Posts by lightbox

  • Raw Tube Kemper tone vs demands for everything else (read AXE FX demands )

    Quote from Ingolf

    Kemper's profiling technology doesn't have to be inproved.
    It is great as is and it does what it's supposed to do.


    I have to disagree here. There are potential improvements, of course, although they won't come with the current hardware. It's something that can be done in future versions of the Profiler. For example "stitching multiple profiles" into one "multi". Either to improve the realism going from clean to full gain of a specific amp channel in one profile ... or to make dual profile rigs with just one Profiler box. Also I'm pretty sure it would be an improvement to raise the overall sample rate (internal and external) to reduce potential artifacts in internal and external effects chains. And there's plenty of room for some amazingly smooth sound transition when switching rigs.
    There's always potential improvements in technology. CK is right when he says that the profiling and its sound on the current Profiler hardware won't likely ever change. But that can't be a general truth. It's like we're currently using a 2-stroke combustion engine for racing. It's great, it's fun. But one day there will be the 4-stroke engine with turbo charger and fuel injection.

  • Kemper and Focusrite Saffire Pro 40 reamp help

    Quote from Brattcave

    That's a high quality tutorial Martin, thanks a lot. looks terrific as well, what software did you use?


    I'm using Techsmith Camtasia since many years, it's the best screen recording software by far (on Windows).


    Quote from Brattcave

    With the Saffire once you map your mixes to the outputs in the router screen is it just a case of using the master faders of that mix to control the output? Hope that makes sense...


    That's true as long as you make sure, the corresponding outputs are set to grey in the Monitor Section. If these small buttons are blue, then the output level is controlled by either the large volume knob below or the hardware knob on the frontpanel. If these buttons are grey, then they are not linked to the above volume knob.
    This whole approach can be confusing, because if you're using mixes for your outputs, you can control the level with the Mix master fader and with the monitor volume knob. That's why I said, you better make sure you have all monitor outputs other than 1 & 2 set to grey- :)


    Hope that makes sense. I'm much better explaining things in videos than by text, hehe.


    Cheers,
    Martin

  • Kemper and Focusrite Saffire Pro 40 reamp help

    Hey gang, I did a tutorial explaining how to use the Focusrite audio interfaces & MixControl software to record & reamp with the Kemper Profiler. Hope this helps. :)


    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.


    Cheers,
    Martin

  • Questions about the 625 Performance Mode rigs

    Timo, with all due respect. :)
    I totally understand your technical explanations. But my opinion is still the same. The whole performance file naming concept is a usability problem. It's a fact that we don't have a librarian software yet and we still don't know anything about the planned capabilities of such a software. So we have to deal with what we have. And Performance management is a pain in the *** the way it is right now. I've been developing software for many years, so I pretty well know that there's not even a single technical excuse to go with this overly simplified file naming convention for performances. It could have been handled in a different, more user friendly way.


    In my opinion, it's not to late yet to change this. My suggestion would look like this:
    My-Gilmour-Set-24.kipf
    StatusQuo-Rossi-3.kipf
    and so on.


    It shouldn't be a big problem to extend the file names like shown above because the performance index would be found after the last occurance of a dash (or just right in front of the file suffix delimiter), basically the file name just extended at the beginning, leaving the "24.kipf" or "3.kipf" sequence as is. Of course I would also request to change the 0 vs. 1 mismatch as well to make things managable for human beings without the risk of accidential confusion.


    Just my 2 cents to get around this "design flaw" (sorry, I really have to call it this way),
    Martin

  • Questions about the 625 Performance Mode rigs

    Quote from examiner

    Not really an anomaly. Pretty standard MIDI patch numbering scheme. If there's a beef it's really with the people who wrote the MIDI standard 35 years ago or whenever....


    I disagree with your statement. If it was something to do with MIDI (or let's just call it binary) numbering, then it wouldn't have been a problem to start the Performance Index with 0 as well. It's a fact that the difference between Performance Index and filename is confusing. Even Burkhard (a Kemper employee) got it wrong in the german language thread.

  • "KPA AUF Deutsch"

    Quote from Burkhard

    Zu beachten ist, daß die Dateien nicht den Namen sondern die laufende Nummer der Performance im Namen tragen, also z. B. '19.kipf' enthält alle Daten der Performance 19.


    VORSICHT! Das stimmt so nicht!
    Die Performances werden beginnend mit der Ziffer 0 aufsteigend gespeichert, nicht mit der 1 wie der Performance Index im Display dargestellt wird.
    Die Performance 19 ist also das File 18.kipf. Ein echter Design-Fehler, der sich hier leider eingeschlichen hat.

  • Future of the Kemper

    Quote from Giogiogio4

    ... it would be great if Kemper
    upgraded the CPU ( or allowed users to send in ), or even make the product
    with CPU upgrades compared to that of a pc ( plug and play pretty much )


    I wouldn't bet a single cent on this to ever happen. And to be honest, I don't like the idea because it complicates things more than it helps. There would be profiles that work on an upgraded system but not on a "vintage" system without having an obvious distinction. No, I think the Profiler will have some more years with frequent software improvements before we'll see a "Profiler II Pro Edition". You're safe to buy, imho.

  • KPA into mixing desk and PA help needed

    I just explained why Ingolf uses -20dB on stage ... that doesn't mean that I use -20dB in my environment. ;)
    My personal setting is -6dB on the Profiler with the Focusrite Liquid Saffire 56 Line Input set to 6 of 10 which gives me roughly -4dBFS maximum.

  • KPA into mixing desk and PA help needed

    The maximum output level of the Profiler on the XLR Master Outputs is +22dBu, the TS Master Outputs are +16dBu.
    Usually that's way to much, the german broadcast specifications allow up to +15dBu maximum before clipping occurs but the nominal max. level should not be higher than +4dBu (professional audio) or +6dBu (german broadcast audio).
    So you can easily see that turning down the Output Level by 20dB will get you to +2dBu on the XLR Outputs and -4dBu on the TS Outputs ... and that's just fine for most applications.

  • SPDIF setting

    Quote from nightlight

    That's interesting. Would you mind doing the test again at 48.1 khz and without the SRC converters?


    Hi nightlight,


    I have to agree that there will always be a small difference and to be honest, I expected some clear indication for differences in the higher frequencies. But the difference image shows a pretty uniform pattern over the whole frequency range. That's why I will do another test with perfectly adjusted levels as soon as I find the time.


    I didn't understand your request for another test. I did this test with 48kHz as this test isn't possible without SRC. Maybe it was just a typo on your side and you're asking for a 44.1kHz comparison analog vs. digital? Will try to do this as well, although this requires some configuration changes here. Give me some time to do that. :)


    Cheers,
    Martin

  • SPDIF setting

    [Blocked Image: http://www.wikpa.org/_files/spectrum-difference.jpg]
    I did a spectrum comparison of the two recordings. In an ideal world, the difference image on the bottom should be 100% black. But it isn't. The difference image hasn't even been edited to increase the contrast or brightness.


    If I find the time, I will do this test again and precisely adjust digital vs. analog levels with a 1kHz sine wave first.


    Cheers,
    Martin

  • SPDIF setting

    Recorded a short & simple clip ... digital and analog at the SAME time and then moved it in my DAW to play in sequence.


    First one is the digital route with the Behringer UltraMatch set to re-sync to the Focusrite and resample from 44.1 kHz to 48kHz, the second one is analog outputs straight into the Focusrite Liquid Saffire 56. No level adjustment, no compressors, no limiters.


    http://www.wikpa.org/_files/kpa-test-digital-analog.mp3


    I think you can easily hear the difference. The analog recording has much more brilliance, presence, you name it.

  • SPDIF setting

    Quote from lightbox

    Tomorrow I will do a few tests to see if there's a degression of the sound quality due to the conversion and re-sync.


    Ok, it's been a while since I got these Sample Rate Converters.
    I just want to report that the sound quality of the UltraMatch conversion is less than perfect to put it mildly. Going back to analog output.


    Cheers,
    Martin