How do Beta high/low pass filters in cabinet block affect Kone on monitor out?

    That's interesting. Appreciate you finding that and sharing it. I had been setting the low pass/high cut to around 6200 and the high pass low cut to around 80-100, depending on the room. Looks like I may be able to drop the highs down a little more.

    • Official Post

    numbers like this really mean nothing.
    as you can see in the frequency plot of the Creamback 65, the speaker does reproduce frequencies well outside this area.

    a PROFILE will already have this information as part of the CABINET, but since close mic'ing can emphasize the high end use either the Pure Cabinet or High Cut parameters to adjust the signal by ear. Preferably in context of a full band playing.

    Simply copying numbers will honestly get you nowhere I'm afraid - trust your ears.

    Quote from DonPetersen

    numbers like this really mean nothing.


    Simply copying numbers will honestly get you nowhere I'm afraid - trust your ears.

    Huh? I don't see the logic here. If one looks at the attached plot the -3dB points are approximately 75 and 5kHz. Setting the cuts to those values will absolutely get you more than nowhere. Yes, I agree that one would want to use their ears. But if I were deaf (thankfully I'm not, yet ;)) these settings would be a relatively good approximation and would be much better than nothing. The cuts are simple hi and lo cut, so none of the frequency response detail (comb-like response) is accounted for with the cut filters, but that's the nature of filter approximation.


    IME, the cabinet model never properly accounts for the high frequency issues that the Kemper commonly reproduces through FRFR speakers. This might be due to micing techniques and could be why some profiles are better in this respect than others. I never like the result of a mic placed near the center of the cone. The highs are never pleasant for me in that case.

    • Official Post
    Quote from lbieber

    Huh? I don't see the logic here. If one looks at the attached plot the -3dB points are approximately 75 and 5kHz. Setting the cuts to those values will absolutely get you more than nowhere. Yes, I agree that one would want to use their ears. But if I were deaf (thankfully I'm not, yet ;)) these settings would be a relatively good approximation and would be much better than nothing. The cuts are simple hi and lo cut, so none of the frequency response detail (comb-like response) is accounted for with the cut filters, but that's the nature of filter approximation.


    IME, the cabinet model never properly accounts for the high frequency issues that the Kemper commonly reproduces through FRFR speakers. This might be due to micing techniques and could be why some profiles are better in this respect than others. I never like the result of a mic placed near the center of the cone. The highs are never pleasant for me in that case.

    have you tried Pure Cab? It is specifically there to alleviate artifacts introduced by close-mic'ing.

    Quote from DonPetersen

    numbers like this really mean nothing.
    as you can see in the frequency plot of the Creamback 65, the speaker does reproduce frequencies well outside this area.

    a PROFILE will already have this information as part of the CABINET, but since close mic'ing can emphasize the high end use either the Pure Cabinet or High Cut parameters to adjust the signal by ear. Preferably in context of a full band playing.

    Simply copying numbers will honestly get you nowhere I'm afraid - trust your ears.

    Hi Don,


    I appreciate the information. I lifted those numbers right from the Celestion web site where they state the frequency response of the speakers. I have had good result using those numbers as a starting point.

    Quote from DonPetersen

    is that in isolation, or in mix context?
    a lot of unpleasant high frequency content, that even tube amps generate, is masked by cymbals, but carry important transients that make the up most of the note attacks.

    In every context.


    I don't agree that there is any unpleasant, high frequency content that contains important transients. I can't think of any playing situation for which I want to retain unpleasant, high frequency content that needs to be masked by anything. To each his own I suppose. Thinking about it, maybe some metal or other specialized sounds might need that, but that's not what I play.


    I have designed and built many tube amps over the decades. I also own(ed) many tube amps. Never dialed up a tone that needed unpleasant, high frequency content to get a good a sound. Sure, some amps are capable of putting that out. Many Marshall's in particular went the way of horrible, bright tones. As did many other amps. Those are the amps to stay away from or modify IMO. Also, I have never agreed that I should use additive EQ (i.e. add treble) to a guitar sound to sit in a mix properly. If it isn't sitting in the mix it is usually because of frequency congestion for which subtractive EQ (of one or several instruments) will solve the problem. All of my tube amp experiences are with guitar cabs with limited frequency response. Connect a full range speaker and you have the opportunity for even more high frequency trash.


    My approach with the Kemper is to use a PA, full range type of speaker as a monitor. The Kemper is ulitmately connect to the FOH PA anyway. This gives me the possibility for a matched tone between the two. This leads to the problem of getting rid of unpleasant, high frequencies. Pure cab, hi cut, presence cut, treble cut all are necessary for me to get the sound right.


    Sorry, this got way off topic from the OP.

    Quote from DonPetersen

    FWIW
    Guitar speakers are rarely, if ever, pointed directly at the ears, which makes them seem much softer than they really are - while a close mic will pick up it's actual sound quite accurately.

    A long time ago, I made a fun experimental profile of my Marshall for playing at home (but, it is useless for recording or for playing live) by placing the microphone at the same position as the back of my head when playing live.

    Quote from lbieber

    Never dialed up a tone that needed unpleasant, high frequency content to get a good a sound.

    I guess you also didn't put your ears directly in front of a speaker cone (which is where your poor SM 57 sits) while dialing in the tone...


    A tone that sounds nice and pleasant in your ears while you are playing may actually be pretty piercing where your microphone sits.

    I could stick a tweater into my earhole and get a horrible result, but that would be stupid. I am speaking about a normal listening position which may be hard to define and would merit discussion, but what happens at the micro level is not what I would call normal.


    The variation in tone from the dust cover to the edge of the cone of a guitar speaker is immense. Which is why guitar micing techniques are important. Distance is also a big factor.


    The best recorderd guitar tones are not close mic'd on the dust cover IMO. And no profile should be made with the mic close and at the center of the cone. So, sure we can imagine dumb places to locate our ear/mic and then say it is unpleasant.

    • Official Post
    Quote from lbieber

    The best recorderd guitar tones are not close mic'd on the dust cover IMO. And no profile should be made with the mic close and at the center of the cone. So, sure we can imagine dumb places to locate our ear/mic and then say it is unpleasant.

    it's all in the execution - there actually is a mic that sounds amazing on axis, dead center of the speaker https://tulmicrophones.com/G12.html

    Quote from Kemper Support #1

    The filters in the cab module will affect the sound of the monitor output signal even if Kone mode is activated and "monitor cab off" is active.


    I guess I don't understand the design decision here for Kab/imprint users. If the Kab speaker imprint is the simulated EQ curve of real speaker, why filter that further with high pass and low pass filters? I don't typically do that with a real amp and cab. I do often filter an IR or FRFR source though and while you can do that with the main output, it's pretty advantageous to be able to change those cutoffs based on the speaker or amp combo. And, why would I want to make that same EQ rolloff choice for FRFR on a Kab that's supposed to be behaving like a real speaker? Why couldn't the per cab HP/LP filter be limited to the main output?


    For those of you who are using the Kab and imprint (via monitor output) to monitor yourself and sending the main output to the board, do you see a reason or need to further roll off the simulated speaker with HP/LP filters?

    • Official Post
    Quote from lbieber

    Nice, learn something new everyday. I wonder how well it works. Ever used one? Looks like it might be difficult to procure one.

    it is hard to get hold of one.
    I have played PROFILEs made with a G12 - and they are great! :)

    and so can you:

    Willi Dammeier Rig Pack (December 2019)

    • Founded in the early 90s by Willi Dammeier and Rüdiger Klose, the „Institut für Wohlklangforschung“ in Hannover has built an International reputation, hosting renowned producers for a large variety of musical genres that recorded and produced in Hannover like Grailknights, Apoptygma Berzerk, The Beauty of Gemina, Colourhaze and many more.

      All PROFILE™s of this Rig pack are original sounds used in productions and often live.

      The sounds were captured using a very unique hand-built microphone from South Africa, the Tul G12. The Tul G12 was designed to capture the sound of a guitar cabinet as if a classic combination of three mics was being used. Just by pointing it straight at the cone of the speaker, the Tul G12 captures a wide range of characteristics in one single go, taking most of the guesswork out of properly mic’ing a guitar cabinet.

      This Rig pack includes 22 Rigs for guitar plus five Rigs for bass..


       DownloadDate: 2019-12-11, File size: 2.32 MB
    Quote from lbieber

    I could stick a tweater into my earhole and get a horrible result, but that would be stupid. I am speaking about a normal listening position which may be hard to define and would merit discussion, but what happens at the micro level is not what I would call normal.

    I'm not getting into that "I am right and you are wrong" mode of discussions.


    All I'm saying is that a recording of a mic'ed amp (and that's what a Kemper profiles are to some extent) sounds different than what you hear in the room (normal listening position). An amp that sounds great to you at your listening position may actually sound horrible, with over-the-top high-frequency content (sic!) if you stuck your ear where your microphone is.


    There are different ways of dealing with this - choosing the right mic and position is part of the solution, post-mic equalization another.

    Quote from ToH2002

    I'm not getting into that "I am right and you are wrong" mode of discussions.


    All I'm saying is that a recording of a mic'ed amp (and that's what a Kemper profiles are to some extent) sounds different that what you hear in the room (normal listening position). An amp that sounds great to you at your listening position may actually sound horrible, with over-the-top high-frequency content (sic!) if you stuck your ear where your microphone is.


    There are different ways of dealing with this - choosing the right mic and position is part of the solution, post-mic equalization another.

    I was not making a right or wrong comment. I was simply saying that we could put our ear or a mic in a lot of bad listening positions. Further, I would never tweak a guitar tone for any of these bad listening positions.


    I think those of us with even limited experience know that the sound changes on and off axis and with distance. Back to my original comment, I can't think of any playing situation for which I want to retain unpleasant, high frequency content.