Don't forget, what you send to be recorded doesn't have to be what you listen to whilst recording. Depending on how you monitor the KPA, you can send a DI track to the recorder, or an amped sound but without the the reverbs, delays or modulation but still hear the whole lot whilst you record.
This thread seems more appropriate for my question:
So sorry it this has been answered but I have read through and don't find an answer. I'm considering buying a Kemper Power Head and Kabinet. The head puts out 600w and the Kabinet is rated at 200w. I'd never hook up a 600w amp to a 200w cabinet and crank it. Not that I need 600w. But any concerns on such high power rating difference?
The common consensus with a solid state power stage is to have more power than the speaker. Should the amp start to clip, it will produce (most likely) unpleasant distortion. That clipping can also be dangerous to some speakers.
With a bigger amp, you're more likely to get the speaker distorting. You should notice this easily and it will be at significant volume.
I say, don't worry about it.
i admit I have never tried a polyphonic tuner but I can’t see the point of them as I only have one hand available to tune with anyway. Am I missing something really obvious?
The idea is you strum all six strings simultaneously and the display shows which are in tune and which aren't. You then pluck the offending strings individually and the tuner automatically reverts the a good quality chromatic tuner. Thus it saves having to check each string individually, to find if any are out. If none or only a couple of strings are out, it's convenient and saves a small but measurable amount of time. It's a sound idea.
But it doesn't work.
I found the polyphonic tuning on the Polytune garbage. I wouldn't have trusted it live ever. No idea why it works for some but not at all for me but there you have it!
The reason I asked is that the Kone looks suspiciously close in spec/construction to the: K12H200TC
So I'd be curious to see their charts side by side, which apparently will be impossible!
This has been discussed previously and it's definitely not the same speaker. The wizzer cone is differently sized and the ohms are different if i recall. The size of the wizzer is directly relevant to how the dispersion characteristics have been designed.
There's nothing to say that the TC will sound bad and there are plenty of people here saying they've tried them but it will definitely not respond as Kemper intend the Kone to.
What Zappledan is suggesting is that - as was suggested earlier - you make a special "phase reversing cable" - wired so that the tip of one plug connects with the sleeve on the plug on the opposite end of the cable and vice versa.
I would just take a cable you already have and reverse the connections at one end. (I would also label it so it doesn't screw you up at some future time.)
Use this doctored cable to connect the second cab to the first. Phase problem fixed.
Yep. Or open the cabinet and swap the spade connectors at the speaker. I understand the desire to not do this and the rationale that it shouldn't be necessary but alas, errors during manufacturing will always happen. People get things wrong.
Since I am having phase problems when linking my two Kabinets in mono via the Powerhead speaker output, is it probable I would also have phase issues when running a stereo setup with an external poweramp and the L/R monitor outputs on the Powerhead?
P.S. I’m a bit surprised no one else has mentioned linking two Kabinets together. It’s a really cool mini stack and probably sounds massive when the phase is correct. One Kabinet sounds bigger than anticipated.
If you use the same two cabinets and the same speaker cables, yes, definitely.
As I mentioned earlier, this sounds like a straight forward case of one of your speaker cables being wired incorrectly and is a very simple fix.
Both speaker cables are new and identical. I also tried both cables on both Kabinets. Everything works OK until I link the Kabinets together. It surely does sound like a phase issue though. Appreciate the reply!
Also, I wonder if I’m in a small minority of Powerhead owners who are trying to use two Kabinets in this way?
Do you have a multimeter? I'd check that both cables are wired tip to tip. It's easy to get it wrong and usually makes no difference, until you add a second, identical speaker!
Hmm, ever heard of a Variax?
Granted, it's not profiling, but classic "modelling", but with my James Tyler Variax plus my Kemper, I'm pretty much up to anything - Drop D LP to open tuning acoustic with the twist of a knob...
Good enough for my purposes - and even for a Doobie Brother like John McFee...
I had the guts from an early Variax built into a Telecaster. It really sounded great. It came down to me realising that the sounds of each model were less important than I thought and the tactile qualities more important that lead me to letting it go.
But from Tele to Les Paul to acoustic, it all sounded great.
Does it matter? Does it have an effect when reamping? I'd imagine that there's plenty going on in the Kemper that raises the signal.
I didn't say "I" couldn't tell the difference, I said "most people"... I'm talking about the people listening to the final mix, most of which aren't musicians. IE- the masses listening to mp3's these days.
For most of those people, a sim (especially the Kemper version we've heard a demo of) is indistinguishable from a "real acoustic" that's been mic'd up. It sounds close enough that, given their lack of knowledge about sim's, they wouldn't even question whether it was "real" or not. Maybe people some will notice it sounds a bit "off", but I doubt it.
But say that isn't the case, say it's obvious that it's not a real acoustic. Who cares? As long as it's the sound you are looking for or works in the song.
Prime examples: Hall and Oats, Genesis, ZZ-Top, et al used drum machines for certain songs because that's the sound they wanted. And yes, it was very obvious that those were not real drums, but it worked for the song. Phil Collins, a DRUMMER, used one on one of his most popular tracks, "In the Air Tonight", even though he had access to any drum set he could possibly want and some of the best engineers on the planet.
And these days, there are sims for just about everything, and many of them can fool even the most snobbish cork sniffer. I even heard about one company that uses software and hardware combined to make simulations of real amplifiers, and even professional musicians can't tell the difference!!! I'm sure you'll tell the likes of Neal Schon to stay out of any recording studios too....... waiting.....waiting......waiting.....
Well, this is another can of worms! To most listeners, they can't tell the difference between a Fender Twin and a Kemper. To most listeners, they can't tell the difference between a Kemper and Amplitube. Most listeners can't tell the difference between a Custom Shop Fender Strat and a Harley Benton......
No one here is saying that the acoustic simulator isn't wanted, a great tool, amazing for those without an acoustic or even a great way to come up with some very useable sounds but if you have an acoustic and are remotely serious about recording and want to record the sound of an acoustic guitar, most people are going to do the real thing. Else we'd all be using a Variax already!
And let's face it, the drum machine section in songs such as In The Air Tonight are not trying to sound like an acoustic drum set, it's there for a specific sound which is very challenging to get from acoustic drums.
But my original point is that recording an acoustic guitar is not hard. Easier than recording a human voice in most circumstances. If you're recording instrumental music with no acoustic instruments, then a sim makes some sense but if you're recording a singer or real drums, micing a real acoustic is the least of your problems.
I don't record music to please anyone else, certainly not the mp3 listeners. If I want the sound of a Telecaster, I use my Tele. If I want acoustic, I will use my acoustic otherwise I might as well sell it.
Not trying to persuade others to do the same just countering points raised which suggest recording acoustic guitars is difficult.
Nice playing DamianGreda !
Besides your playing skills, I am missing a good room, mics and the knowledge how to mic an acoustic the way you do
...so as soon it is released, I will try how far I can go with the simulation.
I am also happy to try the piezo of the acoustic with the kemper acoustic simulator. Thanks to my bad recording knowledge, it might get me further than a badly miced acoustic;)
It's really not as hard as you make it out to be. Most rooms can be made to be good enough with a few additions; blanket hung in the right place for example. A nice mic helps but a basic condenser mic will do a great job. I've achieve good results with very affordable mics.
Then, it's a case of moving yourself around in front of the mic. Move one way and you might get more bass; move the other way and you bring out more of the pick against the strings.
Sure, if you're going for high end solo acoustic stuff you need to up your game but otherwise it really is easy.
I use the rig volume. I did run into a headroom issue a few years ago where there was some audible clipping occurring. It turned out that one of the effects blocks after the amp had its level a little bit high (set by the profile creator). With that brought down to zero, I've not had any issues.
Due to how I initially set the device up with a particular profile that I liked (which was already quite loud) I tend to find all standard profiles a bit quiet and have to bring them up to balance the ones I have in my Performances. I could get round to reducing the level of all of my favourites but I have better things to do!
The KPAs main strength is its ability to provide quality sounds for recording. Other than an audio interface, no other hardware is needed.
There's already a mic in any profile containing a cab, you do not need another. If you don't like the sounds, use a different profile, a different cab in the profile or some post EQ.
Imprint isn't saveable, it's global. It is under consideration to make it per rig in the future.
People also use the aux in to receive a mix from the FOH for the same purpose.
Don't forget, you can use the XLR main outputs and the main 1/4" outputs at the same time too.
I have have the band's wireless mixer in my rack with my Kemper, so use that for IEMs regardless of whether I have a FOH engineer and house PA or we bring our own.
Difference between a regular instrument cable, and a Speaker cable (for the Kabinet). This is why I waited a day. Kemper said the other cable would overheat. It was worth the 1-day wait.
I have always used speaker cables but most of the guitarists I know use anything. One in particular has always used a guitar cable, with Marshall 100w heads etc without any issue and regularly gigs and tours.
I'm not about to do the same as I have three speaker cables but i can no longer agree that there is a genuine difference. Certainly, weedy, cheap instrument cables might be a problem, especially with fine shielding as the second conductor. If that breaks the circuit damage might occur to a valve amp but a good quality instrument cable appears to be ok!
Either use morphing to add more mids, rig volume and delay mix or create a new rig with those settings.
It keeps all your slots free for essential effects!
I don’t know what 2 is but at -15 to -20 dB or so it’s loud sure, but it’s not tight or deep enough for high gain fast thrash, metal, chugging, etc type playing.
Most people that play the really heavier stuff gravitate towards oversize 2x12s or more. If that is your preference, i can't imagine that there's any 1x12 vintage size cab that will suffice.
I do play heavier stuff but not metal and have gradually grown out of 4x12s, then 2x12s and am tempted by the Kabinet. With the current climate, I'm unlikely to be able to for a while and might hold off until I can try one anyway.
Unfortunately I have to agree with you, it is sad that a lot of people can't be bothered to read the official documentation and ask the most basic question on social media instead.
However, the official manual for the Kemper consists already of 329 pages of pure knowledge which I found incredibly useful when starting out with the Profiler and still consult on a regular basis when diving deeper into a specific functions. Therefore, I think a good official documentation is still important and super useful to those that do read the manual or at least consult it instead of bothering the support or other users - yes, we do exist
The Powerhead was a hell of a lot of money for me. I tried to be sure that it was exactly what I needed to integrate into my existing rig and downloaded the manual before making my mind up. I read it thoroughly, pulled the trigger and have read it since. Despite the page count, it isn't actually that big and isn't written in a heavy text format, making it easy to work through.
I have zero sympathy for those that complain about missing functions they assumed it would have or lack of basic understanding through their choice not to do some research. Many almost pride themselves on not being the sort to read a manual.... Well, you get what you put in. It's not exactly hard work to scan your way through, picking up a few hints as you go!