Doesn't answer this about twice a week? The editor will follow and allow users to manage and save files. You should have the option to work traditionally, or embrace the cloud thing.
The editor will allow users to create and restore a complete backup. I've yet to see any info regarding the ability to import and export individual files locally, aside from IR's.
Regarding “pro” features they seem committed to decisions that give many pause. But again, using an atypical connection or sort of forcing the market forward a bit, however exasperating it is to many, hasn’t hurt Apple.
Even Apple lets users manage their own files.
That is very interesting! I have changed that and yes, I can notice the feeling you say but it is still clearly the perfect sound of the rig. I mean, using the KPA's headphones output and Space effect OFF it is still clearly noticeable the difference between direct and through interface.
Make sure the volume is the same when listening directly through the Kemper and your interface.
PD: this Babyface has not SPDIF
. Is there a way to send from the SPDIF to the ADAT without losing info?
And I think I will give reaper a shot since its free, that was my other choice between that and studio one. Ive heard a lot of good things about it, and I like as well try it before i spend $400 on studio one.
If you're interested, Presonus offers a free version of Studio One called Studio One Prime. It has some limitations, but you can at least get some idea of how it compares with Reaper.
The only thing I have heard about reaper that made me want to go toward studio one is that because reaper is so customizable that it might have a steep learning curve and not be as intuitive (I just read that in one article dont have any idea if its actually true)
The learning curve in Reaper really depends on how much you want to customize it, in my opinion. In my case, I wanted Reaper to function as close to Samplitude as possible, so I had to learn how to modify it to replicate Samplitude's behavior, but for basic recording and mixing, the learning curve is pretty minimal, in my opinion.
Yep, this is what I said
I was providing an actual quote for anyone who might've missed it.
I definitely recommend S/PDIF if you have the option. I'm using a Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 with a couple of S/PDIF (input/output) cables. A lot of people use Studio One, though my DAW of choice is Reaper. One reason I prefer Reaper is its sheer flexibility. The user interface, appearance, behavior, all of it, everything is customizable. Another reason is that it's extremely stable. I'm using Windows and I can't remember the last time it crashed. Before I started using Reaper, I was using Samplitude. I was extremely familiar with and loved Samplitude. However, I started using Reaper because I was having issues running an older version of Samplitude in Windows 10(the newer version had some bugs). I didn't want to switch DAWs, but I didn't really have a choice. However, after spending a little time configuring Reaper, I actually ended up preferring it over Samplitude. When I try to use Samplitude now, it feels a bit lacking and unwieldy. I should also mention that Reaper is free to demo, and when the demo runs out, you can still keep using it. That being said, Reaper costs $60, which is approx. 1/7th the price of Studio One Professional.
Anyway, I play through Sennheiser HD600 headphones exclusively; however, I use a pair of Mackie HR824 monitors for mixing.
BTW, talking about what "Other Gear" means, I remember one of the mods closing a thread (not sure it was about the QC already... or was it Fractal or Atomic?) with the reason that by "other gear" they merely meant other hw to be used in conjunction with the KPA.
Glad they have apparently changed their mind on the matter
Christoph posted this in this thread:
"Don't worry! It's absolutely fine for us to discuss even competition here!"
But if new profiles sound better than old profiles, assuming a new profiling methodology is implemented, why would anyone use the old rigs?
I'm sure some people would abandon their old profiles, though I suppose some people might have certain profiles they really love or use for gigs or some such.
Another possibility I thought of, though I'm not sure about the technological wizardry that would have to be implemented. I had suggested this when Kemper had asked about wishes for the editor: supposing a sort of "side car" for the Kemper could be developed that would allow for more processing power to be added to the unit.
This unit would be connected via the ethercon and would be use to expand the number of FX slots and routing options, as well as give the ability to run two profiles in series or in parallel.
That's really stretching the current technology, and I don't know if it would even be possible. Think of something like offboard DSP for additional processing, with the data transferred through the ethernet port, given that these are capable of speeds of 1 gbps, if I understood correctly.
That's one possibility. If I had to guess how it'll play out, my hunch is that new hardware with expanded capabilities will probably take the form of a KPA revision.
What do you mean with "merge"? You never (should) merge an IR to a profile (hitting the merge button).
Merge is only for making merged profiles. Merged profiles consist of a direct amp profile with the cab of the corresponding (!) studio profile! Merging any IR / cab to any profile does not make any sense? Maybe I didn't understand.
I was using them with studio profiles, but I also tried them with direct profiles.
I don't care how impressive a modeler is. If I can't manage my own files, forget it.
It's been a long time since I tried it, back then I used the IR conversion utility to convert the IR into a Kemper cab. Then for reference I ran the same IR in a Torpedo Live and compared the two. Maybe they have improved it since then?
Could be. This is the first time I've imported IR's into the KPA using Rig Manager. I didn't merge them, though.
Yes, but it's not the same, the Kemper doesn't convert/load IR's accurately, they sound very different once imported into the Kemper.
I imported a few IR's directly into Rig Manager via drag and drop from a Windows Explorer folder and then drag and dropped one of them onto the Cab section in Rig Manager, then compared it with the same IR in the Axe-Fx III. I'm honestly not hearing any notable difference. What kind of differences are you hearing?
When/if the Kemper II comes out, I sure as hell hope it doesn't break old profiles.
According to Christoph, this won't be an issue:
Ok
Slow here..I am an old fashioned "bar by bar" mixing guy adding every parameter with automation of my DAW..maybe I am getting old and the quarantine has also a heavy toll on my brain cells but you talk about taking the "reamped" fx every time from the kemper right?
I'm not sure I totally understand the question, but the effects would be part of the profile and included in the recording; however, during the tracking phase, you'd record a dry guitar track along with the regular guitar track. The dry track is what you'd use to reamp the profile and make changes to the effects or anything else if you needed to. Out of curiosity, how familiar are you with reamping?
I mean during the mixing and the automation process..while I see the advantages of "amps reamping" in many situations I fail to see these advantages for the "effects reamping"..but to each his own..
The advantage is that you not only get to hear the actual effects you plan to use on a recording in real-time, but it also provides a means to change them after the fact if you need or want to. I mean, there's nothing wrong with adding effects later, but one advantage to hearing them in real-time is that it's inspiring and can shape your playing.
But what you describe...I don't know...that sounds damn time consuming before even the recording session starts...
I don't find adding a DI (for reamping later if necessary) time consuming, but that's me.
I would bet that people that play live with tube amps don't have identical sound from night to night. I know I didn't.
Consistency is one of the advantages of amp sims. When recording, I think it's more efficient and convenient to be able to accurately capture all of the nuances of a specific tone rather than have to fidget with tone shaping tools after the fact to match the source.
There are so many ways today to track with fx without recording them..I only know of very few situations in which tracking with a lots of fx backed in is really needed.
Thanks to reamping, you can change any effects you record later, so there's no good reason not to track with them, and like I said, there's a practical benefit to hearing all of the effects in real-time.
ColdFrixion Don't quote me on things I never posted! Thanks!
It obviously wasn't intentional, but thanks for pointing it out.
