Raw Tube Kemper tone vs demands for everything else (read AXE FX demands )

Well Christoph has responded to this before. The question is, what exactly do you want them to improve about the Kemper's "raw amp tone"?

You say that you bought it because it was better sounding than three of your real boutique amps. So it's basically already arrived at that destination, it can't get 10% realerererererrrerer... er... than real. If it's already "there" then there's nothing else to do on that side, unless you want it to no longer sound like a real amp but something different, in which case you wouldn't pick a Kemper, because "real amp tone" is what it's all about after all....

I'm confused. You're citing a great profile made using the current profiling technology as evidence that the raw amp sounds need improvement. If the current algorithms produced such a great tone, then why improve them?

I'm all for improvement on the effects side.

I guess I am also confused by what you are saying or asking for

Why should they change an award winning concept and start messing with the best dynamic raw core amp sound? Sound is always subjective and ones personal favorite amp is always anothers poop amp sound, it's a never ending discussion. The same goes for amp profiles. More effects, library software + more secret future ideas they have mentioned etc are by far the most requested features and therefore most logical for them to work on. There are many fantastic kemper vs real amp A/B clips out there and many users are selling their real amps after profiling them. Big producers are using the kemper on major albums, and for me it can't get better than that.

From the beginning every fractal unit have needed constant firmware updates to sound more realarer, unlike the kemper. I and many others hate having to swith back and forth between axe fx 2 firmwares for different amp versions and the hyperbole marketing needed for every new Axe fx fw is always very funny. -This fw is finally real...... until the next one.... It would be terrible if Kemper decided to change their amp sound = changing all great sounding profiles.
Cliff Chase has shown how irritated and influenced he is by the kemper but he can't profile amps like the kemper or use its technology or algorithms. He can keep changing his modeling like always and copy the eq with traditional tone matching and use static IR's. Nobody needs an Axe fx 2 for tone matching, it's been used in studio DAW recordings for over ten years with Ozone and other plugins. I find every new Axe fx 2 fw to be different than the other, not always better like its marketed.
The kemper and Axe fx 2 are two completely different units with different technology and algorithms and they will never do the same things or sound/feel the same. kemper really raised the digital amp bar to the top and it's just natural that other companies will try to sound better than they did before. Kemper will keep developing in many areas, and so will other companies.

I think what Rescator is asking for are better FACTORY PROFILES, not improvements in what the KPA does. He refers to the Morgan AC 20 profile as being stellar, and I believe he would like to see the factory profiles achieve a similar level of quality. (By the way, now I'm sorry I missed out on this Morgan AC 20 profile that is no longer on the exchange!)

I can appreciate Rescator's desire for more profiles to his liking, but I must point out that opinions regarding amp profile (and actual amps, for that matter) are quite subjective. I am certain that there are many KPA users who prefer other profiles to this Morgan AC 20, and that's fine.

One thing I will say about many of the factory profiles is that I do believe the effects that are used on them are a bit of a hinderance in judging a given amp profile's usefulness to a given user. When shopping for a tube amplifier, I don't know of anyone who auditions the amp with a bunch of effects on it. What we are looking for in an amp first and foremost is a certain tone and feel. We can add whatever effects we like afterward.

The Kemper folks naturally want to show off the effects that they put into the KPA, which is probably partly why they have so may profiles with effects on them. But I would argue that by the time someone actually buys a KPA, they've already heard what they can sound like via various YouTube videos featuring the KPA, both with and without effects, so the quality of the effects is already well known to a user. There is no real need for the factory rigs to have effects active by default. I think it would be wise for Kemper to change all Factory Profiles in future updates to have ALL effects inactive by default. It's just a better way to judge each profile. I know that we can easily turn off the effects ourselves, but if the best way to judge a profile's tone is without effects, then THAT should be the default presentation, and we can easily turn on any effects present in the profile should we want to explore the profile further.

To me the profiling process is already accurate enough and works well. I think profiles will only improve over time as better and better tube amps, mics, environments are profiled by professionals or talented amateurs.

Where the Kemper can improve a lot is in the user interface and effects offered. A rig editing program that connects to a computer via USB and/or a librarian program is desperately needed to manage the growing number of profiles. I think the effects can also be increased with models and controls more like their real world counter parts.

This all comes back to basic subjectivity that is often discussed here. If I took all the profiles I thought were 100% awesome and made them into the default profiles, there would be many who would not like any of them. This is due to my profile preferences being compatible with my speakers, guitars and playing style and not what everyone else uses. They (whoever chooses stock profiles) take a mix of profiles that work well with different players and gear so that everyone is happy likes the profiler and searches for more profiles that work for them instead of dumping the KPA and getting different gear.

The Morgan AC 20 just happens to be a profile that seems to work well with many players and different gear, so it is unfair to compare it to other profiles.

Quote from AxeMan2U

(By the way, now I'm sorry I missed out on this Morgan AC 20 profile that is no longer on the exchange!)

it's still there.

Morgan AC20 Morgan Morgan 1x12 Absolute rmpacheco 4.61 / 5.00 April 15, 2012

Kemper's profiling technology doesn't have to be inproved.
It is great as is and it does what it's supposed to do.
Also the general flavour of the factory profiles is fine as they give an overview of what extremely different sounds are possible with the profiler (= proof of a non trademark sound).
The only thing that has to change is the expectations of a given user how a profile is supposed to sound and how a profile is supposed to please him.
Such expectations will inevitably lead to frustration.
Profiles sound exactly how the people who did the profiling intended them to sound.
If you like it, then fine, if not, move on.
Don't argue with somebody else's taste.
Be open minded about your fellow colleagues and Kemper users and be open minded about profiles.

since the Morgan AC20 profile is so popular I think it's a good idea to take a closer look at a few interesting parameters, so it's properties can be implemented or adapted into other profiles:

pre-stack EQ/boost
1250Hz +2.8dB
2500Hz +7.0dB
5000Hz +1.9dB
10000Hz +0.9dB
Mix 89%
Vol +0.8dB

Amplifier settings
- Definition 5.1
- a little more Power Sagging (1.7)
- a little less Pick Attack (-1.0)
- quite a bit of compression, 3.8 <- this might be a reason why this profile is so pleasing for many users
- Clarity 4.0
- Tube Shape 5.6

EQ
Bass +0.6
Middle +1.6
Treble flat
Presence -0.6

these EQ settings are also an indicator, tho highly dependend on the profile it translates to: a bit more bass, strong mids & a touch less presence

Cabinet
if you like this rig, obviously you should try this cabinet with other profiles
interesting to note that this cab uses the high and low shift parameters
High Shift -0.4
Low Shift -0.3

Thanks Don it's really interesting.

I love the raw tone you get from the KPA and especially these amazing editing features from which you can take a simple profile go to some unbelievable tones. This editing process is so simple & effective you can get some tones that the original amp will probably never achieve This is the best feature on the KPA for me : I could survive with just a single profile , even just with the gain knob & basic EQ.

lol

Why is it interesting and so important that Don quoted the settings of the Morgan AC20...haven't you guys already looked into the settings of this 'incredible/wonderful/amazing/mind boggling' Profile
You should have done what Don just did months ago, that's how you learn to tweak ordinary Profiles into killer RIGS.

First of all, it's NOT a Profile, it's a RIG.
If you want to hear the actual Profile then remove the EQ Boost, remove the 3.8 added Amp block Compression (like Don said, "this might be a reason why this profile is so pleasing for many users"), turn the Cab Volume down from +8.3 to 0.0, and suddenly it becomes a very ordinary "Profile".

Learn how to tweak your Kemper and suddenly "Factory Profiles" magically turn into Morgan AC20 Profiles.

Quote from Ingolf

Kemper's profiling technology doesn't have to be inproved.
It is great as is and it does what it's supposed to do.

I have to disagree here. There are potential improvements, of course, although they won't come with the current hardware. It's something that can be done in future versions of the Profiler. For example "stitching multiple profiles" into one "multi". Either to improve the realism going from clean to full gain of a specific amp channel in one profile ... or to make dual profile rigs with just one Profiler box. Also I'm pretty sure it would be an improvement to raise the overall sample rate (internal and external) to reduce potential artifacts in internal and external effects chains. And there's plenty of room for some amazingly smooth sound transition when switching rigs.
There's always potential improvements in technology. CK is right when he says that the profiling and its sound on the current Profiler hardware won't likely ever change. But that can't be a general truth. It's like we're currently using a 2-stroke combustion engine for racing. It's great, it's fun. But one day there will be the 4-stroke engine with turbo charger and fuel injection.

Ah come on, now you're really quoting me out of context. We actually don't disagree here.
Of course I didn't want to say 'will never be improvable' but 'with the current hardware of the profiler good and sufficient as is', meant as an opposition to the people who demand that the profiler in its current state must be improved.
With future generations of the profiler and more processing power though you have some valid points in what's improvable, and I think there's a general consensus about that.

Quote from lightbox

I have to disagree here. There are potential improvements, (...) For example "stitching multiple profiles" into one "multi".

but this has nothing to do with the underlying profiling process...

I think rescator's problem is with the quality of the profiles available, not the profiler's "tone" per se, given that he likes the Morgan AC20.

Since tone is something that is extremely subjective, it's impossible to decipher what he means by raw amp tone. It's not so much an issue with the profiler, but the way an amp was profiled -- mic choice, cab choice, placement, etc.

And in that respect, I think the only option is to either profile ampifiers the way you would like to, or keep your fingers crossed and hope something you like pops up on the rig exchange. Also, try and tweak some of the profiles into a rig that suits you.