Posts by KnoxHarrington

    I use both options and when you can afford it, it really shouldn't be a matter of exclusion but more a matter of finding the right tool for the right situation.


    When recording I usually use the Kemper, but I almost exclusively use profiles I made of my own amps which I have known of years and have learned where their sweet spots are. It's indistinguishable from using the real thing to be honest. I have a professional recording studio and I usually had the amp head in the control room and the cabinet miked up in the live room so I took the "amp in the room feel" out of the equation when comparing to the KPA, and there really is no significant difference.


    However I do use the UA OX from time to time especially when I know the gig requires me fiddling around with amp settings, for instance between songs. On the other hand, I have profiled most of the settings that I used during these specific sessions so I use the OX less and less. I keep it around in the studio for when a client wants to use his real amp without making too much noise.


    The thing I personally love about the Kemper when compared to using tube amps is its stability, reliability, consistency and ergonomics. No more worrying about tube replacement or cap replacement in old amps etc. No more hauling both the Plexi head and the Dumble clone head to gigs etc. That's what really stands out for me.


    The one thing I would advise you is: profile, profile, profile. The Kemper can store so many profiles, just make one every time you find a useful sound, it really takes a matter of minutes. And document everything, not just in Rig Manager, but in a separate document. Also, try making a profile of your amp connected to for instance the UA OX, this will give great results as well and makes it able to profile in silence.

    Nice job! Also, don't forget that turning up the volume on a tube amp is not the same as turning up the volume on the Kemper. The increase in volume on the latter is much more linear, whilst most volume increase on a tube amp is usually in the first quadrant of the volume knob, which can make it feel fatter and louder much sooner.

    The one thing I'd really like to see happening is the ability to capture entire rigs including multiple stacked OD pedals. The Kemper can't do this realistically, yet, at least to my ears. I'm not talking about modulation pedals which would be impossible to profile because of their temporal nature I guess, but profiling multiple (static) stacked OD or boost pedals should be possible someday.


    I think the Kemper is great for people who use profiles of clean or distorted amps without much pedals in the chain and rely on amps for breakup. I personally play high headroom amps which don't break up 99% of the time and I rely on pedals for grit. I have yet to come close to the sound I get when stacking my OD pedals through an analog amp.

    Hi guys,


    Just wanted to share this with you. I was always looking for a way to profile some of my 100W tube amps without blowing the windows out of my house. I was thinking about constructing a box to place the cabinet and mics in but never got around to it.


    Yesterday I was messing around with the Two Notes Torpedo Captor X and thought: what if I plug the output of this thing into the return of the KPA and make a profile? How will that sound? The results are extremely convincing and now I can profile in silence! Granted, you're actually profiling one of Two Notes' IR's (in this case a Two Rock 2x12 IR) but I frankly cannot hear any significant difference between the profiles I made with the Captor X and the one I made with my actual Two Rock 2x12 and a mic in front of it.


    It's also very useful for creating direct profiles: the Captor X can send out direct signal without any processing and so I was able to make some direct profiles of my amps in complete silence, which sound great when played through a cab or the Kabinet. I even merged the profiles with the "full" profiles I made while capturing Two Notes' IR and I think it's a wonderful solution.


    Just something I wanted to share, I'm not affiliated with Two Notes in any way. Take care guys!

    You are saying "This, so true", but Nikos did say the opposite?!

    Nikos thinks that Mark Knopfler likes the Kemper because the profiler "nailed" his amp tones "perfectly". Seems he just sees the Kemper as a good tool and economic solution. Not less, not more.

    No, he did not say the opposite, that's why I said "so true", lol. Read his post: Nikos says MK did NOT specifically like it because it nails the tone of his amps etc., which was somewhat confirmed by my conversation with the crew member.

    The KPA is not Mark Knopflers (and ofcourse all the others) choice because it has "good sound" and nails the profiles perfectly..it is also a serious,well thought out tool with a great,proven concept for gigging and recording.And we know this is true for every tiny detail.

    This, so true.


    I had a lengthy conversation with one of Mark Knopfler's crew members last tour and he stated that Knopfler didn't really care all that much for how much the KPA sounded like his tube amps. He certainly wasn't caught up in it as much as some people are. He just really liked the sound of the unit, the flexibility, the stability, the ergonomics and the reduction in crew burden it proved to be.

    Hey guys,


    I browsed a lot but haven't found an answer, sorry if it has been discussed before.


    As I understand it, Clean Sens and Dist Sens is used to balance the levels between clean profiles and distorted profiles. Does this also apply to a clean profile with added distortion effects? Or is it only applied to profiles of distorted amps, i.e. with "inherent" distortion? I can't seem to figure it out.


    Cheers!

    I just pre-order the QC. Thinks I'm looking forward to testing:


    - How does it compare to the KPA when profiling / capturing a rig which includes multiple (stacked) OD pedals?

    - How will the different operating modes of the KPA (browsing vs performing) compare to the modes of the QC (presets, scenes, stomps)?

    - How does the UI experience compare to the KPA, including the computer editor?

    This looks very interesting. I'm really curious as to how the QC could capture an analog rig with multiple stacked drive pedals (ie BB into TS or vice versa). I never really got convincing results with the KPA.