Posts by Wheresthedug

To be honest I never use it as most of the things I would want to use aren’t available via the quick select button.

I would be really interested to hear how others are using it though.

The answer is “maybe” because t it depends on exactly what you are trying to achieve. Are looking for 4 completely different FX before the stack section to replace the ones you have there already? If yes then the answer is no. You would need to change to a new performance slot. How ever, in this case changing slot makes perfect sense as none of those FX need to continue into the new performance slot. If you mean that Delay and Reverb don’t carry over smoothly when you change slot that is a different thing. It is possible to select that delay and reverb tails either continue or get chopped but it’s your choice. Only the DLY and Rev FX slots can do this though.

However, if you are looking for different variations of the exiting 4 Fx then you can use morph to control them.

If you are looking for ways to turn on and off more than 1 Stomp at a time then this can be done by assigning multiple Stomps to a single remote switch so each switch could control several different FX combinations.

The bottom line is there are a vast number of possibilities and more than one way to achieve most of them but you are always limited to only 4 Stomp FX in front of the stack section.

EDIT: just noticed that the first Fx in your chain is Delay. That would get cut off when changing Rigs in a performance. However, most people would use the delay after the Stack section (unless going for a specific effect like early Van Halen etc) so if you move your Delay to the DLY or Rev slots the tails can carry over without being cut off.

I agree in principle with you on that but don’t think it’s quite that simple.

I’m neither and amp designer nor computer programmer so I could be wrong but a few problems that spring to mind include:

Simply modelling a a simple tone stack’s interactive behaviour would only capture the tone element of the interactive relationship but wouldn’t necessarily capture the downstream effect it has on other parts of the system (such as power amp gain). This would be even more apparent in an Amp with a tone stack before the gain stages of the pre amp (Mesa Mark series for example). So it may provide a different tonal flavour but it may be optimistic to expect it to map the controls “one to one” as the OP requested.

Using a modelling algorithm would require the tone stack to be programmed for each and every amp being profiled. That would require someone at Kemper to code every amp in existence. I can already hear the moaning of the forum and Facebook about the XYZ boutique amp (only 5 in existence globally) isn’t in the list of models -come on Kemper what are you playing at this amp is an absolute must have. ? no matter how hard a company tries they will never be able to model everything.

On a more positive note, there really are only a limited number of common tone circuits in everyday use. They also call TMB tone stacks FMV (Fender Marshall Vox) so it could be possible for Kemper to code a limited number of typical stacks which a user could select from a menu. I believe this is something ckemper has previously suggested may be possible but I haven’t heard anything about this for some time so have no idea whether it will ever be implemented. However, even this is clearly not what the OP was asking for. The post (and many other similar ones) seems to be asking for the ability to profile with the tone knobs at different positions and they magically convert that information into a single

Profile that behaves like the real amp. That simply doesn’t seem possible with the current technology. I wouldn’t be surprised if CK and the team did find a way to crack this problem one day but it would almost certainly require a new profiling process and new hardware.

Some including V8guitar have suggested alternatives that work along the lines of morphing between profiles which might provide some sort of workaround but I have no idea whether the current hardware could handle that (I suspected not).

Quote from musicmad

First you say that it can't be done, then link to an implementation that could actually be used in the Kemper as well :). Doesn't have to be "profiling". The Duncan concept would be interesting to have in itself.

I agree that it can be done with an alternative method but not current profiling. However, I also pointed out that in order to do it would probably require component level modelling. The Duncan tool doesn’t model the sound but merely shows the frequency plot of various component and circuit designs. The tool lets you swap resistor and capacitor values to see what effect they would have but doesn’t create that sound. In order to actually create that as a “sound” you would beed to model the effect which I suspect would require much more horsepower than the KPA was designed to provide.

You can’t save input choice as part of a preset at all.

From the manual:

“Unlike the other parameters of the Input Section, the Input Source is set globally, rather than by Rig. It will therefore not be saved in an input preset.”

As a result of this I don’t have any use for input presets at all so just set my CS and DS lock the input settings and forget about it. That does of course mean accepting sub-optimal noise gate settings as a trade off.

I fully understand what you are proposing but as far as I understand it would be impossible to use current profiling technology to do this. You would need component level modelling like Axe and Helix. This would also come with a massive additional processing requirement which the Kemper wasn’t designed for.

The biggest problem comes from the way even just the three knobs in a TMB tone stack interact with each other. Turning the Treble control affects how the other two work so it would be impossible to do enough single point profiles to create a tone stack that provides one to one likeness of the original amp.

If you haven’t already done so, I highly recommend downloading the Duncan Amps tone stack calculator and playing with individual control s to see how they affect the others. If is really helpful to see it change visually in a real time graph and makes the whole concept come to life.

Thanks for the update GS very much appreciated.

I agree with much of what the OP says.

I rarely have an issue with noisy guitars. Even when I do (single coils with a lot of interference in the room) the noise gate threshold required to deal with this is often so high that it kills sustain so badly that the noise is the lesser of two evils.

However, all mid to high gain amps (I’m an old school classic rock kind of dude not a total high gain metal head) have some noise floor. This is usually more annoying than pickup noise in my experience as it is persistent (pickup noise stops when I turn the guitar volume down). However, the noise gate setting required to deal with this is clearly very different from rig to rig. I almost never change my CS or DS settings; even though I have multiple guitars they are all similar enough to not need to change anything on the input when I swap between them) so CS/DS are always locked on my KPA.

Some people use one guitar for a whole gig (or at least a few guitars that are similar enough to use the same CS/DS settings) but I would imagine very few people use just one rig all the time. Some will use one for every section of every song. Others, like myself, may use a range of core sounds (maybe 4 or 5) with different gain levels and therefore, different noise floors.

Noise gate threshold needs to change from rig to rig for optimal results. This would mean either

A) unlocking the input section and saving all settings on a rig by rig basis

B) adding a noise gate stomp to each rig that needs it ( ties up an FX slot which could be used for something else) but this is a different noise gate and functions more like an audible effect than the excellent transparent gate in the input section

C) just accept sub-optimal settings

While I can see the advantage of being able to lock the Noise Gate with input settings in the case of a guitar with noisy pickups, I believe that a solution to amp noise is at least as big an issue.

Therefore, my suggestions would include:

Allow the current NS to be independent of the input settings lock. Before anyone says that would be illogical as the idea is to lock everything in the input menu remember that the input selection isn’t currently able to be saved as part of a preset either. To me it seems totally weird that I cant set up a preset that includes my input routing including CS levels for reamping so a noise gate change wouldn’t be a big departure from current thinking.

Add a similar noise gate to the Stack section with a pre/post option similar to the tone stack settings as both option will affect the outcome differently.

However, I think my ideal solution would be to have a logic based setting which works somewhat similarly to Pure Cab. Noise Gate could be set globally in the input section and locked as it currently is. BUT add the same control to the Stack section as well. If both have a value then the higher value takes precedence and overrides the lower value. In this scenario we would be able to set and lock the input Noise Gate to the lowest level necessary to deal with noise pickups (which doesn’t change from rig to rig) but automatically increase this to the optimum setting to kill amp his on higher gain rigs. That seems like a win/win solution which should be easy to implement given that Burkhard and the rest of the team have already implemented the same logic in the pure cab code.

Christophe Kemper has already said an acoustic simulator will be released so I think you may get something sort of similar in the not too distant future although it is more likely to be an FX type rather than a profile which would have the advantage of still leaving the Stack section available for other things like a profile of an acoustic amp etc.

Good idea but an absolute bitch to set up and use (unless there was a computer based editor ?). Maybe something that wasn’t feasible to add in the past but which might be possible in the not too distant future?

Now that is something I could get behind ?

That would be a fantastic addition. However, I would like to see it added to all pitch/harmoniser FX rather than just analog Octave. The analog octaver is monophic so no use for chords. It would be great though be able to add a lower octave to only the bottom of chords.

It’s not going to happen with the current profiling methodology and hardware. As far as I am aware, that would require a total overhaul that would result in Profiler 2.0.

As Locrain said, that is how modellers like Fractal and Line6 work. It is a totally different approach from the ground up. If I was looking for that sort of functionality I would definitely buy an Axe or Helix.

I’m not sure I fully understand the signal path you are trying to achieve.

The Stack block output is everything up to the amp and cab. Therefore, if an FX loop is being used in Stomp A - D it will be sent to the same output as the Stack (say Monitor Out for example as the Stack is effectively mono anyway ). F you select Mod Mono or Mod Stereo the FX loop could be placed in FX. x or MoD slots which would give everything upto the Mod signal including all Stomps and the Stack.

The Delay/Rev output option only ever includes those two FX slots. However, you don’t have to have Delay and Reverb FX in those slots. So you should in theory be able to put an FX Loop in one of those two positions and have i go to the same output as the Delay/ Rev options (say Main Out for example).

It sounds like you haven’t yet found profiles that work for you yet.

I’ve been using mine for up to 8 hours at a time for nearly two years but have never experienced any ear fatigue with my Adam Ax7. Quite the opposite, compared to my real amps, Guitar Rig, Two Notes IRs etc I find it the least fatiguing set up I have eve had.

It isn’t currently possible to save performances to Rig Exchange as there is no suitable file type. However, I think this will change with the new Rig Manager 3 as this will be able to handle Presets etc with the new file extensions. Therefore, I would seem logical that such functionality could be extended to performances too.

If you make a decent Direct Amp Profile of you amp (with no speaker selected during the profiling phase) and refine it as necessary it should be efficiently indistinguishable from the original amp through the same cabinet. Anytime I’ve done it with my Boogies and used an A/B pedal to switch while playing they have been almost identical. In a blind test I couldn’t tell which was which but if really pushed to choose one I almost always found that I favoured the profile over the real amp but it was more a guess than an obvious “that one’s the Kemper”.

My suggestion is just to make a few more Direct Amp Profiles. It is an easy process but the results can vary a little and refining may be necessary.

As Ruefus said although I would do it slightly differently (there are usually several ways to achieve a result with the KPa so pick the one that works for you).

I would insert the new version of the rig in a performance slot. Then lock the full Stack section. Now change to the next slot you want it inserted in and hit save. Repeat until all slots are replaced then unlock the Stack.

Go to the system menu. There is a Performance Load command to select how you want it to function, pending a selection, immediately play slot 1 etc.

Quote from spikey

Vocals is just filler between lead parts...

Kind of like when Geddy Lee starts singing it kills a perfectly goo instrumental ?

I dad the opposite experience initially. I just found EVERYTHING sounded amazing ? my initial time with the KPA was spent like - pick a profile (any profile) and play with it all night. Next day pick a different profile and enjoy it for hours repeat for months ?

One suggestion for learning the controls though - some of the settings such at tube shape or sag can be quite subtle. We all have a tendency to listen with out eyes too so we can convince ourselves we are hearing a change based on the number on the display ( likely to be an even bigger problem with a vision on screen editor ?) rather than using our ears. My solution to this is to use Morph and an expression pedal. Choose a parameter you want to experiment with and assign the heel position base state one extreme and the toe down state to the other extreme. Now just close your eyes and play. Move the pedal WHILE playing and really listen for any changes.

Once really comfortable with that one parameter reset morph and linke to something else. You can even experiment with two or more changes simultaneously. E.g. what happens when reducing sag and increasing shape instead etc.