Posts by Greggles

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    Thanks for the explanation. I agree with all that. Most of it isn’t that important to me, but I know is for many others. I’ve always preferred 1 great sound, to a whole lot of options that aren’t so good.


    And yes, very impressed with Kemper as a company.

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    Quote from Atlantic

    If I had to express my current state of mind on the Kemper vs QC issue it would be:


    Kemper is in front by a lot as a global solution. But QC will catch up eventually. And Kemper should and probably will try to compensate in the several subjects that the QC has already the upper hand. They have time to do it.

    I’m curious to know in what way you see the QC having the upper hand?


    Owning both, I would say the main difference is the multi amps in the QC and that it is easier to get a good capture (harder to get a great one). Other than that, I think the Kemper is much better.


    Not wanting a fight. Genuinely interested. I bought the QC and want to like it, but it feels like a toy to me. I keep thinking I must be missing something.

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    Quote from creative360

    I don't doubt the veracity of your firsthand experiences recounted here. I only wish that the difference—those disparities in one direction or the other—were the key to making better music. Historically I don't enjoy being part of the profiling process. Something about that granular scrutiny—and it happens in the studio a lot too, a/b'ing compressors and eq's for instance—that goes against my musical orientation. I find it creatively draining. That's why I do appreciate how you others so deeply invest in the process. I also wish that good tone, in general but especially in the upper echelons, was more common. I live in the epicenter of small, guitar-centric venues in NYC, and I've also spent a lot of time in the studio (because of another career) with big names. Point being it's not surprising to hear venerable, internationally-established musicians delivering mediocre sounds. No matter the gear. Sometimes it's the room, but not always. Those tones can hinder the performance, but with the greats, not as much as you would think. In the studio, yeah I love my vintage amps. But I also love the Kemper. I don't know. Tone is a thing. And I know how to get it. But it's both easier and less important than what you'd think if all you read about are the experiences recounted in these forums. That's why consistency, reliability, basic mechanical functionality, etc is still a big part of the value of the Kemper. It doesn't mean there aren't other ways to sound great, or easier ways to implement the magic processes that CK invented. And yeah if CK decides, and if the QC is a big part of the impetus, to "revisit" profiling, who knows, it may not be a bad thing. But in 2021, for me the Kemper platform is still the easiest way to sound good and get it done. (Yes I want a Stomp—a cheap tiny alternative, but would that really make me happy? I'm not dying to make the effort.)


    I agree completely. A great performance is most important. Some of my favourite recordings, have terrible sounds in there. I also think most musicians should stay away from engineering. I get the desire to do it themselves and understand what’s going on, but it is very hard to engineer yourself well. Concentrate on making the music.


    As I said earlier, playing with the QC only reinforces to me, how good the Kemper really is. It won’t be (and isn’t for everyone), but if the raw sound of a great amp is more important to you than multiple routing options, there is a depth and realism that is still untouched by QC. I think QC oversold themselves on the accuracy of their captures. “Easier to get a good sound, that is pretty similar to your amp”, doesn’t sound as impressive, but is a more accurate description. The comparisons to KPA don’t help either product.

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    Makes sense to me. My day job is a studio engineer and I’ve been recording bands for 30 years. No drum machines and very few synths etc. Real instruments in good sounding soundproof rooms.


    So I have the facilities and experience to mic an amp accurately (well no mic is as good as our ears) and the isolation from the amp to refine it well and do accurate a/b comparisons. I don’t like to say it, but I agree that a lot of the profiles I hear don’t really represent the amps accurately. As with anything, it takes a long time to do something well and I think the better you get, the more you expect - therefore often taking even longer.


    I also build valve/tube amps as a hobby.


    I’m not surprised you’ve found it easier to capture your amp with the QC. I think they’ve been deliberate in making it easier to get a good capture, without needing the same level of engineering skill. That’s not a put down or having a go at anybody. Just an observation. Before refining the KPA profile, the QC sounded better. I find that some profiles need more work than others. Learning about the sag, tube shape, clarity etc. helped me close the gap and get some pretty much indistinguishable profiles. It can take a lot of a/b ing to get it right, where the QC doesn’t give you that option, but also needs it less.

    It mean that we will continue to get very different reports about the quality of the QC captures v KPA profiles. Both opinions will be right! :/

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    Kemper tells me some of my small amps, with valve/tube rectifiers have noise gates too. I assume it’s the voltage sag it detects when hitting it hard.

  • Neural Quad Cortex

    My QC arrived 2 days ago. I’ve had a number of guys using my Kemper profiles as their go to and suggesting I offer them for sale. It was then suggested, if I’m gearing up to do that, I might as well do captures for the QC at the same time. I looked to see who was offering captures for Quad Cortex and couldn’t find any, but found people wanting better than currently available. Ok, I’ll buy one.


    Feeling a bit guilty seeing all the people that have been waiting for months for their QCs.... I bought it on Sunday afternoon and it arrived Tuesday morning......


    I must confess to knowing very little about it, other than people saying it will be a Kemper killer, game changer, much more accurate captures/profiles etc.


    I’ve only skimmed this thread, so excuse me if I’m repeating anything.


    There are clearly a lot of interesting things you can do with the QC routing, but as far as being a game changer and having more accurate captures, it isn’t and they aren’t. Not yet anyway. It’s only been a couple of days, but this just feels and sounds like a glorified modeller. Obviously it’s early days for the QC and it will presumably improve, with time, as the Kemper has.


    The QC is fairly intuitive, but that’s because it’s mainly surface. It doesn’t have the depth of the KPA. First thing I did was capture an amp I was already setup to profile with the Kemper. I didn’t read the manual, as I wanted to see if it was as intuitive as claimed. Just swapped the leads across and after finding where the menu was, captured the amp. Easy to do and sounds good. It doesn’t sound the same as the signal from the mic’d amp though. The QC capture is cleaner than the Kemper (which was truly indistinguishable from the original mic’d amp) and hasn’t captured the same depth and dimension. It sounds and feels more like a really good amp modeller.


    I re-tried capturing the amp 3 more times with the QC, changing guitar and mic input levels, as all reports are that it is better than the KPA. Each capture was very slightly different, but still not the same as the reference signal.


    At this point I thought I’d better check the manual, as I was obviously missing some hidden settings that would allow me to refine the capture. No, that was it. Nothing more. As I say, it’s easier to use, because there are no hidden parameters to tweak.


    Now the QC capture doesn’t sound bad by any stretch, but it isn’t the “unprecedented accuracy” they advertise. For people used to using modellers; using the captures will be a huge step up and probably feel like a game changer. Compared to their modelled amps, the capture is significantly better. I was profiling/capturing a custom made Deluxe Reverb and their model isn’t anywhere near as good.


    For those of us used to using great amps and expecting the QC to deliver those sounds in the same way the Kemper does, it will probably be disappointing. Obviously the standard of Kemper profiles varies widely, due to its accuracy. It will reproduce whatever you feed it (after refining). It sounds and feels like the QC has been designed so you don’t need the skills of a great engineer in the same way you do with the KPA. It’s like they’ve used the amp as a starting point, but still process it in their own way. It’s probably harder to get a bad capture with it, but then also harder to get something truly great. They seem to have homogenised the capture process.

    I think the Kemper is a long way from being out of date. If the sound of the raw amp is important to you, it still can’t be beaten.

  • Kemper Kone needs driven imprints.

    Quote from DonPetersen

    IR do not reflect non-linear effects such as 'drive' - all they are is a complex EQ really.

    If you found IRs that work well with what you have in mind (the high gain Creamback IRs) then this just proves that you can get there with EQ.

    generally speaking I'd advise rolling down the highs (Presence) while increasing the Mids, possibly the bass as well


    There isn’t any way to change that between clean and driven profiles though, is there? Only global settings?

  • Kemper Kone needs driven imprints.

    If you want to hea

    Quote from Wheresthedug

    I understand that and I still propose the same solution. “Drive” is only a name I came up with it could be called breakup, speaker frying or anything else. All I am saying is, instead of creating new imprints for each speaker being driven harder simply add a parameter to the existing imprints that introduces the effect of speaker drive gradually rather than a binary “speaker ideal conditions” / “speaker breaking up”.


    OK, thanks for clarifying. I didn’t get what you meant before.


    Yes, that’s a great idea and a step further again. My idea would be simpler, but yours is even better. :/:thumbup:

  • Kemper Kone needs driven imprints.

    Quote from Wheresthedug

    I think I “drive” type setting at rig level for existing imprints would be the best solution for your needs. That way the same imprint could be used with clean rigs and dirty rigs (with just the drive function being increased)


    Unfortunately that won’t give me the sound I want. Lack of drive isn’t the issue. The trouble is the sound going to FOH is very different to what’s being heard through the Kemper Kabinet. Full range mode can get part of the way there, with a fair amount of eq on the monitor output, but it doesn’t really represent the profiled amp.

  • Kemper Kone needs driven imprints.

    My ideal tone has always been non-master amps cranked and the Kemper has been capturing my collection of amps very well. Played back through studio monitors, where I’m hearing the full amp profile; it sounds great. As close to the real thing as any mic’d amp can be. Love it.


    Playing these profiles through the Kab though, is far from satisfying. It’s been bugging me since buying it and I realised it’s because the IRs are all clean. Speakers driven hard, change tone, as well as distorting. Not an issue as much with overdrive created in preamps, where the output valves/tubes and speakers aren’t being pushed hard.


    I’ve tried some of the in-built IRs with my direct profiles, in the profiler and they sound good clean, but completely change the tone of a cranked amp. In the same way, if I try swapping my captured cabs from clean to dirty profiles or the reverse, the tone completely changes. [Sometimes good, but not the sound of the original amp.]


    I noticed today there are 2 high gain Creamback IRs in the cab section and found they worked well with the profile I was working on (cranked Deluxe Reverb through a Celestion Gold). I could swap them with very little change in tone or response. I’d pretty much given up on being able to use the Kab and was looking at passive wedges to go with the Power Head. I now realise having some cranked speaker imprints would allow it to work.

    So I/we need some (clearly marked) cranked speaker imprints for the Kab/Kone please. The missing link to making the Profiler near perfect. Alternatively, a way to be able to add to the existing imprints ourselves.


    Greg

  • Newly Made Profile Writes Over Existing Rig

    I was profiling an amp today, through 3 cabs and being very careful to make sure I didn’t get the variations confused. I setup 3 sounds from a completely different amp, with the text I wanted for the new profiles. The different sounds were so I could make sure I was saving and not overwriting any of them, as it was obvious it wasn’t what I was working on.


    I also made sure to only partly name each one, so I could finish it after profiling and not get messed up with the duplicate naming. That worked, except one profile vanished. It was there and then at some point had gone. Fortunately I had a record of the settings and the mics hadn’t moved, so I was able to redo that one.

  • Newly Made Profile Writes Over Existing Rig

    I’m new to profiling, but have been experiencing the same thing. I’ve found it only renames the old profile. It doesn’t actually overwrite the sound. I’ve been using a DI only capture as the rig I start with, which makes it obvious if I have the right profile. That’s the worst part. Being sure you’re working on the correct profile.