

Display More

Please allow me to contradict.

In my knowledge there is no classic tone made by both preamp and power amp cranked up into distortion. Classic amps use power amp distortion, they lack preamp distortion. Modern amps have preamp distortion, the sound usually degrades when you add power amp distortion. As a consequence, we had no individual yet (and no pro user) that has asked us for two separate distortion stages.

About coaxial speakers: we have done many speakers tests to determine the advantage of coax. There is the advantage of one virtual sound source for sure. But IMHO the difference is very slight. Coax speakers never went its way into mainstream of hifi or studio speakers, even in the high-end region, even though the concept and its advantages are known since many decades. In my experience separate speakers have no tendency to emphasize high frequencies due to the separate locations. If you have made such experience, the reason could be different frequency responces from different speakers.

I mean i use the kemper for a long time and for many reasons but if you look into the corners of sludge, doom, and stoner metal ther it is normal to have a fuzz or overdrive that hits a non mastervolume amp hard on the preamp ... and overdrives sound best when used with a slightly overdriven amp... it sure has a muddy feel that has no place in many music genres but yeah i mean it has its purpose and tube saturation of even the mic signal is also common or the gain staging in general, konz amps made a good video on that ... that all is just my subjective opinion so yeah but thanks a lot for the answer @ckemper ... that coax thing was just a side note just prefer them and i think for demonstration purposes that is a important factor... speaker always color the sound and yeah ... when people are in my studio they expect the kemper to sound like a amp with a 4x12 on the studio monitors but it is "a miced" amp i think people always need a bit to get used to that many never heard their amp miced ... then i often mic their amp because they love that amp and then when they are happy i profile it and they always were happy ... and i had the same experience ... i tried the kemper at thomann and i was like "meeeh no not my thing" and then a friend bought one and together we profiled my amp and i was instantly convinced. If i remember right i ordered my kemper the same week. Maybe Kemper parties like tupperware parties would work very well xD ...

i just want to say for new kemper users that the choice of studio monitors, the profiling of the own amps and the settings in the amp section of the kemper (sag, definition and so on) good irs or cabs in general and the addition of real pedals can make your tweaking so much faster and the results much better... even misha mansoor from periphery made the precision drive to work well with digital devices because it works well ...

Quote from Bommel

Maybe Kemper parties like tupperware parties would work very well xD ...

LOL

Quote from Dlaut

LOL

haha but honestly, like i said profiling my own amp convinced me, the pre made ones not

I am very happy to see @ckemper posting.

Yes, contacting support should always be the preferred method for support. But that is not always the case and there are a few negative threads that pop up. It's nice to see someone from the Kemper camp respond.

I have learned so much from this forum. To the point where I realize I do not even know half of what I thought I knew.

Quote from ckemper

Modern amps have preamp distortion, the sound usually degrades when you add power amp distortion. As a consequence, we had no individual yet (and no pro user) that has asked us for two separate distortion stages.

The Laney GH50R allow to dial the amout of poweramp distortion desired, probably because some people find that interesting ?

Quote from ckemper

About coaxial speakers: we have done many speakers tests to determine the advantage of coax. There is the advantage of one virtual sound source for sure. But IMHO the difference is very slight. Coax speakers never went its way into mainstream of hifi or studio speakers, even in the high-end region, even though the concept and its advantages are known since many decades. In my experience separate speakers have no tendency to emphasize high frequencies due to the separate locations. If you have made such experience, the reason could be different frequency responces from different speakers.

Hello Christoph,

I am pretty sure the legendary Tannoy Dual Concentric would cordially disagree your statement (bolded, for emphasis).

http://www.musictech.net/2014/06/studio-icons-tannoy/

True John. I used the Little Reds, which IIRC were DC, during my first engineering course back in '87.

Still, given that they were "mainstream-studio" 30 years ago, it all seemed to die on its ass fairly-quickly.

Quote from schreckmusic

I have learned so much from this forum. To the point where I realize I do not even know half of what I thought I knew.

... which means I don't even know a quarter of what you thought you knew, Ant.