Lost Patch

It might depend on how you navigate and load Slots in Performance Mode. If you do it via remote control (PROFILER Remote or MIDI) former edits are withdrawn. So, either navigate with the RIG Navigation Cross or store the Performance before moving to another Slot.

Quote from Burkhard

It might depend on how you navigate and load Slots in Performance Mode. If you do it via remote control (PROFILER Remote or MIDI) former edits are withdrawn. So, either navigate with the RIG Navigation Cross or store the Performance before moving to another Slot.

I know you are a very logical person Burkhard and everything about the Kemper is clearly thought out in great detail (nothing left to chance). Therefore, I presume there is a reason for this strange behaviour. Could you explain it please? It might help us come to terms with it as, at the moment, it is not intuitive to work this way.

Is there any prospect of this being changed so that changes are NOT lost when navigating with the remote? Or is this something the we will always have to live with? It would be a massive improvement in work flow for me (and I believe from several other posts many others).

Thanks

The logic is described in the manual. We try to distinguish between editing and temporary changes during a live performance.

If I activate for example a Delay Freeze or initiate Morphing of Pedal Vinyl Stop or switch Rotary Speed to "fast" in Slot X, leave to another Slot, and return to Slot X, I would like to load this Slot in its stored default state and not with Pedal Vinyl Stop in toe position, which means signal muted. Otherwise unpredictable odd things could happen. That's why any edits are interpreted as temporary in nature and withdrawn, if you leave a Slot via remote control. If you want to edit your performance permanently, we are assuming you sit in front of your PROFILER anyhow and can use the RIG Navigation Cross to navigate through the Slots. If you store Slot by Slot it makes no difference.

To be honest I very rarely use the Navigation cross at all. One of the reasons I don’t like using the cross is that it behaves in a very counterintuitive manner much of the time (though not always which makes it even more confusing).

When selecting sounds I almost always use RM even with all its current unpredictability. When I want to edit something I use the soft knobs and when I want to change slots I hit the footswitch on the remote. Therefore, at the moment I need to hit store 3 times every 30sec - 1min plus I have to deal with the popup that also asks if I want to store the whole rig or only the current effect ?

I don’t know why you would assume someone would automatically use the navigation cross instead of the remote if they have the remote hooked up anyway. Therefore, I would definitely urge you to consider making the saving format the same whether using the cross or remote to change slots.

I fully understand your logic about how slots load in a performance environment but this is totally different from editing. Therefore, it Would be fantastic to have an “edit mode” response and a “play mode” response.

Every day another urgency …

What is counterintuitiv about the RIG Navigation Cross?

Left button steps one Slot to the left.

Right button steps one Slot to the right.

Up button steps on Performance up.

Down button steps one Performance down.

Use those buttons and you are in edit mode.

Use the Rig Buttons of the Remote and you are in play mode.

Hi Burkhard, its not an “urgencyl” just an inconvenience

After nearly 40 years of playing I have become so used to using Up and Down arrows to move to the next preset that I keep accidentally using them and changing performance instead of slot. I spend an unhealthy amount of time shouting and swearing at my profiler. Maybe I need anger management counselling not a system change

Also when using the Navigation cross in Browse mode I naturally want to use up and down arrows to move to the next rig but keep accidentally engaging the filter by option. Even after Well over a year of using the Kemper it still feels unnatural to me. Its a bit like the situation where many users find it awkward and confusing to use the up/down footswitches on the remote because they are reversed from the layout they are used to on other gear.

Your methods may actually be MORE logical (sensible) than common industry standards but at the end of the day the tool is there to serve the user and make their life as easy as possible. It is not for the user to adjust their mindset to accommodate the tool. Anything that makes a tool more intuitive to multiple users can only be a good thing. As users all have different workflows and experiences. There is rarely a one size fits all best solution. Therefore, if flexibility of UI can be implemented, without significant time/cost which gets in the road of other priorities, I think it would be welcomed by many users. However, I am very hopeful that the new Rig Manager will be so impressive and intuitive that this will all become irrelevant very shortly

What makes you believe, that the fact that you are erroniously using the Up/Down buttons of the RIG navigation cross to change the Slot - while the Slots are displayed horizontally on the screen and the Remote's Rig Buttons are organized horizontally - is a common user problem and if we changed that logic, more users would be satisfied and not less?

In Browser Mode the Up and Down buttons don't engage any filters. They take bigger steps while Left and Right step by one. And those bigger steps are dependent on the "Sorted By" criteria selected. If you select "Sorted by Name", Up/Down jump to the next starting character. If you select "Sorted by Date", Up/Down jump to the next date and so on. This is the case since day 1 and I cannot remember that this has ever been criticised. So, why do you think, this doesn't serve "the user"?

Generally, this concept of "the user" is an oversimplification. We have many users with different background, different workflow, different preferences, different needs. If we would add an option for every corner case user request, the product would be unmanageable as a consequence - for every user. We don't intent to create SAP for guitar players. And even there: If you implement SAP, you better accept to adapt their application philosophy. That applies to any standard software.

By the way, this has little to nothing to do with this thread.