A few things about profiling

    Now I did another extesive profiling session. And there were some things that I would like to feedback:


    1) Return Level
    I found it very awkward that every time that I switch from Browse Mode back to Profiling Mode and then switched from "Kemper" (default) to "Reference Amp" I had to readjust the Return Level again. Why can't it remember the last setting? And even worse there was a huge volume jump every time that I readjusted it. It always defaulted to maximum and what I needed was way back on the left side - so quite a volume jump! It took me a few times to learn that I better not have any string vibrating on the guitar while touching the Return Level or else there was a huge jump up in volume that made us fear for the monitor speakers. (FW1.6.0) I think if it cannot be made to remember the last setting it should at least better default to minimum. Not to maximum.


    2) Stomp Slots
    In the beginning of the session I lost more than one hour just on debugging some really major volume drop in the Direct Out. The signal in the amp was way much cleaner (lower level) than compared to the direct guitar signal into the amp. Can you guess what it was? In the Rig that was active before the profiling I had a stomp activated where I had set up a "Wah Pedal Booster" to control the amount of gain with an expression pedal. As I did not connect any pedal for a profiling session the value defaults to minimum - which lead to the level being so low. Of couse it opens up a whole new palette of possibilities to have all the stomp effects available before the amp that is being profiled. And, yes, this is mentioned in the Manual. And, yes, I read it. But, alas - I forgot it. :( So in the first moment (well - in the first hour of debugging...) I found it a bit confusing. When profiling, watch out for the stomps!


    3) distant miking
    Just to share this: really amazing how much further away you can go with the mic as compared to recording. On recordings far miking always sounds somehow more "room" and a bit more mellow. But on profiling it is the opposite: very dry and a nice kind of brightness added! Ok - after 2 Meters the effect collapses and the result sounds phasey and somehow midrangey. I guess this comes from too much room-reflection-signal being erased from the profile?

    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.

    Yes distant micing is one where where the KPA falls down, it really sounds bad and somehow accentuates pod like fizzyness unless you spend a lot of time with the reverb recreating the room sound and lo-passing the result. I think the reflections confuse it's reading on the distortion which seems to be accentuated by the overall frequency response change from more room.

    I guess it depends mostly on whether you are after high-gain sounds or crunch sounds.

    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.

    I completely disagree regarding distant micing not working during profiling. My home studio is treated to reduce ambiance significantly as I want to be able to adjust that in post. As such when I distant mic, it isn't room reflections I hope to capture but a reduction of the proximity effect. The KPA faithfully reproduces that. I've profiled 3 amps now and in each case I placed the mic similar to where I would when recording and the KPA did a great job of emulating the tonal response I was going for. I guess its about managing expectations. I don't listen to my amps with my ear against the speaker and as such prefer not to mic them up that way.

    Yes,


    If you are distant mic'ing in a very ambient room, you are essentially modeling a reverb as much as or perhaps more than an amp, which the Kemper was not designed to do. If you really want room sound, dial that in with some very wet reverb. Otherwise, make a DI version of your amp tone and add an IR of your cabinet with ambience using a different program instead of a Kemper profile. IRs are better for creating reverb/ambience.


    I don't think the Kemper "falls down" since it's not designed to model room responses, it's designed to model amps.


    J

    Far micing is not intended to capture more room ambient! The resulting profile is dry as all others but the sound character is totally different than the same setup recorded to a DAW. I did exactly this in a studio, after each profiling we recorded parallel both from KPA and the identical mic setup we just used: totally different results in the recording and in the KPA! Sometimes better, sometimes not. Something really new, test it and you know what I mean. Can be great for brilliant crunch sounds.

    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.

    Edited 2 times, last by fretboardminer ().


    The IR loading in the KPA is not a convolution algorithm. There won't be any ambiance even if you use a IR captured with significant ambiance.


    Quote from fretboardminer

    Far micing is not intended to capture more room ambient! The resulting profile is dry as all others but the sound character is totally different than the same setup recorded to a DAW. I did exactly this in a studio, after each profiling we recorded parallel both from KPA and the identical mic setup we just used: totally different results in the recording and in the KPA! Sometimes better, sometimes not. Something really new, test it and you know what I mean. Can be great for brilliant crunch sounds.


    Did you refine the distant miced profiles? I guess distant mic is all relevant. To me that means something greater than about 1 foot away to around 3 feet or so and off axis. Room micing would be something 3 to 10 feet away. The first isn't intended to capture ambiance but a slightly truer aural image of an amp, removal of the proximity effect some mics have, and capture some of the tonal signature of the environment. The later is absolutely intended to heavily incorporate room reflections. I don't think room micing is a very effective technique for profiling, but distant micing (as in not kissing the grill) is effective and I found it to be very accurate.

    Quote from Will_Chen

    Did you refine the distant miced profiles? I guess distant mic is all relevant. To me that means something greater than about 1 foot away to around 3 feet or so and off axis. Room micing would be something 3 to 10 feet away.

    Yes, I always refined. I thought we have to?!? As I don't know how long is good I thought better too long than too short and did something like 5 minutes.


    Your distinction between distant micing and room micing is in accord with my experience. Between 30 Centimeters (1 foot) and 1,5 Meters (5 feet) it was quite helpful. More than 2 Meters (6 feet) the results in the profile always has some "phasey", boxy character. But even this was helpful if it was blended with another, closer mic.

    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.