Posts by Ruefus

Quote from OneEng1

No, it is not. That isn't what his statement meant at all.

The various algorithms and routing needed to cover every amp with modeling was considered too difficult and clunky. As a result, Kemper decided to do something different (Profiling). This is fundamentally different than modeling.

Now, my belief as an engineer is that CK actually does have a generic model that he uses to tweak the capture/profile; however, that doesn't change the fact that the KPA fundamentally operates different than a modeler.

Note: ToneX and QC are also capture and model tools vs. pure modeling.

All of this is basically crap anyway. Who cares? How does it sound, and how well does the workflow match your needs? These are the important questions. Who cares how it manages to do it?

Display More

I'm not sure what "find an automated method, rather than modeling amps by hand." means to others. To me that says "Profiling models amps.....automatically."

It's fundamentally different than traditional modeling. Yes. It's automated.

Whereas the tonestacks for Liquid Profiles are (apparently) done by manual means. Since they specifically state they're modeled.

Using Christoph’s own words….profiling *is* modeling:

Quote from Christoph Kemper

For my circuit, there were simply too many interdependent parameters, and it would have taken ages to model just one or two dozen amps.

As a basically lazy person I spent my time trying to find an automated method, rather than modeling amps by hand.

The number one problem (I find) with IEMs is using cheap, what I'll call "Amazon quality" phones. Fuzzy, thin.....horrible sound. Poor sealing for ambient sound....etc. If all the gear is decent, and it sounds like it is, the headphones are the most likely culprit.

I had to use a cheap set for rehearsal and the first two songs when my Shure SE215s finally broke. The replacements were a set of KZ-brand, which some say are great....but I was horrified. Thin, tinny, screechy.....just "Screw this....". The pastor's message started, I walked off stage, drove to the local Guitar Center and bought new ones. I didn't really want to spend the money, but...just so much "ewe". I was the back for the response set. (I know....not everyone has a GC 10 minutes from where they are.)

You do not need to throw hundreds at IEMs to get a good sound. Shure SE215 IEMs sound better than any ~$100 set has a right to. They're also extremely durable. That one set had lasted 8+ years and I never found a reason to buy better. $400 for the Sennheisers is a ton of coin to drop, hoping you get it right. You can't return IEMS once opened. At least not around here.

If you don't have room mics, or don't have them in your mix, that will help. But its a much lower priority compared to quality IEMS. I'll mix in the room mics to give a more natural in-the-room tonality and combat the 'boxy' feel. It's not perfect....but neither is a live stage, blaring monitors and a compromise mix to cover the musicians and singers. Pick your poison.

HTH a little.

Quote from Steve5478

I think that Kemper has really to be worried

I don’t think so. Directly competing with others doesn’t seem like Kemper’s way. They do their own thing.

Neat!

Also inexpensive. Drop that into an existing, traditional pedal board and you've got a solid setup without much hassle.

Quote from BillyNoSocks

reminds me of this thing:

Quote from Pitaorj

small, wireless and cheap m-vave chocolate

Nice find, but the OP is looking for something that mounts to the guitar itself.

I agree with Steve5478. It's unlikely to happen. To cover all the bases, they'd need to have a powered and passive version.

They sell the Kones in quantities of 1, 2 or 4. That way, you can load them into whatever you like.

Quote from lbieber

OK, but the comment wasn't made regarding who carries the equipment. Is the subject changing or did I miss something?

Mine was. Pardon me.

Quote from lbieber

While not the norm, there are guitarists that have and do use rigs for live performance this way.

True. But anyone touring that way has help. Eric Johnson, Bonamassa, ……SRV ran more than one.

Guys like that.

Local types? Y’all better be *killer*, on time and easy to get along with.

I can’t imagine trying to fit that much gear onto a club stage. Much less load in/out. Helping the drummer is annoying enough.

Just as an FYI, because I too thought the Turbo was ridiculous, but there was a method behind it. They added the Turbo due to supply chain shortages (COVID):

Quote from Per Fractal:

We created the Turbo to sidestep semiconductor supply chain issues

Quote from Toneseeker

Your blathering in the Feature requests forum claiming the requests wished for here are "complaining" is missing the very point of this space as are your straw man arguments. Those are the acts of a troll and something you alone are left to "cope" with.

😱🤣 Where have I complained? I’ve stated my opinion.

You don’t like it - or perhaps the way I’ve presented it. Therefore, I’m a troll in your eyes. Regardless, have the last word. Please.

Quote from Toneseeker

Ruefus, in my last posts, I wrote about where I could see improvements in the Kemper's realism in regards to dynamics, more simultaneous effects and its related routing, more loops and outputs and as the thread is titled, the ability to use two profiles simultaneously.. I know it would take more processing power to achieve these thing. I also stated I think the Kemper is a great product, still the best of its kind, that's not complaining. If you are happy enough with what you have, then you should just troll on. It appears this thread is not for you.

You’d know it if I were trolling. The words that come to mind reading your post are ad hominem.

You don’t agree with me? Nor I you.

Cope.

I don’t recall him ever saying it wasn’t possible. Which is a silly statement anyway, given its ubiquitous nature for as long as I can recall. Besides, USB audio is hardly a new invention.

The profiler doesn’t require a lot of DSP to run profiles. Not sure why you think power is a limiting factor when they’ve said the opposite many times. The only time I hear complaints of the Profiler’s performance is discussions like this.

All I’m saying is if a ‘2.0’ is forthcoming, it will need to include something truly innovative and novel (as in - not seen before) aspects.

IMO - Anything less is slapping features on and calling it good. Not unlike cellphone releases these days. Incremental progress, at best.

Quote from Toneseeker

I disagree, Eventually there will be a new model with more features. Just a fact of life with audio gear. A 2.0 will surely have higher resolution and have even more realistic profiles. It will certainly have power for more effects to be used simultaneously. I would also assume it would have more outputs and flexibility and I would have both separate mono and stereo effect loops at the same time. That said, all the updates over the years I have been very thankful for and have made the Kemper a fantastic investment and tool for both live and studio use.

Christoph Kemper has said - repeatedly - that he’s taken the profiling process as far as he can. He’s been saying that for at least 6 years. Maybe he figures something out….but the Profiling process is hand coded and integral to the chip it runs on. Something CK has said before.

Updating that would likely mean a complete reengineering of the process to run on a different chip. Personally, I don’t see an inventor sitting down to generate marginal (if any) gains on a problem he solved 13+ years ago.

If you look at Kemper’s track record, their major releases are things like the Profiler, the Kone, the concepts of Kemper Drive and Fuzz. Liquid Profiles were announced in 2011…it took this long to figure out how to go about it.

More outputs, effects and loops isn’t a 2.0.

Not really. It's quite dependent on the gear you're feeding.

With that said, the main outs are fairly hot, so checking the -12db pad is a good place to start. Maybe try that along with the mains around -18db and see what the person running FOH says.

One thing to realize is that this question makes the rounds here at least a few times a year.

The idea of a Kemper "2.0" has been thrown around, asked about and 'foretold' pretty much since the Profiler was released in 2011.

To me, the only way that would happen is if Kemper found a breakthrough equal to the invention of profiling. Something truly groundbreaking that no one else has done and that current hardware can't run. Releasing a new unit with a few bells and whistles added to the existing tech is....pretty much the next OS release.

Quote from BayouTexan

If you would "pay" for more features than why not just spring for the Head, Rack, or Stage?

To me, this is like the ‘just use your ears’ argument.

People can want different things. Like a comparatively tiny unit that fits in a gig bag.

With current hardware - never gonna happen.

By all indications - not even then.

Don’t confuse full-range with FRFR - which is full range, flat response. They aren’t the same thing.

It looks like a regular, single cone speaker, but it isn’t.

The Kone has a regular speaker and a second, smaller speaker (called a whizzer cone), arranged concentrically.

You can’t close-mic it - per Kemper. If you do, you will have a potential imbalance between the low and high frequencies and probably some artifacts in range where the whizzer kicks in.

Frequency response is 50-10,000.