Here comes Kemper. Bye Felicias

[Orvillain]

That's mainly academically interesting and I hope someone impartial (in other words not someone selling profiles) takes the time to do those tests.

The only thing that really matters is if Kemper users feel these new profiles allow them to get their preferred sounds without switching to a different profile. If they do, then that solves a major hurdle in using the device, even if it's not actually accurate. But as long as preferred results are gained, it's going to be fine.

To me, accuracy is the entire point of these products, and the capture technology specifically. I can deal with differences in tone/accuracy with Helix and Axe3, because those aren't attempting to capture my EXACT amplifier. But the capture products on the market - Kemper, ToneX, NAM, Quad Cortex - they are trying to capture my exact amplifier.

So that is where the accuracy expectation comes from.

I agree with Ben, and I don't at all agree it would be merely academically interesting.

 

[laxu]

To me, accuracy is the entire point of these products, and the capture technology specifically. I can deal with differences in tone/accuracy with Helix and Axe3, because those aren't attempting to capture my EXACT amplifier. But the capture products on the market - Kemper, ToneX, NAM, Quad Cortex - they are trying to capture my exact amplifier.

So that is where the accuracy expectation comes from.

I agree with Ben, and I don't at all agree it would be merely academically interesting.

Now I understand if you are capturing your own amp, you would want it to behave accurately for the EQ too.

But most users are using the Kemper no different from other modelers. They are not capturing their own amps, they are buying profile packs. They can't go to their favorite 3rd party profile vendor and try their real amps and see if they behave the same, no more than we can go to Fractal or Line6 to try their reference amps against their models. So we put the same trust in their claims of accuracy. At best we can pit them against our own examples of said amps.

That's why for me it's better to focus on the end results instead. If I can get my preferred tone without spending a whole lot of time dialing it, then that's good. Using knobs to dial in a capture that is "almost there" is a better workflow than cycling through a pile of captures trying to find the one that has the settings that work for me. It's kind of like movable mic cab sims - I don't have to rely on an IR vendor to have an IR that works for me but can easily make my own.

 

[Orvillain]

But most users are using the Kemper no different from other modelers.

I mean, I'd love to see the data on that. It is a bit of a false dichotomy that you're presenting, because you can capture your own amps and buy profile packs, at the same time and in equal measure.

That's why for me it's better to focus on the end results instead. If I can get my preferred tone without spending a whole lot of time dialing it, then that's good. Using knobs to dial in a capture that is "almost there" is a better workflow than cycling through a pile of captures trying to find the one that has the settings that work for me. It's kind of like movable mic cab sims - I don't have to rely on an IR vendor to have an IR that works for me but can easily make my own.

Not really sure how changing multiple parameters is any easier than just hitting a single button to scroll through a list to be honest, it is just a personal preference you have.

Back when I had a Kemper, I cleared away all of the absolutely dogshit factory profiles, and I made 40 profiles or so of the sounds that I regularly use on all my amplifiers. Then it was really just a case of hitting left or right to find what I wanted. It was very easy.

It just didn't fundamentally sound as good as the real amps I have in my possession. The entire value proposition of the Kemper is that it can capture my real amps. Except it cannot. Not to the level I expect.

If Kemper had NAM capturing at its heart, I'd buy one tomorrow. Because everything else it does is pretty great. I trust @MirrorProfiles opinion when it comes to liquid profiling.

As an aside, I've made around 400 profiles of various amps over the years. But I'm not permitted to sell them... work contract thing. Le sigh.

 

[laxu]

Not really sure how changing multiple parameters is any easier than just hitting a single button to scroll through a list to be honest, it is just a personal preference you have.

Sure. Maybe it's because I'm quite familiar with how amps work that to me it's a lot easier to anticipate what I will get by turning X control than scrolling a list of captures or IRs that might as well be "mystery item #5" - I won't know what I will get until it's loaded, I won't know if "the right one" is the Nth item on the list or if it's even there in the first place.

When my goal is to e.g tweak the sound to make it work better with a particular guitar or cab, I can think in terms of "it needs more treble, less bass" and if I know how I can adjust an EQ or move a mic to do that, I get to the right place much faster. Having the Liquid Profiles that can potentially make it behave more like the amp workflow makes it interesting over Tonex or NAM. Those have the exact same problems as original Kemper even if they are more accurate.

My only experience with profiling my own amps is with the QC and it took a lot of time to cover even one channel, when there were various sweet spot sounds. If I could have shrunk the number of captures down and relied more on EQ to make it behave like some of those settings, that would have been preferable to me. Saving the starting point settings for EQ is a big improvement already because it makes it much easier to track the differences between captures.

 

[Orvillain]

Sure. Maybe it's because I'm quite familiar with how amps work that to me it's a lot easier to anticipate what I will get by turning X control than scrolling a list of captures or IRs that might as well be "mystery item #5" - I won't know what I will get until it's loaded, I won't know if "the right one" is the Nth item on the list or if it's even there in the first place.

When my goal is to e.g tweak the sound to make it work better with a particular guitar or cab, I can think in terms of "it needs more treble, less bass" and if I know how I can adjust an EQ or move a mic to do that, I get to the right place much faster. Having the Liquid Profiles that can potentially make it behave more like the amp workflow makes it interesting over Tonex or NAM. Those have the exact same problems as original Kemper even if they are more accurate.

My only experience with profiling my own amps is with the QC and it took a lot of time to cover even one channel, when there were various sweet spot sounds. If I could have shrunk the number of captures down and relied more on EQ to make it behave like some of those settings, that would have been preferable to me. Saving the starting point settings for EQ is a big improvement already because it makes it much easier to track the differences between captures.

Yeah I get you. I think I just come at it from a fairly amp-centric background. I've deliberately designed my life all these years to be able to play valve amps, even if it is just at home. So they're still the gold standard for me, and accuracy in terms of the overall capture process is more important to me than being able to tweak it after the fact. I've already got a bunch of platforms where I can tweak away to my hearts content. For me, capturing is supposed to be a time-saving device, essentially.

When I use ToneX or NAM, I don't hear salient differences between the captures and the real amp I'm capturing. So if the EQ is wrong, then that just means I set the amp up badly before capturing.

With Kemper... there are ALWAYS salient differences, and no matter what I tweak or what I change about the capturing process, I could never get the capture to be as close to the amp as the others are. So that is where I come from. All the tweaking in the world means nothing if the core tone isn't accurate.

 

[BenIfin]

F.w.i.w ..... I totally get and understand - and agree - with the whole "if it sounds great to you, then it is great for you" ... that's why some love a Fractal ... some love a Helix ... some love a KPA ..... and some even love a QC

To me .... if what Liquid Profiling is and does is "just a better" Kemper Profile ... that's great ... but it wont change the core issue of needing multiple profiles of the same Amp at different settings etc.... in order to maintain and maximize authenticity

However ... if what C.K has said is what Liquid Profiling will do [and that's a big if] in that you will be able to L.P an Amp once and it will be authentic across the full gain and eq range ie: 1 x L.P = 1 x Real Amp at all its settings ... then this will be a big deal.

Hence why I want to see and hear some reputable A/B's from credible Profilers.

Interestingly ..... the following is taken directly from the OS 10 Addendum which I just posted over in the L.P thread in the KPA Forum:-

As per the OS 10 Beta Addendum: " ..... we recommend setting the EQ of your reference amp ..... putting all knobs to their exact noon position ..... leave the PROFILER’s EQ parameters in the PROFILING menu at noon position whilst PROFILING, too ..... for [Liquid] PROFILING, it is preferable to set the gain control of your reference amp to the maximum position.....These unusual settings might not sound all that great, but they are electrically stable and very reproducible for capturing a Liquid Profile. Once the Liquid Profile is done, you can set the controls on the PROFILER to any value while maintaining full authenticity ..... "

Certainly reads like he is aiming for "the whole enchilada".

Ben

 

[James Freeman]

Yeah... max that gain on the red channel of a 5150III.

 

[Mongillo19]

However ... if what C.K has said is what Liquid Profiling will do [and that's a big if] in that you will be able to L.P an Amp once and it will be authentic across the full gain and eq range ie: 1 x L.P = 1 x Real Amp at all its settings ... then this will be a big deal.

But again, if the Kemper is shown to not put forth an accurate profile at it's core to the reference amp, what does it matter you can change the EQ? Again, I'm not talking about how good the Kemper sounds but how accurate it truly is to the reference amp

 

[BenIfin]

But again, if the Kemper is shown to not put forth an accurate profile at it's core to the reference amp, what does it matter you can change the EQ? Again, I'm not talking about how good the Kemper sounds but how accurate it truly is to the reference amp

Yep. True. Guess all I'm saying is that we don't [yet] know how these new ground-up L.P's will sound with the X-Amp Kemper Amp Channel baked-in-to the Profile of the Real X-Amp (?) We'll find out soon I sense :)

 

[BenIfin]

Interestingly ... I just downloaded the Liquid Profiling Packs for OS 10 for the KPA Website from Mbritt and RigBusters and this is the content of each pack:-

By my reading, it very much looks like (?) its 1 x Liquid Profile = 1 Whole Real Amp Channel.

I'm guessing the K and T in Mbritts L.P Amp Pack is "King of Tone" and "Tube Screamer" and 1 and 2 for the SV20 is different Inputs.

Rigbusters simply have 12 x L.P's for 12 x Different Amps.

This is getting interesting.

Ben

 

[Mongillo19]

Interestingly ... I just downloaded the Liquid Profiling Packs for OS 10 for the KPA Website from Mbritt and RigBusters and this is the content of each pack:-

View attachment 9499

View attachment 9500

By my reading, it very much looks like (?) its 1 x Liquid Profile = 1 Whole Real Amp Channel.

I'm guessing the K and T in Mbritts L.P Amp Pack is "King of Tone" and "Tube Screamer" and 1 and 2 for the SV20 is different Inputs.

Rigbusters simply have 12 x L.P's for 12 x Different Amps.

This is getting interesting.

Ben

Hopefully other profile makers follow!

 

[Orvillain]

This is getting interesting.

ehhhhhh debateable

 

[Deadpan]

Hopefully other profile makers follow!

Added some Liquid DA to the Slow pack. I like the results.

 

[Mongillo19]

Added some Liquid DA to the Slow pack. I like the results.

Glad you are liking it! I definitely think it's a cool idea

 

[Sascha Franck]

The only thing that really matters is if Kemper users feel these new profiles allow them to get their preferred sounds without switching to a different profile.

Totally agreed.

To me, accuracy is the entire point of these products, and the capture technology specifically

Accuracy schmaccuracy.
No, seriously, I absolutely get your point and in case it's important for you, I would never even remotely try to tell you that you could be wrong.
Just that it's not relevant for me.

For me, any amp I ever used, regardless whether it was a real amp, cheap, expensive, tube, digital, whatever (and that obviously includes modelers), has always been a mere starting point as I'd usually use further devices and tweakings to get to whatever my achieved sound was anyway. And I never had accurately "authentic" sounds in my mind. IOW, whenever I thought "Marshall" it didn't have to be a certain model but rather something to take me close enough to the ballpark.
Sidenote: I actually like it that way because without looking for any authentic sounds, my entire gear purchasing history certainly became much more manageable financially.

Anyhow, along those lines, for me the modeler/profiler wins which is offering a nice amount of decent starting points and enough tweakbility to probably take me elsewhere - with as great of a workflow as there is. And once you have a well sorted amount of profiles on a Kemper (which defenitely is a sort of big thing to get to...), it checked those boxes pretty well in the past already, at least IMO. On-unit editing (quite relevant for me) is absolutely excellent in my book (in some aspects even better than on the Helix) and the new liquid profiling only seems to enhance that.
No, I never owned a Kemper (I always thought it was for good reasons, but I'm not too sure anymore...) but I had one borrowed some times and was playing them on various occasions, too - and it's always been a very pleasant experience. In fact, much more than my "stock" Helix experience.

As said, it might only be me and I absolutely understand anyone asking for accurate profiling. Just don't need it at all personally.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Just made a liquid profile of the BE100.

Started by following their advice of gain on 10 - too noisy to do a profile, so I lowered it to 8.

Profile itself sounds pretty good, not too different to the source although with some "kemper giveaway sound" to it. I'd absolutely be happy with using the tone, so no complaints.

Tried adjusting settings on the new profile and then matched them on the amp, then A/B'd. Not even close, the amp was way more drastic with the difference.

Didn't sound bad as such, but it doesn't make the experience any more like using a BE100, nor does it negate the need to make profiles at different settings. Will test it more to see if there is a better way of doing it.

Its a nice enough improvement to using the models, but the claims feel a bit bold atm. Its basically made the EQ behaviour a bit more amp like and familiar in a general sense. Will test more

 

[laxu]

For me, any amp I ever used, regardless whether it was a real amp, cheap, expensive, tube, digital, whatever (and that obviously includes modelers), has always been a mere starting point as I'd usually use further devices and tweakings to get to whatever my achieved sound was anyway. And I never had accurately "authentic" sounds in my mind. IOW, whenever I thought "Marshall" it didn't have to be a certain model but rather something to take me close enough to the ballpark.

Yeah I'm in that same camp. Last real Marshall I owned was an OG JCM2000 DSL50 (with bias drift issues and all) and I never thought of it in terms of "Plexi" or "JCM800" but "can I get Gary Moore, Zakk Wylde etc. Marshall users' tones."

I was flipping between my BluGuitar Amp 1 ME, Strymon Iridium and Axe-Fx 3 yesterday for Marshall tones and then just threw my hands up and went "these all sound/feel pretty much equally good for what I want." We are in the age of luxury where so many solutions are really, really good.

 

[Jarick]

Updating now and we'll see how it goes.

Right now I've got too many modelers and too much gear. Curious if this will get Kemper over the hump for the "stay" pile or not.

My biggest issue right now with the Kemper is the same as before, it's a lot of time and work to get good consistent tones. Yes technically profiles are plug and play, but not all the plug and play profiles sound good, and even if they are close, need some fussing to get there. Dunno if liquid profiling will change that or not...maybe. Also don't know what it means for all the existing thousands of profiles.

Honestly, I'm kind of leaning more towards something like investing in high quality "FRFR" monitors like Atomic CLR. The more time I spend, the more it seems like monitoring >>>>> everything else.

 

[Jarick]

Updates are in, and I have to jump in to work meetings for the next many hours.

But 10 minutes with an M Britt Liquid profile and I'm actually impressed. It's not just the same as turning the knobs, especially gain. The tone stack of a Plexi works way more like expected. Cranking the gain up changes the tone instead of just getting brittle. Bright cap seems to be a big factor.

Need to explore, but very promising!

 

[jay mitchell]

Its a nice enough improvement to using the models, but the claims feel a bit bold atm.

And no modeler/profiler manufacturer has ever done that before, right?