Dual Cab Support

    Request for dual cab support where a soft button under the Cab section would act as a toggle and allow a second cab to be loaded. And then have a mix control added to be able to mix the two cabs together, where center knob position is equal amounts of each cab.


    This feature could thereby support any of the following tone shaping scenarsos:
    - Using two different cabs
    - Using the same cab but with two different mics
    - Using one mic on two different speakers


    The user would utilize the mix knob to control the blend. These are all important scenarios to more closely mimic real life studio procedure.


    Profile makers that wish to offer the dual cab feature in their rigs could simply take a second profile immediately after the first, but with a different cab and/or mic/placement. And then load that resulting cab into the first profile.


    Make sense?


    Sonic

    Quote from MtotheEikel

    Makes sense, but I'm not sure if the hardware is capable of doing that

    Theoretically speaking it seems it should be purely software, the only question being whether or not the internal processing could be done in parallel or have to be serial.


    As I was struggling the last few months to extract the kind of tones I wanted, I began reflecting on the basics of what normally transpires in the studio. And I was reminded the tones are almost always derived from at least 2 mic(s) and/or cab(s)/speakers. Today, someone can profile with as much variety as they like, but then the user is stuck with whatever configuration was offered at time of profiling. However, this proposed Dual Cab method would open up some real flexibility to the many, many people who buy the KPA for use with existing profiles. They would now be able to mix and match two cabs for themselves thereby tone shaping in a valuable way. And profile sellers would then also have an optional value-add pathway of many options to offer. For example, rather than choose a rig with two mics on a cabinet, a profile seller could offer a rig that comes with a handful of cabs to load - each cab being the same physical cab but with different mics. This would then allow the user to control which pair of mics they want by loading up whatever two cabs (mics) they wanted and blend (mix) them the way they want. This is just one small example. The other more obvious example would be to load two physically different cabs. The permutations are almost endless.


    Very valuable feature IMO.

    Edited 2 times, last by SonicExporer: Clarifications ().

    Well seems like an interesting feature to be implemented. Regardless of the KPA being able or not to do it, I'd like to point that lots of profiles are made using a blend of mics / positions, so that regular studio scenario would be already covered in many cases.


    Cheers.

    Quote from sercho

    Well seems like an interesting feature to be implemented. Regardless of the KPA being able or not to do it, I'd like to point that lots of profiles are made using a blend of mics / positions, so that regular studio scenario would be already covered in many cases.
    Cheers.

    What you highlight is actually part of the very problem though. The cabs and mics used are a huge part of the sound, and users are stuck with whatever the profile maker configured. The Dual Cab feature would instead put a great deal of that choice & flexibility back into the hands of the user. For another simple example: Let's say a profile maker would have normally used 2 mics on a cab and blended them. Instead, now the profile maker could offer two cabs (the same physical cab with a signal from each mic), letting the user blend them as desired. Or maybe use just one of them instead of being forced to use both mics blended. Again, almost endless permutations.

    Edited 3 times, last by SonicExporer: Clarifications ().

    Quote from SonicExporer

    What you highlight is actually part of the very problem though. The cabs and mics used are a huge part of the sound, and users are stuck with whatever the profile maker configured. The Dual Cab feature would instead put a great deal of that choice & flexibility back into the hands of the user. For another simple example: Let's say a profile maker would have normally used 2 mics on a cab and blended them. Instead, now the profile maker could offer two cabs (the same physical cab with a signal from each mic), letting the user blend them as desired. Or maybe use just one of them instead of being forced to use both mics blended. Again, almost endless permutations.

    I get your point, I simply assume the profile makers have gone for the best sounding blend / combination of mics / positions or offer different profiles for different positions in the same pack/session. I agree with you: with this feature you would have more control. I don't think I need it but I still think it's a nice idea as a new feature; doesn't seem feasible to me, though... :/

    Quote from SonicExporer

    Theoretically speaking it seems it should be purely software, the only question being whether or not the internal processing could be done in parallel or have to be serial.

    I would like that feature as well :)


    Regarding your assessment of it being "purely software" - there is sill a processing power limit somewhere in the unit, especially if the cab portion is not just a simple IR (which it isn't).

    Quote from Michael_dk

    I would like that feature as well :)
    Regarding your assessment of it being "purely software" - there is sill a processing power limit somewhere in the unit, especially if the cab portion is not just a simple IR (which it isn't).

    Understood but unless I'm mistaken, the worse case scenario would be serial processing. In other words, the ideal approach would be to multi-thread/process in parallel so the KPA is processing both cabs simultaneously and have those two signal paths mixed/blended (per the knob setting) and then back on to normal processing. However, if the KPA couldn't do this kind of parallel processing due to some sort of resource limitation it should be able to process the signal in a serial fashion. First cab, and then stall that result while sending the pre-cab signal to the second cab, and then blending them. This could introduce a bit of latency but I suspect it would be low, possibly entirely negligible. Only Mr. Kemper knows these answers but I would be a bit surprised if there was a hardware impediment to this feature.


    It is becoming more apparent as I get more familiar with the KPA that as far as serious recordings go, the device is an interesting tool for pro studios because they have access to everything needed to re-profile or tweak, etc. But the reality is, from a customer base perspective, there is a huge segment who wants to be able to buy profiles and use these devices in home studios. So having flexibility in some key areas like the proposed Dual Cab feature is really quite important. Even in a pro studio setting it would be helpful because a producer could instead potentially tweak the cab/mic settings using the Dual Cab feature after profiling, rather than having to go back and mess around with the mics/cabs & mixing board and re-profiling again. Just changing the blend between the cabs could be very useful when tracking to get slightly different sounds for the tone and stereo spectrum.


    I could go on and on about the value of this feature, it really is quite significant for recording purposes. Even for live use a person might be able to thicken up and tailor their sound. But definitely for recording, big value for people who are serous about tone and flexibility.


    Sonic

    I've been using dual amps and cabs for quite a while. Then I started doing the same with amp modelling when bias FX allowed for this on my then alive ipad.


    I think dual cabs would be great to have in the kemper. No doubt about that. Some of the best tones I've ever gotten were made up of two amps and/or cabs.


    Though maybe taking it a step further would be better? Why not just be able to blend two profiles together in this manner? Too tired to think clearly of what the implications would be.


    And probably the hardware wouldn't support that anyway.

    Exactly, Dimi.


    Implementing the additional cab only will obviously demand much less CPU power. I'm sure you'd agree that if there was any way the company could've squeezed a dual-amp feature into the KPA, it would've.


    We've asked about this on the forum on and off for years, but AFAIKR, Sonic's dual-cab request is a first and would logically require much less CPU grunt, which is why I support it. It just makes sense, IMHO.

    Quote from Monkey_Man

    Exactly, Dimi.


    Implementing the additional cab only will obviously demand much less CPU power. I'm sure you'd agree that if there was any way the company could've squeezed a dual-amp feature into the KPA, it would've.


    We've asked about this on the forum on and off for years, but AFAIKR, Sonic's dual-cab request is a first and would logically require much less CPU grunt, which is why I support it. It just makes sense, IMHO.

    Yeah, and cabs tend to make up such a big part of how profiles sound anyway (or real amps for that matter). Assuming this doesn't also mean more processing power is used (or too much processing power) it could be more do-able to just have dual cabs. Which would still be awesome, as cabs (and micing) make such a difference.

    Exactly, you guys hit the nail on the head. Much of the tone is in the KPA cabs section, which represents cabs/speakers/mics. And the whole cab experience is captured in just one screen, so it makes for an easy A/B user operation to swap back and forth visually.


    If the feature can't be implemented via concurrent (parallel) processing to achieve near zero latency impact then it could certainly be done one cab at a time and then mixed (serial). The latter would have some latency impact but it may be entirely trivial. Again, this is speaking theoretically but I'd be quite surprised if there was kind of resource or technical impediment to this feature. And for those users or profile makers that want to keep using just one cab, fine, no negative impact to them whatsoever.


    Sonic

    If you're using 3rd party IRs, a simple wav editor (I use Audacity) can merge different cabs into one file and then use Kemper's Cab Maker to convert to kipr. If anyone could figure out a way to convert kipr cab files into wav, that would solve the issue without the need for 3rd party IRs

    Quote from ElDoca

    If you're using 3rd party IRs, a simple wav editor (I use Audacity) can merge different cabs into one file and then use Kemper's Cab Maker to convert to kipr. If anyone could figure out a way to convert kipr cab files into wav, that would solve the issue without the need for 3rd party IRs

    Yes. This is constructive thinking!
    Cab maker should have a function for merging several kipr's into one :)


    It does make sense, but as others indicated, the biggest hurdle is probably the existing architecture.


    If you really want to punish two amps, another Kemper should be in your sights.

    I can't speak for the specific design of the KPA as I don't have access to the code & architectural design. But in parallel with a long track record in the music industry, I also have three decades of software/OS/firmware design and multiple patents under my belt. So when I say that I'd be really surprised if this dual cab feature isn't possible, it was coming from a perspective that has a little more weight than sheer speculation. FWIW ;) That said, I have seen an awful lot of sloppy code and poorly thought out designs in my day that caused an impediment to advancement. So there's no guarantees. But fundamentally speaking, this feature may very well be quite easily doable in the big picture of things.


    Whether or not Kemper will even see this thread is another question. lol


    Cheers,


    Sonic


    Well, they have been quite responsive to suggestions from what I've seen. I'm pretty sure if we could get dual cabs within the existing framework, they would have little reason not to implement this request. And it probably has little to do with poor coding, Mr CK really knows his stuff and squeezes out all the power he can get from most of his devices, judging by my experience with two such devices.


    They have reserved power in the past for future developments, so perhaps if they prioritise dual cabs, they would do it. My guess is that we are running out of power though, going by the fact that LEDs seem to take longer to instantiate than they did when I first got the unit.


    But just the premise that the cab section takes less processing power than the amp section is fallacious, I would think. The cab section seems to interact very heavily with the amp section and can completely change the sound of an amp.

    Quote from nightlight

    But just the premise that the cab section takes less processing power than the amp section is fallacious, I would think. The cab section seems to interact very heavily with the amp section and can completely change the sound of an amp.

    Good point, and I agree with your thinking, AJ.


    IMHO, it should theoretically use less CPU power than the combined amp and cab Profile, but how much less is anyone's guess.