Kemper 2 expectations

  • Please, can you tell me the difference between a consumer product and a "professional" product, in this line of gear?

    Let's stop splitting hair :) I think a sport car can be used by armateurs and profs ;)


    I think Iwouldn't have bought a Kemper if I had not seen it before played by some professional guitar player..

  • ^ So much reason for a K2.

  • I don't know what your specific complaints are and I won't look through the 17 pages to find out but it probably has to do with something I see all the time on this forum. I don't think these complaints are necessarily wrong, just that in the grand scheme of things, they are probably irrelevant. There are so much other more important things to focus on and have together as a musician. But don't take my word for it, if this device is holding you back from becoming the musician you want to be, there are plenty of other very capable ones you can use so I'd advise you to sell this "consumer product" and move on asap instead of hoping for a future update to accommodate you; much faster to get to your goal that way.

    Typical. You seem to think you are so successful you can speak for all other musicians. Arrogant, derogatory and boring. Next!

  • The local music shop perspective notwithstanding, I always scratch my head when I hear people on the internet giving this incredibly successful company “advice”.


    The original Kemper design is not comparable to the rack version (I’ve owned and gigged both) or any other brand’s rack device versus a floor version. And it’s preferred by many for exactly what it is, not despite its design.

    Hey brother, Are you Saying that there is a ‘sonic difference’ between say, the powered head version that I own versus the power rack version of the Kemper?


  • Actually, it's white metal, Ash. I like to sing about God mostly. Praise the Lord! Let all perish in his righteous wake! Haha

  • Noooo just saying racks are racks and floors are floors and I like using the toaster, kind of a cool mini amp head, in the studio and live, so for me the whole push for a floor version holds zero appeal.


    You said it correctly, "for YOU". Others have chimed in here, and in other threads/forums, about wanting a floor version. Personally, I too would like a floor version of the Kemper since that would give us a simpler, all in one, solution not offered by the head or rack versions.

  • I think for „better“ / more detailed / whatever algorithms you either can optimize the current ones or add more processing power.


    My guess is that the current ones are very well coded, maybe even in C wrapped in C++?


    At some point though, you run out of proc power, e.g. double profile playing, 10 reverbs in a chain etc.


    Question is: who needs these features?


    I guess there can be a lot more achieved with the current HW, the builtup itself (platine layout) could be reused in most parts if there was another processor needed for a particular reason.


    In my opinion lots of potential lies in evolving the SW in terms of usability aspects and feature additions. They do this and it is the right way. Nevertheless, all these efforts you can reuse with a more modern CPU, but I guess we won‘t see a KPA2 with one in the next 1-2 years minimum. We‘ll see it when the potential of the current platform is at it‘s limits.

  • Obviously new profiling algorithm based on neural networks.
    It's just godsend to any developer in audio software business.

    Can be done with current HW, depends on how long a profiling process „is allowed to take“ regarding usability aspects. In theory, a DNN could approximate all this in an arbitrary grade. If you do it cleverly it should not take too long. One approach would be not to use DNN for the ultimate approximation but just for frequency ranges whose transfer function can not be approximated good enough with classical methods. I guess they use section-wide transfer functions anyways. Use reinforcement learning to make it even more efficient.


    Basically I guess they do their FFT stuff anyways, but more defined profiling would mean more complex transfer functions equals more processing power for the same latency.


    I think you can optimize the transfer functions a lot by having look-up-tables of arbitrary effects combinations (algebraic operations already done). This might be the reason why there are not sooo many different effect types. Most of them are very flexible due to wide ranges, but might share these optimized transfer functions.


    Anyways, cool and nerdy thread. :-D


    If I am too „off-topic“ tell me and I stop. ;-)

  • A floor version would not “simplify” my live or studio approach; having to fall to my knee to make on the fly adjustments, the way I had to with a traditional pedalboard, would be a terrible step backwards... for me.


    And that's totally fine. You don't want the floorboard version, then simply don't not buy it :-).


    For those who do want it, like myself, would be a great addition. I can keep my current Kemper in the studio and bring the floorboard version to gigs. Everyone's happy!