Posts by SeanChristopher

Quote from whippinpost91850

yeah. Jarrod and I disagree on refining

I love Jarrod and he's a great genuine guy. But unfortunately, we disagree on Refining too. When I asked him about it, his experience with Refining was the opposite of what I've heard from everyone else.

Quote from DamianGreda

In my opinion, it is not a well-done video. He did'n do profile refining(after Guido's video I think it is important step ) and set definition parameter without checking against AMP sound. I must admit that QC came out pretty close.

Once he added the different ODs, and didn't Refine, the comparison was invalid unfortunately. Fun comparison concept but a few minor flaws in the way it was executed. He's a really nice guy and loves his Kemper so it was all unintentional on his part. But still-the different OD's, not Refining, and setting Definition without referencing the Amp's original tone-were too many unequal factors that added up to an unfair comparison.

Its so surprising Jarrod doesn't Refine too, because his Profiles come out sounding Killer! Lol

Quote from Wheresthedug

I start auditioning all Tone Junkie profiles by first turnong OFF the compessor stomp and delays ? they completely drown out the profile. I also can’t understand why Jonathan feels the need to stick a compressor in front of a heavily driven high gain amp like Mesa Triple Crown or Single Rec. Those are some seriously compressed sounds to start with.

I just recently checked out the Triple Crown and Mark V Tone Junkie Profiles (Flash sale made each pack $2!). I was extremely surprised to see the that not only the compression in the Amp section of each profile was turned up, but there was also a Compressor added in front of the Profile too! Hahaha I was like, "what the hell??! Who on earth ever needs this much compression on anything-EVER??!! Hahahaha ??" I had such a good laugh because it was so over the top and ridiculous! Lol

I think the Tone Junkie guys might not be very familiar with high gain tones in the first place. They seem to go about setting up high gain rigs the same as they set up lower gain stuff. It takes some work to get any Tone Junkie Profiles to sound "modern" or "high gain" at all. Which is unfortunate because they make some amazing lower gain and mid gain stuff. It'd be sick if they were at that level with higher gain stuff too!

But yeah, I typically completely turn Compression in the Amp and disable any Compressors in the Rig when I'm working with anything above a mid-gain Profile. One a certain amount of Gain is there, you're squashing something that's already squashed and that sound usually doesn't work for many situations

Quote from Ingolf

You'd made a capture of a cab powered by an arbitrary random neutral sounding amp.

Sounds odd to me and VERY far from accurate.

Amps and cabs always belong to each other.

You just described it so simply and my dumba** needed a paragraph to explain it lolol

Quote from nightlight

Didn't mean to cause offence. What I mean is, is there any manual or link you can direct me to which has this info? You mentioned TGP, no longer a member there haha

I'd just be surprised if the QC's full rig captures did not allow you to separate the cab from the amp. That would seem like a step down from the Kemper's amp+cab modus operandi.

Was trawling the 900-page thread on TGP, and someone said you could also capture just the cab. How does that work?

No worries, no offense taken my friend

I didn't mean to give off a defensive vibe or anything like that. I meant no offense on my part either and I'm sorry if it seemed that way. That definitely wasn't/isn't my intention.

I was just trying to explain because I felt like there was some miscommunication. We seemed to be mostly on the same page before that so I was just confused lol but now I totally get what you mean. Part of why I've been so vocal about that drawback is because it seems like such a step down from the Kempers capabilities, like you mentioned. I think we're thinking the same thing lol and you know what they say about great minds thinking alike

I read about the QC's full rig Capture limitations from one of Dougs posts but I heard the QC's manual is up online. I'll definitely look around online for some more solid info for you. I too, get really into researching as well so I totally understand the want for more information. I'm the same way haha!

And regarding the Cab Captures, I think the way to do it would be basically like Capturing a full Amp+Cab Capture with a few differences. So you would mic up the Cab you want in the way you'd shoot your IR, and then you'd use a totally clean and flat power amp or a PA or something like that which doesn't add coloration as the amp, and then you'd take the Capture of that. And then theoretically, you can stack it with an Amp Capture like an IR. But I'm not sure how well it works because I don't think anyone has tried it. It's like the preamp Captures and power amp Captures, and at this point they're more ideas of what the QC might be able to do but it hasn't been tested yet. I'm not sure what I think of it. But I can see Cab Captures stacked with Amp Captures being boomy in the low end (just like when you use 2 IR's on top of each other and it gets really boomy and dark sounding lol) based on two interactions from two power amps being stacked on each other. But, for all I know it could work out pretty well lol

Quote from nightlight

Just seems like conjecture at this point. I can't imagine the QC being unable to swap out an IR.

On stacking Captures: Might be handy if you can capture a pedal and then stack it, but we'll have to wait and see if the system works as advertised.

No conjecture from me when giving you info you asked for, my friend.

I think you might be mistaken, or misunderstanding lol. No one is saying you can't use different IRs with the QC.

In a full rig Amp+Cab Capture (which is the equivalent of a Studio Profile) there is not a way to disable or mute the Cab to allow using other IRs with that Capture. In a full rig Amp+Cab Capture, the Cab has been mic'd up so there's no IR involved.

It isn't like throwing an IR on Profile or DI Capture. I think you're thinking it's like that, and you think I'm saying you can't just swap the IR with any kinds of Captures. Definitely not what I mean brother haha.

Full rig Captures have a mic'd up Cab in them and the QC currently has no way to separate an Amp+Cab within a Capture and no way to mute the Cab in full rig Captures. The QC doesn't even have a way to tell what part of the Capture is the Cab so a full rig Capture is stuck with the mic'd up Cab sound from when it was made.

If you're working with just DI Amp Captures (no Cabinet, equal to a DI Profile) then you can use different IRs with it.

With Kemper Profiles, an algorithm called CabDriver figures out where the Amp ends and Cab begins in a Profile and it allows you to turn off the Cab for any type of Profile so you can use different IRs or Cab presets.

That Cab flexibility is limited to Amp Captures. That's my only point lol. You asked about the difference between Profiles and Captures and what about the QCs limitations were being discussed and I'm just explaining haha. No conjecture on my part regarding anything I've said about Captures. These are things Doug Castro has literally said on TGP and I'm just passing on the info after you asked lol

Quote from nightlight

I don't see the difference though. Both devices can do direct profiles. And the cab can be added or switched on each? So why is this being typed as some revolutionary feature?

The only difference is that with the KPA, you can swap the cabs no matter what kind of Profile, versus with the QC it has to be a DI Capture.

It's definitely not a new feature or anything and I think the point of my post might have been missed lol. I was trying to point out with the all kinds of Profiles you can swap the Cab but you can only swap the Cab in certain kinds of Captures. The only new feature the QC has is the ability to stack Captures. And then I've also heard people talk about Capturing each individual part of an amp to stack Captures in crazy ways but that's a really rare use-case that I don't see being a common thing.

ejanuska welcome! And I'm glad you're enjoying your KPA

Hi Jenfi1979

I HIGHLY recommend the Audio Technica ATH M40x headphones for using with the Kemper and/or mixing.

The Audio-Technica M50x headphones are more commonly recommended but I personally wouldn't go for those. They're a little more expensive and more popular but, they're also way more hyped in certain frequency ranges so they're more for listening to music and consumer audio. The low end gets boomy fast and the high end gets ice picky, and the mid range is kind of scooped compared more flat response headphones.

The Audio Technica M40x headphones are more affordable and have a flatter and cleaner response and in my opinion they sounded clearer in comparison. They honestly sound great and really surprised me.

I've compared the Audio-Technica M40x's to the M50x's, Beyerdynamic DT770 Pro's (too quiet when used with most stuff without proper power), Sony MDR-7506, Sennheiser HD 280 Pro, and a few others that I can't seem to remember off the top of my head lol.

But the ATH-M40x's sounded cleanest and had really clear and open mid-range, and they're surprisingly loud lol. AND they're one of the more affordable options.

Don't let the price fool you, the ATH-M40x's can compete with headphones way outside their price range.

Its worth at least getting them to compare side by side with other options you're interested in. If you can afford it, get the ones you're interested in and compare them side by side. That's the best way to make sure you're picking whichever best suits you ?

(sorry for the long post! Lol I spent a bunch of time choosing and comparing headphones when getting my first pair and hopefully this will either save you some trouble, or help give you some more info and a new perspective Hope this helps!)

Quote from Calaban

The final piece of the puzzle for me, being a home recording enthusiast, was the Digitech FreqOut. No more blasting my monitor as and standing awkwardly above my desk trying to get that sustain and feedback. No, the FreqOut is not a “perfect” representation of true guitar feedback, but if massaged just right and mixed well it is indistinguishable, for the most part.

Kemper and Neural ABSOLUTELY should build a version of this into their products. I am dismayed that none of the big modelers have this. It really does bring it THAT much closer to the “real deal.”

I hear so many great things about the Digitech FreqOut pedal

It sounds like a really killer pedal and I'd also love to see that in the KPA at some point. I've heard a lot about it over the past few years and with how popular it is, I'm really surprised that all the big modelers and the KPA don't have an Effect like it as well. It would definitely be a really useful Effect that would have the potential to improve the experience of playing through a digital rig.

There's even a thread requesting a Digitech Freqout Effect in the "Feature Requests" section of the forum

I just added my vote on there a while ago haha

Quote from MadH

What I always liked about the Profiler vs a modeler, is that I can actually compare the real amp vs my profiles and see how accurate they are. With a modeler, such as the Axe FX, you have no choice but to rely on somebody else's ears. Same thing happens when using somebody else's profiles. This is what Neural DSP is trying to avoid and what I believe Kemper should do as well.

I think I might be misunderstanding what you mean lol I apologize!

Respectfully, Captures and Profiles are the same concept. So both are dialed in before taking the Capture/Profile. The only way to avoid that problem with either, is to make them yourself with your own amps and tones.

Do you mean the auto-refinement part of the Capture process helps yield better results right off the bat so users won't have to feel compelled to use 3rd part Captures (like what can occasionally can happen when working with Profiles), and that avoids the problem of using Captures/Profiles that someone else dialed in ? Because that I can definitely agree with and can see where you're coming from Although, just as our subject matter reveals, you can get even better and more accurate results when Refining properly with the KPA. So that also is a way to avoid the problem of being driven to use 3rd party Profiles after not being satisfied with your own attempts to make Profiles.

But also as we've been mentioning, adding an auto-refine part to the Profiling process would ultimately be the best way to get the best results with the least amount of effort needed Because as we've seen, the QC can get some pretty close results with their algorithm-and we've also seen that the Kemper can get really accurate results with the caveat of needing much more refinement and effort. I imagine the Profiling process would get extremely accurate results much faster if auto-refinement was added to the Profiling algorithm.

+1 This would be such a great effect to have in the Kemper.

It's crazy this thread was started over 3 years ago lol. I hope if this Effect does come out, that it's sooner than another 3 years from now lolol

The Kemper team tends to kill it with whatever they're doing so I'm sure once this is on their radar, it'll start to happen

Quote from nightlight

I don't follow the argument about the QC capturing each element of the amp and cabinet. Isn't that what the Kemper does, i.e. You can capture the amp as a DI, you can capture the cab together with the amp and you can switch around amps and cabs?

Or am I missing something? It seems highly unlikely that you can capture a cab without an amp being involved in the equation.

The KPA can separate amp + cab in Studio Profiles because of the CabDriver algorithm that basically makes a guess (and a really good one at that imo) where the amp and cab separate.

Calaban gave great context that explains the advantages of DI Profiles and why they were made after the KPA's release. The DI Profiles are just the amp without the cab, so you have more flexibility with the cab in the most authentic way possible.

The QC's full rig (amp +cab) Captures are the equivalent of Studio Profiles. But the cab can't be removed or changed with the full rig Captures. The full rig Captures take up only one block and allows for less CPU to be used for your core tone, so it has its advantages.

However, there is the option of using amp Captures (with no cab) which are basically the equivalent of DI Profiles. Neural DSP should be releasing some of both kinds of Captures with the factory content and hopefully people who start selling Captures will make both kinds of Captures to keep options open for users that want flexibility with the cab

Quote from MadH

I was surprised by that. His profiles are usually quite good and I assumed that he spent adequate time refining. Specially when the differences are that obvious.

I guess he goes after the sound that he prefers instead of accuracy. I rather have accuracy from the start and then adjust to taste on my own.

I still believe that if accuracy is the goal then refining should be fully automated because if not, when using somebody else's profiles, the results will always depend on how much effort they put on refining and their ears.

I think that's where the QC's algorithm has an advantage (and sort of a disadvantage at the same time lol) over the Kempers Profiling algorithm. T

The QC's Capture algorithm works longer than when Profiling, almost as if the "Refinement" is automatic. This is a great idea and has the potential to get really good results (even when people don't want to Refine a lot like in the M Britt video). But the QC not having a Refine option after the Capture is done, prevents it from being able to improve the accuracy of the Capture beyond the initial Capture process. So in other words, if the Capture's accuracy isn't to your satisfaction at first, then you have to re-do the Capture-rather than being able to just Refine it in the areas that might need it, to get the most authentic results possible.

I think the QC adding back the a "Refine" type option to the Capture process, would allow better Capture results. Because idk first hand but, in all the QC Capture vids so far, I can hear some really obvious differences between the amp tones and the Captures. And it seems that there's no option to further the accuracy of the Captures aside from re-doing the Captures completely, or hoping the Bass Middle Treble and Gain is enough to get the Capture closer to the amp tone. But if they added the "Refine" option to the Capture process, I think the results would be a lot better Because Captures have a ton of potential as it is.

I think if the KPA's Profiling algorithm had an automatic Refine section of the process, yet still had the same Refine option as always, then it would make for some more accurate results right off the bat-which would ideally require no Refining or much less Refining if any is needed at all

Quote from pippopluto

Oh, I did not mean to feel ridiculous...

This discussion has turned in a sort of competition where one has to show that the other is "wrong"; not my interest. I like to bring thoughts and elements on the table and discuss them.

Nothing wrong in you having your ideas. I am out

You know what, I didn't mean to either.

We can have differing ideas and it can be all good

As I said before, we can still be homies!

I, much like you, just like sharing ideas and observations

I definitely didn't mean for this to turn into any sort of verbal debate competition and I apologize for adding to the problem.

We both clearly have ideas that are valid from different perspectives and hey, that's just life

Quote from Ibot39

If you watch the lastest MBritt video called "MBritt's Kemper profiling secrets" you can clearly hear differences between the Kemper and the real amp (listening with APS Klasik 2020 studio monitors). Don't get me wrong please, it's not night and day!! Maybe Kemper even sounds better. But if you focus on "authenticity" it is not 99 % and only 1 % missing here. Mr. Britt himself is hearing it and calling it mid hump. That is what some people mean, when they talk about recognizing the Kemper because of some TS like sound.

So it seems that even Mr. Britt has to improve on refining than?

M Britt definitely could have done a wee bit more Refining imo lol

I think a huge part of the level of accuracy reached when profiling has to do with the Refining technique. I'm not sure if you saw the video of Guido B making some Profiles but in that vid, I couldn't hear even the smallest difference between the amp and Profile-much like my experience with other amps being Profiled as well. A big difference in the Profiling technique between Guido and M Britt is their Refining technique. Guido B took the time to Refine each register and aspect of the tone that needed refinement, and Refined as many times as he felt necessary until 100% accuracy. And M Britt only Refined one time and it was quite short.

So far evidence has shown that if someone takes the time to Refine each aspect of the tone that needs Refining, there really can be a level of authenticity reached that's indistinguishable from the real amp. It's crazy how much of a difference that Refining multiple times can make

Quote from pippopluto

Yep, this is what I said

Well, this means that - in your projection - at least half of the captures will be separated modules. So every user will have things the way they like best. Don't forget that Neural is already going to make several captures available at launch, and their declared plans are that other will come regularly.

Yep, I am assuming things... like you are No-one is able to draw conclusions about any strategic flaws in the device and its planned development ATM. Your critiques may end up being a real issue or not: we just don't know.

What I am saying - again - is that QC users won't have to be stuck with "Studio" captures. IOW, the imitation of not being able to detach the cabinet is not going to be an issue for them as it would be for the Profiler.
Also, they have models that they can mix with captures.

All in all, I don't see in the concept any serious limitation that would make the QC not enjoyable for anyone: each device has its characteristics, no device can do everything all the others can, and each one has got something others haven't. I am sure many will be happy with the QC, and they will be willing to give something up in favour of its strengths.

I believe there's room for anyone and anything

Display More

Yes there are other kinds of Captures but, different kinds of Captures existing doesn't change the fact that the Captures themselves only have B M T and Gain to tweak within them, and it doesn't change the fact that you can't swap Cabs in full rig Captures. You're talking as if somehow, other kinds of Captures existing and other features, somehow makes the drawbacks I mentioned non-existent and that's just ridiculous lol.

You may think other things about the QC make up for that aspect and you might be right. But I wasn't talking about other aspects in my observation. I tried to be clear about the fact that I was talking specifically about the QC's Capture section and the KPA's Amp block in comparison to each other.

I'm not making blind faith based assumptions. I'm making assumptions based off of what's realistic and what the current market offers and what the market demands. And simply put, no one's really talking about using Captures of each individual section within an amp and signal chain. Pretty much everyone is talking about full rig and DI Captures so idk how in demand Captures of each section within an amp will be but so far, that seems like something a small percentage of people are interested in doing based of off what people are actively talking about in regards to the unit.

But it could go either way. I guess neither of us know more than the other would so it's a guess on both ends lol.

And I'd like to stress again how i'm not saying that it'll make the unit terrible or make the experience bad. I'm just literally making observations about some limitations i've noticed and have commented about how they'd be drawbacks for my uses and other's with similar workflow's or situations.

Somehow me making observations has triggered a need within you to defend the QC as if it's being attacked lol. As if my observations are an attempt to sabotage your experience with your QC and I assure you that's not the case. If I came off that way, I apologize. I'd like to assure you, I have no malicious intent and I doubt anyone else here does either. I'm merely making observations and comparisons based on the facts we know so far.

As the new "game changer", it's pretty normal for people to compare it to the competition that it's claiming superiority over. Naturally, people will notice things they like and don't like. And while exchanging observations and analysis of individual aspects of the units workflow or features, you keep feeling the need to discredit and disprove the things people are observing. I'm making observations about only specific aspects in comparison to the KPA and I've explained how those things can be drawbacks. And others are expressing their opinions just like you express yours.

Like i've said before, you're right from a certain perspective. And I actually see how you would get to what you're thinking. And it's valid from the other side of the tracks, if you disregard the context of what i'm saying. But that's the issue. You ignore the context to attack the validity of anothers' observation.

There's a difference between respectfully disagreeing and just explaining your opinion-and disagreeing with someones opinion and trying to disprove it or explain why it's wrong lol. And for half the comments i've made, you ignore the context of my observation to explain what other aspects make my opinion less valid. It all isn't necessary because, we're homies man haha. If you haven't noticed, I keep saying you're right too from a certain perspective. You're just ignoring my perspective to make yours right.

I see many advantages and upsides to the QC as well, so it's not all negative. I'm merely being analytical and making observations here. Some of them just happened to be drawbacks. That's not a slam or an attempt to slander anything lol. That's just normal for the new piece of gear while it's being looked at by people. There's definitely no need to be defensive, my friend Like I said before, we can disagree and still be homies ahaha I mean no offense and I see where you're coming from. But it'd be cool to feel like that same courtesy was returned. After all, we're buds so what's with all the bickering? hahaha let's just say whatever and agree to disagree

Quote from pippopluto

I am pretty well aware of what the differences are between the two approaches

What I am saying is that QC users won't have to change cab in a "studio capture" hence missing the whole original thing, because the possibility to stack captures allows them to just choose any pre, any power section and any cab/IR and create a rig. So they can profile the whole chain and also its parts, and play with the block as they like.

Hope this clarifies

You're assuming everyone who does Captures of their amps and setups will individually Capture each section of the rig and each section of the amp and the truth is, people most likely won't do Captures that way.

If you end up finding a Capture you like and want to start working with, and the person who did the Capture only did a full rig Amp+Cab Capture (which will probably be about half of the Captures that are around due to that being the most efficient and simple way to Capture a setup and it takes up the least CPU with one block), then you're stuck with that Cab in that Capture. THAT is my point, my friend.

You're assuming there will be this plethora of thoroughly Captured amps and preamps and power amps and it honestly will only be like that if you're doing Captures of your own Amps.

The majority of Captures will either be Amp Captures with no Cab, or full rig Amp+Cab Captures, and pedal Captures. So about half of the rig Captures (not including pedal Captures) will have a Cab that you're stuck with. You get me ? lol

I get what you're saying. But you're assuming everyone will be individually Capturing each section within an amp and signal chain and I doubt that kind of exhaustive Capturing will be done by many people lol

We have to look at it practically and think about what's realistic. Just because people can Capture every individual part of their signal chain and each part within an amp, doesn't mean every single person will. And I doubt people selling 3rd party Captures would do it like that either. Most likely, people selling Captures will do full rig Amp+Cab Captures or DI Captures (just like with Profiles) for each Amp or pack of Captures or whatever. I doubt anyone's going to take the time to Capture every little part of the Amp and signal chain individually for the small percentage of people who will use those kinds of Captures to begin with.

The only people who will want to do all that work are the ones who are using Captures that way, I honestly don't see sellers doing Capture packs this way because it's a huge hassle for not much gain. So unless you have a bunch of amps to do that kind of tedious Capturing with, then it might be hard to find those kinds of Captures. I wouldn't plan on those being common types of Capture to buy or find on the cloud or whatever.

I don't mean to sound negative or rude, my friend. I'm just trying to think practically and realistically

The issues start when people stop thinking analytically and logically. I don't see an issue with looking at the facts and things you can gather so far, and making an informed personal comparison and evaluation of something. The problem is when people insist on subjective things being definitive.

Assuming the unit sounds good or bad based on how some YouTuber makes it sound when they're using it? Ridiculous and subjective. And people letting that hold so much weight to their opinion is part of the problem too. But looking at the workflow in the videos, the features and how they work, looking practically at the options you have, stuff like that, THAT is logical and analyzing things in a way that actually has potential to benefit you. It's the same thing you'd do if you had it in front of you and it's totally normal to compare it to other gear that it's up against.

I don't think anyone has any malicious intent or is feeling overly defensive about their gear. I think Neural DSP's marketing, and the attitude of people awaiting the QC, has just left a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths. And when you're looking into something and wanting information but all you can find is empty hype, big claims, and obviously biased promo videos, and people spouting off random assumptions with no context, it's kind of a bummer lol.

When something ia marketed so aggressively, with so much hype and large claims, it's pretty normal for it to be judged against the competition that it's claiming superiority over lol. Being offended or upset when that happens is just absurd

Aw man!!

I've actually seen the KPA's LED's flashing in cool patterns in videos too! I've always thought that maybe the KPA had a really cool lightshow type feature for shows or something. I always wondered how to do it hahaha I guess now I don't have to ask the question

Kind of a bummer though lol, I always thought that was a really cool live feature

It's good to know why it happens and that it isn't intentional though. Now I can stop wondering every time I see the KPA's LEDs flashing in videos lol