Posts by SteinbergerHack

    nightlight,


    For those of us who don't have a performance per song (lots and lots of work to maintain), but rather have banks of tones that are used generically across many songs, it is nice to have an effect or two that are optional within a given song.


    The problem then becomes, you get to the song, select your general performance, and turn on a chorus (for example), but within the song there is another rig you need so you switch over to that rig. When you return to the original rig, your chorus is off now.

    Right.


    I think of it as having one set of switches to control the amp channel (profile) and another set of switches to control the FX presets. This is how a basic multi-channel amp works with a basic MultiFX unit. When you change the amp channel, the FX setting doesn't change, and vice versa.

    Ever since experiencing that thing one of the first things I've tested when choosing new digital gear is the latency between patches. After researching (most likely on this forum) I was aware before I bought the Kemper that it would behave in this manner and, although a step backwards from previous gear in having instant access to every patch (TC G Force in my case, although the Kemper is so much more capable), I decided I could work within those limitations.


    Now you're aware of the Kemper's limitations, you just have to decide whether you can work with them or not.

    All true. My reason for posting is to ensure that there isn't a "hidden" way to avoid or minimize the latency that I don't know about. Kemper's sound is my first choice, but I really need to be able to access more than just 5 patches directly.


    Quote

    P.S. I'm only trying to help, not argue.

    P.P.S. I don't play 3 minute pop songs (any more)

    🙂

    All good! Asking questions to dig into the issue isn't arguing at all - it's helpful.


    It just seems that every time I have asked this question or similar, the first response is "why do you need more than 5 presets for a song?". I realize that a lot of people do work that way, but it is not universal.


    What I would love to be able to to is to set up a grid, where rig slots 1-5 are the different amp gain profiles, and then every performance page is different FX preset. With the "Keep Slot" setting, the two could be independently selected....but the latency kills that approach.:(

    I don’t have any of my old rack FX anymore to test this but I do wonder if those old devices were really as seamless as we recall or if we are just remembering with rose tinted glasses (mix metaphors I know but you get the point 🤣)

    Well, I played a gig with my Quadraverb last night (and the night before that, and many. many nights over the years). Patch changes are effectively immediate, no matter where I go in the list. Yes, it has fewer features and less functionality, but it's also 30 years old.


    No rose colored glasses involved here.


    Think about this for a moment - if you pressed a channel select button on a regular tube amp and it took that long to change, what would your opinion of it be? If you went to use your wah pedal and it took a quarter second to turn on, would you think that was OK?


    I'm not trying to be overly critical, but I honestly don't get why anyone would try to defend this as being "normal".

    i’m not 100% sure but I think the scenario with effects like Quadraverb etc is a little bit different. In these cases we typically had an analog dry signal path with the effect on top so the analog path wouldn’t need to change so there wouldn’t be any gap anyway. I can’t remember if my old Quadraverb was full dry through or not but it probably wouldn’t have mattered anyway as I ran a little 8 channel 1U rack mixer to run the FX in parallel anyway.

    Yeah, I get what you're saying. but the basic premise stands - there was/is no perceptible delay when changing among a wide range of patches with the old-school rack FX units. I tried the Kemper without ever even considering the possibility that digital gear had actually gone backwards in this regard, and got burned by it.

    Surely the pauses between musical performances in theatre a greater than 250ms?

    Have you ever played a Broadway-style show? Many of them will have periods of 20-25 minutes with no break, cycling through a half-dozen or more musical styles and often several instruments - particularly the newer ones. Then the bow/curtain call music is almost always a composite of every theme in the show playing 16 bars of each, then jumping to another. That one "song" can be a three instrument, 15-patch monster.


    There is a reason I have asked the question, and "planning ahead" doesn't address it.


    Beyond that is the fact that I generally do not have the time to build a full set of custom patches for each show. For example, last weekend I played a 20-song concert with a group of local actor/singers. One read-through before the show, then perform. Basically sight-reading onstage, with no chance to "plan ahead" for anything. I have to be able to jump to damn near any combination in real-time. This weekend I'm doing a full production, but it was a late call and I didn't get the book until tech week (it was literally on the stand when I walked into the first run-through). Again, no time for building custom patches for the whole show (and this one doesn't even have an intermission - it's straight through).


    I'll say it again - not every guitarist lives in the three-minute pop song world where you work in a single musical style, rehearse things to death before you hit the stage and always have time to make adjustments.


    Quote

    the digital modeling/profiling realm all pro products are going to have a small gap before selecting the next bank, it's how they're designed.

    Helix has snapshots, and Fractal has scenes and channels within preset blocks. Both allow immediate switching to a much larger number of patches than 5. Fractal's approach is not terribly user-friendly, and would require a very expensive MIDI controller; Helix is easier to work with.


    I prefer the sound of the the Kemper and would not replace my Bogner with a Helix. Fractal, though, allows me to build a grid of 8 scenes and 4 amp channels in a single preset (total 32 patches), and with MIDI you can set it up to switch combinations of blocks and channels within a preset with a single switch. Kemper only gives me 5 total.


    Hence, my question. If I could do something to reduce that latency, I can make the Kemper work for me. Without that, I'm pushed to my second choice, the Axe-FX.


    Here's an honest question, though. In the 90s I went through a variety of rack FX units. I never ran into switching delay like this, and in fact I still have a Quadraverb in my rack. 128 patches, all effectively instant. 30 years later and the new stuff can't do what we had back then? Really?

    The delay switching between performances is unimportant. Switching between 5 rigs in one performance is instant (audio is instant, the graphical display will lag, also unimportant). I can't imagine you'd need more than 5 rigs for one song (performance). Switching to the next performance assumes you are starting a new song

    You would be wrong in that assumption. I do a lot of theater work, so 5 patches doesn't begin to cover what I need instant access to.


    My basic rig using my tube head and rack FX is set up to give me 6 gain levels on my amp switch and 30 FX patches with no more than 2 switch moves, all instant.


    Not everyone operates in the realm of 3 minute pop songs.

    changes between performances are never instant because the Profiler needs a bit of time to load the 5 rigs in a performance. Only the switching between slots in the same performance is instant because the rigs are already preloaded in memory.

    OK, that makes sense.


    What can be done to minimize this delay? Does the total number of rigs or performances loaded into the KPA make a difference?


    Is the Stage faster than the rack/toaster?

    The only thing I would like to have on a hardware basis is a built in wireless system. All other things like a bigger text layout of the remote, some improvements in configuration (taper) or effect usage is purely software. So surely no real deal maker for me. It is quite astonishing great at all.

    This would seem unlikely. Every nation has different laws surrounding the usable frequency bands, and they change every so often. Thus, it would require a whole bunch of new models, and they would all risk becoming obsolete with the next FCC ruling or IEC directive.

    If you are looking at playing with backing tracks and/or or recording at studio volumes, go straight to studio monitors. None of the guitar-cabinet based options will be appropriate for this application, and the wedge monitor approach like the Yamahas, Headrush, et. al., aren't going to sound anywhere near as good as you can get with the same money spent on a pair of studio monitors.


    Also, forget the term "FRFR" and focus on getting the most accurate sound reproduction you can get.


    Something to keep in mind is that for equivalent costs in a monitoring system, audible volume range (SPL) is inversely proportional to sound quality. The louder a device is designed to operate, the more it will cost to get similar audio response accuracy. Thus, for the best sound, pick your budget, then apply that price point to the lowest volume solution that will fit your needs.

    It is interesting to note that the first thing that the QC wanted to compare itself to is the Kemper.


    The old saying is "To be the best, you have to beat the best".


    QED.

    ... It would be awesome to see Kemper put out a powered floor unit with an updated profiling algorithm and updated interface. This is what we are all waiting to see Kemper, lets see if this happens.

    Not really. I don't think that this i what we are "all waiting to see".


    I have no interest in floor devices of any sort; bending down to the floor to make a minor adjustment is uncomfortable and looks terrible onstage. There is a reason that Kemper, Fractal and Line 6 all offer rack-mount versions of their top-tier products.


    I also have no need of the power amp; I end up having to mix vocals and acoustic instruments into my monitor, so the power stage has to be later in my signal chain anyway.


    Also, what about the interface needs to be changed in your opinion? While the KPA is complex, the menu interface with callouts for the physical knobs is pretty intuitive.


    The only thing I really would like to see from Kemper is faster loading times, so that changes across performance pages could be done during live performance. Other than that, it's fine as-is, from where I sit.

    1) Much faster loading of performance pages so that direct access is useable for live work.

    2) The ability to select a new FX preset on-the-fly from the remote without having to change the profile/rig.

    3) The ability to select a different profile independent from the FX preset that is in place.

    the "limitation" of rig switching in perform mode is that you need to play a rig for at least 300 ms before you switch to the next one. Jumping between two rigs in a rapid fashion is not a real life scenario and will lead to the scenario you are experiencing. If you switch to another rig after you played the current one for a couple of seconds you will not notice any lag when you switch to the next one.

    Can I ask a related question?


    I have seen delays in the past when using MIDI PC commands to move between performance pages. Reading this, I think it probably had to do with what you describe here - two commands in quick succession from the MIDI board.


    Would a change across performance pages with a single MIDI CC47 command be instant?

    So do you mean hit a stomp to toggle between 0 and 50? I'd use a pedal for that but if you're super curious I could check for you

    Not to toggle, but to set a specific value.


    Kemper has some really cool features that use CC#s. For example, CC#47 lets you select a Performance page; the value you send is the page #. You can also set things like reverb time and mix, delay regen, amp gain, monitor volume, etc.

    Does the GCP allow you to program the buttons to send a CC command, or only PC commands? The online documentation seems to only cover PC commands, which would be a serious limit when working with the Kemper....?

    Totally agree although..... just to apply a slightly different lens....this is"only" about your monitor.


    For live, in the past, as you miked your cab it was essential to get the best on stage sound as that directly translated into your FOH. With the KPA you typically send your sound direct and your monitor is now "relegated" to what you hear. This means that it needs to be good enough - it just shifts the emphasis slightly I feel :).


    Hope that makes sense

    Yes, it makes sense.


    I think that different players have a different view of their need for "perfect" sound. Some of us want it to be "really good", and accept a 99% monitoring solution while leveraging the advantages of volume control, size, weight, and flexibility. For those who are constantly chasing the tone monster and seeking absolute perfection, they're going to want a very high-quality monitor so that they get the full impact of a rig like the KPA.