Kemper Profiler MK 2

[Jarick]

I bought the Tone Junkie everything pack in my last go around and kind of forgot about it. I never loved his BE100 but didn't realize there was a BE50 Deluxe. These profiles sound fantastic, super balanced. I'd say much better than the Michael Britt ones and even a bit better than the Bert M JJ Junior pack I recently got.

There's over 10,000 files in this massive folder so I've got a lot of digging around to do...

 

[LP59]

Kemper actually shines in the, IMHO, most important area of the UI, the editor. Preset management in the Rig Manager is better than what anybody else has. With meta data like comments and favorites and ratings and organizational tools, it's quite good. The UI for I/O options is clean and well thought-out.

I don't understand the praise the Fractal editor gets. It's very primitive by comparison. You can't even organize presets into folders and has terrible support for managing presets on your computer. The UI for scene controllers in the editor is awful, as is the UI for I/O options.

I think the lesson Fender taught us with the TMP, is a UI that is focused on optimizing the user experience for the first 15 minutes with the device is important. The TMP UI is great to get anybody up and running in those first 15 minutes. It's quite poor after you've spent some time with it and have become familiar with it, but people tend to review its UI based on the experience of those first 15 minutes, so it has a reputation for a good UI, when I think the opposite is true.

 

[OneEng]

Kemper actually shines in the, IMHO, most important area of the UI, the editor. Preset management in the Rig Manager is better than what anybody else has. With meta data like comments and favorites and ratings and organizational tools, it's quite good. The UI for I/O options is clean and well thought-out.

I don't understand the praise the Fractal editor gets. It's very primitive by comparison. You can't even organize presets into folders and has terrible support for managing presets on your computer. The UI for scene controllers in the editor is awful, as is the UI for I/O options.

I think the lesson Fender taught us with the TMP, is a UI that is focused on optimizing the user experience for the first 15 minutes with the device is important. The TMP UI is great to get anybody up and running in those first 15 minutes. It's quite poor after you've spent some time with it and have become familiar with it, but people tend to review its UI based on the experience of those first 15 minutes, so it has a reputation for a good UI, when I think the opposite is true.

Agree, but I would very much like to have a built in setlist manager where you can assign a performance and / or rig in that performance to a specific song. Then if you could just create your setlist in the order you want the songs in, a method of just hitting a single -> forward command to go to the next song in the setlist would be fantastic.

I actually started writing one myself a few years ago before Kemper released the rig manager, but they wrote me and said something was in the works.

I understand that there are now setlist managers that include MIDI integration which would handle this though.

I generally do agree with you that the ability to find rigs you need for a specific sound is very good in Kemper.

 

[LP59]

Agree, but I would very much like to have a built in setlist manager where you can assign a performance and / or rig in that performance to a specific song. Then if you could just create your setlist in the order you want the songs in, a method of just hitting a single -> forward command to go to the next song in the setlist would be fantastic.

I actually started writing one myself a few years ago before Kemper released the rig manager, but they wrote me and said something was in the works.

I understand that there are now setlist managers that include MIDI integration which would handle this though.

I generally do agree with you that the ability to find rigs you need for a specific sound is very good in Kemper.

Kemper is the best at the moment, but all of the editors from Kemper, Fractal, Line6, NDSP, Fender, etc. need improvement. Everybody has been so focused on getting tone to a high quality level that the UI has been given low priority. Line6 seems to be the first to understand that focus should now be turned towards user experience.

 

[quadgear]

Kemper actually shines in the, IMHO, most important area of the UI, the editor. Preset management in the Rig Manager is better than what anybody else has. With meta data like comments and favorites and ratings and organizational tools, it's quite good. The UI for I/O options is clean and well thought-out.

I would not say that Kemper shines in editor or preset management. It's archaic/limited in many respects. Being at parity with (other) bad software does not create a great user experience.

Kemper is very much stuck with a mindset that it's perfect as-is and should not be improved. Perhaps even worse is categorizing issues as "impossible" to fix (these are quite rare when you control the firmware and the editor).

Here are a few limitations:

• Comments are pretty limited to a one line that does not wrap or have any formatting. There is no separation of your notes versus the notes of the original creator.
• Simple things like nudging a value by arrow buttons, key press, or edit boxes would be very useful.
• There are huge feature gaps between the mobile and desktop versions of Rig Manager.
• The output block is pretty confusing in terms of which outputs the EQ affects. This may be a KPP specific issue.
• Many operations are limited to "one rig at a time", ignore folders, etc.
• Backups of a profiler are not strictly supported inside of rig manager (you can't simply copy contents and then restore them)
• Most of the effects power comes from "presets" that immediately lose their identity. Load a specific type of wah or overdrive and you'll never know which one you chose previously.
• No way to view or edit settings without a Profiler connected
• [Will stop here to avoid derailing the conversation. Specific issues are not the point. The point is that there are significant improvements which would be useful.]

The core issue is that people get used to their tools imperfections and ignore any possibility of improvement. Kemper also seems to get blocked by prior (implementation) decisions, extremely literal interpretations of requirements to resolve, and a tendency to categorize changes as "impossible" ... especially when the change might need a change in firmware.

 

[OneEng]

I would not say that Kemper shines in editor or preset management. It's archaic/limited in many respects. Being at parity with (other) bad software does not create a great user experience.

Kemper is very much stuck with a mindset that it's perfect as-is and should not be improved. Perhaps even worse is categorizing issues as "impossible" to fix (these are quite rare when you control the firmware and the editor).

Here are a few limitations:

• Comments are pretty limited to a one line that does not wrap or have any formatting. There is no separation of your notes versus the notes of the original creator.
• Simple things like nudging a value by arrow buttons, key press, or edit boxes would be very useful.
• There are huge feature gaps between the mobile and desktop versions of Rig Manager.
• The output block is pretty confusing in terms of which outputs the EQ affects. This may be a KPP specific issue.
• Many operations are limited to "one rig at a time", ignore folders, etc.
• Backups of a profiler are not strictly supported inside of rig manager (you can't simply copy contents and then restore them)
• Most of the effects power comes from "presets" that immediately lose their identity. Load a specific type of wah or overdrive and you'll never know which one you chose previously.
• No way to view or edit settings without a Profiler connected
• [Will stop here to avoid derailing the conversation. Specific issues are not the point. The point is that there are significant improvements which would be useful.]

The core issue is that people get used to their tools imperfections and ignore any possibility of improvement. Kemper also seems to get blocked by prior (implementation) decisions, extremely literal interpretations of requirements to resolve, and a tendency to categorize changes as "impossible" ... especially when the change might need a change in firmware.

All very valid points. Also add typing in values vs using the GUI to achieve a value .

While you can name an effect in your library, as you point out, the name doesn't stick when it goes into the performance or rig.

 

[LP59]

I would not say that Kemper shines in editor or preset management. It's archaic/limited in many respects. Being at parity with (other) bad software does not create a great user experience.

Kemper is very much stuck with a mindset that it's perfect as-is and should not be improved. Perhaps even worse is categorizing issues as "impossible" to fix (these are quite rare when you control the firmware and the editor).

Here are a few limitations:

• Comments are pretty limited to a one line that does not wrap or have any formatting. There is no separation of your notes versus the notes of the original creator.
• Simple things like nudging a value by arrow buttons, key press, or edit boxes would be very useful.
• There are huge feature gaps between the mobile and desktop versions of Rig Manager.
• The output block is pretty confusing in terms of which outputs the EQ affects. This may be a KPP specific issue.
• Many operations are limited to "one rig at a time", ignore folders, etc.
• Backups of a profiler are not strictly supported inside of rig manager (you can't simply copy contents and then restore them)
• Most of the effects power comes from "presets" that immediately lose their identity. Load a specific type of wah or overdrive and you'll never know which one you chose previously.
• No way to view or edit settings without a Profiler connected
• [Will stop here to avoid derailing the conversation. Specific issues are not the point. The point is that there are significant improvements which would be useful.]

The core issue is that people get used to their tools imperfections and ignore any possibility of improvement. Kemper also seems to get blocked by prior (implementation) decisions, extremely literal interpretations of requirements to resolve, and a tendency to categorize changes as "impossible" ... especially when the change might need a change in firmware.

I share the same frustrations and as I said above, the Kemper editor needs improvement. But at least Kemper has comments and a browser for presets on your computer and a mobile app and folders, etc.. By "shine" I meant Kemper is the least bad editor out there .

 

[OneEng]

Kemper is the best at the moment, but all of the editors from Kemper, Fractal, Line6, NDSP, Fender, etc. need improvement. Everybody has been so focused on getting tone to a high quality level that the UI has been given low priority. Line6 seems to be the first to understand that focus should now be turned towards user experience.

I think that part of the problem is that traditionally hardware companies are finding themselves more software companies than hardware. The companies that make this transition best will be the ones that survive. Many times hardware companies have a tough time moving into writing client apps, phone apps, or cloud services. Worse, they make the mistake of putting the same firmware manager in charge of these things (things that they are clueless about).

I agree with you though. Line 6 seems to get it best at this point in time. We will see if others figure it out quickly or not.

 

[BenIfin]

I would not say that Kemper shines in editor or preset management. It's archaic/limited in many respects. Being at parity with (other) bad software does not create a great user experience.

Kemper is very much stuck with a mindset that it's perfect as-is and should not be improved. Perhaps even worse is categorizing issues as "impossible" to fix (these are quite rare when you control the firmware and the editor).

Here are a few limitations:

• Comments are pretty limited to a one line that does not wrap or have any formatting. There is no separation of your notes versus the notes of the original creator.
• Simple things like nudging a value by arrow buttons, key press, or edit boxes would be very useful.
• There are huge feature gaps between the mobile and desktop versions of Rig Manager.
• The output block is pretty confusing in terms of which outputs the EQ affects. This may be a KPP specific issue.
• Many operations are limited to "one rig at a time", ignore folders, etc.
• Backups of a profiler are not strictly supported inside of rig manager (you can't simply copy contents and then restore them)
• Most of the effects power comes from "presets" that immediately lose their identity. Load a specific type of wah or overdrive and you'll never know which one you chose previously.
• No way to view or edit settings without a Profiler connected
• [Will stop here to avoid derailing the conversation. Specific issues are not the point. The point is that there are significant improvements which would be useful.]

The core issue is that people get used to their tools imperfections and ignore any possibility of improvement. Kemper also seems to get blocked by prior (implementation) decisions, extremely literal interpretations of requirements to resolve, and a tendency to categorize changes as "impossible" ... especially when the change might need a change in firmware.

Not to mention that up until the MK2 announcement, C.K constantly and repeatedly said that the profiling process / methodology was as good as it could be ... unimprovable ... then ... all of a sudden ... yep ... we can do a lot better.

Everything you have pointed out is bang on ... and as someone that has used a KPA on and off for a long time, there are many more "quirks" that could be added to your list.

CK / KPA have painted themselves into a corner with the upcoming MK2 Profiling .... if it isn't, as they claim, going to be better than anything else out there - and that will be quick and easy to determine - they will have bought themselves a very big own-goal-credibility-hit.

 

[Eagle]

Not to mention that up until the MK2 announcement, C.K constantly and repeatedly said that the profiling process / methodology was as good as it could be ... unimprovable ... then ... all of a sudden ... yep ... we can do a lot better.

Everything you have pointed out is bang on ... and as someone that has used a KPA on and off for a long time, there are many more "quirks" that could be added to your list.

CK / KPA have painted themselves into a corner with the upcoming MK2 Profiling .... if it isn't, as they claim, going to be better than anything else out there - and that will be quick and easy to determine - they will have bought themselves a very big own-goal-credibility-hit.

This is the same as all of the digital platforms. They all claim it’s a done deal until the next one comes out. It’s all bs and you should judge it on the product yourself.

 

[hunter]

There's so many cool things out there nowadays...depending on what type of tones you're after, maybe one of the preamp pedals could be a cool idea when you need to go direct.

The more I spend with the Player, it's really cool but almost has to be self contained or in a pretty limited pedalboard. It's a shame they don't have an effects loop onboard as that would have made it a lot more flexible. For instance I'd love to run direct profiles into my Ox Stomp and then feed back for stereo effects in the Kemper but that's not possible.

Just get a cheap used Mk1 Stage then, it does all that and more ...

 

[Sascha Franck]

I’m not too worried about latency in the 2-3 mS range. But one have to also take into consideration that many people also use other digital items in their signal chains (like separate delays and reverbs, for instance), and that these things do add up. So if we use your example of playing with a monitor 6 ft away and then add 2-5 digital items with 2-3 mS latency each, the combined latency can quickly become an issue.

I seem to be pretty sensible to latency (usual disclaimer: no, I'm not Mr. "In The Pocket" - these are still two different things, just somewhat related), so I basically agree.
Yet, compared to playing through a typical traditional live rig, as in using any combination of an amp and a cab, these are usually placed further away from the player than FR monitoring solutions. With IEM systems there's zero distance and I for one place my (personal) guitar monitor next to whatever stage monitoring wedge, so that's pretty much as close as it gets. An amp/cab would easily be placed 1-2 meters further away. So that results in something between 3-6 ms (or maybe even more) of "latency headroom".
And yes, I'm perfectly aware of digital latency vs. "real space introduced" latency. but for most live purposes, that's not too relevant IMO.

Anyhow, I still try to keep rig latency as low as possible. Ah well, I'm actually not doing so with my current rig (nested digital devices), but it's below 4ms fully loaded, so that's fine with me.

 

[Sascha Franck]

I have to remind myself, don't feed the troll.

So you're starving now?

SCNR...

 

[Sascha Franck]

Btw, following the "doesn't feel like the real deal", "only a real amp/cab experience is acceptable" (add a bit of amp-in-the-room flavour to it...) and what not discussion throughout the last pages, I feel like an outlier.

In all seriousness, if anything, the greatest aspect of modeling for me as a live player (at least once modeling had crossed a certain "quality threshold", which IMO it has) is that I *don't* have to deal with all that archaic, inconsistent mess anymore. Which is especially true for cabs. If I wasn't using modeling for my core tones but wanted to keep using whatever real amps, I'm sure that by now I'd run them through a load box and then into whatever FR system.
The differences in projection of one and the same cab under different conditions has been driving me bonkers as long as I can think of. I own (or owned, some are still there) some great sounding cabs and while they were fantastic at times, *all* of them sucked so much ass at other times, it's simply been maddening. Even my 70s Orange 4x12 (/w well worn in old Greenbacks), possibly the best cab for my taste I've ever played through, has been a victim of that more than just once (let alone the handling aspects).
I really did everything to adress these issues. Got a Deeflexx, came up with a modified variation myself, installed "speaker donuts", whatever. And as far as the FOH signal goes, I always brought my own mic, mounted with a mic clamp straight on the cabs, the position carefully measured.
In the end, it was all working fine, sometimes great - just that more often than what I found acceptable, it wasn't.

Add to all this that with FR solutions, I can have the same sound (minus the dreaded Fletcher Munson thing...) while practising at home, playing on small vs. large stages, playing with IEMs vs. monitors, etc. Especially being able to have my live sound at appartment volumes is possibly worth more than anything else.

In a nutshell: Someone would basically have to point a gun to my head to make me use a real cab ever again (unless the situation dictates it, such as on sessions or rental backline gigs).

 

[Dimiguitar]

This is the same as all of the digital platforms. They all claim it’s a done deal until the next one comes out. It’s all bs and you should judge it on the product yourself.

Does Cliff claim perfection?

 

[BenIfin]

Does Cliff claim perfection?

Axe FX Standard ~2006 .... so only for the last 19 years

 

[Dimiguitar]

Axe FX Standard ~2006 .... so only for the last 19 years

Kidding aside, is that truly accurate though? I have seen numerous posts of users who claim amp sim perfection only to have their minds blown by new firmware (times x100). But I cannot remember Cliff making such claims. Maybe it's happened in the past and I haven't seen it or don't remember it.

 

[Dimiguitar]

I agree with some of the sentiment that Kemper editor/librarian has advantages over other such apps, minus some issues like everything freezing when laptop goes to sleep/wakes up (well, don't know if this happens anymore, used to happen for some). Using tonex these days I miss the way the Kemper editor/librarian works.

 

[BenIfin]

Ok ... this is weird ... apparently the exact same profiles and same efx and same settings etc.... on MK1 and MK2 - the Gain profiles sound *totally* different ... the Clean profiles much more "identical"

This should not be the case as (a) they cant be MK2 profiles as that FW isn't out and (b) being [ MK1 ] Legacy Profiles, they should sound identical on each unit I would have thought (?)

To the best of my knowledge, C.K / Kemper have made zero claims about the MK2 playing back MK1 profiles "differently" or "better" (?)

Something very strange going on either with this video -or- the MK2 playing back MK1 Legacy Profiles really changes their sound (?)

 

[Orvillain]

He's messed something up there. The MKI sounds like 2 cabs being applied, whereas the MKII sounds normal.

His panning positions are different, particularly noticeable in the rhythm section. This can easily throw the ear off. The rhythm tones are not as distant as the first video, which to me implies that he did mess something up with that first one. But the solo tone has a similar difference, where the MKI sounds wooly and a bit shit, and the MKII sounds clear.