Posts by OneEng1

    What I'd rather have is a wireless USB connection to the USB-B port.

    For you and others that would like this option, I think the only chance would be if CK decided to offer a Kemper USB wifi dongle.


    They would need to find a piece of off-the-shelf hardware that already has driver support for the KPA operating system (I am guessing they are using Linux, but someone feel free to correct me). Then they would need to modify their code to allow the remote ethernet commands to be transported over this new interface.


    Might be a nice upgrade CK ;). Shouldn't cost to much to private label a piece of hardware and test and validate the changes. I suspect most people would be willing to shell out $100 for something so easy to use for the new remote software.

    You can create Performances, swap rigs, slot locations and arrange performance on the KPA. You can also name everything from the KPA itself. This has been true pretty much since the unit first shipped in 2011.

    Folders would be nice - but everything else is already there. I know it works because initially, I barely used Rig Manager. Performance mode was and still is where I spend the vast majority of my time.

    If I could write my one "Set List Editor" for KPA, you would be able to assign a performance name to a song. You could create a list of songs in any order and name the set list. The KPA would then have the performance for the first song in the first performance slot, etc, etc.


    The way my gigs usually go is that we decide what songs we are going to play, write it down (spread sheet with big print so you can see it on a dark stage from a standing position when it is on the floor). If I could just have the tools for that .... it would be a great Christmas present :).

    LOL. Indeed.


    I think that we all are very fortunate to live in a time when tools like the KPA and QC are there for us to use. I know I waited a VERY long time for the KPA to come along while hauling around a metric sh** ton of tube amp gear every night ;).


    While tone definitely does matter, it has been my experience that it matters so much more to those of us who play guitar than it does to those who listen to any kind of live music. I do completely agree that having a lead guitarist that is inspired by his on-stage tone is critical to a "great" performance. In fact, I have had nights when the lead guitar player has become so distracted by his inability to achieve the "magic" he is accustomed to that he couldn't really do anything right.


    I believe that the QC is a good tool for home pluckers and a few other use models for sure. I am just not sure I buy into the idea that the Kemper's best feature is its ability to exactly mimic a specific tube amp setup (although I must admit this was the marketing that made me want to get one). Over the years, I have become much more enamored with its ability to be a killer live rig. Great FC layout, great efx, super easy to get a specific sound for a song, ultra reliable, rack version, etc, etc. Of course, I am a live player. I only rarely record, and I am much more concerned with how a specific tone sits in the mix than I am if that tone is an exact replica of the amp that was originally profiled. I am also very concerned with how easy a rig is to setup and tear down. I know ...... not really the exciting things to talk about with guitar gear, but man, I just couldn't do the whole head, cab and pedal board thing anymore.


    I do appreciate all the feedback being left here. You are right, I (at least) have been too quick to jump on Drew for things that really aren't that relevant to his good feedback on the QC just because it doesn't really work well for my specific use model.

    I've been at shows where people were using PodXT's and HD500's and Axe FX Ultra's into little FRFR combos on stage and then micing them up, and the audience notices the poor tone, and even talks about it over beers in between sets. The bands are never told straight up that their tone sucked - they go off thinking it was another successful show.


    The audience does notice. I've never really been on board with this "the audience doesn't care, so neither should you" attitude. It makes zero sense to me. If it were true, we should all be using Peavey Bandit's and Boss DD3's.


    IMO.

    This was in response to :


    It's kind of funny to me how guitarists these days will spend 100x more time and energy trying to find subtle differences in a guitar sound that won't even be noticed by most people or disappear in a mix/full band concept.


    Rather than just make music. I'm willing to bet your band would sound just fine with either unit.


    In this case "Either unit" was referring to KPA or QC.... both of which sound infinintely better than the PodXT or HD500 (and arguably better than the Axe FX Ultra as well).


    My point being you certainly appear to be making the case that people in the audience can tell the difference and even comment on it (with your examples) and therefore would also comment on the differences between the KPA and QC.


    Now, I'll be the first one to say that sometimes my reading comprehension doesn't bat a thousand, but man it certainly looks like you were making EXACTLY the point you just said you were not trying to make.

    I do not test sound sources in a mix when I am trying to analyse the qualities of the sound source. That makes no sense to me. I am perfectly capable of telling if a bass guitar has too much mud without having a kick drum blasting away over the top. If I am trying to detect harshness in a guitar recording, why would I blindfold myself by slapping loads of cymbals over it? Again - that makes no sense given the actual discussion at hand.

    I beg to differ. The ONLY place your tone matters is in context to the music you are playing with. I think you would be shocked at how bad some really great guitar riffs and chord lines sound when the guitar track is isolated and played by itself without the band.


    I guess if all you want to do is play into headphones and listen to your tone, then the context IS the guitar by itself. For the rest of us, the way the guitar sounds in the mix is the ONLY thing that really matters.


    So just for my own sanity on where your arguments lie:


    1) Do you believe you could pick out the QC, the original amp, and a KPA playing in the context of a full band?

    2) Do you believe that any differences that exist between the 3 would be noticed by an audience hearing only 1 of them live?

    I believe the contention is that somehow the audience experience would be effected by using a lesser quality amp than the QC and/or Kemper .... or that the QC capture accuracy is better therefore the audience experience would be better than a KPA because of the improved accuracy.


    Both of these are largely untrue in my experience.


    While it is less likely, an old PodXT in the hands of a guitarist that is good and can tweak and eq his tone well (and is a great musician), can sound great live. Now, just to be clear, it is much more likely that a KPA or Axe IIIFx (or QC) would sound great since they are easier to get sounding good and have more "great" sounds in them.


    Still, we are talking about what the audience experience is, and most audience members are much more effected by the stage presence of the band, the lighting, and literally a hundred other things much more than the guitar tone.


    Claim QC capture is more accurate than KPA (Ok, maybe so)

    Claim QC sounds "better" than KPA (Getting a little more shaky here)

    Claim QC over KPA in a band results in the audience noticing the band sounds better (Ahhh. Nope.)

    here I am again

    I've work on some sounds yesterday for a couple of hours and I had no problem but today I've got this message

    (see attachment)


    does anyone have any idea what this is about?

    Hope the reformat works for you.


    This is a debug screen letting engineering at Kemper know the line number, function and expression evaluated where the error was thrown (literally in C code you "throw" an error code with a function and "catch" it with error traps).


    Hope your KPA is working smoothly for you now.

    The only real advantage the Kemper has over the QC to me is 1) Proven touring record and 2) 10 years of people Profiling rigs with the thing. I find the whole "well this one profiles closer to the source!" argument to be such a tiny and ultimately meaningless thing to get caught up on.

    I also add:


    1. More ergonomic layout of foot switches (further apart)
    2. More foot switches (5 slots per performance vs 4)
    3. Less gig friendly than a KPA head or rack with the FC (too many cables around your feet and the need to have power at the performers position)

    I agree with your other 2 points as well.


    I am just kind of mystified at the amount of attention minute differences in tone gets in this discussion. It is like the never-ending discussion between Axe III Fx and KPA IMO.


    Now if some are saying that the comparison between QC and KPA is more like the comparison of a PodXT vs KPA, then I would agree. There is a significant tonal difference.

    I have only listened to clips of the QC vs Kemper, but from those many clip comparisons, I would say that both are close enough to pass muster in a live band situation ..... with regards to tone that is.


    When playing live, work-flow and ergonomics are far more important than when plunking around with a computer. I believe that we all agree that the QC is inferior to the KPA for live deployment due to this fact.


    Now, as for what the audience hears ..... there is simply NO WAY an audience would perceive a KPA or QC as "sounding better" in a live situation. There are about 1000 other factors live that are going to make way more difference than any tonal difference we can hear between the QC and KPA and the original tube amp.


    As for the artist playing? Well, in any situation where a wedge is being used as a monitor .... no way. The setup of the monitor send, the quality of the monitor speaker, the other stage noise, etc, etc, are all going to have larger variance than the difference between the QC and KPA. Really good IEM's? Maybe, but again, I doubt it. The only situation I can think of that even the artist could hear the difference would be playing by himself/herself .... and even then, I think it would be more a matter of "different" vs "good/bad".


    I am still of the opinion that the QC work-flow is its biggest problem for live use, not the quality of the tone it gets.

    I absolutely mean profiles and not modeling. I do own a Helix now, and I do like it, but I would have never touched digital if not for the KPA. I still don't like modeling so much, as it is today.


    I think modeling and profiling are two different animals. I vastly prefer profiles. I use Helix for practical reasons, but I would haul tube amps over the Helix.


    I don't think I am alone in that, either. I think a lot of people and even the market, see this as the first to compete directly with the Kemper. The Kemper managed to convert some militantly anti-digital people; like me.

    This ++.


    If any of you have ever lugged a VHT 4x12 cab with P90's in it (and another VHT "fat bottom" 2x12 cab) around with a VHT UL head every night, you can likely understand why I started "softening" my "militantly anti-digital" attitude :).


    Now, when I did start thinking about digital, it was with the absolute certainty I would be giving up some tone for the weight....... I was wrong.


    I think that QC has an entire generation of growth before it matches the road worthiness of the KPA though. For gigging, I think there are lots of holes in the design.

    This is probably one of the reasons: https://www.theguardian.com/bu…hips-reaches-crisis-point

    That could definitely be part of it. Generally speaking, no product manager likes to risk too high a production run if he/she isn't sure of the demand. This is especially difficult right now since even products that had paid orders are getting delayed by many months. My guess is that these guys buy in quantities of thousands, not even tens of thousands initially ..... making it even harder to get your stuff built (pretty small orders)

    The other issue I always encounter is that some things that sound "OMFG good" when you are all by yourself, suddenly can't be heard with the full band playing, muddy up the songs, or just sound so harsh you don't want to be heard ;).


    I always keep my original profiles that have been gig tested and used many times so if I make changes, or try a different profile I think is going to sound better in a specific song or used for a specific kind of sound, I can easily compare to one I KNOW sounds pretty darned good already.


    It is surprising how often the "old standby" gets the nod :)

    The roto molded cases are more durable and easier to work with .... but they are a bit heavier, and generally a bit more expensive. Still, they are my preference.


    I have and still use some SKB cases. They are light and less expensive, but as pointed out the aluminum framing bends easily and can make it hard to mate up the covers. The latches also sometimes pop loose when you catch them on something while carrying the case around. Having said that I have a decade old one within arms reach right now ;).

    I was originally thinking it could be smaller than the current Kemper Foot Controller; however, looking at mine right now, I seriously don't see how you could gig with anything less than the buttons already on the FC.


    Maybe $500 - $800 is a bit aggressive. Perhaps $900-$1200 would be a better bet. If there were any way to keep the price south of 1K I think it would be a huge winner.


    Kemper rack or toaster with FC ~ $2300.00

    Kemper Stage - $1700.00

    Kemper Mini - $999.00


    Looks like a pretty good product lineup all using the same base firmware, utilities, and server infrastructure.

    OK, I don't know about you guys, but for me, the MOST exciting thing about this development is that once Kemper has a wireless mechanism of deep editing a KPA (of any flavor), it is a very SMALL step to a future "Kemper Mini".


    For years I have argued that the product line would be best served NOT with a Kemper II (at least not yet), but with the addition of a FM3 and/or Line 6 HX Stomp competitor priced around $600 to $800. That would knock the ball out of the park IMO. They wouldn't be able to build them fast enough ;)


    Many existing KPA users would get one for a backup for sure .... or even if you don't feel the need for a backup, then a simple throw and go solution you can put in a backpack.

    Just curious. What words would be considered "soundy"?

    [chuckles] ....


    Hi Frequency, Phase coherent, Low Frequency, clipped, etc.


    The problem is that there are just not enough English words in the sound related arsenal to describe sounds:


    "Sharp attack", "Grainy", "Dull", "Muddy". Seems like sound is most frequently described with words that describe non-sound related physical characteristics (mostly touch and sight I think).

    Ambivalence..I told you..


    We guitar players look for the "cleanest dirty sound" and for the "most defined distortion"..


    There are no other instrumentalists which such permanent schizophrenia on their gear..it is inherently in electric guitar.A total mess.But sometimes it sounds great.^^

    LOL. Yes, and we describe guitar tone in terms of anything BUT sound:


    "Glassey", "Wet", "Brown", etc.