These are internal system pages, that we are using in the company to evaluate and check our hard- and software.
They are not made for a save use, they are hidden for that reason.
It's like lifting the engine cover of a modern car. Have a look, but don't pull the cables 
[quote='ChrisBeaver',index.php?page=Thread&postID=26507#post26507]
what he said. this helps a bit. i also belong to the "still-missing-a-little-bit-of-true-amplike-response-crew", especially with extremely dynamic picking styles, as described by radley. stop beatin him for having a point here fellas...
Are you refering to your own profiles or factory/user profiles?
I agree with you. I raised this a few times in other threads in that although the profiled version of my amp may initially "sound" the same as the real amp, it certainly does not respond as well as the real amp. I find that when I play the real amp there is lots of reaction from the amp which makes for a "lively" playing experience. However, the profiled version of the amp lacks the same "liveliness" completely, unless of course you start using compression pedals, but I don't want to use a compression pedal because that then changes the sound completely.
I would be interested in listening to an A/B comparison to your amp and the profile.
You should definetely get the same feel from the profile.
What amp model did you profile?
Did you refine it?
Please send an A/B audio file to our support hotline for me to listen.
[quote='Radley',index.php?page=Thread&postID=25881#post25881]This thread is a chance for me and *anyone else* including Mr. Kemper, to speak their mind concerning the KPA. The idea here is not to simply complain, but to offer helpful suggestions to improve the product for everyone:
Take your favorite distortion pedal or overdriven amp - play something sensitive with your fingers - that's right, bare flesh on the strings (a la Jeff Beck). Listen to the way the attack translates into tone - now do the same on the Kemper with a similar gain patch. It is *not* the same - it is a different feel/response altogether. My 12 year old Boss GS-10 does it way better than this, and that is why I used it as an example. The KPA is a whole new generation with so many incredible new features - I just don't want to see us lose some of the most foundational aspects for building great tones...
Radley, do I get it right?
You take only modeling amps (Axe Fx, Boss) as a reference for evaluating and comparing the sound of the KPA?
Christoff - I am trying to be helpful. I am very impressed that the KPA can copy my show-tested presets from another modeler so well - it is a very handy function indeed! I profiled 3 more of my amps yesterday, and it's getting better and better.
(I guess I still don't understand why my requests for thread deletion have not been honored - they were not posted to create a 'kerfuffle'!)
How does it happen that it get's better and better?
You are learning to refine your modeling amp in a better way?
I find many posts a bit confusing.
I will quote and answer them individually and hopefully we can find some points here.
So with close micing you get results, that sounds closer to the original amp, than with distant micing? Is that the situation?
Fortunately you don't need section level meters, as it's virtually impossible to clip a signal. The exception is the input and output, where you find that level meter.
Also you don't need a dedicated profiling return level meter.
The output level led will indicate this, as stated in the base manual.
It's kind of logical: If you clip the profiling return, you will clip the output at the same time.
Hey CK, Do you mean you feel it's possible right now, or that it's a feature that could be added?
I'd love to be able to capture the rooms tone curve and map that onto a reverb that's added.
Right now I find that the actual tone changes quite a bit when distance micing, and my Kemper isn't really able to capture it that, the softening in the treble end from the diffusion of sound I guess. If you want I can post some clips against the profile it makes.
It has always been possible. I don't expect problems.
Do your close mic profiles sound closer to the original?
... But as you read in this great Alan Parsons article: If the distance is not more than 30 - 40 cm, you will hardly catch any other signal by the microphone, such as other instruments or the surrounding room.
Distance miking is possible. The profiler will compensate for the latency.
The reverb tail of the room will shrink, which can be of an advantage, since the sound will be more direct.
If desired, reverberation can be added afterwards.
What is more important: the frequency responce of the room is fully captured.
Hadley, your comments and answers weren't too helpful yet.
Display MoreMr. Kemper - Again, I am very impressed with your presence and concern here on the user board - I will attempt to answer your questions below:
Some questions here:
Have you done your own profiles yet?
Yes I have, and two of them have been uploaded to the Kemper Rig Exchange. I did eight more today, and believe I may have found a way to get the sounds I need, thanks to a new user on the board. (Bill Ruppert)
What is the secret behind that?
Have you refined them well?
I am happy to share numerous examples, but I don't share my performing patches. The comparison that means the most is a highly distorted signal compared to the Kemper model while profiling, especially if it is direct from a modeler with no cab simulation, or an amp's line output - the Kemper model will always sound more grainy, and a bit less smooth than the reference signal.
It has been clearly stated in the manual, and a number of times on this forum, that you should not expect good results from profiling a modeling amp. This is because some modeling amps do not react the same way a tube amp does.
Are you aware of that?
What Firmware version are you on?
Who told you that the KPA is doing simple EQ matching only?
No one said that's all it does, but I understand it is a part of the process, no? I was only saying that I feel the EQ match is very accurate as well as the Cab matching...
Your first post looks a bit different to that ...
Have you used the deep amp parameters yet, such as Definition, Sag, Shape, Bias etc.?
Apparently not enough, as I am still getting the feel for how these parameters play on each other - I plead guilty on not having mastered this one...
Those parameters are pretty easy to use, and mostly independent from each other. It wouldn't take you more than 20 minutes to get what they do.
CK
CK
Display MoreThis thread is a chance for me and *anyone else* including Mr. Kemper, to speak their mind concerning the KPA. The idea here is not to simply complain, but to offer helpful suggestions to improve the product for everyone:
I will start with this observation: I believe the KPA is a very innovative product, with vast potential - for this reason it *will* be copied (the highest form of flattery), and it is important for the originators to stay ahead of the game.
My main issue with the KPA is not it's EQ matching abilities (they are excellent), nor it's current effects arsenal (they are limited, but adequate), nor it's Cab matching capabilities, but rather the basic nature/character of the main 'distortion engine' that is used to build all the different distortion and gain models when profiling. It simply doesn't sound/respond tubey enough - to my ears, it sounds/feels somewhere between a digital simulation and solid state, especially on the transients and attacks. There is a certain 'crackle and sputter' graininess that gives it away for me - I realize that the EQ & Cab matching is enough for many users, but I believe the *nature* of the distortion must become more analog/tubelike for the final result to be totally convincing. At $1800 US, this is certainly not a typical consumer item - it is one of the 'Mercedes in the world of Chevy' modelers - this means it must perform well enough for serious pros, along with everyone else. EQ matching alone is not enough in the recording studio - all the qualities must be there, or they start wheeling out the tube amps.... *DISTORTION Matching* is the weak link of the KPA (and many other modelers as well). IMHO, the KPA engine has not fully captured the essence of quality tube distortion in all it's glory and complexity....
And what say You?
Some questions here:
Have you done your own profiles yet?
Have you refined them well?
Will you share them with us?
Who told you that the KPA is doing simple EQ matching only?
Have you used the deep amp parameters yet, such as Definition, Sag, Shape, Bias etc.?
CK
None of these Volumes alter the sound.
But the controls arebscaled differently, giving you a different perception.
Display MoreAfter two weeks with my Kemper Profiling Amp, these are my observations:
* KPA profiling isn’t perfect, but very close - don't stop now CK!
We are very satisfied the way it works right now. There hasn't been changes to it in two years.
* Something is missing in the extended low end when profiling.
Have you done your own profiles yet? You can easily tweak the low end by refining the profile by playing low notes and riffs.
* Stomp drive effects and boosters need improvement in noise levels and digital aliasing (gainy overdrives).
The drive effects are not noisy by themselfes. They amplify the noise of the guitar.
* KPA profiled distortion never sounds as smooth or analog as the original amp’s.
* I have been somewhat disappointed with the factory profiles, but maybe that’s why we should do our own? :o)
* The Strength of the Kemper Amp distortion is the high end punch & clarity - the Weakness would have to be the lousy feel on the strings when you are playing smooth, sensitive, connected lines (not much warmth or ‘give’). I also miss a full, complete low end response.
* The overall KPA playing feel is a bit stiff, but the sounds can be very realistic (rather like the POD HD-500).
* Many of the profiles posted are unusable to my ears.
The factory profiles were made by more than a dozend professional teams of guitarists and producers. Those profiles were perfect for any of them, who made it, in quality and usability.
Quality means: The profiles were absolutely close to the original in every aspect, sound and feel. There is no single report from those who made profiles, that the KPA introduces a signature sound to the profile, in a way that it reduces or emphasizes the low or high end, or modifies the feel in a certain direction. What you hear is what these teams wanted to profile.
Some people have stated, that some profiles do not clean out well enough. If that's the case, than you listen to the shortcomings of the reference amp that has been used. We offer a decent parameter set to modify and augment the original sound of the amp.
Usability means: All the profiles were usable for those who made them. We have learned already that a profile of one man does not necessarily fit to the other. And many state that they don't like the factory sounds.
I have received profiles from a friend of mine and I called im back, because I thought two profiles were broken, because I found them unplayable. He confirmed that those profiles are perfect, these were sounds that he's been playing since 15 years and now being happy to have them in the Profiler for using in on a national tour.
That is the reality. No profile is a compromise to impress a majority.
I will be happy to discuss that deeper. Please open a new thread for this.
* Most of the effects could benefit from more parameter control, as well as EQ.
Tell me what parameters you are missing.
Mainly we want to limit the numbers of parameters, to keep thinks a usable as possible.
People are already looking for functions that are already implemented.
There was the wish for a tape delay a few days ago on the forum. All delay types are tape delays!
CK
Check this again. None of these volumes alter the sound.
There is no need to trade different volume parameters against each other, fortunately.
Lock and Global is pretty much the same
CK
Why would I take over a use concept that would limit our possibilities?
The Electro Harmonics design is a compromise from the 70's, bound to three controls only.
The Electric Mistress is missing a Manual knob, for controlling the middle frequency of the flanging.
The Manual knob is standard in many other Flanger and Phaser designs, e.g. Boss.
The design of the bigger *Deluxe* Electric Mistress is even different. There you have a switch for engaging the Filter Matrix.
The Mistress is known to be a Flanger. So it is a good idea to use the Flanger or Comp Filter Stomp for this effect.
I am getting similar results here.
A classic chorus is generally not designed for creating controllable static effects.
CK
It is there and is handled as on any other device:
Choose Phaser or Flanger and set the Depth (not Rate!) to zero.
Or choose Wah Phaser or Comp Filter and set Pedal Range to zero (or Pedal Mode off).
Then set the desired sound by "Manual"
It's not a good advice to set rate to zero on any device for a static sound. Even if the LFO frequency goes down to zero, you might end up with an undetermined (arbitrary) frequency setting.
CK
