Profiling without mic

  • 1.Everyone knows that something's missing from the profiles to be perfect. Kemper made it so close and the main weapon is the straight signals. The micing is the easy way but holding us back from the perfection. What about making a simple signal path...I mean profiling separately direct amp (preamp-power amp), profiling the cab, profiling pedals or whatever and then be able to create a chain on the kemper screen..!!!???

    2. Ok, profiling with these signals and without micing haven't give very good results by now, but come on..this is the future, this is the way...he discovered something that needs more experimentation and he and the team stopped there???why..?A little more fantasy and don't stop to experiment. PROFILING WITHOUT MIC is the solution to perfect sound. And some philosophy: everything that have authentic results comes from the inside.. if we want to change the world we have to change first ourselves from inside..if we want to heal an illness only from the inside we can make it (I am a homeopathy)...and so a perfect sound will come from the inside! Micing a cab from outside always will cut a significant part. And the crazy part is that Kemper found the inside way, simply we need some steps yet!!!

  • You can already profile without a Mic by making a Direct Amp Profile.


    As for the modular signal chain part that would need a whole new set of hardware as the current DSP isn’t designed for that. That might come one day but it isn’t going to happen on the current models.


    FWI I think profiling with a mic is actually the full sound as the speakers and mic are a massive part of the tone which is lost with direct profiling but there is no single right or wrong answer.

  • Everyone should know that profiles are perfect for me. I get the sounds (and feel) I want/need and that's all that matters to me.

    I can imagine a few more people feel the same … so the first word of your post is already a pretty bold and untrue statement. ;)

    You have some aggressiveness in your answers and a little more ego..I just try to give some ideas for a new further step and nothing more..so simple!!!and even in here, at profiler forum there are a lot of people that have stated that the sound could go a step further "IN GENERAL". so think about in other forums and in real life..I could answer with aggressiveness either but is not what I want to do. eventhough I tried to inspire some new ideas..ok? Kemper had a crazy new idea..if you had listen his idea before you see it you would laugh, ha..??

  • You have some aggressiveness in your answers and a little more ego..I just try to give some ideas for a new further step and nothing more..so simple!!!and even in here, at profiler forum there are a lot of people that have stated that the sound could go a step further "IN GENERAL". so think about in other forums and in real life..I could answer with aggressiveness either but is not what I want to do. eventhough I tried to inspire some new ideas..ok? Kemper had a crazy new idea..if you had listen his idea before you see it you would laugh, ha..??

    There's no aggression in lightbox 's post.

    He rightly stated you made both bold and false claims about profiling.

    ("Everybody knows..." and "haven't give very good results by now").

    My first impression was you were borderline trolling, but on second look I found your post simply naive so I left it there.

  • The mic itself and the way it is positioned is an integral part of the guitar sound as we know and love it from countless classic recordings.
    A mic doesn't 'take away' anything, it adds character and personality. The way it is positioned or even mixed with other mics ads the vision of the person making the Profile.


    Also, as was already pointed out, you can make Profiles using the FX-send (preamp only) or Speaker Out of an amp if you use a suitable DI box and know what you are doing.
    On top of that, neutral mics have been around for ages, but they never seem to matter much in the whole quest for great guitar tone.

  • There's no aggression in lightbox 's post.

    He rightly stated you made both bold and false claims about profiling.

    ("Everybody knows..." and "haven't give very good results by now").

    My first impression was you were borderline trolling, but on second look I found your post simply naive so I left it there.

    really now..that's the point? to defence? and what should I do? to find here in forum other statements from others that claim what I ve said??would be ok for you if I do that? and irony is not needed. and lastly I didn't say that kemper don't do excellent job.

  • really now..that's the point? to defence? and what should I do? to find here in forum other statements from others that claim what I ve said??would be ok for you if I do that? and irony is not needed. and lastly I didn't say that kemper don't do excellent job.

    What you should do is use the Profiler as it is intended.

    Make your own profiles.

    If you should encounter problems people here will help you.

    Just stop making false statements and incorrect generalizations.

  • I tried to inspire some new ideas..ok?

    Let me put it this way: You're basically just 3 weeks into your (hopefully fun and exciting) Profiler journey and there's plenty you still have to learn, discover, experiment, understand. That's fine, it's part of the (overwhelming) experience. But please remember that here's people that have been using this device for many years, on a daily basis.

    I congratulate you if you're self-confident enough to make statements about your own thoughts … but it's beyond funny that you claim to speak for "everyone". Read Don Petersen's post and understand that what you're asking for with plenty of exclamation and question marks has been possible since day 1, many years ago. ;)


    Cheers

  • … but it's beyond funny that you claim to speak for "everyone".

    I don't speak for everyone..end of this joke, please!!and yes everyone can read the forums and make a statistic for himself and make a reference to what he read!I apologize for writing above: "Everyone knows that something's missing from the profiles to be perfect. "I didn't expect that you'll take so hard..let's stop it here and please..

  • 1.Everyone knows that something's missing from the profiles to be perfect. Kemper made it so close and the main weapon is the straight signals. The micing is the easy way but holding us back from the perfection. What about making a simple signal path...I mean profiling separately direct amp (preamp-power amp), profiling the cab, profiling pedals or whatever and then be able to create a chain on the kemper screen..!!!???

    2. Ok, profiling with these signals and without micing haven't give very good results by now, but come on..this is the future, this is the way...he discovered something that needs more experimentation and he and the team stopped there???why..?A little more fantasy and don't stop to experiment. PROFILING WITHOUT MIC is the solution to perfect sound. And some philosophy: everything that have authentic results comes from the inside.. if we want to change the world we have to change first ourselves from inside..if we want to heal an illness only from the inside we can make it (I am a homeopathy)...and so a perfect sound will come from the inside! Micing a cab from outside always will cut a significant part. And the crazy part is that Kemper found the inside way, simply we need some steps yet!!!


    Just create direct profiles, GeoZorbas . After that, you can pair with any cab you like in the profiler.


    If you feel you are missing something still, go through a power amp into a real cab and you'll realise that there's very little difference between the profiler and a real amp. It's about 99 per cent there, and in some cases it actually sounds better than the real amp, plus you can play at any volume, etc.

  • Thanks for the kind advice. I have played through poweramp and cab and sounds excellent. I feel kemper sounds excellent. I believe that kemper recreates about 90-95% the real amp. There've been a misunderstanding with "something missing ..my point was something else and everyone sticked to "something mising" !!!

  • GeoZorbas, please take a breath and realize that no one here meant to insult you in any way. You made some statements in your first post in this thread that did show a misunderstanding of some of the

    terms and methods used for creating profiles. The comments were not an attack on your

    philosophy; they were an attempt to show you where your facts were incorrect.


    And they pointed you to areas where you could find some answers and potentially get better results.


    Profiling is an art. Part of that art is selecting the best method for creating a profile. Part of that art is

    microphone placement. Part of that art is dialing in the sound you want on the device you are profiling.


    Even knowing how many profiles you need to make to get the totality of the device you are profiling

    can be tough to gauge.


    My suggestion is to keep at it. Re-read the manual sections on profiling. Until you get experience in making

    profiles of all types, you may struggle getting exactly what you are looking for.

  • Come on guys...
    OP is clearly a non-native speaker, and I for one am aware that is quite easy to "simplify too much" your idea when you want to write in a foreign language and try and be effective within a few lines.

    He's referring to the hundreds of users that have been writing in the years that "the Profiler is "9X% there"". Now this can certainly be debated if you feel you need (as for me, I don't), but I believe this is a secondary point in the OP.


    TBH, I am reading some defensiveness as well :p

    Please note that when a non-native speaker tries and respond to an argument, their writing style can become more involuted... making things worse. Please stop their escalation with comprehension :)


    On top of that, neutral mics have been around for ages, but they never seem to matter much in the whole quest for great guitar tone.

    True. And this is something that has always puzzled me, specially from those who are after the "amp in the room". Who knows, maybe they perceive that as "too technical"?


    On other forums it's been explained that a measurement mic is one of the conditions that allow the creation of the AITR sound. I believe the subject would deserve some deepening...

    ... and this somehow brings us back to the OP.
    :)

  • As pointed out above the mic and speaker are crucial to shaping guitar tones for stage/studio.


    The guys aren't attacking you, just pointing out how to get the most out of this forum full of pros. I think your passion for sound is awesome.

  • I really like profiling without a mic.... I use direct profiles to play Power Rack out to Guitar Cab. It works great. And I can play at any volume with cranked profiles which would be too loud playing directly through the Tube amp at home. I use the Kemper DI Box and a two notes captor as the load box when profiling. That way I can even profile silently... My guitar room does not have great acoustic so profiling with mics does not give the best results. For this I use commercial profiles (M Britt and ToneJunkie). For example I like the sound of my VOX AC15HW1X very much. When the power amp tubes start working the sound is magical.... I can almost get the same tone with my direct profiles and a cab at any volume. I tried an attenuator, but the direct profiles with guitar cab sound better...

  • He's referring to the hundreds of users that have been writing in the years that "the Profiler is "9X% there"". Now this can certainly be debated if you feel you need (as for me, I don't), but I believe this is a secondary point

    Man..thanks God someone understand what I was talking about!!!!Something missing was exactly that, 90-9??% percent of real amp. But no one understand it..and no one asked what I meant!Lastly I suggested something different, it has nothing to do the way we profile until now..I thought someone with engineering skills could try something different or say this can't be done. that's all..

  • I suggested something different, it has nothing to do the way we profile until now..I thought someone with engineering skills could try something different or say this can't be done. that's all..

    This is a "feature request" section. This implies to me that the feature must be capable of being implemented on the current hardware. Otherwise it isn't a feature but a whole new product. I think my first post actually did answer your question.


    As for the modular signal chain part that would need a whole new set of hardware as the current DSP isn’t designed for that. That might come one day but it isn’t going to happen on the current models.


    2. Ok, profiling with these signals and without micing haven't give very good results by now,

    It appears to me that most people in this thread are disagreeing with your logic not having a go at you or being defensive Kemper fanboys. I certainly think that profiling without mics currently delivers excellent results. However, I still prefer mic'd full Studio profiles most of the time. Some others prefer Direct with a real cab or a separate IR. Neither is right or wrong, better or worse, they are just personal preferences.


    this is the future, this is the way...he discovered something that needs more experimentation and he and the team stopped there???

    Again, I'm not convinced what you are proposing is actually "the future" or a way of improving. It is just a different philosophy. In fact it is much more similar to the way modellers like Axe and Helix work. Again, not better or worse just different. Personally I prefer the simplicity of capturing a full signal chain in one step and being ready to rock. It has a workflow much more similar to just plugging into an amp and playing. I suspect (although I have no inside knowledge about this) that CK and the team stopped where they did because they already consider that job done and therefore have little interest in taking it further. I don't think further refining profiling process represents enough of a challenge to get CK excited to be honest.


    PROFILING WITHOUT MIC is the solution to perfect sound.

    That is another statement of your personal taste rather than a fact. I am not saying that profiling without a mic isn't the perfect solution for YOU, but that doesn't mean it IS the perfect solution for me or anyone else. Its all just taste which is totally subjective.


    Micing a cab from outside always will cut a significant part. And the crazy part is that Kemper found the inside way, simply we need some steps yet!!!

    Once again we have a fundamental disagreement on the philosophy of the profiling process. Most guitar sounds we listen to involve a mic somewhere in the chain. I know what Jimi Hendrix guitar sounded like when captured on tape with a mic but I have no idea what it sounded like standing in front of the amp in the same room as him. The same for Van Halen, Vai, even Joe Pass, Martin Taylor or Tommy Emanuel. Even listening live I am still hearing them through a mic/PA in most cases. Therefore, the mic is in integral part of the signal chain and the sound that we experience. It doesn't "cut a significant part" but rather adds it's own flavour.


    On the other hand, modelling actually doe "start from within" by actually trying to replicate the effect of every part in the signal path of the actual amp design. I'm not sure how (or even why) you would profile that level of detail when it can be accurately modeled by writing the appropriate code.


    profiling the cab, profiling pedals or whatever and then be able to create a chain on the kemper screen..!!!???

    Once you get to this stage you have gone beyond profiling and entered the realms of component level modelling. There is nothing wrong with that. It is a perfectly valid way of achieving a given end result. Axe and Helix etc do an amazing job by taking this route. However, it is massively more processor intensive. It's just a different way of doing things. Is it better? No. Is it worse? No. It's just different.


    One of the reasons Kemper was able to develop a hardware unit that is still going strong nearly a decade after it was designed is because he found a way to achieve a similar result to other people with substantially less processor requirements. Your suggestion would likely require a whole new level of hardware that would quickly become obsolete when new features require even more processing power.


    I can't claim to speak for others but it appears to me that the reason nobody commented in any detail about your idea was due to the way you appeared to make claims on behalf of "everyone" who has played a Kemper and also confused your own subjective opinion about quality of results with objective facts. You are perfectly entitled to your opinions, as are all the others in this forum, but there is a big difference between our own opinions and even general agreement, let alone irrefutable fact.

  • Yes you did answer with your way of thinking and I liked your answer because it was polite and targeted!!I don't believe it's a new product because the base is what Kemper has done and yes maybe needs more digital processing power. What's out..I DON'T SPEAK FOR OTHERS..did you read this somewhere else?but not at mine text. everyone knows...is what I have found statistically in every forum about the percentage (%) Kemper reaching the exactly same sound as the amp. Unfortunately the DETAIL on understanding the words plays a lot of matter on misunderstanding!!also if you have a different opinion on my statement, means that you know or believe or you have made your statistics that Kemper can profile 100% the original sound. You and I and many others users of Kemper, I BELIEVE that we chose it for 2 main reasons ( I don't speak for everyone-I am not a lawyer, I don't represent anyone). For having a very good tone and being able to profile better than anything else a real amp. I suggested something so IF can happened by someone..I gave all my good energy and positive feelings on this. No need from anyone to analyze separately every word I wrote and re analyze and think anyone that knows better..I am getting tired by this..