nah same thing in this video, what monitors or headphones do you use? ... listen closely to the mids and lower mids the sound overall sounds ultra close but it does not have that thickness
I A/B'd them in my DAW and solo'd both samples, one on top of the other. Monitors are Mackie HR824's and headphones are Sennheiser HD280 Pro's. My hearing is fairly good as well, and can hear up to 17kHz.
well cut everything above 2k and listen to it maybe you know and hear then what i mean ...
I can hear the difference on my 16 year old Labtec 1070 computer speakers.
I can hear the difference on my 16 year old Labtec 1070 computer speakers.
xD yeah i mean it is a thing that, once you notice it you hear it in every profile...
On thing I noticed repeatedly is the vast majority of comparisons don't do it in parallel. They run serial one clip, then the other. That doesn't allow for proper comparison. They need to A/B back and forth during the process to properly portray how similar (or different) the clips really are. Furthermore, when the tracks are inside a mix that doesn't help the comparison. They clips really need to be just the raw rig.
A few months ago I managed to find a video that did a great job of comparing some clips, will see if I can locate it again. later tonight...
xD haha not bad 
well the most important thing is that you know your stuff ... but for some things it is so much easier if the monitors are very linear and so on ... after my tannoy monitors got destroyed i had to switch monitors to times since 2016, first i could only afford a behringer monitor set and the my genelecs BUT the most important thing in my studio are not the genelecs it is tha a/b monitor controller where i can switch to my avantone mixcubes... man, it is not soo important to get teh best monitors but a a/b set is so important... your ears fatique after a while and other speakers are great, and i do not have to do the famous "car test" anymore
well cut everything above 2k and listen to it maybe you know and hear then what i mean ...
The way to tell where the differences lie is to match the samples using an EQ matching plugin. In this case, the differences are centered around 600Hz and approx. 1.9kHz. The level differences in those two areas is less than 1dB.
The way to tell where the differences lie is to match the samples using an EQ matching plugin. In this case, the differences are centered around 600Hz and approx. 1.9kHz. The level differences in those two areas is less than 1dB.
Did I not say pretty much EXACTLY this as being the two areas where I often hear issues in the profiles? Thanks for providing the data. It does make me wonder though, if a simple EQ matching plug-in can detect this why is the KPA not doing the same?
man, it is not soo important to get teh best monitors but a a/b set is so important... your ears fatique after a while and other speakers are great, and i do not have to do the famous "car test" anymore
This is correct, which is why I often recommend for home recording to get a nice set of near field monitors and a nice set of monitoring headphones. Between the two, with practice, you can usually accomplish everything that is required.
Did I not say pretty much EXACTLY this as being the two areas where I often hear issues in the profiles? Thanks for providing the data.
A level difference of less than 1dB is practically nothing. If we were talking about a difference of 2 or more dB, okay.
The way to tell where the differences lie is to match the samples using an EQ matching plugin. In this case, the differences are centered around 600Hz and approx. 1.9kHz. The level differences in those two areas is less than 1dB.
What program did you use? Here is a EQ Match using Ozone 7.
Blue Amp
Yellow Kemper
[Blocked Image: https://snag.gy/2Pts98.jpg]
it is not level alone it os compression & gain structure ... there are many ways to get the eq spot on but its about the gain structure in that area...
What program did you use? Here is a EQ Match using Ozone 7.
Blue Amp
Yellow Kemper
[Blocked Image: https://snag.gy/2Pts98.jpg]
I'm using FreeFilter, which is the best EQ matching software I've ever used, even better than FabFilter Q2 or Har-Bal, in my opinion.
it is not level alone it os compression & gain structure ... there are many ways to get the eq spot on but its about the gain structure in that area...
One thing that's being overlooked is that the Kemper profile actually sounds a bit fuller. Why do I say that? Did anyone not notice that the profile is using more reverb?
One thing that's being overlooked is that the Kemper profile actually sounds a bit fuller. Why do I say that? Did anyone not notice that the profile is using more reverb?
Reverb? Are you talking about the clips in the OP?
Reverb? Are you talking about the clips in the OP?
No.
A level difference of less than 1dB is practically nothing. If we were talking about a difference of 2 or more dB, okay.
1 db is enough if in certain areas, especially when you start layering tracks.
it is not [EQ] level alone it is compression & gain structure ... there are many ways to get the eq spot on but its about the gain structure in that area...
Agree 100%. We usually hear in terms of frequency but this particular situation we are discussing is more about how the gain structure and other elements are impacting perceived frequencies.
Really wish I knew how the profiling works,whether a profile is being built from scratch via test tones or if there are fixed templates the KPA uses (detects & selects) and the refines with test tones. Because if it is the latter then it is more of a modeler hybrid that might explain why it sometimes misses the mark. I'd also like to understand better why apparently the KPA sometimes has issues profiling rigs exhibiting both preamp and power stage distortion. Since great tones often come from rigs that have both those attributes it leaves me wondering if that isn't maybe where the "something missing" is emanating from. As I said before, I'm new to the KPA, but it would sure be easier to understand how to try and post-tweak things if I understood more how the profile was being created in the first place. Are we to assume that for certain types of power stage emulation we are expected to compensate with the Clarity knob and the Sag knob and the Compression knob, etc? That we should not be expecting a duplicate, but rather use post-tweaking to create the most realistic sounding amp we can with the understanding it may not be identical to the source. I'm just overall a bit perplexed by the KPA still. It's a great device, I'm not bashing it at all, just perplexed by a few things.
1 db is enough if in certain areas, especially when you start layering tracks.
This isn't a layered track, and layered guitars will be EQ'd and panned differently anyway. Try cutting .7dB or even 1dB at the fundamental and you'll see there's no real, perceptible difference.
This isn't a layered track, and layered guitars will be EQ'd and panned differently anyway. Try cutting .7dB or even 1dB at the fundamental and you'll see there's no real, perceptible difference.
It was a general reference. When tracks are layered even small differences can become even more noticeable. For example a quad tracked panoramic will usually exhibit more prominently any deficiencies than a single track, or even a stereo track. 1 db cut or boost in the pair of frequencies we have been discussing will absolutely be distinguishable in most scenarios. If had the time to create a parallel clip demonstrating this I would, but the KPA has already consumed way more time than I initially anticipated. Anyway, try it for yourself if you doubt, just make sure the Q isn't unrealistically narrow. If you try it and cannot hear a difference then your monitoring setup is where the problem lies. That said, we are not talking just frequencies, there's likely more going on in the gain structure itself (or other attributes) which all combined we hear as frequency differences.
It was a general reference. When tracks are layered even small differences can become even more noticeable. For example a quad tracked panoramic will usually exhibit more prominently any deficiencies than a single track, or even a stereo track. 1 db cut or boost in the pair of frequencies we have been discussing will absolutely be distinguishable in most scenarios. If had the time to create a parallel clip demonstrating this I would,
Luckily you don't have to - it (effect of layering) has already been demonstrated here:
