Again, time should not matter in the sense that you should use as much time as you need to have the best possible result.
Well, I guess in the video there wasn't enough time. I thought the pedal capturing was great and really close if it's the same one I saw.
So after several delays it will be released still in the alpha stage of its development and customers will double as test users.
Great!
I doubt that it will be released in an alpha readiness state, but we shall see. I wish them the best in that case because I will send mine back if that's the case. 
They do create unnecessary constraints.
No more constraints than Apple, Microsoft Office, Banks, etc put on us every day Mattes... Ever buy gasoline these days with cash? I can't remember the last time I did that. So you gonna walk cause you don't trust a digital gas pump? 
For example, we can't even post here without logging in. Is that a constraint too?
In reality, this is not the happening
Until proven otherwise, Like the redo I suggested above, I can't agree.
you can probably get the same result with both units
Do you know how many times the word "probably" is used when it's unlikely to happen? 
Granted both units can be made to sound pretty close, given time and effort.
The lack of parameters in the qc makes me think that if you don’t like a capture there’s not much you can do about it
There are lots of parameters you can adjust in the QC after the capture and I have watched them do that. Gain, Bass, Mid, Treble, and Volume.
As long as they do insist on 'validating' me by being logged on to their cloud in order to operate that device completely, it is unsuitable.
I don't think you need to be on-line to "use" the QC for a gig/session. Only to download new presets and captures and updates. By itself, it's a fully functional unit IIRC everything I read. Please correct where needed...
It should not matter if you spend more time one way or the other.
Well, yea if both units require time to tweak/refine/capture their best tones, and you take that time away from one of them then you have ruined the comparison test, have you not? I did not allow for that with the Kemper because I was basing the time allowed only from the QC's perspective. I have since been "notified" that refining Kemper's tone properly may take a longer period of time, and that's what I think Bea should allow/redo. Or did you mean something else?
Judging by the TGP thread there surely will be a lot of confused people if this thing fails.
Especially Doug... I think he is "not" planning for that to happen, and that's a good thing for the rest of us.
Quotewhich he's being paid not to be, no matter how much he protests otherwise
Call me naive but If that is really the truth, then all bets are off and you can't believe anything you saw, heard, or read in the video.
Sigh...
Edited: So let's say for a second you are correct and have proof of that. Care to share? And if you do have proof, has this always been the case?
You know why I'm asking that, right?
QuoteI think it's time to say not one of us has a valid opinion on the sound of QC captures as not one of us has touched, seen, heard or smelled the thing.
If the above is true, you Sir are correct, as far as the video "capture/profile" comparisons. I am basing this on being paid to purposely make the QC sound better than the Kemper did, which I consider an underhanded thing to do.
QuoteI mean it's not fair and equal to let the qc profile for 5 minutes but cull the Kemper process after 2 minutes?
Put that way, yes I see your point. Even if it is built in that way for the QC, the Kemper should have been allowed to have equal tweaking time. I would LOVE for Bea to do a "redo" again and allow this to happen.
There is earlier videos.
No problems or doubts, no woofiness or cocked wah.
Just great profiles.
External Content www.youtube.comContent embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.
I believe was the Soldano SLO amp he recently compared that had the woolies. Not the Victory.
I asked, "I just would like to know the reason behind not allowing for saving individual captures to a USB stick?"
By the way, did Doug ever give you a direct answer?
Yea as much as I can tell. About the ability to save "single" files/captures, he said IIRC that it was not programmed yet.
He said, "At the moment nothing is locally stored because we haven’t built the software to allow for it."
Meaning- "I believe" (take this with a grain of salt) that you can store internally, but not load or save individual files/captures to/from USB, yet.
Ya know, 79 pages in on this topic, on a product that's not even been released yet, is pretty amazing. I appreciate that Mr. Kemper has "allowed" us to cuss and discuss the pros and cons of an unreleased product that has technical, monetary, and musical/tone viewpoints on our choices as consumers on this Kemper forum. There are some forums, who would not have done so. That said, I will reiterate that there is "nothing" wrong with owning both products, or none of them. It's our choice as always. I do enjoy the competition that both boxes bring to the table. For us, It's a good day to be guitar players.
right ...
Of course it's right, I said it...
And just for your edification, I doubt very much Rabea will say anything here just because I mentioned it... lol
So in other words a promotional video published to make you doubt your current product
That's an untrue and reaching statement "if" that was directed at me. I don't doubt the tones of my Kemper at all. If I did, I would not have one.
you missed the point that it sounded good in 2019 and now it didn’t.
No, I didn't miss it. I addressed that right under- ... And Bea "did" refine the profile on the 2nd video.
Mind you, this has nothing to do with the reason that many people are drooling over the QC. GAS is a fun hobby in and of itself. I mean, really, who doesn't like playing with new toys?
I love new shiny's and G.A.S., thats not why Im interested in the QC however.
oh man ... that’s not the point
So, what point did I miss? They were both given equal time frames. Yes, both can be tweaked "after the fact".
What I don't get is after making profiles of the same amp ( the 1st one good) on two different occasions, why was "the last one" not questioned when it came up wooly sounding when comparing with the QC? I'm not talking about the 1st comparison as of late on YT. Did he, for whatever reason not get a good profile even after "refining" it (in the 2nd video)? That doesn't make sense to me yet, so maybe Bea can explain it better here...
don’t forget that in the first video he published ( which was removed since ) he apparently “forgot” to refine the profiles.
Yea that's why he redid it.
Why not spend 10 minutes trying to fine tune the profiles?
Nothing wrong with that at all, but he didn't have to do this with the QC, even time-wise.
There is earlier videos.
No problems or doubts, no woofiness or cocked wah.
Interesting, and very nice sounding profiles I agree. He did that on June 11th, 2019. So WTH happened? did he forget how to do a profile? lol....
I'm being facetious but really, if the same amps sounded good then, where did the woofy that I heard as well, come from now? Hummmm.
