Copy an amp vs. profiling an amp

    Is a profile of an amp similar to a hardware copy of an amp?


    I think - no.


    Even a great profile includes mic coloring, the chosen mic position, mic pre / EQ, room, speaker ...


    It's an approximation of the used signal chain - not only the amp alone.

    (All trademarks are trademarks of their respective owners, which are in no way associated or affiliated with soundside.de)


    Great Profiles --> soundside.de

    Edited once, last by Armin ().

    I think the approch of amp sim (VST or maybe (probably) AXE-FX) where they build the simulation from HW schematic or by comparing signals measured directly on the hardware could be assimiled to "copy" of real piece of hardware. They try to recreate the same behaviour of knobs, settings ...
    In the case of the kemper, this is only a snapshot of a rig. The "tonestack" is just a EQ block and doesn't react as its hardware counter part.

    COMPONENT MODELING
    In theory Component Modeling could copy your real hardware amp, but in reality it cannot. There are some things that just aren't modeled:


    You can model every component on a schematic and still fall short due to the effects of:
    A) Differing components used over time via differing production runs
    B) Placement interference with board components (Cliff made this point)
    C) Differing tube manufacturer
    D) Differing speakers used over time
    E) Speakers load on board components
    F) Speaker parts altered over production runs
    F) Wood type used for cabinet
    G) Wood Density

    Most guitarist run into some of these issues with vintage guitar pedals and NOS tubes knowing that even the same specs do not give you the same sound results!


    REAL AMPS
    Their sound alters recorded due to many many reasons (mic placement, quality of wires, gear used, experience of sound engineer, plus all that mentioned above)


    Plus real amps sound vastly different just on:
    A) where the speaker faces
    B) the room its in
    C) distance to your ear
    E) level to your ear
    F) your ear fitness (young vs old w/tinnitus)
    G) your ear fatigue
    H) Guitar Type, Guitar Year, Guitar Components, Guitar Player's Style, etc


    , etc, etc, aside of what's already mentioned (production run year, type of tube, component placement, speakers used)


    We can go on forever with all these subtle but noticeable differences.


    AXE FXII
    I think that for the FXII, it's constant evolution in parameter additions, tone matching additions, IR and Power Tube Amp algorithm changes, attest to how difficult it is to accurately emulate a real amp, and so the idea is to give you enough tonal knobs and parameters to "dial it in", hence all the tweaking. Some love this, some get real frustrated and ask for help. Some get that help as presets from others that "don't sound the same" to each other due to differing setups. Some even get the lovely advice from Fractal moderators (paraphrased) "stop trying to emulate your amp and just pick a good sounding model and play!" which is pretty good advice overall, but not what everyone wants to hear when the $2k unit they bought was championed at sounding just like the amps it models, you own one, and it's not sounding the same to you.


    I also think that the stellar effects of the FXII kind of makes it easy to forgive any lack in amp simulations you may find.


    KEMPER
    I think the difficulties of recording an amp that Armin talks about is what is seriously behind all the tonal differences between profiles of the same amp.


    The 2 things that hold the Kemper back from an COMPLETE amp simulation are:
    1) having to have profiles be only your current amps settings currently (yet the Kemper can switch between them faster than you can turn the knobs on the real amp)
    2) how many base models the Kemper has that it stores parameters in. (I read somewhere there is 1 clean and 3 distortions and some rare amps that currently don't model well)


    PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH KEMPER
    I've profiled my Tungsten and had one guy playing it out my 8" studio monitors with a sub, whilst another was playing my Tungsten by itself with it's small cabinet and 12" speaker. Outside the room I couldn't tell the difference. Inside the room there were slight differences depending on where i stood in the room, and of course, each player has a style, so I had them switch.


    In the end, they sounded quite identical, despite the differing speakers. The Subwoofer of my monitors gave the Profile a chest thump that the Amp in the Room did. I liked BOTH and had no preference. It was that realization, that I had no preference for one over the other that made me finally part with the Amp of my Dreams: my Tungsten Crema Wheat, and live off the Kemper's profile of it.


    And it might get 3-4.5 stars on the Rig Exchange because people prefer Peaveys or Marshalls or Fenders, but I know what I owned, heard & like, and the Kemper nailed it.


    Of Note, I find that volume affects what I think of a profile. If I take profiles I originally didn't like and normalize them to ones I do, I have a different (often better) opinion. So may "poor profiles" are not poorly profiled, but low in volume!


    TONE MATCHING
    I've tried Tone Matching, heard and played tone matching, and bought Tone Matching,and it just doesn't have the same sweetness, none of the dynamics, and frankly Tone Matching SUCKS. Tone Matching is the Trailer Park of Amp Simulations.

    Surely it's irrelevant whether an amp is copied, modelled, Profiled, etc...every company uses different methods.


    IMO, what's important is the end result, how the 'brain' of the unit and the algorithm successfully produce the tone and the feel of a tube amp.


    Does anybody think CK didn't know how to 'model' amps by following the schematic and the way the components interact with each other...of course he did, he could do that in his sleep.
    If CK created the Kemper as a modeller we'd all be sitting with a few dozen amp sims, there would be no need for a Profile Exchange, we wouldn't have 80% of the amazing amp Profiles we have now.


    Instead, CK decided to take it to another level, beyond what any modeller had ever done, and there's no doubt he succeeded.
    If you don't believe me just switch your Kemper on and take a listen...have you ever heard anything like it before? :thumbup:


    By far no. Not even close. As much as I like the a Kemper I'd not trade my favourite amps for it. Too many sweet spots, I don't want to fill the profiler with obscene and unmanageable amount of one amp profiles.
    I also yet to hear a profile which would sound like cranked jcm800 through good 4x12 :)
    If anything profiler can't emulate the smell
    As far as technicalities go, I truly believe that Kemper is some form of sorcery or alien tech.