Next level profiling: ONE Amp - ONE Profile

  • Usually I choose profiles with a little higher gain and then reduce its gain manually a little bit. I feel like this sounds better in many of my personal musical situations. But this again only works because the Profiler gets to know all those previous gain stages up to the desired profile gain state in the profiling process. The other way round does not work properly (putting more gain to a cleaner profile) for the same reason.


    I don't like having one million profiles to choose from with most of them being the same amp. So the way how I use profiles made me think of this: For a better workflow... what if the Profiler (or the next generation!) would be programmed to really react like an amp according to its gain AND its EQ knobs? This means: put all those gain stages (=profiles) into one adjustable profile. Technology and Computercode should be already there, even with the current generation. This should be easily doable (?) in my understanding. Yes, the profiling process maybe could take more time (?) but that should be not the problem.


    Next stage: a new Kemper with two dsps could easily blend two of these one-profile-oneamp-amps into a double amp setup.


    This would make life a lot easier than it already is with the Kemper and maybe would leave a lot more space for patches instead of having it blocked by profiles.

    Better have it and not need it, than need it and not have it! - Michael Angelo Batio

    Edited once, last by Alienator ().

  • That's not quite right I'm IMHO.


    Starting with the gain issue: I agree that reducing the gain on a profile sounds much more natural than increasing it for the reasons you describe. However, it doesn't sound the same as turning the gain knob down on the real amp. I have done extensive tests on this with a THD BiValve head. Turning down the gain on the KPA gives a result almost identical to reducing the guitar's volume knob. Depending on the amp this may sound very different from reducing the amp's gain. Non Master Volume amps like the THD or Marshall Plexi etc definitely sound like rolling the guitar volume down when you reduce the KPA gain. It's a great sound and definitely very natural, which I really love, but it doesn't guarantee that profiling an amp at max gain allows the KPA to capture all the gain levels up to that point.


    As for EQ: I think one of the best features of the KPA is the fact that the EQ is consistent and predictable unlike every amp having it's own idiosyncrasies which need to be learned. The problem is that nearly every valve amp ever made uses a version of the TMB tone stack (a.k.a. FMV tone stack). This affects both tone and gain but more importantly each control affects all the others. Turning the Treble control affects the frequencies getting through to Bass and Middle. Trying to simulate the interaction of these controls is likely to be a massive task and largely undesirable anyway. It seems that a move in that direction would basically turn the KPA into a modeller like Axe FX, Helix etc. These achieve it by trying to model the real thing right down to individual component values and they do a great job. If I wanted that sort of user experience (i.e. all the controls of each amp behaved exactly like the physical amp) I would by an Axe FX to be honest.

  • Thanks Wheresthedug for your answer. Maybe you misunderstood. Let me put it this way. Currently I have 10 amps with up to 20 profiles or gain stages each on my main Kemper. That makes about 200 profiles you have to test and choose from. Why not combine the profiles of each amp? That would reduce the amount and the work flow. My main point in this feature request corner of the forum was exactly this: requesting the feature of having an improved profiler (either this generation or a much more improved next generation) with profiles of amps that ARE able to react like the profiled amp by just combining (this is just my non professional way of putting it) all the profiles of different gain stages of an amp (as they already come in most profile packs, anyway) into ONE profile and under the mere control of the gain knob of the profiler. This should be easy to do as you theoretically just have to "combine" the many profiles (="gain stages") of one amp into one profile and put some "flawless-change-morphing-thing" between them. This really should only be a matter of mere programming in order to have the gain knob not trying to manipulate the amount of gain of a profile as you describe it but, simply spoken, fluently and internally change the different profiles (gain stages) of the same amp as they were profiled - stage by stage.


    I hope this description makes more sense.

    Better have it and not need it, than need it and not have it! - Michael Angelo Batio

    Edited once, last by Alienator ().

  • It seems that a move in that direction would basically turn the KPA into a modeller like Axe FX, Helix etc.

    Yes, but that was not my point, I hope I could be more precise as to what I meant with my second description above.

    Better have it and not need it, than need it and not have it! - Michael Angelo Batio

  • i think if the kemper took snap shots in various positions and applied a "blend" between them it would be pretty good and more active in reaction. Example; taking a profile at 9 o clock in all positions then another at 12 and then at 3 and have them react accordingly via the KPA .

  • Alienator OK I think I understand.


    Basically some sort of hyper morphing between individual profiles rather than individual parameters? Basically the 20 profiles of each amp that you currently have would go into some kind of folder (hidden away in the depths of the KPA rather than an actually folder of 20 profiles) and the morph thingy would blend smoothly between them?


    In theory that sounds plausible. In reality I think it might be massively more complicated matter fraught with inconsistencies. I could be wrong though and if anybody is capable of thinking outside the box and making it work its surely the guys at Kemper.

  • i think if the kemper took snap shots in various positions and applied a "blend" between them it would be pretty good and more active in reaction. Example; taking a profile at 9 o clock in all positions then another at 12 and then at 3 and have them react accordingly via the KPA .

    The difficulty with that is that a TMB tone stack doesn't work like that.


    Setting all controls at 9,12 and 3 o'clock, doesn't translate to morphing to one at 9 one at 12 and one a 3 because of the way they interact with each other. To get that sort of blending to be even vaguely accurate you would need a whole table of values say


    T10, M0. B0

    T0, M10, B0,

    T0, M0, B10

    T5,M0,B0,

    T5, M5,B5

    .............

    .............

    ..............


    The best way to understand this is to download the Duncan Amps Tone Stack Calculator then move the controls and watch the frequency response graph. That is why modellers need to go down to individual component and circuit design level to get the controls to work like the real amp. In the tone stack calculator you can actually change the component values and change their layout to see how the frequency response and the level of interaction changes. Its fascinating stuff even if actually understanding it is way above my pay grade ^^

  • I understand (well, not really as a mere musician but I "feel":D) the difficulties that you describe.


    But, you know "it is impossible for man to fly and to land on the moon"...as we all know, right?


    I bet (pray) this feature just WILL come some day. I wonder if the programming staff already thought of this. Imagine how superior that would make the Kemper immediately - marketingwise and compared to any modelling (for me it already always was, of course). No more thousands of profiles. Just the amount of different amps (and their channels) that you need loaded, named and visible. Everything else, all the profiles and magic, hidden in the guts of the Kemper.


    Just do it.

    Better have it and not need it, than need it and not have it! - Michael Angelo Batio

    Edited 2 times, last by Alienator ().

  • because of the way they interact with each other.

    Honestly, given all the interaction between controls and the fact that each amp weights things differently, I'm really amazed that Kemper has managed to do the profiling at all. I mean, a snapshot is hard enough, but I dial back the gain knob or my guitar and it behaves like the freakin' amp does? That's just voodoo, man.

    But, you know "it is impossible for man to fly and to land on the moon"...as we all know, right?

    Yeah, but where are my flying cars?! :)

    Kemper remote -> Powered toaster -> Yamaha DXR-10

  • Regarding the gain variations, I would be fine when I were able to combine several profiles into one "profile-set" where the KPA even simply switched from one to the other profile when a certain gain amount is crossed.

    Example:
    Profile 1 : Gain (on the KPA led-dial) 3

    Profile 2: Gain (on the KPA-led dial) 5

    When turning the gain dial beyond the middle between 3 and 5 (4), the KPA switches from profile 1 to profile 2.


    That would even give me the freedom of including a drive pedal profile into the set, where say from 8 and up, I could set it up so that it switches to a profile that has been created using a drive pedal. I could even combine different amps for different gain levels. Why limit this?

  • Why limit this?

    No reason. But it is human to first always see difficulties and all that inhuman (???) work to make such new things happen as you always see in this request corner.


    I am thankful that some people ignore difficulties and just invent. Imagine Christoph Kemper just having given up because of all those difficulties in developing the profiler. He just did it by only asking "how" on his way. At least this is what I imagine he did because it's cool 8o.


    Do the one amp - one profile now.

    Better have it and not need it, than need it and not have it! - Michael Angelo Batio