I've come to the decision that I like smaller profile packs the best. I think for ten dollars, I'd actually prefer around 10 profiles (plus possibly DI versions of same). Especially if there's no more than 2 profiles with pedals in front, but maybe that's just me
So this is my first foray into making profiles.
I'm just getting my feet wet, but I thought I'd share them with you guys.
The amp is the recently released Marshall DSL20HR head, and the cab is the PRS Mark Tremonti signature cab - a beast of a 1x12.
The profiles can be found in the rig exchange under author "Michael DK", with the names MARS DSL20 V30 A MDK and MARS DSL20 V30 B MDK, respectively.
Rather than starting out simple, I've routed the signal through the DAW :
The "A" profile is made with a Slate ML-1 mic, using the U67 model (I think). The "B" profile is made with the Slate ML-2 mic, which was multed in the daw to two tracks, one with the vintage sm57 model, and one with the Royer R121 model. Both profiles have hade some light EQ treatment and whatnot.
They are both fairly gainy, but not modern metal levels.
Hope you like them! Leave a comment if you try them out, both good and bad feedback is appreciated.
I will probably make a bunch more profiles in the future.
I haven't played a lot of tube amps (apartment dweller most of my adult life blah blah blah), but the one I did have some years ago I rolled some tubes in - stock ones, cheap upgrades and more expensive mid-tier ones (JJs). I made recordings of each using a reamp box. There was definitely a notable difference, both for pre- and power tubes. Didn't change the amp into something completely new, but there were definitely differences I would consider significant - especially for the JJs. Not just for playing response, but also listening. And my ears are definitely not golden
It does seem to be the consensus that the KPA headphone out is generally better than most interfaces used by "regular" users.
Barring any colouring of the headphone out of the KPA, then maybe it could be considered sending the DAW playback via the aux in on the kemper so you can monitor via kemper rather than the interface's headphone out (addressing your point 3) above). Don't know if the aux in is suitable for line level, though.
Feel free to report it to ebay as being in violation of the End User License Agreements of the products involved.
I don't for a second believe that a power cord can make a difference at all, but how much is the power cord?
I'm asking because a lot of this HIFI stuff is really really expensive for what it is, and possibly you could get a small power conditioner for the same amount of money - which may or may not make a difference, but depending on the power in your area, your house and any appliances on the same circuit in the house might actually be beneficial.
Have you experienced any problems you are seeking to alleviate with the power cord?
There's a link in my signature that explains the process for Logic Pro X and a focusrite interface. It may give some helpful pointers for your interface too - I've tried to explain it fairly detailed. It's not too complicated, but it's not completely obvious either :-). I think the tricky thing is how the interface communicates with the DAW regarding outputs (DAW outputs vs. the interface outputs) - for Logic/Focusrite, it's not 1:1.
My (limited) understanding is that the "artifacts" which appear on the analyzer are the result of phase cancellations. Surely for phase cancellations you need a minimum of two sources to be out of phase with each other. A close mic has a single source right in front of it so what is the other source that create the artifacts?
It's at times like this I REALLY miss Monkey_Man knowledge and clarity of explanation.
The two sources can be the direct signal (shortest path from speaker to mic) as one, and the sound being reflected from eg. the floor can be the second source. So a single mic situation can certainly have the same or similar phase issues (specifically here comb filtering).
Yes, MM is missed
Be aware that the situation described in that article is related to the performer hearing two "versions" of their performance, one of them delayed by latency (hence the "latency" heading"). If you are able, you should try monitoring with closed-back headphones so that you don't hear the direct acoustic sound of the pick hitting the strings along with the amplified signal, but only the latter.
Fletcher-munson is dependent on the actual sound level in the physical world - the Kemper has no way of knowing how loud things are outside the box.
You could maybe program an approximation of an "average" curve in an EQ stomp (placed last in the chain) and then adjust it yourself to your liking using the mix parameter.
I can understand the urge to do this, though in practice, I think it’s a bit useless. Depending on how you mic and EQ a profile, a Fender can sound like a Marshall, can sound like an Engl, can sound like a Bogner... etc etc
One of the reasons why people searching for a particular amp always makes me chuckle (unless it’s something fairly unique, like an AC30 compared to a Marshall, for example).
Please don’t take this as hating on your request, just that there are so many more variables when making a profile compared to traditional modelling.
Another aspect is that manufacturers make up their own version of non-trdemark-infringing names, which would mean that you would have 10 columns of different versions of the name "Marshall", ten versions of the name "Fender" etc etc
I really would like an Editor where I can customise the interface to my needs.
For example, look at this window. The Rig Librarian takes up most of the real estate on my space.
Meanwhile, the editor section is a small strip at the bottom.
I would like a big Librarian section when browsing profiles. When I am editing a profile, however, I want to have a bigger space for the editor side of things.
Another thing: It looks like we are currently limited to seeing the controls for one section in the edit portion, whether that is the amp and cab, a stomp, delay, reverb, etc.
I'd say give us the option to have three editing sections open. Or five. Or just one.
One way to do that, could be that we just have them as detachable windows that we could move around on the screen. Naturally, they should be "always on top" while Rig Manager is open.
Of course, even having them docked in the window is fine. Or maybe two docked and three floating. Or whatever.
"Total flexibility with my Kemper Rig Manager". You could maybe get Paul Gilbert to shoot an ad for you in which he says that
good idea on the floating windows
The whole point of the Kemper Kabinet to get the “amp in the room” sound, which has traditionally been missing from modellers and their mic’ed sound.
Exactly. Otherwise, it would make more sense to buy a regular FRFR than the kemper kab. Potentially cheaper price notwithstanding.
Regardless, we already have a method of making cab profiles - it's the profiler
The mic placement, the freq response of the microphones, the room acoustics, etc ... these issues already exist and somehow got resolved when doing normal profiling.
As a matter of fact, if you profile with the Kemper DI and also just mic the speaker, you can already figure out the cabinet's effect on the sound. So I still don't quite get why (using the power amp of the Kemper) and just mic-ing the cabinet (like we do every time we profile) this would not work.
I am not saying I could do a good cab profile with a $20 Radio Shack special microphone but the pro profile makers should definitely be able to.
The result would be the sound of a mic'ed up speaker - not a speaker by itself.
I think an horizontal sliding overlay pop up when hovering over or selecting one of the controls would be cool, at least as a selectable option. Much easier to slide with a mouse more accurately, especially on a small laptop, where the software knobs would be much smaller and harder to see.
The pop-up solution would be elegant!
The issue with stereo is that the built-in power amp in the Kemper is mono. Once they support active speakers (or external power amp + speaker) it should work.
Also, the more I think about it the less I understand why it has to be just the built-in speaker imprints.
Today, you can plug the Kemper into an amp (like a guitar) and profile it. On a powered Kemper why couldn't you just plug in a speaker (cab) and profile that? That should make a very good speaker imprint - as compared to the know baseline of the Kone.
That way you could borrow your friends precious old cab from the late 1800s, profile that and sound just like that with the Kemper cab.
I suspect that the influence of the mic placement would yield results that would be too far removed from the sound of the cab itself to completely compensate by the DSP