Profile Pedals (requested again)

    A SUPER cool and very VALUABLE feature would be the ability to profile OD pedals on their own. (not hooked up to an amp at all when being profiled)


    Then you would save the profile as a stomp and NOT an amp, thereafter you have your own stomp, amp AND cab profiled by yourself
    for what YOU want. (your own complete chain/rig is what I'm taking about)


    For me I'd like to profile my Bogner pedals, my '96 Fulltone Fulldrive etc..etc.....


    Christoph can this be done easily/quickly by you or your team and if so can it be done ASAP?


    I appreciate this as been requested by others somewhat, however, I have no idea what the response or outcome is.

    This has been suggested/requested several times since the beginning and would imply the capacity of running 2 profiles at the same time. Not sure whether it can be done....

    "Music is enough for a lifetime, but a lifetime is not enough for music" Serghei Rachmaninoff


    Quote from guitarnet70

    This has been suggested/requested several times since the beginning and would imply the capacity of running 2 profiles at the same time. Not sure whether it can be done....


    I'm not entirely sure it would force 2 full blown profiles to be run at once. The unit already has dirtboxes on board. The question really is whether the parameter architecture behind the current dirtbox modeling is sophisticated enough and could be manipulated by the profiling process. My guess is its no where near as complex and as such likely won't be added, but we can always hope! It would be insane to own a product which not only can capture the sound of any amp but any dirtbox as well. Honestly though, a standalone dirtbox profiler might be an additional good revenue stream for the folks at Kemper. I bet lots of folks not into digital amps would be happy to use a box which woudl allow them to keep their precious, rare, or expensive boxes at home...

    The point is that stomps are modelled, not profiled.
    In a KPA rig, part of the computational power is devoted to make the stomps play in real time, part to interpret the profile file. We don't know whether the latter task is more demanding (power-wise) than the former. If yes, interpreting two profiles (stomp and amp) could hit the processor's limits. If not, there could be room for the task. But then you'd need to interpret two profile files plus the remaining modelled stomps. So further limits may arise.
    The algorithm should have to be heavily rewritten anyway.

    Quote from viabcroce

    The point is that stomps are modelled, not profiled.
    In a KPA rig, part of the computational power is devoted to make the stomps play in real time, part to interpret the profile file. We don't know whether the latter task is more demanding (power-wise) than the former. If yes, interpreting two profiles (stomp and amp) could hit the processor's limits. If not, there could be room for the task. But then you'd need to interpret two profile files plus the remaining modelled stomps. So further limits may arise.
    The algorithm should have to be heavily rewritten anyway.


    CK has stated in an interview that the profiling is essentially automated adjustment of hundreds of variables of an amp model. The Profiling is the automation, not the playback. A similar front end programming automation could be applied to the dirtboxs IF the existing parameter architecture is deep enough with no additional computation power required during playback (CK also stated the dirtbox design was tuned by ear, not "profiled"). Though memory would need to be allocated to storing the profiles and with so many unwilling to manage their amp profiles, I can only imagine how many support requests for failed firmware updates Kemper would get with folks trying to stores 1000's of profiles and 1000's of dirtboxes...

    Quote from Will_Chen

    CK has stated in an interview that the profiling is essentially automated adjustment of hundreds of variables of an amp model. The Profiling is the automation, not the playback. A similar front end programming automation could be applied to the dirtboxs IF the existing parameter architecture is deep enough with no additional computation power required during playback

    It might be that the most computational power is required during profiling rather than playingback. The profile file has to be interpreted tho, and this requires power. Of course I'd love to see such a possibility in the KPA, if it were possible and if Kemper were willing to edit the code.

    Quote from viabcroce

    It might be that the most computational power is required during profiling rather than playingback. The profile file has to be interpreted tho, and this requires power. Of course I'd love to see such a possibility in the KPA, if it were possible and if Kemper were willing to edit the code.


    A "profile" is more or less a set of parameter definitions for a complex amp model. I would imagine interpreting a profile is no more processor intensive than if all the parameters were exposed and we had to set them manually. Now there may be some type of IR captured and stored in a binary for the cabinet, no idea about that. Regarding profiling stomps, it would simply automate the process CK and crew would have to do on the back end. For example, say the Green Scream has 15 back end parameters: low cut/boost freq, low level, high cut/boost freq, high level, tone stack pre/post clipping, clipping character, boost range, EQ range, number of gain stages, etc. A dirtbox profile process would analyze the response from a dirtbox and set those already existing (but not exposed in the UI) parameters to mimic the real deal. There would be no additional processing hit over what is already required to use the dirtbox modeling.