New profiling (Better cab separation)

    Have some questions.


    I made some di comparison by ear vs old made di profile vs new method.
    to me it seems like di profile made with new method saves without a cab, and that sounds like a profile made old way but with cab on?
    that say di profiles are not more accurate now but separated and that's the only difference?


    also, when have the new mode activated the old made di profile does not have a cab attached any more and means that it can be used as a new made one?


    i have not tried this but feeling profiles made the new way (or old with cab on) will be a little to bright? anyone have that feeling?
    have tried a bunch of profile and experience that, but that might be just me, i know when playing di profiles back in the day i often prefer it with cab off, and that would not be possible now with new method, and that means that a profile made mix ready sounded good in pa but will be a little to bright in cab? but i know i can compensate with monitor eq on kemper.


    well some thought i have..
    i will do some recording comparisons in the future to easier judge what's happening, sometimes the ear fool you in the end of much testing ;) hehe

    The profiling itself hasn't improved. The process has. SO a DI profile will sound the same before and after. Only now that DI profile is automatically detected and placed in whole in the Amp block, so it no longer takes up a cab slot.


    Once you make a full profile with the cab as well you can merge the cab with the DI profile and the result should ideally sound the same (as the cab profile). The advantage is that you can now send a truly accurate DI profile out at the same time as the full profile with cab through different outputs. That's all.


    Personally I'm not 100% convinced by the results, I find the DI + merged profiles tend to sound closer to amp sims that use an IR for their cab. However that could be something to do with my setup (using a THD Hotplate line out as my DI out from the amp), or the version of the beta firmware I'm using, or just my results. Everyone else seems super happy, so I'm guessing they're getting much better results.

    Hi,


    Quote

    i have not tried this but feeling profiles made the new way (or old with cab on) will be a little to bright? anyone have that feeling?


    1 - KEMPER JVM PROFILE 2 - REAL JVM :D


    [Blocked Image: http://www.brickwall.pl/jvm/JVM_KEMPER_REAL.jpg]


    NOW TIME TO LISTEN : http://www.brickwall.pl/jvm/JVM_KEMPER_REAL.mp3


    All samples recorded (not reamped) via SPDIF. CLEAN SENS SET AT 0.
    In my opinion - the profile is still not 100% like real amplifier. Too bright and still overcompressed :D


    Stay Metal!

    I'd honestly be surprised if it was indeed 100% accurate separation, but could it be perhaps you're not happy with the results due to some inconsistencies in profiling methodology, Per? I was looking at the DI box that Kemper uses for profiling. From the webpage:"Now with Direct Profiling Kemper have gone even further and are able to capture the sound of a tube-amp including its power-amp separately from the cab - even when the cabinet load is active. This works by tapping the sound exactly where it hits the speaker cabinet: The speaker output! As high voltage and high wattage are present, a dedicated DI is required. This specialized DI box is capable of scaling down the tube power amp voltage to a line-level signal, suitable for the Profiler, on a XLR output jack. The high-power signal is forwarded to the speaker cabinet through a different output jack."So could the DI box you're using have some role to play? The old DI profiles before the firmware was made beta did not sound 100% representative to me, they had an odd character about them when compared to the original amp. I don't have a power amp, so I have no idea how the magic works, but it is of continuing interest to me. Also, can someone confirm whether normal profiles sound the same way when profiled with 2.8? Asking because there was a firmware revision some time back where commercial profilers and others were suggesting that the sound had changed.



    Sinmix, what are those clips representing, i.e. which is left, which is right? And are those DI profiles recorded with 2.8 through a cabinet vs the amp recorded with a cabinet, or is it a complete profile recorded with 2.8 vs an amp and cabinet recording via mic?

    Quote from nightlight

    Sinmix, what are those clips representing, i.e. which is left, which is right? And are those DI profiles recorded with 2.8 through a cabinet vs the amp recorded with a cabinet, or is it a complete profile recorded with 2.8 vs an amp and cabinet recording via mic?

    It's simple, I set the amp and recorded some riffs. Then I did the profile of this setting and recorded with Kemper. FW 2.7.4


    Stay Metal!

    Did you re-amp or just play again?


    For me the first part (Kemper) sounds much more noisy during the mutes, there's still residual fizz/crackle going on while muting, while with the real deal it gets a lot quieter. There's still some crunch going on but it mostly reduces, so the Kemper sounds like a noisier amp or like the signal just has a lot more noise in it.


    It also looks like the real deal has a greater dynamic range going on in general form the waveform. This tallies with my experience too.


    However, could you try reducing your input clean and dirty sens settings on the Kemper, line up the volumes on output side only, and then try re-recording. See if that makes things a little better?

    Those images have disappeared, but it would be good if you record those clips with the same signal source as suggested by Per, Sinmix. I have no doubt that the amp waveforms will have a different character. But the squished waveform of the Kemper in the earlier clips was not something I expected.


    EDIT: waveforms are back, nice.

    I still see the pictures?

    I'm just trying to be as truthful to my experience and personal opinion that I'm clearly presenting only as a personal opinion no more no less in an honest and truthful discussion about equipment.

    Play Again ;) Its JVM guys this amp is noisy as hell :D


    Stay Metal!

    This has probably been discussed but I still can't find clarity on what this new profiling does for me. I am the user looking for killer profiles. I never use profiling and probably never will. Does this new profiling change anything in sound quality or feel? Thats all I care about. I don't care that its slightly off from the original amp.

    Quote from thedommer

    This has probably been discussed but I still can't find clarity on what this new profiling does for me. I am the user looking for killer profiles. I never use profiling and probably never will. Does this new profiling change anything in sound quality or feel? Thats all I care about. I don't care that its slightly off from the original amp.



    If you do not use a Guitar cabinet, there is no Direct benefit.

    I'm not sure about this, Paul :)


    Swapping cabs on a same rig should be more faithful, providing you use "3.0" cabs and rigs.
    IOW, the cab should have less amp flavour, and\or the other way around :D

    Quote from nightlight

    I'd honestly be surprised if it was indeed 100% accurate separation, but could it be perhaps you're not happy with the results due to some inconsistencies in profiling methodology, Per? I was looking at the DI box that Kemper uses for profiling. From the webpage:"Now with Direct Profiling Kemper have gone even further and are able to capture the sound of a tube-amp including its power-amp separately from the cab - even when the cabinet load is active. This works by tapping the sound exactly where it hits the speaker cabinet: The speaker output! As high voltage and high wattage are present, a dedicated DI is required. This specialized DI box is capable of scaling down the tube power amp voltage to a line-level signal, suitable for the Profiler, on a XLR output jack. The high-power signal is forwarded to the speaker cabinet through a different output jack."So could the DI box you're using have some role to play? The old DI profiles before the firmware was made beta did not sound 100% representative to me, they had an odd character about them when compared to the original amp. I don't have a power amp, so I have no idea how the magic works, but it is of continuing interest to me. Also, can someone confirm whether normal profiles sound the same way when profiled with 2.8? Asking because there was a firmware revision some time back where commercial profilers and others were suggesting that the sound had changed.



    A DI box with a transformer in it may round off the edges I suppose. A custom DI may be in order to get the best result.Looking forward to more info on this matter. Thanks to all who have been testing this feature.