Profiler OS6 Operating System

  • I'll take the downgrade from genius to, say, thoughtful ?

    'Forward thinker'?


    I love the fact that most rig packs that focus on a single amp contain lots of clips with differing gain levels - and channel/switching options. Your idea is genius (stay with that a bit longer) but I'm not sure how it would be achieved so it would work faithfully with every possible amp/speaker cab/microphone combination and the numerous variations possible based on recording/profiling techniques.

    "I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be." - Douglas Adams

  • So, what are people thinking for the OS6 Beta; May, June, July? Completely pointless to speculate, I know, but the new preset management will be fantastic to have, and the other goodies will be welcome too. I'm really glad they decided on a 3-tier menu, especially with the abundance of delay effect types.

  • 'Forward thinker'?


    I love the fact that most rig packs that focus on a single amp contain lots of clips with differing gain levels - and channel/switching options. Your idea is genius (stay with that a bit longer) but I'm not sure how it would be achieved so it would work faithfully with every possible amp/speaker cab/microphone combination and the numerous variations possible based on recording/profiling techniques.


    'Forward thinker'?


    I love the fact that most rig packs that focus on a single amp contain lots of clips with differing gain levels - and channel/switching options. Your idea is genius (stay with that a bit longer) but I'm not sure how it would be achieved so it would work faithfully with every possible amp/speaker cab/microphone combination and the numerous variations possible based on recording/profiling techniques.

    I kinda do something similar using the morphing feature.


    I had to reverse wire my expression pedal so that heel down (the default setting when selecting a rig) is actually toe down on my expression pedal.

    Then I profiled most of my settings at full gain, and then use the expression pedal to reduce gain and adjust various pre-eq, tone settings and volume settings so I can go from full distortion in toe down and then rock the pedal back to crystal clean.


    I have a couple where I went the other way so toe down (on my pedal) is clean and rocking back goes full distortion (though I rarely do that).

    I have these for a couple of patches where I want to change the patch, instead of rocking the pedal back, and have it be clean.


    This makes it so nice to be able to go from distortion to clean and back without having to change patches.

    Actually, I really only have to change patches if I want to change my delay/reverb settings.

  • My point is that at different stages of gain ( as an example) the amp might show other characteristics other than eq changes, plus takes the hassle out of us trying to work out how a particular amp behaves at different settings.


    I suggested it because amp packs have various stages of the amp and it would be good if these were just one pack. Also we know that the more you drift from the original profile, the less is sounds like the original for all the reasons mentioned...


    Is it possible? If some had suggested profiling 5 years ago I'd have laughed so seems like the hardest bit is done although I don't belittle what this would take. Perhaps this is profiling - next generation...

  • 'Forward thinker'?


    I love the fact that most rig packs that focus on a single amp contain lots of clips with differing gain levels - and channel/switching options. Your idea is genius (stay with that a bit longer) but I'm not sure how it would be achieved so it would work faithfully with every possible amp/speaker cab/microphone combination and the numerous variations possible based on recording/profiling techniques.

    You are right, so many variables but I would focus on just the amp, so effectively DI profiles. With Kemper Kone, the speaker is already separated as a profile so it makes sense to truely mimic the amp.


    I'm happy with forward thinker and if Kemper want to offer me some consultancy in R+D..... :)

  • You are right, so many variables but I would focus on just the amp, so effectively DI profiles. With Kemper Kone, the speaker is already separated as a profile so it makes sense to truely mimic the amp.

    Not sure I'm going to be a fan of Kone. I've messed around a lot with IRs and other cabs that are embedded as parts of profiles - Britt's 2x12 by 3P and an old 1960 with a set of well worn Greenbacks from Top Jimi being two standouts. I've also tried a number of times to see if a DI profile with various cabs can be made to exceed the Studio version with the original profiled cab. Not been happy with the results in either case.


    It's amazing how badly you can make some of the most revered amps in history sound with a miss-matched cab or microphone. Got sick of chasing the IR/cab rabbit and these days if a profile doesn't sound good as is it goes right into the 'out' box. Kone is not on my wish list at all.


    I know others have had great results with this though so I'm probably in the minority.

    "I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be." - Douglas Adams

  • I sort of agree although I'm lookignat it slightly differently.


    I don;t want more variability but more accuracy. I see the Kemper kone ( software part) as being able to fully separate the speaker and amp profile. The more accurately each aspect is profiled, the better.


    However, I will still rely on others to tell/suggest to me that a JCM800 ( for example) works best with greenbacks, rather than endless fiddling :)


    Hope that makes sense, it did in my head :)

  • I see the Kemper kone ( software part) as being able to fully separate the speaker and amp profile. The more accurately each aspect is profiled, the better.

    Agree 100%. Not sure how the software currently does it, but I'm certain that lots of lines between the two are being blurred. Funny, you don't usually think about 'grey areas' when it comes to digital.

    "I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be." - Douglas Adams

  • I don't think it's that complicated. The Kemper will know the frequency response of the kone. And then it will use that curve to modify the curve of the selected IR.


    Resulting EQ curve = Greenback (example) - (linear - Kone response)


    Something like that (probably got the details wrong but you get the idea)

    Kemper PowerRack | Rivera 4x12 V30 cab | Yamaha DXR10 pair | UA Apollo Twin Duo | Adam A7X | Cubase DAW
    Fender Telecaster 62 re-issue chambered mahogany | Kramer! (1988 or so...) | Gibson Les Paul R7 | Fender Stratocaster HBS-1 Classic Relic Custom Shop

  • Imo, that's genius and should be elevated above mere thought-level.


    It's almost as if part of me wants to incline you to keep expressing that thought everywhere on the forums and on FB. It would be a huge leap, or possibly a feature for a future Kemper 2, but it's a simple yet genius idea that we should ensure is out there for the people that be.

    One might consider the following: you can get an accurate profile of an amp with its controls (other than gain or volume) adjusted in a particular way. We see this all the time. So you have two profiles with the knobs in different settings, and both profiles are very good. Wonder if it would be possible to do this...


    1) Program into the Kemper the number of tone knobs on the amp being profiled. Maybe create settings for Fender tweed, Fender silver face, Marshall NMV, etc. tone controls.

    2) Set the tone knobs on the amp to 0. Make a profile.

    3) Set the tone knobs on 10. Make another profile.

    4) The Kemper could perform a profile merge to make the control range of its tone knobs to cover the span difference between the first and second profile.


    This of course would require some software development, but might not require new hardware. It would give you tone control "modeling" much closer to the original amp then what is available in current profiles. There might not be a need to profile gain and volume knobs as the profiler does that now anyway. But again profiling an amp at different gain settings would be helpful to replicate say a Fender amp with the bright switch on (the bright boost reduces as the volume knob is turned up).

  • That's kinda what I was suggesting but you've added the custom settings, so that's real genius! For example the "bright" switch is just a label which you profile on and off.


    I think we all recognize that there are infinite variations with all these settings ( e.g. adding a bright swtich on and off instantly doubles the settings across the board) but at least with some selected profiles (an amp might need say 10 profiles at different settings) it will be more accurate throughout the ranges.


  • To what level of accuracy would we want? Kemper have made a habit of doing it properly or not at all and in my experience, amp controls interact with each other. How many people would then criticise Kemper for not behaving like the real amp at all. So to do it right you need to profile with -


    Low Gain

    • bass 0, mid 0, treble 0
    • bass 10, mid 0, treble 0
    • bass 10, mid 10, treble 0
    • bass 10, mid 10, treble 10
    • bass 0, mid 10, treble 0
    • bass 0, mid 10, treble 10
    • bass 0, mid 0, treble 10

    High Gain

    • bass 0, mid 0, treble 0
    • bass 10, mid 0, treble 0
    • bass 10, mid 10, treble 0
    • bass 10, mid 10, treble 10
    • bass 0, mid 10, treble 0
    • bass 0, mid 10, treble 10
    • bass 0, mid 0, treble 10

    With those 14 profiles, it might be enough for some of us to consider that it now behaves like the real amp but I suggest that it won't completely capture the way the controls interact with each other as they're only captured at minimum and maximum values. And Kemper would only be able to claim that it closely approximates the amp at various settings. Is that enough for the bigger market or will it be viewed as a half-baked failure? That's definitely the Line 6 approach and they've shown that they aim to get each control to mimic the real thing but I'm neither convinced it works or is beneficial.

  • To what level of accuracy would we want? Kemper have made a habit of doing it properly or not at all and in my experience, amp controls interact with each other. How many people would then criticise Kemper for not behaving like the real amp at all. So to do it right you need to profile with -


    Low Gain

    • bass 0, mid 0, treble 0
    • bass 10, mid 0, treble 0
    • bass 10, mid 10, treble 0
    • bass 10, mid 10, treble 10
    • bass 0, mid 10, treble 0
    • bass 0, mid 10, treble 10
    • bass 0, mid 0, treble 10

    High Gain

    • bass 0, mid 0, treble 0
    • bass 10, mid 0, treble 0
    • bass 10, mid 10, treble 0
    • bass 10, mid 10, treble 10
    • bass 0, mid 10, treble 0
    • bass 0, mid 10, treble 10
    • bass 0, mid 0, treble 10

    With those 14 profiles, it might be enough for some of us to consider that it now behaves like the real amp but I suggest that it won't completely capture the way the controls interact with each other as they're only captured at minimum and maximum values. And Kemper would only be able to claim that it closely approximates the amp at various settings. Is that enough for the bigger market or will it be viewed as a half-baked failure? That's definitely the Line 6 approach and they've shown that they aim to get each control to mimic the real thing but I'm neither convinced it works or is beneficial.

    You missed:

    • bass 10, mid 0, treble 10
  • You missed:

    • bass 10, mid 0, treble 10

    Its a lot worse than that. I’m fairly sure that because of the way TMB sone stacks interact in a non linear fashion you would need at least


    5,5,5

    5,5,0

    5,0,5

    10,5,0

    10,0,5

    5,10,0

    Etc

    Etc

    Etc



    I can’t work out how manyprofiles you would need to allow them morph smoothly but my guess is it’s nearer 100 than 14.

  • The idea of "multi layer profiles" is not new here or in the audio world (NEBULA example: https://www.acustica-audio.com/store/t/nebula).

    Some years ago I was asking about the same thing ;)

    But I like this idea . I'm afraid this would require a whole new level of DSP algorithm to interpolate between profiled states.

    If you are trying to mimic every possible combination of the amp within the Kemper, I guess.

    In an ideal world, sure it would be nice to have that capability.

    But do you really, in practice, use or need EVERY possible combination of settings?


    If you're ears are so discerning that you can hear all those nuances from the amp but not from the Kemper, you should just buy and hold on to that amp so you can re-profile it as necessary!


    Personally, I like the fact that I can set the amp to a certain sound and capture THAT sound.

    I don't want to have to then fiddle with it again in the Kemper to get it to sound "right".

    If I wanted it to sound different from that, I'd just do it on the amp and capture a profile of THAT setting to begin with.


    Aside from that, unless you are doing covers of various bands, do you really need that many variations of tones?

    So many that you can't simply create a profile for each one exactly how you want it to sound from the beginning?

    Sounds like a sound guys nightmare if you are changing tones that much during a performance (or even on a CD you are recording)!!!


    In the end, I don't expect the Kemper to replace an amp in totality.

    If I need that much flexibility, I would just make sure I have the amp available if I needed to change the sounds so much that I couldn't accomplish it with the profiles I already have in the Kemper.

    All I need the Kemper to do is take snapshots of the best tones I need to use so I can call them up without having to go through the whole mess of setting up the amp and dialing everything in each time I want that sound.


    On a side note, this is the precise reason Tom Scholz invented the Rockman.

    He had all these different tones he used to make the Boston sound, layering them up and such.

    Every time he needed to record a different part, he had to go through the whole signal change and make all the adjustments to EQ's, compressors, etc and he got tired of doing it.

    So he invented the Rockman and built those changes into the hardware so when you change the setting, it does all that work for you electronically. And if you need to tweak it further, you can do it with MIDI programmable EQ's,

    If Tom wasn't such a hard core analog man, I can only imagine how the Kemper would have benefited him back in the 70's!!!!

    Of course, then we probably wouldn't have gotten the Rockman, which means we probably wouldn't have gotten the Kemper.

  • The idea of "multi layer profiles" is not new here or in the audio world (NEBULA example: https://www.acustica-audio.com/store/t/nebula).

    Some years ago I was asking about the same thing ;)

    But I like this idea . I'm afraid this would require a whole new level of DSP algorithm to interpolate between profiled states.

    It all sounds a bit overly complicated to me and borders on modelling instead of profiling. The Kemper captures a single setup well and then you play that. You can switch to a different rig that gets the next sound and many commercial profile packs cover the whole range of an amp anyway.


    This would most likely have to be a whole new product and a different approach with a lot more DSP, as you suggested.

  • It all sounds a bit overly complicated to me and borders on modelling instead of profiling. The Kemper captures a single setup well and then you play that. You can switch to a different rig that gets the next sound and many commercial profile packs cover the whole range of an amp anyway.


    This would most likely have to be a whole new product and a different approach with a lot more DSP, as you suggested.

    I like such idea but I don't need it so much. It is rather concept what can be done to GAIN or STACK EQ knobs behave like in the real amp.

    Knowing life, such ideas were probably taken into account or at least considered. Perhaps this is how morphing was born.

    Because if you take into account this function, you can try to simulate the change of the the EQ setting depending on gain.

  • I just think there is something in between...so not profiling every parameter to get an exact copy but some of the range to get a better representation.


    Personally I don't tweak profiles that much but its why there are so many profiles at different settings....


    Anyway... one for Kemepr to think about as only they know if its even viable...