Treble detail in profiles woes

    That's a blanket statement and I simply disagree. As I said the verb isn't just about tails or "depth" and location, but about how frequency response is perceived, the Kemper doesn't compensate for psychoacoustic effects. A dry tone is a great tool but not the only tone. If that's all you and your audience need then more power to you, please don't assume the same for others though.


    I like fidelity. I didn't get a Kemper because I wanted to profile anything. I actually got it because I cannot record at full volume and it was the best sounding digital amp, because it sounded better than the competition. Closer to how real amps sound, closer to how they feel, closer to their gnarly glorious dirty imperfection. Further from the pristine digital deadspace. It is however not perfect.


    That is a shame given that it is uniquely positioned among existing digital amps in terms of hardware to overcome and get that much closer to perfect reproduction of the imperfect.

    I'm sorry to take it out on you, but I really have tried all this stuff and I just feel a little frustrated at this point. It's not your fault, so I apologize. I know that if you have to do something long enough then, well, eventually people assume that a workaround is the actual optimal workflow. I'm not there. I don't feel that dangling a mic in the room to record a Kemper while I have the actual amp right next to it makes a whole lot of sense (even if I have done it ever since I got one of the second batch way back when). Given the Kemper's hardware I also question - Why logically in this world when I have a unit sitting on my desk that literally is designed to make impulses and capture and process responses, I am applying a convolution reverb using IR files made elsewhere to the tracks it outputs in a DAW?

    I simply want the best for Kemper. I am invested. It is therefore the best for myself. I want to make distant mic'd sounds that actually sound like my own amp does, warts and all. I want better. Everyone should. It's wanting better that drives invention and innovation, it's what gives you cars rather than faster horses. It's also caring. Something else I've learnt from product development : once you're left with only people that think your product is perfect - you are doomed.

    Regardless though Christoph has responded, put his proverbial foot down and said he has no intention of ever implementing anything like this. So it's a moot point. The KPA is what it is now and must be accepted for what it is with its own imperfections and limitations, and I'll just continue to use conv verb in my DAW and find a hardware solution if I ever use it live. That's the sound that I like, I'd have liked to have the sounds of the various rooms other peoples profiles have been made in, but that's not going to happen.

    Quote from Per

    I know that if you have to do something long enough then, well, eventually people assume that a workaround is the actual optimal workflow.

    While you feel something is a flaw, I feel it's a strength. While you feel you have to come up with a workaround, I feel the Profiler does exactly what it's supposed to do. If I had to get me a Marshall JCM 800 profile, I couldn't care less about your room or any other person's idea of a room. I will be the one (or the artists recording at my studio) who decides which room should be used for a particular song and I can guarantee that it wouldn't be the original profiler's room baked into his profile (if this was possible).


    Also, I think you either underestimate the power of great parametric reverbs (which the ones in the Profiler certainly are) or overestimate the importance of convolution reverbs on individual instruments. I do use convolution reverbs quite often but pretty much never on individual instrument tracks. Convolution Reverb shines on the Main Bus where basically everything comes together, just like a band playing in a real room where the entire band's sound interacts with the room.

    You just illustrated my point. You already do have their room in the profile to a substantial extent in its frequency response of the cab. If you truly want rid of the room in the profile you must use a merged/DI profile, switch off the cab section and mic up your own cab in your own room. I agree that having the option is great, but if the product were as you described that would be the only way to work. Fortunately it isn’t and we all benefit because of that, flexibility allows you to build your own workflow. Why are you so against that?


    I know convolution verbs aren’t perfect (or are rather too perfect), and I agree parametric verbs such as the Kempers are excellent and usually better when you want a reverb effect, and I appreciate the knowledge of how you like to use different reverbs, but how you use it is not entirely relevant to me. As I keep on pointing out, I’m not looking to add reverb tails, depth, mix cohesion, etc, instead just a psychoacoustic frequency effect. That really requires a specific frequency behavior from the reverb, which is what convolution does best, or at least much better than a user trying to program the controls of a parametric reverb. As I have now said several times I have tried this and cannot achieve a convincing sound like my room with the onboard reverb, regardless of how great it is, it doesn’t fit my bill.


    I get that it feels awkward and scary to see someone rocking the boat, and that can get the heart racing, but it’s not out of some malice, I have no interest in “taking down” anything, only building up. The Kemper deserves to be the best product it can be. It is great already, but like I said, not perfect.