Neural Quad Cortex

I got my Kemper on the 15th August 2012, it´s from the second batch, hence some leds are dead. But it's still the best purchase of gear in my musical life, because no other company delivers updates and improves a product that long and the KPA is still up to date.

The QC is flavour of the month and those "review" is paid advertising. Each channel has about 300.000+ subs, they released their videos on the same day. Evan when Rhett Shull that he buys the QC it's advertisement, because no one knows how much he will pay. On the one hand it's intersting that he will load some captures to QC online library, but on the other hand he sells his kemper profiles.

I really hope someone puts out a comparison between the QC and the KPA in a band situation (in a mix). I think the KPA will succseed, but I'm biased (not related to positive grid

I got my Kemper on the 15th August 2012, it´s from the second batch, hence some leds are dead. But it's still the best purchase of gear in my musical life, because no other company delivers updates and improves a product that long and the KPA is still up to date.

The QC is flavour of the month and those "review" is paid advertising. Each channel has about 300.000+ subs, they released their videos on the same day. Evan when Rhett Shull that he buys the QC it's advertisement, because no one knows how much he will pay. On the one hand it's intersting that he will load some captures to QC online library, but on the other hand he sells his kemper profiles.

I really hope someone puts out a comparison between the QC and the KPA in a band situation (in a mix). I think the KPA will succseed, but I'm biased (not related to positive grid

Quote from SeanChristopher

I would definitely take all of the influencer's reviews (mostly basically promos and ads) AND the hype with a grain of salt lol, that's all i'm saying

Like I said before, I prefer the endorsement/influencer ads over Joe Shmoe so-called "honest" comparison videos because I just want to see an overview of what the product has to offer and how a pro can make it sound. If it piques my interest then I'll buy it, and if it turns out it is not for me then I'll return it within the grace period. These devices are way too deep to make a simple binary decision of A is better than B without trying them first hand.

Very interesting gear and I've been following it for a while (due to the quality of the plugins they make). Most of the "reviews" are just infomercial, hence not usable for making a decision about purchase. Clearly hype makreting.

Rhet's video is the best, I've listened to wave files and the samples sound different, but not different enough to make on better than the other. In this case, I'd trust Kemper more, as there is many years of knowledge behind profiling process (and definition knob)

I don't need fancy UI on the unit (still can't understand why anyone would, but that's personal preference) and wifi functionality is kind of ridiculous. I think I am getting proper old, as I don't really need or want an amp with the same features as iphone. It feels like those features were added under influence of some silly focus group just because they appeal to certain market. For me they just add to the price/make the unit less reliable.

It doesn't have all good stuff Kemper has (1000s of profiles/Kone/powered head/rack)

Having said that, I am definitely going to try it asap and if I like it, I'll buy it. I haven't bought an amp/modeler for a long time.

If CK would somehow figure out profiling of amp controls response, that would be deal done for profiling tech.

It's probably been said before, but the layout of the Kemper remote is just perfect for live use, and I can not see how the Quad Cortex can achieve the same thing without a lot more foot tapping. Also the switches seem too close together on the Quad Cortex for reliable switching in a live situation. With the Kemper I have found that I only need 1 performance to cover all styles, with 5 rigs from acoustic sim, clean to high gain, each with a morphed lead setting and up to 4 stomps/effects i can turn on/off for each rig. I can't see how the Quad Cortex can be set up to achieve the same thing.

Two features that the Kemper has that are overlooked in this debate: Morphing and seamless switching. I hate scenes. I prefer to be able to switch whole rigs with virtually no interruption.

Quote from CelticGibson

Two features that the Kemper has that are overlooked in this debate: Morphing and seamless switching. I hate scenes. I prefer to be able to switch whole rigs with virtually no interruption.

FW 3.0 in the Helix has this option. "Having" is a matter of programming. Headrush has this from day 1. I don't understand "hatred" towards scenes. It is the best and most powerful way of seamless switching. Helix has 8 (or more) seemless switchable scenes per preset. Yes, you can do morphing with the Helix. Of course you can. The Kemper is much more limited. Yes, I prefer the Kemper because of of its amp sound.

Quote from dean701

Like I said before, I prefer the endorsement/influencer ads over Joe Shmoe so-called "honest" comparison videos because I just want to see an overview of what the product has to offer and how a pro can make it sound. If it piques my interest then I'll buy it, and if it turns out it is not for me then I'll return it within the grace period. These devices are way too deep to make a simple binary decision of A is better than B without trying them first hand.

I can 100% agree that trying a product is the only way to truly form an accurate opinion for yourself and for your your circumstances. I've also been very vocal on this forum about comparing units side by side if possible, whenever people are asking for advice along the lines of " Should I buy Unit A or Unit B?"

Before getting my KPA, I was only considering the Headrush pedalboard. And comparing my Headrush to the Kemper first hand, was the only was able to check out and directly compare workflow, tones, UI, Effects, etc. Because otherwise I was just looking at the Headrush's touchscreen and UI and scribble strips for the stomp switches and all of the truly sick features lol. But comparing them directly instead of just thinking of pros and cons, gave me a real idea of the capabilities of each unit and the sonic results I could get with them. And that experience was what made the best choice for my situation so obvious. So I definitely agree with you on that. People comparing the QC and whatever they have first hand, will never have to wonder "which is truly better to me?". Because they'll have a preference based on that first hand comparison

I'm not saying one unit is better than the other definitively. I'm just stating some drawbacks that have been overlooked. I'd like for this unit to be what it was promised to be just as much as anyone else. But I don't want to base my opinion off of the ads and marketing and hype either. I think at this point, everything's about preference and this unit will for sure be a contender if it's at least even decent. And once it's established and bugs have been worked out and everything, it might be cool to check out one day.

But it hasn't launched and everyone who has preordered and bought one so far has literally done it based off the hype and based off of the promos and advertising and what the unit was promised to be. People shouldn't get it for the "newest coolest thing" factor, because that's like upgrading iPhones when you don't even need to lol. People could really benefit from only making big gear purchases after making an informed decision based off of credible sources. That's all i'm sayin

Quote from Alienator

FW 3.0 in the Helix has this option. "Having" is a matter of programming. Headrush has this from day 1. I don't understand "hatred" towards scenes. It is the best and most powerful way of seamless switching. Helix has 8 (or more) seemless switchable scenes, the Kemper only 5. Yes, you can do morphing with the Helix. Of course you can. The Kemper us much more limited. Yes, I prefer it because of of its amp sound

This is one thing I did notice in the QC videos. Linking expression pedals to multiple parameters looks very much like morphing. HOWEVER, it looks like you can link andy expression pedal to any group of parameters which would effectively mean multiple MORPHING Groups. In my opinion this is a much more flexible and easy to understand/use methodology than the current Kemper 1 x Morph plus various other fixed pedal types than can have multiple uses (wah>Pitch>Volume) which is a pretty unintuitive and overly complicated workflow for my limited brain capacity to handle. I would love to see Kemper ditch the current Wah>Volume>Pitch>Morph thing and replace it with a simple 4 x morphine pedals.

Found why the demos are fizzy =

but is the Kemper free of that « alasing »?

Quote from Marmoset

Found why the demos are fizzy =

External Content youtu.be

Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.

Display all external content

Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

but is the Kemper free of that « alasing »?

the guy who made this video literally said in the description that he tested and he couldnt find any aliasing on the kemper and axe fx iii because of the high oversampling

There are many open questions since the serial product is not on the market.

As far as I understand the capture function is not as easy as some people in some forums want it to be.

I already mentioned what Pete Thorn said about the "less gain" and "minus 3db" in his review.Is this a problem?Nobody knows..yet..no one of the other promoters did mention anything about this but:

He also said that he contacted Rabea on this problem and got some info on volume staging during the capture process which in my eyes..is very "interesting"..and does not exactly sound like easy "plug & profile"..

Anyway.We will see.

Quote from Wheresthedug

This is one thing I did notice in the QC videos. Linking expression pedals to multiple parameters looks very much like morphing. HOWEVER, it looks like you can link andy expression pedal to any group of parameters which would effectively mean multiple MORPHING Groups. In my opinion this is a much more flexible and easy to understand/use methodology than the current Kemper 1 x Morph plus various other fixed pedal types than can have multiple uses (wah>Pitch>Volume) which is a pretty unintuitive and overly complicated workflow for my limited brain capacity to handle. I would love to see Kemper ditch the current Wah>Volume>Pitch>Morph thing and replace it with a simple 4 x morphine pedals.

There is currently a good thread about scaling up the morph function of the Kemper. I think morphing different parameters and or effects etc. is a great feature. If then I still could use the assigned effects independently I am more than happy and with such feature with one performance I am done.
But such features always should be in a useful layout. It is not only the opportunity of having it rather making it ease of use.

My summary:

I still think about the QC as an Upgrade of an UAD Apollo for Gitarrist. I could not think of such a piece of gear being used live and in rehearsal due to the size and layout of the switches as well as I would never be happy with adjusting anything considering the health of my back. Therefore splitting the amp from the rc is in my opinion best choice. But this is only me and there are different opinions for sure.

I would be very wary of trying to read too much into that aliasing video. I don't know what the settings were (and even if I did I'm not sure I would really know how to interpret the output) but when I just tried to run the same test on KPA and Guitar Rig 5 they both looked pretty spiky and similar. Certainly nothing like like output from his "Free Plugin Test". Maybe somebody with more experience and knowledge could explain what I am actually supposed to be looking at in that video

Quote from Wheresthedug

I would be very wary of trying to read too much into that aliasing video. I don't know what the settings were (and even if I did I'm not sure I would really know how to interpret the output) but when I just tried to run the same test on KPA and Guitar Rig 5 they both looked pretty spiky and similar. Certainly nothing like like output from his "Free Plugin Test". Maybe somebody with more experience and knowledge could explain what I am actually supposed to be looking at in that video

if you actually compared neural plugins to other plugins(stl/th-u/native)]/kemper you would immediately notice aliasing is there and it's sounds VERY weird to play. In the mix/recording its fine whatever just eq the high's, but when you are playing its big no no, i would even dare to say it affects the distortion grain. And no its not a latency thing when i was comparing them i ran through the same daw/interface.

Quote from Wheresthedug

Maybe somebody with more experience and knowledge could explain what I am actually supposed to be looking at in that video

Listen to this "french sounds" ... oui oui ouioui ouiouioui

These are the artefacts (aliasing) you get from harmonic content (distortion, saturation) hitting the Nyquist frequency wall (and being interpreted as "wrong" frequencies within the audible spectrum). Since it's a sine sweep, these "wrong" frequencies sweep as well like a bird under substance abuse.
Oversampling in combination with a good low pass filter can avoid that ... or at least reduce it considerably.

thanks Martin.

French birds high on drugs ! Gotcha now ?

Seriously, I know what you mean and understand the basics of the problem. What I was getting at is that listening is one thing; relying on a video f a spectrum analyser is another thing entirely particularly if you don’t knowhow to interpret the graph. When looking at the KPA on SPAN I still seem to be seeing very spiky output (to be expected as the nature of distortion adds harmonics) both above and below the fundamental sine wave frequency. In his video you see a smooth sweep with a few aliasing spikes mainly above the fundamental. So not really sure what I am looking at.

Quote from StefanErtle

There is currently a good thread about scaling up the morph function of the Kemper. I think morphing different parameters and or effects etc. is a great feature. If then I still could use the assigned effects independently I am more than happy and with such feature with one performance I am done.
But such features always should be in a useful layout. It is not only the opportunity of having it rather making it ease of use.

My summary:

I still think about the QC as an Upgrade of an UAD Apollo for Gitarrist. I could not think of such a piece of gear being used live and in rehearsal due to the size and layout of the switches as well as I would never be happy with adjusting anything considering the health of my back. Therefore splitting the amp from the rc is in my opinion best choice. But this is only me and there are different opinions for sure.

yes, that thread is partly due to my constantly whinging about the need for a second morph set ?

I totally agree about preferring a separate standalone amp and remote footswitch rather than an all in one footboard or plugin. That’s why I love my Powered Toaster and Remote ?

Quote from Wheresthedug

So not really sure what I am looking at.

His analyzer is too slow to show the fun. I just made a short video with my Kemper Stage where you can easily see (and hear) the french birds high on drugs. First 2 sweeps with all slots off, then sweeps with Kemper Drive and AMP block on.

MIND YOUR EARS, NO TALKING, ONLY NASTY SWEEPS!!!

Quote from kroma6020

I got my Kemper on the 15th August 2012, it´s from the second batch, hence some leds are dead. But it's still the best purchase of gear in my musical life, because no other company delivers updates and improves a product that long and the KPA is still up to date.

@kroma6020 please contact the Kemper support team about a solution for your dead LED issue.