Posts by Dimi84

    Take care! You’ll be back eventually. ;)

    Possible. I'm using an fm3 now, and occasionally axe fx III. But I'm not somehow dogmatically tied to any of these units. Life is too short!


    And they all have their imperfections, for me. I just prefer using fractal currently for a number of reasons, especially tweaking and form factor, plus trying to stick to the mantra of not accumulating stuff I'm not regularly using at a given time.


    I just felt like posting this because I see people at times draw dubious conclusions about kemper. It's often not born out of sufficient testing. And I'm at times associated with claims I don't really make, just because I have criticisms of kemper (which certainly i do), however reasonable one may/may not consider them to be.


    Ps: I would be interested in seeing some kind of portable kemper unit in the future. Due to covid-19 not travelling much. But I'll be back to more frequent travels hopefully soon.

    Sold kemper after conducting comparisons to newer devices and my amps. I'd comment on the thread about cortex, but can't anymore. If mods think this doesn't belong here, feel free to delete.


    So here's a note, since such topics came up on quad cortex thread.


    I've conducted many tests with kemper. Some tests focused on the effect of multiple distorting stages on profiling accuracy. With significantly distorting multiple stages, I've illustrated how you can get a "cocked wah" effect.


    Kemper is not intended to profile such tones. This isn't controversial considering such information is in the manual. Such tests were never some kind of a "gotcha". Just interesting tests to me personally and potentially helpful to others. I've had people contact me about lowering master vol by 0.5 points and getting proper results, unaware of the limitation. Exagerated"cocked wah" issue does not happen when all goes well through profiling.


    That said, there's certain rare amps which work in a manner that result to a similar issue like multiple distorting stages can. This is so even if you aren't running preamp + power amp distortion. I've had that happen with kraken, an amp you see on Rabea's test video, per my testing diary (there's been so many different tests through the years, with different units, it's hard to remember).


    I've also seen the same with a marshall preamp. Some times this is setting dependent, others it is not. But it's not a "typical" profiling case and isn't what you normally expect from kemper. It's more rare.


    I feel that should be noted. It's arguably a limitation some would be better off without, but nonetheless.


    (Btw if you see youtube influencer tests, it makes sense not to just assume they are super proficient in testing, or even know kemper well enough, for that matter. Some times mistakes happen, some times people just aren't as experienced for a given task, but folk assume they must be; other times people are fairly proficient but happen to be unaware of a given factor; and in some cases people draw much more radical conclusions than the tests point to, confusing the methodology itself. Bad intent or even intent determined by cash is imo somewhat less common than may be assumed).


    Furthermore, kemper profiles having a more "ts" quality than my profiled amps is a separate issue I'd claim to see. It should not be confused with the former. Apparently now people use "cocked wah" to describe that as well, but I feel a distinction should be made.


    I do believe kemper is slightly more TS focused compared to source (my amps). I don't feel that any amount of testing or experimentation of mine would help settling much of such disagreement here. If you believe this hasn't been illustrated publically, with proper methodology, perfectly fine. We probably have deeper disagreements about methodology from some point on, too.


    Michael Nielsen doesn't disagree with me about the "TS" focus, btw. If anything, he's often talked about it. Sinmix doesn't disagree either. The list isn't as short as some may assume. In some circles, it's more or less what we've come to expect from kemper -- for a long time -- and has often been a reason why people preffered the profiled tones. Results of relevant tests have even helped players like Leon Todd improve their kemper tones.


    But I would not argue about some exagerated cocked wah effect through profiling working as intended. That's absolutely a much more substantial effect than what I claim to have experienced/expect from profiling my most common amps. If kemper gave you the exagerated cocked wah sound from typical profiling it would have been extremely obvious and very easy to spot for most people, either through blind tests or even blind feel + sound tests, which are also possible to conduct, and good for nuances.


    There's no way the device would be as acclaimed as it is.


    Which is to say: I don't feel it's fair to paint kemper with a broad cocked wah brush. And on my end, pls don't confuse what my own testing has/has not been, as some of you here have followed such progression elsewhere.


    Cheerios and don't be too scared of the cocked wah! Goodbye from me!


    Also: kemper doesn't go bad because of cortex coming out. Like, really. It's ok to keep using kemper. Not everything is about matching some "pro" ideal either (no, I'm not saying "pros don't use kemper", deep breath pls, deep breath, for some). And, as much of a truism this is, nothing is perfect, including fm3 and quad cortex.

    If one were to say that there is a "right or wrong" way to use a device, that's an evaluative statement. Meaning: there's an epistemic standard at play.


    This can be "what the creator of the device intended". It can also be many other things: for example what one's music requires. It can surely be said that a certain use is "wrong", given the original intention of the creator, but "right" when the evaluative standards changes.


    I don't think the poster would disagree with that. The issue with such discussions seems to typically arise from people presenting one epistemic framework as the only one that can and ought to matter compared to all the rest (possible for this to be true, but imo rare).


    Personally, I've been using the kemper drive to try and get something close to the green scream but with a bit less of a mid hump. I did compare against different "tone" green scream settings and eventually seemed to preffer the kemper drive results for the intended purpose.

    Neural cortex will supposedly allow "captures" of pedals, to be used in one's chain. The axe fx models plenty of pedals to great detail, with an expanding list... Positive grid introduced the ability to put together digital pedals years ago... And the helix has a few drive sims I much prefered to anything in the kemper.


    Which is to say: there's a lot in the digital drive realm.. Much of it imo done very well. Kemper had not really been in that conversation till now.


    But testing the new drives against other devices right here, put against a variety of analog and digital units, I definitely think they really did a great job. I wouldn't present this as an innovation out of this world -- not quite -- but results so far have been spectacular for me... And I like the unique elements in this approach.


    I have a couple of analog pedals I've been using with the kemper to drive profiles further. With the fulltone sim and kemper drive, I'm not sure I'll feel much of a need for these anymore; they'll probably be delegated to tube amps full-time.

    In my experience, there's cases where a pedal in front profiles similarly to a non-OD set up; and there's others where it doesn't. It's difficult to predict what happens.


    Typically so-called "multiple distortion stages" can cause problems. But it's not a given. I've had cases where there's significant distortion across multiple stages and the results were comparable to profiling the set up with a single distorting stage, whether from pedal or preamp.


    I've also seen people profile set ups with OD pedals in the chain, get less accurate results than otherwise, and call it "close enough". The results would certainly not have been acceptable to me. I'd instead use the pedal in front of Kemper + non-OD profile, in some such cases.


    In other words: there a "personal" element that comes into play. Considering this, if I were you, I'd experiment profiling this set up.


    If I felt the results are as accurate as profiling without the OD, I'd use the OD profiles. If I felt there was a sacrifice in accuracy, I'd pin the 2 profiles (screamer + profile of amp vs profile of OD plus amp) against each other to evaluate which approach is best.


    The reason for this is simply that it's possible to have a less accurate profile but nonetheless prefer it to the screamer plus profile solution (and that's happened to me in some instances as well). One way to found out what works best for you :)

    Are you reffering to some issue with direct profiling in some circumstances or profiling in general?

    I’d find a tube amp tone I like. Then profile it. Close enough? Cool. Not so? Spend time to see if further profiling efforts gets closer or try another amp that sounds similar. Seems hopeless? Consider other digital solutions, too — and if these don’t quite cut it, just use the real amp and be done with it.. on which end I’d consider if a load of gives me what I need, for convenience in analogy to tone, feel or not.

    You’re probably right, but they could make an app that simply controls RM running on the desktop. I think that would be a simpler project but I know nothing about this stuff.


    The new Editor is fantastic and I have no complaints, but it would be really nice to sit on my couch and control it from my iPad.

    I use Google remote for stuff like this at times, linking pc (windows) to my iPad. Gotta test the editor that way too. Chances are controls are somewhat finicky used that way, but gotta test.

    MementoMori what is the case that people wat to enter values via KB? I don't get it. What difference it will be 12.3 or 12.0 dB

    The problem lies that people sometimes use "." and sometimes use "," Sometimes thay do ot use nothing just plain "12" ...nevermind.


    Have you tried TME? :P

    Even slight tweaks of some settings can make a meaningful difference for me (for example “definition”). On windows, holding shift will allow for finer adjustments easier, but numerical values would still work better for me personally.

    To say that something is "obscure" is an evaluative statement. It involves a judgement that is based on some framework where there's a threshold below which A is justifiably "obscure". People will clearly have different ideas about what these standards are, should be, some perhaps making more sense than others. I listen to some sources I'd call "obscure" that are pretty darn amazing. Them being obscure doesn't have to be a ding on them. And I was aware of the tonejunkie podcast, kemper users linking me to it, but haven't spent much time listening (not that it's bad).


    In so far as the beta goes... not so surprising to see that someone (or some) have this.

    Pickups matter, style of play does, tuning does, the guitar bridge may, and so forth and so forth. I've had Harley Benton guitars costing 100-200 euro sound great through the kemper (and close to audio clips of sellers). It's just that plenty of variables do come into play. Profiles are snapshots usually set-up using a particular guitar, monitoring, pla pla.