Exponentially proportional refining time & other esotheric things

    I've just read this from TGP:


    If you want to do a profile with the mic further away from the amp then
    it's really important that you refine for a longer time, it seems to be
    an almost exponential thing. For me if i use a DI out from the hotplate
    then the KPA can pretty much nail the sound without even needing a
    refining stage, maybe just a very short burst. With te mic right on the
    cloth and a good volume then the KPA needs a shorter refinement
    usually, and when the mic is further away and there's more room noise
    you start to have to refine for 10 or more minutes to get a sound that's
    close.


    Not sure whether mdme sadie is a member here as well...
    This post hit my curiosity, I can't recall to have read about something similar on this board.
    What do you guys think? :|

    I haven't had much luck with the mic far away from the cab, I haven't done the Refine for 10 minutes, maybe 3-4 minutes, I'll try that next chance I have to see if it makes a difference, thanks for the post.

    The room reflections create diffusions especially in the high frequencies that will let them sound softer.
    The Profiler will not copy the room and diffusion, but the correct frequency responce, thus sound with more high end. The profile is ok, even after short refinement, but the reception of the ear is different.

    Quote from ckemper

    The room reflections create diffusions especially in the high frequencies that will let them sound softer.
    The Profiler will not copy the room and diffusion, but the correct frequency responce, thus sound with more high end. The profile is ok, even after short refinement, but the reception of the ear is different.

    Thanks for your clarification :)

    Quote from ckemper

    The room reflections create diffusions especially in the high frequencies that will let them sound softer.
    The Profiler will not copy the room and diffusion, but the correct frequency responce, thus sound with more high end. The profile is ok, even after short refinement, but the reception of the ear is different.


    Chris, would it be possible to implement a seperate process to create an IR of a given setup with ambience mics in the Kemper? With a IR-reverb you could then duplicate the room and diffusion as well.


    I can see that an IR-reverb could be difficult to impement in the Kemper since longer IRs can take significant amount of processing power and memory and I don't know if the KPA can handle that. But that would be a great feature to have since that would be the final step to an "amp in a room" sound.


    I like distant miking a lot myself. Alan Parson once stated in an interview that when recording Pink Floyd he puts the mic 18"(!) away for a start and sometimes even further away. That would pick up a fair bit of ambience and I personally like to do that myself. If you are in a good room I prefer that over adding digital reverb later.


    Right now we cann capture the frequency response which works very well but it would be fantastic to capture the reverb as well.

    Quote from Garrincha

    Chris, would it be possible to implement a seperate process to create an IR of a given setup with ambience mics in the Kemper? With a IR-reverb you could then duplicate the room and diffusion as well.

    Convolutions reverbs are certainly fascinating! But there are lots of environmental IRs around, many of which are free. If I got you right, why do you feel it would be important to capture the exact ambience of the room where you play/profile? You already have that ambience: the room itself!
    Generally speaking, unless you play in an open space, you always have "the room" in your sound. And, with the freedom of choosing among cathedrals, famous theatres and clubs, stadiums... a generic single room would seem of no interest :|

    Quote from viabcroce

    Convolutions reverbs are certainly fascinating! But there are lots of environmental IRs around, many of which are free. If I got you right, why do you feel it would be important to capture the exact ambience of the room where you play/profile? You already have that ambience: the room itself!
    Generally speaking, unless you play in an open space, you always have "the room" in your sound. And, with the freedom of choosing among cathedrals, famous theatres and clubs, stadiums... a generic single room would seem of no interest :|


    I was thinking from a recording perspective. True if I play the Kemper over a FRFR in a room I have the reverb of the room. But when I record an amp in a good sounding studio I might want to have that room right there in the Kemper and have it on every track I lay down with the specific profile. I could of course take an IR of the room with a different software and apply it later at the mixing stage but it would be easier to have that all prepared in the KPA.

    you can already do this with the built in reverb.
    Just set the mix to 100%
    a small decay time, and the tweek the freq/bandwith etc untill happy.
    its not perfect, but you can simulate it quite well.
    Then simply adjust the EQ controls to suit.


    Blend in your track with orignal guitar, job done! : )


    No, its not perfect but with good tweeking you can get pretty darn close!

    Quote from Garrincha


    I like distant miking a lot myself. Alan Parson once stated in an interview that when recording Pink Floyd he puts the mic 18"(!) away for a start and sometimes even further away. That would pick up a fair bit of ambience and I personally like to do that myself. If you are in a good room I prefer that over adding digital reverb later.


    Right now we cann capture the frequency response which works very well but it would be fantastic to capture the reverb as well.


    Parsons stated explicitly in that interview that he will not any other sound source at this close distance. That includes the room - it was not his intention to capture the room.


    Have you tried profiles at 18'? Of course it is possible.
    I have tried it. There is no significant room portion at this close distance. But it sounds different to close miking. The profiles came out great!


    We have no plans for a room capture.


    CK


    Parson was just an example there are other famous guitarists who do record with a lot of room. Jimmy Page was notorious for working with room mics all the time.


    I already did profiles at 18" or even further away because I intentionally wanted the different frequency range. Those profiles indeed came out great. I just thought it would be handy to capture an IR of the room as well.


    On the other hand I can see the problem with an IR-reverb inside the KPA. It's probably going to add a bit of latency as most IR-reverbs do in the DAW world. That's not what I want in a guitar amp ;)


    It's also no big deal to do a set of IRs myself when I'm in a good room and use those later in the DAW with Altiverb or something similar. A friend of mine was at Abbey Road a couple of years ago but unfortunately they wouldn't let him record impulses... :(

    Well, having no plans for a room-capture facility is different than having no plans for an IR reader... who knows? :)

    Quote from Garrincha

    A friend of mine was at Abbey Road a couple of years ago but unfortunately they wouldn't let him record impulses... :(

    ... wonder why ... :huh:


    ROTFL

    Quote from viabcroce

    ... wonder why ... :huh:


    ROTFL


    When he told me the story I wondered why he did even ask ;)
    But then: Many famous studios don't have such a policy and there are great IRs of them in Altiverb. I'm using the IRs from the old UA studios (now Cello) all the time and their echochambers are fantastic for vocals and guitars. Also Westlake, Hansa, Hook End Sarm, Wieseloord, Allaire are there already. So my friend thought he might just take a chance ;)


    Abbey Road is very secretive about all things there anyway, much more than any other facility. You ain't even allowed to take pictures without explicit permission.


    But then there have always been rumors that a certain drum library that comes with dedicated IRs actually has IRs of Abbey Road although they are said to be named differently. I have forgotten which library that was but it was a substantial rumour back in the days.

    Quote from viabcroce

    refine for 10 or more minutes to get a sound that's close.

    My impression right now is that variation in playing styles (technically, not musically) is more important than just duraton. If you strum the same chords in the same way for 10 minutes that won't help much more than doing it for just a minute or two. I recently made a profile from 20 cm away from the speaker and after the chords all over the fretboard I also played lots of small noises, pizzicatos, flageolets, bright and ringing chords with clear, tight attacks all the way from pianissimo to fortissimo and double bends that produce those strange subtones and all this weird stuff. That profile ended up much more tighter than earlier, closer ones. Seems like the Kemp needs as much different info as possible, especially on transients, high-frequencies and dynamics. Of course it will need more time to to play all that stuff - so the refining will take longer, yes.

    www.audiosemantics.de
    I have been away for quite a while. A few years ago I sold my KPA and since then played my own small tube amp with a Bad Cat Unleash. Now I am back because the DI-profile that I made from my amp sounds very much convincing to me.

    Quote from fretboardminer

    My impression right now is that variation in playing styles (technically, not musically) is more important than just duraton. If you strum the same chords in the same way for 10 minutes that won't help much more than doing it for just a minute or two. I recently made a profile from 20 cm away from the speaker and after the chords all over the fretboard I also played lots of small noises, pizzicatos, flageolets, bright and ringing chords with clear, tight attacks all the way from pianissimo to fortissimo and double bends that produce those strange subtones and all this weird stuff. That profile ended up much more tighter than earlier, closer ones. Seems like the Kemp needs as much different info as possible, especially on transients, high-frequencies and dynamics. Of course it will need more time to to play all that stuff - so the refining will take longer, yes.

    I also agree +1 :thumbup: