Grzegorz, could you please upload single track (one guitar only) reamped through Amp and the same track reamped with Kemper? With no IR added. Just dry signal from both of them. I would like to compare those two in Audio diff software. It will give me the difference track.
New profiling (Better cab separation)
- pacocito
- Thread is marked as Resolved.
-
-
Grzegorz, could you please upload single track (one guitar only) reamped through Amp and the same track reamped with Kemper? With no IR added. Just dry signal from both of them. I would like to compare those two in Audio diff software. It will give me the difference track.
Done! DI_KEMPER DI_SAVAGE http://www.brickwall.pl/savage/ All samples recorded this time by me (sorry
) ESP LTD Seymour Duncan JB (B) / ’59 (N)Stay Metal!
-
Grzegorz, is it the same track reamped? Doesn't look so, to me. Because the noise before guitar start is somehow different.
-
Display More
Hi,
No my test its simply as hell
1. I made studio profile
2. i made DI profile
3. i Record 4 track with DI profile from kemper
4. Then i record 4 track with my savage connected to behringer dibox (DI from Savage Head)
5. put all track in Cubase and simply add one of my IR to all track - the same IR
6. Mixdown Kemper DI profile + cab IR
7. Mixdown Savage DI track+ the same IR
Still the same amp setting!!! I made also merged profile (Frfom DI and Studio) you can compare merged vs real : First part Kemper then Real then 4xKemper and then 4 x Real :http://www.brickwall.pl/savage/savage_without_limiter.wavDI signal comparison with cab IR: First part Kemper then Real Savage: http://www.brickwall.pl/savage/savage_DI_KEMPER_REAL.wav
Simple?
Stay Metal!
Ahh, now I get it
Thanks!Cheers,
Sam -
its not reamped! i recorded this riff 2 times, first with DI from Kemper then with Real Savage.
Stay Metal!
-
So misunderstanding ruled.
I need the same guitar track reamped through KPA and real AMP. Only this way I am able to make difference track from these two. -
That buzzy noise in the first Kemper Direct clip is exactly what I get when playing a straight Direct profile through my guitar cab. Sounds like interference. As soon as I merge it though, the Merged profile through the same cab sounds much better, even though it's supposed to be exactly the same as the DI profile. I find this quite perplexing...!
Cheers,
Sam -
That buzzy noise in the first Kemper Direct clip is exactly what I get when playing a straight Direct profile through my guitar cab. Sounds like interference. As soon as I merge it though, the Merged profile through the same cab sounds much better, even though it's supposed to be exactly the same as the DI profile. I find this quite perplexing...!
Cheers,
SamWith cab sim off, right?
-
That buzzy noise in the first Kemper Direct clip is exactly what I get when playing a straight Direct profile through my guitar cab. Sounds like interference. As soon as I merge it though, the Merged profile through the same cab sounds much better, even though it's supposed to be exactly the same as the DI profile. I find this quite perplexing...!
Cheers,
SamThis thread gets more complicated every day.
You're playing a DI Profile (Cab OFF) through a guitar Cab, then you're playing a DI Profile with Cabs ON including a Merged Cab and you think they're supposed to sound the same...why?
In one instance the Cab is OFF and in the other instance the Cab is ON going into a poweramp/guitar Cab, how can they sound the same? -
This thread gets more complicated every day.
You're playing a DI Profile (Cab OFF) through a guitar Cab, then you're playing a DI Profile with Cabs ON including a Merged Cab and you think they're supposed to sound the same...why?
In one instance the Cab is OFF and in the other instance the Cab is ON going into a poweramp/guitar Cab, how can they sound the same?No I think he says using the DI profile and the merged profile (with cab OFF) sound different through his cab even if they are supposed to be identical.
-
When using a traditional DI profile it's advisable to keep cab on, in order to not take non-existing parts away from the profile.
-
I think they are talking about "Direct Profiles", made with 2.8, as opposed to "DI profiles" made with 2.7.4 or below.
Since the KPA handles profiles made without a speaker and a microphone differently in 2.8, It may reduce confusion to use the term that matches the situation.
-
I think they are talking about "Direct Profiles", made with 2.8, as opposed to "DI profiles" made with 2.7.4 or below.
Since the KPA handles profiles made without a speaker and a microphone differently in 2.8, It may reduce confusion to use the term that matches the situation.
no no no! simply for my friends merged profile with cab block off sound "better" then DI profile on real cab > all made with the same amp setting etc...
QuoteI need the same guitar track reamped through KPA and real AMP. Only this way I am able to make difference track from these two.
dont get it? why ? i just play 2 times the same riff
on DI from Kemper and then on DI from real amp - maybe im not killer guitarist but fuck this - not the point You have 2 DI track recorded on DI from Kemper and DI from real amps - thats all!Stay Metal!
-
dont get it? why ? i just play 2 times the same riff on DI from Kemper and then on DI from real amp - maybe im not killer guitarist but fuck this - not the point You have 2 DI track recorded on DI from Kemper and DI from real amps - thats all!
(fuck this)™ Grzegorz you should put this in your signature.Because if you want to exactly compare the output of one device (KPA) with output from second device (AMP) you have to compare their outputs based on the same input. When you compare by ear, those track you sent are OK. Because our ears are connected to brain, which is very adaptive and despite the fact that it is not exactly the same input, we can tell if it differs.
But if you want to compare exactly by software, it's different story. Regarding your playing: the holy fact, that I spent good ten minutes trying to decide if those are the same track or not, say that you played very consistently!
I don't want to waste your time by forcing you to do any more reamps. I just thought it would be very exciting to make such exact comparison of those two. We should get difference track, where you could hear what is KPA missing to real amp. I don't have sound treated room to do such comparison. So if you will prepare those samples i will be glad. If not, (fuck this)™, nothing will change!
Mam nadzieje, ze nie jestes wkurzony. Ja lubie Polakow. Mam zone Polke! -
Because if you want to exactly compare the output of one device (KPA) with output from second device (AMP) you have to compare their outputs based on the same input
Yes and No! simply - all reampboxes sound fifferent
now im use my palmer reampbox but IMO this fucking guy cut some hi freq and then i reamp the same DI guitars via kemper and spdif - (fuck this)™ for me its no problem - but i know the finall effect will be the same. DI from kemper just hase more low end then DI signal from real amp... Jestem zajebiście szczęśliwy że ktoś drąży temat i chce by było lepiej - a nie tylko tak tak tak nowe lepsze - wierze że jest lepiej i chce by było lepiej - to wszystko Stay Metal!
-
I think they are talking about "Direct Profiles", made with 2.8, as opposed to "DI profiles" made with 2.7.4 or below.
Since the KPA handles profiles made without a speaker and a microphone differently in 2.8, It may reduce confusion to use the term that matches the situation.Just to go a bit deeper, Kemper advises to use a DI box with the cab connected when making direct profiles (Christopher says this in one of the NAMM videos), so that the power amp works with a much closer load to the real cab and its amplitude response with that load is preserved. This is the only way to determine "the cab" by difference.
-
Just to go a bit deeper, Kemper advises to use a DI box with the cab connected when making direct profiles (Christopher says this in one of the NAMM videos), so that the power amp works with a much closer load to the real cab and its amplitude response with that load is preserved. This is the only way to determine "the cab" by difference.
I'm only interested in making DI Profiles using a DI Box connected to the speaker as per CKs instructions, to use with the Ambrosi into a real Cab.
I'm not interested in doing a new/second/DI Profile by micing the Cab and then Merging it to the DI Profile, if I want to do that I'll just use Studio Profiles Ive been using for the last 3 years. -
really looking forward to your results, roger
-
I'm only interested in making DI Profiles using a DI Box connected to the speaker as per CKs instructions, to use with the Ambrosi into a real Cab.
I'm not interested in doing a new/second/DI Profile by micing the Cab and then Merging it to the DI Profile, if I want to do that I'll just use Studio Profiles Ive been using for the last 3 years.I see
You'll have of course to use the same cab in order to have the most faithful sound to the original rig, provided this is your goal. Otherwise the Profiler will sound as good... as always -
I think they are talking about "Direct Profiles", made with 2.8, as opposed to "DI profiles" made with 2.7.4 or below.
Since the KPA handles profiles made without a speaker and a microphone differently in 2.8, It may reduce confusion to use the term that matches the situation.
Yeah, my bad. I started out by calling it a Direct profile, but ended by calling it DI. I am, of course, only referring to DIRECT profiles, done on FW 2.8, using the new profiling process .Anyway... Try it for yourselves. I'm not the only one who has experienced this.
Cheers,
Sam
