For millionth time... Why is Kemper profiles so trebly/fizzy??

    Quote from ColdFrixion

    I must have missed his response. Do you remember the thread Dimi posted that in?

    To clarify — CK had chimed in on a thread and agreed with the term “congestion” but attributed it to dual distorting stages. Don’t remember which thread, too much.


    I am also not sure what tests he has heard exactly and what not. It seemed that he was following up from what I had submitted to support, as well, but I cannot be sure what exactly he was reffering to. I didn’t hear something special from support.


    After CK reply I just thanked them and that was it.


    This doesn’t need to be complicated though... I can share a good DI with anyone who wants to do such a test. I also did test with dual distorting stages vs none right after to show what happens in both cases, btw.


    But all this takes time and effort. It does. And I really wanna move to testing other things at this point, especially considering how boringly “offended” and reactive much of the response to such tests is on the internet. You go near axe or Kemper and bloods boil.


    Support had also told me nobody had brought up any of this (more ts tone, rasp, then the congestion issue). People who are having problems or just want profiling to improve can do tests and hope for a different resolution.


    But yes, up to now I don’t see reason to think kemper is working to fix the slight Innacuracies that exist even with only single stage distorting tones.


    I hope I’m not banned again for following up on out of topic posts. One bán left and I’m going the way of the dodo.


    Cheerios

    Edited once, last by Dimi84 ().

    Like 1

    It's not about defending the Kemper or faulting the Kemper, but I find it discouraging that the focus becomes the device shortcomings. Producing a record is no easy task and at the same time it's not that difficult. If you listen to some of the productions even in this Kemper Community you will find varying degree of excellent to good to whatever.


    I just find it puzzling that at this level quality provided by the KPA some will still blame the device when many others are producing records selling hundreds of thousands of copies using this same device.


    Sure there's always room for improvement but what's needed here is problem solving approach, Problem is someone is perceiving all the Kemper Profiles to be so trebly and fizzy. You know what? Someone will also perceive the best selling or most popular guitar records of all time to be all trebly buzzy crap because they enjoy Jazz or classical guitar or the other way around.


    I simply don't agree with generalization in any way shape or form. Learning how to mix, use reverb and EQ will solve the Fizz Problem, problem solved not by improving the profiling and will never be just by improving the profiling.


    Instead we get all this negativity that makes matters worse and instead of solving anything, it just makes matters worse.


    Come on guys, producers have been using digital guitar tones since AMP farm 1998. that's almost 20 years ago, the improvement since then and now are beyond staggering in guitar tones. Kemper is at the forefront. Look around and see how too many to list others are using the Kemper extremely well with great success if you want to utilize this great tool by learning tips and tricks from success , otherwise carry on with excuses of fizz, raspiness, or whatever new words that you can come up with. My opinion so don't hang me for it. :)

    Edited once, last by Dean_R ().

    Like 1

    Plenty of professional players & producers/engineers have found success using the Axe-FX, yet that didn’t keep you from critiquing what you felt it doesn’t do well. You also seemed quite eager to write it off as not being able to fit in a mix (crazy) and using a single Metallica performance as validation. Yet a few people ask why the device that markets itself as being able to perfectly replicate a source tone has some tonal issues and how to mitigate them and you continue to behave as though we’re irrational to speak of such things.

    Personally never said "extra raspiness" stopped me from doing anything. The vast majority of people don't "let" imperfections stop them. I used a pod for years. Excuses, not here, sorry.


    Profiling deficiencies, as slight as they may be, could have contributed to OP's issue. Hence they came up. My offer about eq matching during refining stands.

    Eq matching during Refining? How do you mean bro? Do you mean just matching it up while you are doing refining? Or do you mean adjusting the reference amplifier that you are profiling?
    I’m old! I need more clarification here! Ha ha Ha ha ha!
    :thumbup:

    Quote from SQUAREHEAD

    Eq matching during Refining? How do you mean bro? Do you mean just matching it up while you are doing refining? Or do you mean adjusting the reference amplifier that you are profiling?
    I’m old! I need more clarification here! Ha ha Ha ha ha!
    :thumbup:

    Dial in amp as close as you can to a recording you have (doesn't need to be too close) of a single guitar track. Then when refining run that track through kemper so kpa matches that.

    Quote from Dimi84

    Dial in amp as close as you can to a recording you have (doesn't need to be too close) of a single guitar track. Then when refining run that track through kemper so kpa matches that.

    But won’t that compromise raw amp tone by adding another coloring preamp and such?

    Quote from mnewse614

    well to run it into a DAW to eq and send back is what I am thinking you mean, so then you would have the coloring of the interface

    You are just sending the recorded track to kemper while refining, tricking kpa into thinking that is still the amp. So it tries to match that still.

    That can useful, for example, in a case where you have a guitar track that has been EQ'd, molded for a particular mix.


    You can do the same with bias, axe fx... Same logic, other than the fact that kemper does not officially support such a function (Andy Sneap was telling Ck to implement it but Ck didn't like the idea).


    You can also do the same with guitar recordings that are not even "made to fit a mix". For example I can dial in my amp and to somewhat match (on some level, can still be quite different) someone's recording of another kemper profile... Profile amp, refine with that signal, and kemper will try to match it.


    There are cases where it does go wrong since this is not really what kemper is meant for. But it can work quite well too.

    Quote from raunch

    A poor workman will always blame his tools.

    Which I don't think applies to most people being "critical" of kpa as seen in forum, not serious one. Few? Yes, quite few Though, through the times.

    Quote from raunch

    A poor workman will always blame his tools.

    I don't know that anyone here is claiming the KPA is bad or that it keeps us from playing or being creative. Though, any worker worth his salt would also seek to get the most out of his tools, especially for the task it was created to do.

    Quote from MementoMori

    Plenty of professional players & producers/engineers have found success using the Axe-FX, yet that didn’t keep you from critiquing what you felt it doesn’t do well.

    You're completely taking things out of context, I didn't buy the AXE FX II , I critiqued rightfully when I was in the stage of making a choice to illustrate that the Kemper felt and sounded to my ears so much better when I played both to compare. I'm sure other producers will get good results, but even in that regards Kemper Clips always sounded better to my ears, so why would I buy the AXE FX II and go the fractal forum and ask them to improve it because all the amp models sound fizzy??? Make sense



    Quote from MementoMori

    You also seemed quite eager to write it off as not being able to fit in a mix (crazy) and using a single Metallica performance as validation.

    Selective reading on your part. When I was in the market for a modeler, many of those who compared Kemper to AXE FX II talked about and shared clips of how the Kemper fits and sounds much better in the mix of identical tracks. So clearly it's not me as many are daily making the choice to buy the Kemper for similar reason. I'm sure others are also choosing AXE FX for their own reasons. So I bought the Kemper after doing research and yes the several terrible Metallica Performances using the AXE FX II were validation to why I didn't chose it.


    Quote from MementoMori

    Yet a few people ask why the device that markets itself as being able to perfectly replicate a source tone has some tonal issues and how to mitigate them and you continue to behave as though we’re irrational to speak of such things.

    It's irrational for someone to buy a product that he or she is unhappy with based on expectations that it should or would be improved in the future to meet their stringent demands and then they go to the company website demanding improvement otherwise the product is all treblly and fizzy, and that's not what the original poster said by the way, its' what a few who aren't really clear on what they want or expect,


    Why would anyone buy a product that doesn't fulfill his or her need from day one and keep it hoping it will be improved? Is that rational.


    Again it would be like me buying the AXE FX II that I happened to dislike its signature tone and then demand that Fractal fixes it.

    Quote from Dean_R

    You're completely taking things out of context, I didn't buy the AXE FX II , I critiqued rightfully when I was in the stage of making a choice to illustrate that the Kemper felt and sounded to my ears so much better when I played both to compare. I'm sure other producers will get good results, but even in that regards Kemper Clips always sounded better to my ears, so why would I buy the AXE FX II and go the fractal forum and ask them to improve it because all the amp models sound fizzy??? Make sense

    You missed my point, which was more about how you apply different standards of logic without realizing it. No different than when you tried to write off Devin Townsend for addressing what some of us have been saying because he uses an Axe-FX without realizing he's on Kemper's own homepage slideshow.

    Quote from Dean_R

    Selective reading on your part. When I was in the market for a modeler, many of those who compared Kemper to AXE FX II talked about and shared clips of how the Kemper fits and sounds much better in the mix of identical tracks. So clearly it's not me as many are daily making the choice to buy the Kemper for similar reason. I'm sure others are also choosing AXE FX for their own reasons. So I bought the Kemper after doing research and yes the several terrible Metallica Performances using the AXE FX II were validation to why I didn't chose it.

    I did the same, and I also purchased a Kemper. But it's silly to think a few Metallica clips are validation, as if that is the epitome of what the device is capable of, no different than comparisons online that don't favor the KPA vs other modelers (and those videos exist).

    Quote from Dean_R

    It's irrational for someone to buy a product that he or she is unhappy with based on expectations that it should or would be improved in the future to meet their stringent demands and then they go to the company website demanding improvement otherwise the product is all treblly and fizzy, and that's not what the original poster said by the way, its' what a few who aren't really clear on what they want or expect,


    Why would anyone buy a product that doesn't fulfill his or her need from day one and keep it hoping it will be improved? Is that rational.


    Again it would be like me buying the AXE FX II that I happened to dislike its signature tone and then demand that Fractal fixes it.

    This is just poorly laid out logic. We as consumers purchased the KPA based on what it was advertised to do. In most ways it does that, in other ways it's a bit less than the marketing narrative. Having it already, I think it's fair to constructively point out what works and more importantly what doesn't, or doesn't as well. Why would the Kemper team not want to receive consumer feedback on how they might improve their offering? And they do continue to offer upgrades and improve the KPA, so to suggest that we shouldn't offer advice on how to improve the core of their offering is just silly. It's not like we are sitting here calling it garbage or that it's beyond improving, to the contrary. The more defensive of you that insist on chiming in and frustrating yourselves fall into this same cyclical argument, that because you or somebody else doesn't have any issue with the KPA that none of us should as well. That's just not very persuasive.


    Bottom line is by using the KPA we can better speak to things we may not have fully discovered by listening to YouTube comparisons and samples.

    It is possible to criticize certain aspects of a product while still using it and contributing to testing that could encourage/shed light on possible developments.


    I do not understand how emotions can always be that strong when it comes to such topics. It's simple for me, really.


    And companies that are open to that can benefit greatly, some times even more than from their "own" testers, depending on stage of product cycle. Nothing new about that either. Kemper understands that well too, I know.

    Guys, you clearly can talk about all you want and that goes without me saying it., I'm just voicing an opinion just like you. We all somehow want to advance our ideas and my idea of these types of forums is that they are an extension to support in many situations by us supporting each other with a product that we all use in the best way we know how.


    All I'm saying here is this is that I saw this thread as a fellow user who needs help, if I can't help because I don't have the expertise or similar experience, I personally don't chime in to pile on the original problem by introducing more problems than solutions, but feel free to carry on and please don't mind my opinion. Please don't feel that I'm trying to stop you from talking about whatever it is that you want to talk about, I was just hoping that we all can be more helpful instead of arguing.


    Peace

    Quote from Dean_R

    Guys, you clearly can talk about all you want and that goes without me saying it., I'm just voicing an opinion just like you. We all somehow want to advance our ideas and my idea of these types of forums is that they are an extension to support in many situations by us supporting each other with a product that we all use in the best way we know how.


    All I'm saying here is this is that I saw this thread as a fellow user who needs help, if I can't help because I don't have the expertise or similar experience, I personally don't chime in to pile on the original problem by introducing more problems than solutions, but feel free to carry on and please don't mind my opinion. Please don't feel that I'm trying to stop you from talking about whatever it is that you want to talk about, I was just hoping that we all can be more helpful instead of arguing.


    Peace


    There were any number of helpful suggestions and explanations as to why there was a difference between the two samples Cedrick posted in the OP, but with all due respect to him, he wasn't open to a number of them. For instance, he didn't like the idea of using a different cab. He also wasn't really open to the idea of tone matching because he didn't want to use tones that have been EQ matched in his projects. Cedrick also mentioned the lack of low-end in a lot of Kemper profiles, to wit I mentioned adding it back in with a Studio EQ. Some (including myself) mentioned that mic and mic positioning play a huge roll in explaining the differences between his original samples, and it was also suggested that most profiles are created by hobbyists while most commercial recordings are created by professionals. Those are just a few examples. Needless to say, there have been some super useful suggestions and rational explanations in this thread. As the old saying goes, you can lead a horse to water...