Posts by Dimi84

"How to get better profiling results?"

Bommel: "Well, play house of the rising sun.... duuuh"..

Cool tips

Quote from DamianGreda

I think it will be great ! The advantage is that it will be integrated with RM database . You can load rig morphing settings (which is not possible with MIDI - at least I don't know how to do it ) , and save rigs . Whole FX managment could be a lot easier with simple database operations.

Yes, I guess so. But if there's important functions omitted which would require me to reach Kemper -- or then I'd have to use both toast me and the official editor at the same time.. not sure which way I'd go. Then again not as different Maybe as using RM now anyway, even if running toast me same time.

Well, will have to see how the editor is when it's released.

Morphing doesn't interest me personally, since eq, gain don't behave as much like the Real amp.

Well, imagine not having RM either. That would be the so-called bonanza. It would render Kemper near unusable for me for recording.

The unofficial editor out there is great. It's not totally clear to me how much of an advantage the official one coming up will offer over "toast me". Depends on how much functionality is added. The fact that it seems to be part of RM may be an advantage.

Will know when it comes out and I test both side by side, I guess. And cabs for me with Kemper most of the time live in the daw pretty much.

Quote from DamianGreda

I belive there are some tricks , when you can refine with some other gear(amp , cab , guitar , eq match plugin) to achive some interesting results. Never tried that. But There are still this "other " reference point. I think Some time ago and44 was talking about some tricks with profiling. Maybe it was about this kind of stuff.

There are many for sure. What I meant in this case is that initial profiling could produce certain results, in a manner different from refining, given a source -- so for example you could have a case where kemper profiles an amp well, but an amp sim badly (many don't profile well) and yet refining the EQ matched sim works well. Then the whole bonanza could give you some possibility to "re-refine" amp profiles with ok results without an amp. But this is such a particular bonanza, I'm not sure it makes as much sense bringing up on my part anyway

Feature requests are cool, and cheers to the user for contributing. Kemper themselves would have the clearest answer about his request in particular. Just on my part it's hard to imagine refining working without a source -- what would it seek to achieve?

Quote from DamianGreda

Imagine EQ match. You have to match to certain source spectrum. How you will define Match source signal if you do not have a source?

Yes, aware of that.

Quote from Dimi84

But I gather you'd still need a comparative signal, even if some digital sim (profiling EQ matched tones often not ideal, and this would probably complicate things further). Still, I would think it's better to do all this "live", with new profile to begin with, having the real amp there.

Was just trying to imagine some.. far fetched scenario this could be of some vague use. But then of course why not profile the amp sim together with the eq match -- why have a profile from earlier on to be "re-refined"? I guess there cooooould be some differences between initial profiling of real amp and refining with EQ matched amp sim.. compared to profiling the matched sim to begin with... that could lend some sense to this method, but doubt it.

But what would the kemper be refining "against" or in comparison to? Refining is quite powerful, but I'm quite positive it works by analyzing a given signal in comparison to profile. I suspect you could allow for "re-refining" of a profile, and that this could have some use.... say in cases where you'd wanna match your profile to something else later on... like some EQ match.. But I gather you'd still need a comparative signal, even if some digital sim (profiling EQ matched tones often not ideal, and this would probably complicate things further). Still, I would think it's better to do all this "live", with new profile to begin with, having the real amp there.

As an experiment, you could 1) try setting a signal chain a certain way. Then 2) shoot a profile. You'll get a tone from kemper, ok. Then 3) refine and it may get closer (or not, in some cases). Then 4) profile the exact same set up again. Chances are you'll end up with a similar sounding pre-refined profile to your earlier pre-refined profile. Then 5) you may switch up amp settings drastically and refine, without shooting a whole new profile -- and you'll see how, at large, the goal of kemper is to match that "new" tone, even considering the initial pre-refined profile of different settings.

It can still get pretty close to the new tone in many cases. In other words: the reference matters very very much.

Quote from schreckmusic

There was an issue that has been recently fixed. When disabling a kemper cab there was a driver that was still running that was not supposed to.

Kemper with a disabled cab into external IR loader was not the same as converted IR loaded into the same kemper profile. The driver in the first instance changed the frequency response. This info was posted by CK in Bommels post about IRs. Of course my memory is shit and I could be completely wrong though

Using my direct profiles plus IR in and outside of kemper, I still see the same differences with latest firmware and cab maker. But I won't expand further, as may change the topic too much and derail, even if IR relevant in this thread

Uhm, it will be interesting to at some point try out what you come up with, considering the process is somewhat unique. For the most part I've used IRs with kemper, not full studio profiles, so this may be relevant to my uses.

Quote from schreckmusic

Interesting, I have to look at my new IRs and see. Thanks for pointing it out.

I myself never seen an IR that sounded the same when converted to kemper format, doesn't matter how long, playing with mutes, ect, ect in A/B situation. When I use kemper, it's almost always with IRs in daw or external loader + direct profiles.

But as Mikko said you can target making a few corrections afterwards. I haven't been able to find a perfect correction myself, but can be made better. The push at 110 is a good "general rule" for profiling too, for me.

Quote from randallreigns

Hey wait. Which output from the kemper ? Direct out ? Monitor out ? Thats all i need to know i understand the rest of what you wrote. And thanks again. The manual...all it said was to plug head emulated out to kemper return input...

Direct out should work fine. Guitar into Kemper, direct out of Kemper into amp input, then emulated out into Kemper return.

Quote from randallreigns

Dimi84

"Can you hear the amp through the Kemper before you hit "start profiling" at all?"

No i couldnt and couldnt figure out why until i plugged into amp itaelf to profile. So im doing emulated out of the amp into return input of kemper and i only hear the amp when plugged into the amp i can then hear it through the kemper. If im plugged into the kempers input i cant hear it.

Ive messed with very very negative volume levels on the kemper AND my interface trying to profile and it still wont accept it. I get the same errors i listed originally. What am i doing wrong ? The kemper is in the green too when playing so how the hell can it be too noisy or loud. Baffling.

Display More

Are you running Kemper direct out into amp's input? I may have misunderstood your set up -- but signal is supposed to run from Kemper out to the input of the amp. Your guitar plugs into kemper's input. Then you run the emulated out to the return of Kemper.

I've profiled a few tube amps through loadboxes, including one internal to the amp, with no problems.

The noise warning can show up with any type of profiling (studio, direct/no cab , using load or not) if there's too much noise coming from the amp, which has only happened to me when using very very high gain tones. But that's not bothered me as these aren't typically tones I use.

There's been a couple of exceptions where the emulated out or even headphone out had too weak and noisy a signal for Kemper. But I don't think that's the case for an amp like yours.

Just before hitting "profile" there's an option in Kemper UI where you can control the signal coming in. Perhaps playing with that could help with the warning signals you are getting about volume?.. How do amp settings influence the output of the emulated out ? Can you hear the amp through the Kemper before you hit "start profiling" at all?

Also -- can the cab Sim be disabled in the Randall for the emulated out? Because if not, and you shoot a full profile, just switching cabs in kemper won't give you the most authentic results considering amp-cab/mic separation likely won't be perfect -- just a note.

First of all, a good test would be profiling the preamp of your tube amp and then running the preamp-only profile through the power stage of that amp with the same cab. For me, the experience of playing, interacting with the sound in such tests has been very similar compared to the "real thing". It's often changes in monitoring that cause undesirable differences to people.

And another note, perhaps more important: Mbritt profiles can be relatively dark sounding. Clearly many love them; however there's also some for whom many of his profiles aren't the best fit. Heck, I've met a few people who had "their" tone right there already and yet were trying out hundreds of profiles only to discover that profiling their own tone is the best way of .. getting their tone into kemper

That is probably worth trying out. But even then monitoring will matter. If your goal would be to have the whole "tube power amp through cab" bonanza -- that's another issue, also do-able. I've at times used kemper as a "preamp expander" for the power stage of my amp just to have more options, using preamp-only profiles, and at times even pre-amp plus power amp profiles through the tube power stage.

Main reason had been that... playing through a guitar cab... is the so-called bonanza. In a good way

Quote from schreckmusic

Good to have you back brother!

Quote from Zappledan

Welcome back!

Thanks, guys

Quote from dB Cooper

Great demo — I love classic KSE. I don’t want to create extra work for you, but if it’s no trouble, I’d be interested to hear the guitars by themselves.

Thank you. I can't do that unfortunately, as video over a year old and don't have this set up nearby anymore. That said, there's a segment of isolated guitars in this comparison towards the end of the track. Cheerios

Personally, in this case... No. It's pretty much like a continuous track, to my ears, where I'd never notice a change.

When I first made this some were telling me they could hear the changes. But that seemed related to what they were seeing in the video. Given only the audio track (or shown the part of video without the reveals) it was pretty much hopeless. It's easy to think we are hearing particular differences when it's in fact the visuals creating that impression.

Given, this isn't my favourite tone, but I had to come up with something to fit the track.