profile Improvement

It's important to note that it profiles the Mic'd sound and not the actual amp sound...that makes the 2 sounds vary some in the real world.

Still uncanny to me how close it sounds though

Eq wise I have really only noticed a slight loss in bass which is easily added back. Very close. But there is that 5% at times the real amp can have, mojo.

I would like to see the possibility of using the spdif input for profiling.

Quote from Joej

I have had this Profile amp over a year and I have pretty good ears. I want this amp to succeed! So close it is to being un beatable....But I must say...there is a missing element in the profiles that are not capturing our amps completely. After the Profile is taken and I go back and listen to the real deal vs Kemper through the same cabinet and a Mesa Power amp and a Mosvalve amp but not much difference there and what I find there is a lack of or missing element of ....How do I say here.....Body. Hair maybe.....Warmth. Low mid fullness maybe. I Profiled my Marshall AFD and although close there is a lacking warmth body mid something or other. Comes out thinner than Original. Im just here to say your s o so close to having this perfect. please keep up the great work.Joej

Did you compare to a direct profile taken from the preamp of the mesa, or a regular studio profile?

IME with the Kemper vs my amp (JCM2000 DSL 100W with 1960 Lead cab) with both a sm57 and a e906 propped up against the grill, is that against both mics, the Kemper profile is almost there....

but, to my ears, it tends to miss the target a little in regards to the bass response of the tone coming out of the real amp.

Sometimes, adding about 1db or so to the bass brings it even closer, sometimes I find I need an EQ stomp in front of the profile to get it there.
Dont get me wrong, it is a very useable sound, but its the dead giveaway for me in blind tests, which I nearly always get right.

IMO, this is the only achilles heel of the Kemper profiling process, otherwise its pretty much flawless in terms of sonic quality.

Thanks so much for making this think CK. Its my best buy of the year!!

Am I reading this correctly that you are comparing the profile that is played back again by the same speaker cabinet?
You are probably comparing to a sound that cannot be seen as the same sound. But I could be wrong.

Please explain exactly how you cabled for profiling and how you cabled for listening to the profile.

Thanks
CK

The e609 is a very nasaly/upper mids heavy mic, personally i like it on guitar cabs because that seems to bring out some of the grit that an SM57/58 smooths over. However it does mean that you lose quite a bit of the lower end punch.

This really isn't an issue of the Kemper though, but of the mic and the rest of the signal chain. However I do think there are still issues with profiles versus the real deal and I'm hoping to find time soon (now that I'm back with my KPA) to do some more thorough tests to see if I can isolate and work out what it is that I'm still feeling that I'm missing compared to my real amps, I know it's not the room sound, but there is something that's somehow not quite as punchy or immediate somehow I was thinking the transients, but it's possible that it is the bass and that's just how my mind is interpreting things.

Guys, be aware that all of you talk about different things.

Per,
Obviously two in this thread compare the original amp to the profiler played back by the same cabinet. This is not.valid, if not done right. Are you comparing it the same way?

ive been using a tube mic that i built for 170 dollars and an sm57 and i have more than enough low mids when listining back to back through studio monitors with the kemper di to innerface and the mixed cab in the room it sounds about 99.5% to where i cant tell the difference i find a problem when puting it through a cab and power amp when bypassing the cab sim is where it seems to loose the warmth to me

Quote from ckemper

Guys, be aware that all of you talk about different things.

Per,
Obviously two in this thread compare the original amp to the profiler played back by the same cabinet. This is not.valid, if not done right. Are you comparing it the same way?

Hi Christoph, actually I have two things I need to compare, normally I just do DI, so it's KPA direct vs amp through mic, i.e. the "correct" like for like evaluation. But I also intend to make another DI profile from my amp and compare KPA through return to original amp's pre through the same cab, which should be fair to compare. The reason I want to do that one is that the last time I tried through my amp the KPA sounded very compressed going through the amp's return, but I didn't have time to really analyze what was going on properly.

No, you compare the mic'd amp with the profile, this is what has been captured. You should hear at both through your monitors. If you want to do it your way you need to run the KPA with cab off through the power amp and cab of the same amp.

Quote from Joej

Kemper not sure I understand your meaning. IF I Profile with a Certain cab..when I do a comparison I should not use that same cab for listening of both Real and Kemper Please explain .Thanks Joej

Our mighty Sage explained perfectly.
I'd add that if you want to hear your amp thru that cab (so without using FRFR or studio monitors) you'd rather make a DI profile to get a better match between the profile and the original amp.

The real amp setup is like this:
guitar - amp - speaker

If you profile with a mic in front of the real amp then the Kemper setup is like this:
guitar - amp - speaker - mic

When the profiles is used with a FRFR system it's like this:
guitar - amp - speaker - mic - FRFR amp - FRFR speaker

So the mic is always there - and so the used mic and mic placement is VERY important to create a great profile.