Posts by OneEng1

Quote from skoczy

@virango, @OneEng1 and anybody who would contribute to the community editor/librarian - I just thought, before you start working on it, it would be nice to ask community about graphical interface/UI and layout, like ckemper asked about Remote's size and layout.
I stress this because resembling Profiler's interface 1:1 with many pages for parameters doesn't make sense, since having all parameters on one page is desired state by many I think. 23" LCD screen will allow for that for sure.

I always tell my engineers that you first have to establish the "what" you are doing before you start discussing the "how"

There are power point templates that can be used to create UI stuff with. If a few of you have some ideas of what a good UI might look like, put together some sketches and some work-flows as a starting point.

I agree that using the UI of the existing Kemper isn't the best approach for a PC program.

In general, the advantage of a PC program is the huge amount of screen real estate. Using it most effectively is an art.

Another point that everyone could work on would be to put together a list of uses for the editor. These are typically called "use cases". An example would be "The ability to adjust the PEQ using a graphical interface showing the eq curve".

Once a good set of use cases can be established, and a general work flow can be agreed on, then we start the process of prioritizing which features get implemented first. Keep in mind that the main architecture has to be designed before the very first feature is implemented. The architecture must be designed to handle all use cases .... even if some of the use cases are never implemented. The architecture should never be the reason a use case is not completed

Generally speaking the act of sending MIDI commands back and fourth is the easy portion of the program. The difficult part is the work flow and back end architecture IME.

Quote from virango

Qt with Qt Designer.

Outstanding! I was going to suggest it myself

Should make it quick work to get going on Windows, Linux, OSX, Android, iOS and Windows if thought out for touch applications. Otherwise, Linux, Windows, and OSX for sure.

Quote from old crow

I think oneng1 is onto something, but it's costly...
I have dxr10 , JBL monitors , akg phones and a 1 X 12 cab.
phones sound the best, but I prefer the 1 X 12 Celestion as it has the feel of areal amp.
the monitors and dxr 10 sound tinny....I don't like tweeters for guitar.

A less costly way to do it would be to create a set of eq settings, or even use one of the output efx slots for a PEQ, to adjust your headphones, or monitor to sound like your FOH.

The real key is to always make your FOH sound good first..... then resist the urge to tweak your rigs based on what you hear only in the monitor or headphones ..... but sometimes we just can't help ourselves

Quote from candyman

Sounds like the HS8 are a good choice for studio monitors for the KPA. Have read good things on this forum about them. Thanks JSB!

I have a friend in Germany that swears by the HS8's as well. I haven't heard them myself though.

Quote from candyman

Hi guys,

I use my KPA PowerHead for band rehersals and the odd live gig (for rehersals I currently play the KPA through my Engl 2x12 cabinet, in live situations I would run the Kemper direct into FOH and use my Engl Cab as "stage monitor", knowing that it will not sound like what's coming out of FOH).

Most of the time though I play the KPA at home through headphones and I would like to get the possibility to hear what I am playing through some sort of speakers (mostly practice and playalong to backing tracks). I am wondering which of the two alternatives would be better for this purpose:

1) A pair of Studio Monitors (like the Yamaha HS series or the KRK RP Rokit series)
2) A FRFR Speaker (like the Yamaha DXR series or the Atomic CLR)

I may also use whichever of the two I am going to get to listen to music / playback some practice recordings, but those use cases are not really a priority for me.

Can anyone give me some advice on what the pros and cons of either option would be / how you may have already solved the same challenge?

Cheers

Paul

Display More

Hi Paul,

I am fortunate in that the PA frequently is setup at my home.

As a result, I can see how the FOH sounds on different rigs compared to how my headphones sound, or how my FRFR monitor sounds.

The monitor has a separate eq from the main L/R. I use the L/R eq to make my FOH sound the way I want, then I use the monitor eq to make my monitor sound the same.

For the headphones, since they use the same output eq as my feed to the FOH, I got several headphones and used the ones that were most closely matched to what I heard at FOH (Audix ATH M50x is what I settled on). Still, this isn't the same as my 5K FOH speaker system.

I take the output from my L/R output at home and put it through a little mixer (A&H ZED 10fx). I tweak the channel eq for the headphones to achieve what I hear from the FOH. I use this PEQ setting when I am playing through headphones. When I play live, I have the eq straight up (no adjustments) since all my rigs are originally created to sound best through the FOH PA.

Anyway .... that was my solution to the problem.

Maybe someday the nice folks at Kemper will give us an output eq library Then you could just switch between "Headphone eq" and "FOH eq". Of course, you can also just make your own settings and write them down

Quote from virango

What about this as starting point?

I took a quick look at it (have to go off to do holiday stuff today and tomorrow). What dev environment are you using?

@skoczy,

Thanks!

I am a seasoned engineer. Sounds like there are a few more here on the forums as well.

Lets wait a bit and see what Kemper comes up with. If nothing is in the works, I would be willing to start a home project to create an editor for the Kemper.... if I could get some help from a couple of other engineers (software would be great. C or C++) to help out.

It would likely take a few months of development before it would be road worthy.

Any takers?

Quote from Burkhard

These volume issues seem to be a mixed bag of completely unrelated items:

@OneEng1 Pedal Volume at 0 after restart. During a restart Pedal Volume is reset to max. The level of Pedal Volume could be verified in the System Settings. Is the expression pedal really at toe position, while the volume bar is at minimum? Is it a dedicated Volume Pedal or a Wah Pedal with Volume linked to it? Is the cable intact and has it been correctly plugged in right from the start? Or are you using an expression pedal with a built in pot to limit its range like for example the Roland EV-5? Make sure, the pedal works at full range.

If you still have an issue, please open a support ticket and we approach this one by one

Display More

Hi Burkhard. Thanks for the follow up.

The issue appears to be 100% reproducable.

FW Version: 5.03.12660
Volume Pedal Model: MOOG EP3
Pedal Position: Full Toe
Pedal Input: 3
On startup - no sound
System->page 5/18->Volume(CC07): 121
System->page 8/18->Mode: Pedal Type 1
System->page 8/18->Function: Volume Pedal

Moving the pedal immediately brings the sound back.

One other note, I have the tuner set to mute when tuning, and when I go to 0 volume, the tuner comes on.

How do I create a ticket? I only found a spot for "feedback"

I have a similar setup to some stated above. I use a Kemper foot controller now, but used to have the FCB1010 with the Uno4Kemper chip.

• All performance levels go from clean to heavy on a left to right basis (usually)
• A couple performance levels are set aside for very specific song usage. These generally aren't used all night long, but rather once in a particular song (like U2 "Streets have no name").
• My top right efx button is ALWAYS a pure boost of 3 db.
• My top left most efx button is ALWAYS either a green screamer, or a pure boost of 2.5db for more gain.
• The second to the most right button is only used for turning on/off the delay in a rig
• The second to the most left button is used for special efx in a rig (auto-wah in I'm just a girl lead for example).

I have heard some here say they have a performance level per song. For me, that is too much to remember and to work with live as our set list constantly changes (especially since music for me is a hobby ..... ok an addiction that is supported by my day job ).

Hope this helps.

Quote from Monkey_Man

I assumed their not having to outsource any of the work and that zero training would be required, klassiker.
I also pictured their working on it "on the side", as time and circumstances allowed, thusly avoiding the inconvenient costs of throwing the team at it full-bore at the expense of the usual day-to-day upkeep and development of the OS, forum modding, customer-service work and so on.

Now we are fudging numbers (I work at this level in my day job all the time).

Developers cost money. For every hour they work on something, it takes 9 hours of support, validation, documentation, and build and release time to add something to a product (useful fast fact for those of you who wanted to know ).

In order to make money, the entire trick is to maximize your development time on the things that will make the most money.

People who start looking at resources as "free" inevitably end up in a financial crisis (since they are not free). If there is "slack time", the idea of maximizing profit should still be the driving force for the work priority (spoken as a true-blue engineering manager ).

Breaking up a program (like an editor development cycle) further increases the cost of a program since you lose efficiency as you move the program around from one developer back to another .... then back to the original etc.

I still think an editor should be on the roadmap. I am just not sure it should be the number 1 priority.

My son kept "borrowing" my Sennheisers, so I thought I would get something else for comparison instead of getting another pair of HD280's.

Turned out to be a good move. Much better sounding ..... to my ears YMMV.

Welcome!

Engineers rule

The UI took me a bit to get a hang of too. The UI is arranged in a physical "left to right" / "Input to Output". Of course there are some options that defy this physical layout

As is the problem with every complex device, making the compromise between fewer controls, and ease of use is always a problem.

I have found that getting good tone from the Kemper is not that difficult a task. Basic operation using the EQ, Amplifier, delay and reverb settings can bring incredible tonal bliss. Everything else is icing on the cake

I like the train of thought that Kemper is designed not to need an editor.

I agree that if you come from a tube amp, the Kemper feels right and the controls are immediately familiar.

If you come from another digital solution, typically, these have been laden with a zillion parameters in a zillion menus. You could tweak all day long on a single patch and not find "that sound" you were looking for in many cases.

As the Kemper becomes more advanced in its features, the value of an editor increases.

I don't think there is any reason to be upset that there is no editor for Kemper. It is a nice wish that may be provided at some time in the future. We should leave it at that. It's Christmas time guys.... time to be a little more understanding ..... give a little more and take a little less.

Now .... Im going to jam out for a couple hours on my crippled Kemper (crippled because it has no editor ). It will be very difficult to enjoy my jam without an editor, but I will simply have to cope I guess!

Good to know that I am not just cursed

Quote from tubelube

So after a hiatus of not playing the electric guitar for a few years (just playing acoustic), I'm back playing it. My original plan was to get an audio interface and use some amp simulation software, which I did. I'm currently using Peavey Revalver as the 6505 was the amp I always wanted, I'm playing through regular powered speakers on my PC or through earphones (going to buy a good set of headphones eventually). Honestly, it's all I need, maybe throw a few pedals into the mix. I'm a bedroom player and €2,500 is no small amount of money but god knows what's going to happen tomorrow. I'm on the fence about the KPA and joined the forum to try and help me make my final decision.

What do you play your KPA through? Audio interface - DAW - monitors or a cab? What monitors would you recommend? Powered cab or other?

Do you have the version without the power amp and use a separate power amp? Which one? Is there much of a difference between the separate power amp and an internal one?

Would you consider the remote absolutely essential or a nice-to-have? Are there any other MIDI foot controllers that work with the KPA?

If you got the rack version, did you also get a small rack to put it into? Which one? What about those things that try to make it look like a real amp head?

Display More

Welcome to the forum

First off, the Kemper.

What you will find if you read thousands of posts (as I did before buying) is that most KPA owners are tube amp converts (mine was a VHT). The most tone discerning players pick the Kemper for a good reason.... it really really sounds good

Next, what you play through matters greatly .... this is true of speakers and of headphones.

Through my PA using DSR112 tops, blissful sound. Through an old set of rat-fur 15" 80's speakers ..... ahhh .... not so much.

I play through headphones quite a bit at home. I previously had a pair of Sennheiser HD280's and found them to be .... eh. I got a pair of Audix ATH-M50x's and wow. What a difference. link: https://www.amazon.com/Audio-T…-Headphones/dp/B00HVLUR86

You can get the most bang for your buck with the Behringer FCB1010 and an Uno4Kemper chip that makes it work exclusively with the features of the Kemper. For home plucking, I am not sure that a foot controller is a necessity. For gigging .... another story.

If your aren't a gigging musician, then I would suggest the toaster vs the rack (I have the rack for exactly that reason). The toaster has more controls.

Good luck!

Personally, I would rather have new verbs than an editor .... but I could be convinced to take both

The Kemper is not a low end piece of gear. The people who plop down the cold hard cash for this kind of equipment are prepared to pay for the best and have found to means to do so.

If a kemper editor were to be released and we had to pay for it, I suspect that most of the people who own the product would pay for it. Software is not free to develop. Not by a long shot.

Here is hoping that NAMM brings us some spring (pun intended) surprises

Quote from P3t3rB

I think this illustrates perfectly why you need to "try before you buy" when ever possible. What one person thinks is great will be dissapointing for others and vice versa. And that if it sounds good to you it is good!
P.

Exactly.

I interacted with another guy here in Michigan who didn't like the DXR10 and replaced it with a DSR115 and is now happy.

I have played in open air with just my DSR112 and that (to my ears) is blissful Of course, one would hope that a $900.00 cab would sound pretty darned good.

Usually, my DSR's are doing FOH duty though and I have only my IEM's for feedback

Quote from MementoMori

Yes, use computers in the studio and at home. My point isn't that there aren't tube guys out there (of course there are), but effects to pedalboards have editors. When I used my POD, I set my tones on a computer with its editor. With all the functions it was a hell of a lot easier than twiddling knobs. These days with how computer-centric our lives have become, I assume people spend more time on an interface than with EQ knobs for these kinds of things.

That is the use case I have as well.

Although I would never use a computer LIVE, I prefer to do my setup on a GUI on a PC instead of menu diving.

Granted, the KPA is a reasonable UI with respect to ease of use. This is especially true for the common adjustments one would commonly make on a tube amp.

The deeper capabilities are not as easily gotten to though. I suspect that there are many features that lots of people don't use simply because they aren't obvious to get to and setup.

A good GUI on the PC would alleviate this problem IMO.