Hm, don't like the sound from FW 1.6 (Edit Fixed now)

    Armin,


    Is it the same track reamped twice with different FW or was it recorded twice using different FW?


    Anyway, I can really hear a difference. The first loop is much leaner in the mid-low ends than the second one. The highs part are very similar if not identical IMHO.


    I definitely prefer the first loop. Sounds much more complete.


    I edited my post after I read more replies to Armin. I truly prefer the pre-1.6.0 sound.
    I thought I was going crazy last weekend thinking that something was odd with my sound. I was spending way to much time adjusting my profiles which I thought were very good 1 week ago...


    Thanks for confirming. This is a Beta, I think testing features and "bolder" changes is what it is meant for and then wait for the reactions of their customers.


    Having said that, I am not sure that the new overall sounding "feature" of 1.6.0-Beta will stay for the official release ;)


    Strange, I prefer the second tones in both of the new clips (though the high gain one sounds as if its slightly distorting the input of a mic pre).

    All 3 examples were recorded two times - first FW 1.5.2 then 1.6.0


    Main Output presence was (accidentally) at +5 all the time.


    The hearing and mind plays some tricks sometimes - yesterday I thought there were a bigger difference.


    But I clearly like the presence in 1.5.2 more - and the noise free sound from 1.6.0

    (All trademarks are trademarks of their respective owners, which are in no way associated or affiliated with soundside.de)


    Great Profiles --> soundside.de

    Quote from Will_Chen

    Strange, I prefer the second tones in both of the new clips (though the high gain one sounds as if its slightly distorting the input of a mic pre).



    Sorry, this thread is on fire and by the time I wrote mine, many others commented. I was referring to the first sound clip that Armin posted. Didn't listen to the new ones yet.

    Quote from imall41

    The point is, one of the biggest selling points of the KPA is to not have to tweak your rigs after a firmware update! ?(


    Excellent point. However, users came out en masse asking for that very thing (reduction of aliasing). I bet the additional filtering they did to "fix" the aliasing may be responsible for the tonal change. Incidentally, has anyone tried to profile anything yet with 1.6? Wonder if there are any differences...

    Quote from Firebird

    I think the difference in all three samples is nothing that can't be fixed with a little EQing. So with the aliasing minimized 1.6.0 is the way to go for me.

    I asked myself the same question.
    And tested it:
    Armin's first testsound with an EQ of +2,5 dB at 6Khz on the second part (FW1.6)
    To my ears this is comes quite close now.

    www.audiosemantics.de
    I have been away for quite a while. A few years ago I sold my KPA and since then played my own small tube amp with a Bad Cat Unleash. Now I am back because the DI-profile that I made from my amp sounds very much convincing to me.

    Now that I've listened to the last two posted samples (Distorted & Clean) I cannot hear a difference at all...


    Weird... From the first sample that was posted it was pretty clear to me that there was a good difference... :wacko:

    First off, I have total faith in Armin's recording abilities, to provide us with objective comparison clips.
    That being said, I prefer (by far) the clips from 1.5.2(the first ones).
    They sound like why I bought this unit, (crisp, alive, raw) like my amps.
    The second samples, compared to the first, sound very much like the differences my ears picked up when the KPA was being compared to a certain competitor.
    I would rather have the aliasing (which never bothered me), than this new blanket added to the sound.
    After hearing these clips, I will not be moving past 1.5.2, until this is resolved :(

    Quote from StealthAMD

    Now that I've listened to the last two posted samples (Distorted & Clean) I cannot hear a difference at all...


    Weird... From the first sample that was posted it was pretty clear to me that there was a good difference... :wacko:

    the distortion clip is closer, the cleaner stuff is more telltale.

    Maybe a switch in the Amp block would be fine:
    Aliasing reduction on/off


    I would use it only for highly distorted sounds then.

    (All trademarks are trademarks of their respective owners, which are in no way associated or affiliated with soundside.de)


    Great Profiles --> soundside.de

    Surprised this thread isn't trending on twitter... 8)
    The clips posted by Armin certainly sound different to my ears (I prefer his 1.5.2 clips). I didn't detect any immediate changes through my AKG K271 cans immediately after updating and I had spent 2 hours before this auditioning and deleting rigs to make room for the update. There have been some posts theorising that some sort of filter has been applied to reduce the effects of aliasing, but this is what CK posted on that (other) infamous thread:
    "...it takes only three seconds for me to speed up our algorithms for the next firmware. But this would eat up some of the headroom for the future."
    I'm no DSP programmer (!) but he never mentioned fixing this with any sort of Hi cut filtering - could speeding up the algorithm attenuate higher frequencies? Who knows...Then again it could just be that we kinda need something new to obsess about :D


    Hopefully a Dev or the guru himself will chime in here and say something like: Whoops, my bad... I knocked the presence control down whilst over doing it with my NAMM Hotel minibar..." 8)

    Suhr Classic Pro, Fender deluxe Strat & Baja Tele, Gibson ES335, Ibanez S Prestige 2170FW, Eastman AR371CE, Variax JTV > KPA > Patch bay inc. Strymons (Mobius, Timeline, Blue Sky), H9 Max, TC Triple Delay, & POD HD500 > Adam A7Xs

    Quote from Armin

    Maybe a switch in the Amp block would be fine:
    Aliasing reduction on/off


    I would use it only for highly distorted sounds then.

    +1
    ... but I would let the switch always off!!!
    I like the new 1.6.0 features, but I don't like the 1.6.0 tonal change & feeling!

    Quote from Brattcave

    Surprised this thread isn't trending on twitter... 8)
    The clips posted by Armin certainly sound different to my ears (I prefer his 1.5.2 clips). I didn't detect any immediate changes through my AKG K271 cans immediately after updating and I had spent 2 hours before this auditioning and deleting rigs to make room for the update. There have been some posts theorising that some sort of filter has been applied to reduce the effects of aliasing, but this is what CK posted on that (other) infamous thread:
    "...it takes only three seconds for me to speed up our algorithms for the next firmware. But this would eat up some of the headroom for the future."
    I'm no DSP programmer (!) but he never mentioned fixing this with any sort of Hi cut filtering - could speeding up the algorithm attenuate higher frequencies? Who knows...Then again it could just be that we kinda need something new to obsess about :D


    Hopefully a Dev or the guru himself will chime in here and say something like: Whoops, my bad... I knocked the presence control down whilst over doing it with my NAMM Hotel minibar..." 8)


    In my understanding, they would have to change the internal sampling rate as well as modifying the internal digital anti-aliasing filter (likely there is an analog one at the input in the Kemper which of course can't be changed via firmware). Again, be careful asking for the core sound of a device to be changed as you may get exactly what you wished for. And we still have folks saying they can hear aliasing...


    Quote from GaryM

    +1
    ... but I would let the switch always off!!!
    I like the new 1.6.0 features, but I don't like the 1.6.0 tonal change & feeling!


    So if CK said more aliasing and the tone from 1.52 or less aliasing and 1.6,can't have both, which would you prefer?

    No doubt that 1.5.2 sounds a bit crisper in Armins first sample, which I prefer, but a little tweak of EQ is worth what 1.6.0 does for me.

    Quote from Will_Chen

    And we still have folks saying they can hear aliasing...


    The aliasing is now sufficiently reduced in 1.6—I can detect it, but it is really not audible under normal conditions, and not an issue anymore—I do hope that the update didn't cause this new high frequency issue, but I have faith in Kemper to fix it.