SPDIF Higher bitrate.

    Please make it handle 48k and ideally up to 24bit at 96k (or even 192k). I know that the end result will be 44.1k for most, but I prefer to work at 48k, and no I can't tell you why my ears aren't that golden but it just feels nicer to me, and I know a lot of studios prefer (or require) higher bitrates than 44.1k for tracking too.

    It's mandatory for interconnection with other gears.
    By the way i asked a french user to make a test and it sounds ok in 96khz.
    You hear a little bit more the "defaults" but it's not like with the pod (pro, xt..).
    With the pod when you increase the sample rate you hear the artefacts, in 192khz it sounds terrible. It just shows the limit of the technic.
    As i said, it seems to be ok for the kemper so i agree, 44, 48, 88, 96 would be fine.

    CK has stated in an interview that the internal sampling rate of the KPA is much higher than 44.1Khz - so it should be possible theoretically. Plus there should not be any artefacts, like in the Pods. As the KPA has high quality components it should continue sounding great...

    I agree. I also prefer 48kHz. We should have at least the option for 48kHz output through SPDIF since that's the standard (48kHz and 44kHz) and as mba said it's a must for interconnection with other gears.

    Quote from Per

    Please make it handle 48k and ideally up to 24bit at 96k (or even 192k). I know that the end result will be 44.1k for most, but I prefer to work at 48k, and no I can't tell you why my ears aren't that golden but it just feels nicer to me, and I know a lot of studios prefer (or require) higher bitrates than 44.1k for tracking too.

    That would be a really good feature. I've done extensive testing with DSP and Distortion and as soon as we got under 96KHz, it started to sound....digital. :)

    Old, fat, proud and pretty damn good at capturing impulses and mixing albums.

    Quote from ckemper

    Can you explain this further? What was the exact test?


    CK

    I had a pod xt pro. When i tried to record the analog output at different sample rates the higher sounded the worst. It's seems that higher sample rates reveal some defaults/incoherences in the spectrum of the signal. In this case low sample rates help to hide artefacts. That was my guess.


    At a time we supposed that the kemper was based on the same technology than the pod so i asked to a french user to record the analog output of his kemper in 44, 96 and 192khz. The signal is more clear more detailled but it does not sound worst by himself.
    My guess is that the signal/processing is different and better.(perhaps it comes from the DA converters)

    Edited once, last by mba ().

    Quote from mba

    I had a pod xt pro. When i tried to record the analog output at different sample rates the higher sounded the worst. It's seems that higher sample rates reveal some defaults/incoherences in the spectrum of the signal. In this case low sample rates help to hide artefacts. That was my guess.


    At a time we supposed that the kemper was based on the same technology than the pod so i asked to a french user to record the analog output of his kemper in 44, 96 and 192khz. The signal is more clear more detailled but it does not sound worst by himself.
    My guess is that the signal/processing is different and better.(perhaps it comes from the DA converters)

    This is weird.
    With well made equipment you should not notice any difference in sample rates.
    Especially with digital guitar amps, that features a natural high end roll off by the speaker simulation.


    CK

    It's just my experience.
    I'm surprised that you find it weird specially when we are talking about digital world.
    Aliasing and artefacts are something well known in digital world or you have to explain me why you do oversampling?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oversampling


    So i don't see anything weird when you get a bad sound of a digital gear.(and we have a long history and lot of examples in guitar world of bad sounds)
    By the way i heard that with some cheap audio interfaces you don't get the same recording result with different sample rates....
    Anyway. ;)


    Is it in your plans to make different sample rates available for spdif? (i think that's the question)

    Quote from mba

    I had a pod xt pro. When i tried to record the analog output at different sample rates the higher sounded the worst. It's seems that higher sample rates reveal some defaults/incoherences in the spectrum of the signal. In this case low sample rates help to hide artefacts. That was my guess.


    At a time we supposed that the kemper was based on the same technology than the pod so i asked to a french user to record the analog output of his kemper in 44, 96 and 192khz. The signal is more clear more detailled but it does not sound worst by himself.
    My guess is that the signal/processing is different and better.(perhaps it comes from the DA converters)



    Probably in that case the issue was produced by your recording device not the source. I try to avoid using analog outputs on modelers for recording. I does not make sense to me using analog outputs when connecting 2 digital devices together. You will always lose quality and issues might appear. Thats why we need more out put sample rates. With spdif I would say at least 44k and 48k. Thats the standard for spdif.

    Quote from mba

    I've no problem with other sources like the Axe-fx.
    I agree that even the best cable sucks the tone so spdif is superior.


    If you don't hear the artifacts while playing regularly but just when recording the issue must be on the receiver since the KPA signal does not change whether you are recording or not.


    The artifacts (and ghost notes) on the pod xt for example were an issue of the software/firmware and happened also using the digital outputs.

    The real problem is that with the KPA being Master then that means your project in your DAW then gets locked to 44.1 too (unless you want all sorts of problems). It may not be important for the KPA itself to use a higher bitrate, but it is important for an S/PDIF devices and /D convertors to be able to do so. Right now that means that the KPA is locked to analog output and S/PDIF is out of the question.

    Quote from MadH

    If you don't hear the artifacts while playing regularly but just when recording the issue must be on the receiver since the KPA signal does not change whether you are recording or not.

    I think that you miss the point, there is no issue with the KPA.

    Quote from Per

    The real problem is that with the KPA being Master then that means your project in your DAW then gets locked to 44.1 too (unless you want all sorts of problems). It may not be important for the KPA itself to use a higher bitrate, but it is important for an S/PDIF devices and /D convertors to be able to do so. Right now that means that the KPA is locked to analog output and S/PDIF is out of the question.

    +1

    The vast majority of pro recording is still happening at 44.1 so I don't see that being limited to that (meantime!) is much of an issue for many. If there's a problem with a system being externally clocked from the Kemper then the problem is with the system not the Kemper.


    Is there something else I'm missing here?

    Well that may be your experience of it, but I personally always record at 48k and based on Gearslutz at least a pretty substantial number of engineers there are recording at any number of rates higher than 44.1


    The final result though is (nearly always) output at 44.1, that's just because that's the standard for CD. But tracking? No, not usually 44.1.

    Quote from ajs

    The vast majority of pro recording is still happening at 44.1 so I don't see that being limited to that (meantime!) is much of an issue for many. If there's a problem with a system being externally clocked from the Kemper then the problem is with the system not the Kemper.


    Is there something else I'm missing here?

    Yes, 1 it's your opinion, 2 there are other standard with higher quality.
    With demateralized stuff you can today release music at the rate you want.

    It has to be said there are huge discussions about which bitrate to use on gearslutz and other sites and there's no clear winner in it all. But if people want to use a higher bitrate while tracking and their DAW and audio interface support it then they should be allowed to. Bear in mind that most DAW's mixers are pretty primitive literal summing devices that don't do any waveform reconstruction so the nyquist limit doesn't necessarily readily apply. Without the reconstruction prior to summing (and summing with higher bitrate aliasing) you can get artifacts and loss of fidelity in the audible range, so the natural solution (until DAWs improve their mixers) is to either use an analog mixer while tracking (which leaves your interface to take care of reconstruction and filtering), or if you work entirely ITB with a digital mixer then use a higher bitrate for tracking and mixing and then bounce down to 44.1 using either your DA or a decent filtering algorithm to do the job.


    Anyhow, regardless of all that (and it's dead easy to get sucked into those sorts of arguments), it's just a case of many people are likely to want it, and I've even seen a few people turned off from the KPA because of this limitation, so that's lost sales. Therefore if possible it should IMO be added.

    Didn't I read somewhere that a higher bitrate was planned? I'd be surprised that it's set at 44.1 and is intended to stay there.


    Yes, it's my opinion that most pro recordings are made at 44.1, and that opinion is based on it being true! :)


    Personally I prefer 88.2 or 96 but it's a lot more tricky and sometimes impossible to work that way meantime.