Posts by Wheresthedug

    I gave myself couple of days to calm down a bit. I will experiment with the current setup I have which is Kemper into fx loop of 6505 112 however I have to say I still prefer sound from the cheap headphones I have . Unfortunately like somebody above mentioned I dont like to be bound to extra wires around my guitar :D I've never liked to use headphones to begin with.

    I dont have space in my apartament to set HS7 or HS8 properly - they have the bass air flow from the back so there should be significant distance between speakers and wall. Thats the biggest obstacle.

    I am slowly leaning to Kabinet I guess. I will wait few more days so I cam make my mind. :)

    Still I have to say I am extremaly happy with KPA itself!

    I wouldn’t worry about space for speakers unless you have enough space to get them 3 or 4m from all walls .


    Contrary to popular belief speakers are actually much better as close to the wall as possible (ideally actually IN the wall) rather than a couple of feet away. The rear facing port isn’t an issue. Genelec also use a rear facing port and say it is fine as long as you have 5 cm air gap.


    Why are speakers better near walls? SPBIR - Destructive interference. The reflections from the back wall can come back out of phase with the original signal and cancel out the original frequency almost entirely for distances of 1/4 wavelength. Unfortunately, turning up the missing frequency doesn’t help as the cancellation still happens.


    The common misconception is that moving speakers a foot or two away from the wall solves this. Unfortunately, it doesn’t. In fact unless you can get the speakers a few METERS away from the wall it can actually make the problem worse as it shifts the problem frequency lower into the range that cheap acoustic treatments can’t do anything about.


    Conversely, although moving speakers closer to the wall doesn’t solve the problem it does move the offending frequency higher and into a range where even cheap DIY panels can work wonders.


    A simple example might help:


    Wavelength = Velocity / Frequency


    If we assume the speed of sound to be 343m/s and the low end of a guitar tone to be around 100hz (just for illustration). The wavelength is 3.43m.

    A sound wave hitting the wall behind the speaker and reflecting back into the room will cause destructive interference at 1/4 of the wavelength for any given frequency. Therefore, if the speaker is 85cm from the wall you will have a huge dip in the response around 100hz. This will make guitars sound thin. Acoustic treatment to handle down to 100hz or below is bulky and expensive. If you are producing bass frequencies from bass guitar or drums the problem gets exponentially harder to deal with.


    On the other hand with the speaker say 30cm (0.3m) from the wall the problem frequency will be centred around 285hz which is starting to get in to the range where cheap treatment can help.

    I understand that and I still propose the same solution. “Drive” is only a name I came up with it could be called breakup, speaker frying or anything else. All I am saying is, instead of creating new imprints for each speaker being driven harder simply add a parameter to the existing imprints that introduces the effect of speaker drive gradually rather than a binary “speaker ideal conditions” / “speaker breaking up”.

    OK, I understand what you are saying but in all honesty that is something I would really want to be able to totally disable and I wouldn't want the settings buried deeper making it more difficult to find the stuff I want to tweak manually. As long as it had a total bypass option to opt out I wouldn't be against others having it if they want it but I would definitely want to turn it off.

    Yes, and in that situation you can hear the result before you commit to a single profile. If it was to be done by an algorithm in Rig Manager as people seem to be asking for, I can't see any way to be able to audition the effect of the blend until after the dual amp rig has been created. That could entail an awful lot of trial and error creating profiles based on guesses.

    Do you have any of the Kone features enabled even though you aren’t using Kones?


    What signal are you sending to the monitor Out? Master Mono?


    How are you disabling the Cab section? In the Amp Block or in the Output Menu? In the output menu the wording is a bit confusing as the feature is “Monitor Cab Off” with an On/Off check box. Therefore, ticking the box to On turns the cabinet off. My logic would be “Monitor Cab” Tick box On/Off. It took me a bit of adjusting to get my head to work to the Kemper logic but maybe that’s just me being stupid.

    I think I “drive” type setting at rig level for existing imprints would be the best solution for your needs. That way the same imprint could be used with clean rigs and dirty rigs (with just the drive function being increased)

    I get the AI is a trendy word. I’m more thinking correlation engines. If anonymous data was reported back to Kemper, maybe it could set the lower level deeper settings based on hours weighted use of the same profile by other users.

    I’m not sure if I fully understand what you are saying but I think you are proposing something along the lines of;


    Profile XYZ has been used by 5000 users recently. In many cases users reduced amp definition and pure cab but increased hi pass filter to 95hz. Therefore, when I load that profile the Kemper will automatically make those adjustment for me simply because they are popular with other users.


    If that is the sort of thing you are suggesting I would be strongly against it. I want the profiles to be set up how I want them not how others use them. Also, what happens if ai have a profile set the way I want it then a little while later the KPA changes all the settings based on user ratings?


    I hope I have misinterpreted your suggestion and if I have I apologise for coming across like a grumpy old fart 😂

    And in particular, as the blending would be done offline, with the option of a frequency dependent blending one could generate an "output" profile with the chiming, sparkling top end of a (insert your favourite soloing lead amp here), but still maintaining that thick and tight low end of the (insert your favourite rhythm amp here).


    I definitely think it would be worth it.

    my only issue with that is that you would be creating the new blended profile in the dark. How would you decide what the correct blend is as you can only hear one rig at a time not both simultaneously you have no reference to tweak the blend to taste.

    I’m so old school that I actually prefer the Kemper UI over modern touchscreen devices like Helix and QC. A limited number of physical knobs for quick immediate on the fly tweaks is a real advantage to me. I’m all for progress but I would need to see demonstrable improvements in workflow to want to adopt a new UI. Too many UI these days are flash looking and full of useless gimmicks that actually make working more difficult. I would use Apple as an example. Each update they roll out now seems to make my like more difficult as multi gesture screens etc end up opening unwanted pages.


    As someone once said “be careful what you wish for, you just might get it” 🤣

    i have requested this a few times. Given that ckemper Is a keyboard player and designed one of the legendary synths of all time it shouldn’t be difficult for him to add this kind of thing to the KPA.


    I believe that digital guitar amps have reached a level where they can easily compete with valve amps for a regular guitar tone. From now on competition between Kemper, Helix, Axe, Quad Cortex etc to get closer to the real thing is going to be a game of vastly diminishing returns. Perhaps it is now time for digital platforms to start to inovate beyond traditional tones and take the guitar to a new level by exploiting the power digital devices have to do things the valve amps simply can’t.

    I always recommend spending as much on room treatments as monitors, mics, or other gear. It really makes the biggest improvement IMO.

    Absolutely!!!


    I have never understood why audiophiles spend hundreds of thousands of pounds/dollars/euros on equipment but put it in a shit sounding room. A half decent setup in a well treated room will sound better for a fraction of the cost. Guitar speakers are no different; even a Vintage 30 isn’t immune from the laws of physics 🤣