Where is the sound of moving air in the profiles?

OK, not meaning to thread-hijack here... But I've heard this "moving air" concept for ages now, and I really want to know what is meant by it.

Is it simply a slight amount of reverb, like is suggested in this thread? Is that the general consensus?

Also (just to add a bit to the discussion rather than only hijacking), when comparing to pro level recordings - remember that you don't know how much processing was added during the mix phase. There might very well have been a good deal of EQ'ing going on.

Quote from Michael_dk

OK, not meaning to thread-hijack here... But I've heard this "moving air" concept for ages now, and I really want to know what is meant by it.

Is it simply a slight amount of reverb, like is suggested in this thread? Is that the general consensus? :-).

Yeah it's a blurred expression.
A microphone doesn't capture 'moving air'.
It can record a room tho'.

I've always thought that "moving air" is what a cranked speaker literally does. When you stand in front of it you can feel it.
The perception of bass frequencies is enhanced with higher sound pressure.
To be sure if there's enough bass frequencies in a profile, cranking your monitoring system will tell you a different story than listening quietly.
I don't associate "moving air" with the sound of a recording except if you play that recording very loud it will "move air".

This seems to be a common theme amongst people who use modelers of any size or shape - the whole room element.

Recording a loud amp in a room with mic techniques that will capture some of that room sound in a pleasing way is very much an art and many people cannot achieve it even with a real loud amp in a decent room.

So it's important to remember that if you can't produce it originally with "old school" techniques, you cannot capture it with your Kemper and reproduce it. There is no way to manufacture that vibe that is 100% accurate.

Adding some good room reverb will go a long way, but in the end you may still feel like it is lacking slightly from the sound you get with a mic a couple of feet away from a cabinet such that it will actually capture some of the room. I will say that after being a reverb snob for the better part of the last 3 decades, I'm really impressed with the Kemper reverb and the space parameter.

In my experience, most profiles are not captured with a lot of room in the capture. That may be part of the profiling process and it may be part of the individual doing the profiling. I really don't know as I don't know exactly the process most people use for capturing profiles.

One thing you may want to try is blending in some IR's from redwirez from far mic'ed and rear cab positions. You could even go further and possibly add 1-3 msec of delay to those IR's to simulate the room even further. It won't take much is my guess. But in a mix the Kemper reverb or an outboard reverb will probably suffice.

I haven't tried that, it's just an idea. But it seems to me like it would emulate what you feel like you are missing.

Quote from Ingolf

Yeah it's a blurred expression.
A microphone doesn't capture 'moving air'.
It can record a room tho'.

Quote from manelarregla

I've always thought that "moving air" is what a cranked speaker literally does. When you stand in front of it you can feel it.
The perception of bass frequencies is enhanced with higher sound pressure.
To be sure if there's enough bass frequencies in a profile, cranking your monitoring system will tell you a different story than listening quietly.
I don't associate "moving air" with the sound of a recording except if you play that recording very loud it will "move air".

Yeah... These metaphors aren't helping matters any, haha... Like saying "the kick drum needs more green!!"... Well, maybe not that bad.. I've also often heard the term "Air" being used of frequencies in 10-20k range ("add some air to the vocal")...

Anyway, comparing apples to apples, let's take the example of a close-mic'ed cabinet. SM57 an inch from the grill at the cap edge. I know it will pick up room reflections, but with a cranked amp I would THINK that the reflections would be drowned out pretty well by the direct sound. If the room is decent-sized, at least the reflections from the walls should be attenuated greatly in comparison. The floor may be another matter, but these arrive so early that I would think they would affect the frequency response more than work as actual "reverb". Comb filtering, nulls and peaks, etc. In this situation, is THIS what the "pushing air" metaphor is in reality?

Do people in the studio ever experience this pushing of air if they are in the control room listening on the studio monitors - while the cab is in the live room?

Quote from Michael_dk

Do people in the studio ever experience this pushing of air if they are in the control room listening on the studio monitors - while the cab is in the live room?

I don't think they think in terms like that.
I'm no engineer but I think they first get the close miking right, using one or more mics as they see fit.
THEN, if they also have a great recording room, they might also capture the room with extra mics to be able to add it to the mix later.

Quote from Ingolf

I don't think they think in terms like that.
I'm no engineer but I think they first get the close miking right, using one or more mics as they see fit.
THEN, if they also have a great recording room, they might also capture the room with extra mics to be able to add it to the mix later.

Yeah - it was kind of my roundabout way of asking: Is the "sound of moving air" something that is missing from just the Kemper and/or amp simulators - or is it something that is missing from ANY mic'ed amp...

Yeah Michael, these are definitely the right questions to question a myth.

"Moving air" is nothing but psychology....our brain is thinking "a digital device cannot sound like a real tube-amp with cabs miked in a room, there is this little difference, let's call it moving air", that's all.

I spent half of my life in recording studios with setups from small to gigantic and even with a lot of experience it's always risky, because everything depends on the room, the positions of the mikes, the tubes of the amps ect. The KPA offers a perfect sound (with the right profiles...) direkt to desk and it will be the same sound in every studio. I wish the KPA would have been invented some years earlier, forget the mystery about the "moving air". Even if you want to have a sound with a lot of "real" room, you can profile that.

I think what people usually mean by "moving air" is a combination of a) room reflections and b) the fact that they're standing in front of a cranked 4x12. My Kemper is running through a 44w amp and a single 12" speaker, but when I crank that fucker up my shelves start rattling just the same as with my 6505 combo. The KPA is certainly not lacking in that department - if anything, I imagine it would be the system you're amplifying and playing it through.

The Profiler sound is a simple deal at first place. The promise is: it captures the tone of your reference amp. If you feel that it is not capturing the moving air of your amp, please record a clip of the A/B comparison and post it to our forum. Everything else is just talk, but no sound.

Hey diseasedbeing,
glad you solved your issue!
I think you should take Eng. Kemper's post to the letter. Post a clip of your miked amp which you consider effectively capturing air moving, then post a clip of a profile which you consider not doing that.
You know, it's hard to explain a sound, or sensations.
I'm pretty sure many useful comments, advices and suggestions will come from the comparison of the two clips. Others might for example hint at something you had not consider, or give different names to something you had defined in a certain way.
I believe we all will learn something in the process, and you'll be much happier with your Profiler, despite your recent progresses

Could just be the speakers you're monitoring with. Moving air takes a lot of volume. I haven't experienced this problem with the profiles I use. Maybe change cabs/ cab parameters? Till's cabs are really good, fwiw.

Yeah, let's stop talking and let's hear something

I never had any problems with the KPA, for me it's "heaven on earth" and with the right profiles it will sound awesome.

I've quite opposite "problem" with my Kemper. Many profiles (the ones which are captured at full or near full volume, e.g cranked amps) sound and behave like cranked miced amp, even at very low volumes. It makes my mind very confused sometimes ;).

Quote from mdeeRocks

I've quite opposite "problem" with my Kemper. Many profiles (the ones which are captured at full or near full volume, e.g cranked amps) sound and behave like cranked miced amp, even at very low volumes. It makes my mind very confused sometimes ;).

That's very true! I get confused sometimes when I hear poweramp compression at moderate volumes with the profiler.

Quote from Ingolf

That's very true! I get confused sometimes when I hear poweramp compression at moderate volumes with the profiler.

Sometimes I also get confused to have 50 different amps in one box..... But you're right, our brain connects poweramp compression with LOUD !!!

I think there is also another thing very important, the UX1 destroys your sound !!!!!!!!!

I had before an Eleven Rack. Worked great direct and through headphones. I decided once to plug it in the UX1 and using the Ux1 as soundcard, the tone was terrible !! anemic, no life, no balls, nothing. Try another soundcard. I have a Roland Quad capture and with direct monitoring (no latency perceived), i can assure you my Kemper has a lot of balls...

What happened to Diseasedbeing and his posts?