Kemper Profiler MK 2

[OneEng]

Wrong.

Explain.

 

[paisleywookiee]

Explain.

You wouldn’t listen anyway.

 

[nicolasrivera]

You wouldn’t listen anyway.

What he said, OneEgg

 

[OneEng]

Ok, I see. On the ignore list you go then. Go bait someone else. I am only interested in good discussion.

 

[Dom Mcsweeney]

 

[ChordInversion]

Well I guess I’m done then. Because unless I do my own caps, I’ve not found anything that works well for me yet.

Same. I've had a Tonex for years, and every time I pull up a capture, it isn't what I need. I've been through probably thousands. It's just now a fit for how I operate.

Amps have knobs on them for reasons. I like modeling, because it also models the function of the knobs on the amps. A very good friend of mind has a Kemper. Another is about to buy a QC to use primarily with captures of his own gear as is main performance rig. We don't argue with each other. Nobody is wrong in having a preference. I think sometimes on the Internet, people forget that. We're not here to sell everyone on the products we bought.

 

[Chocol8]

What profile/capture device doesn’t have EQ controls just like amps and modelers? Yes, they usually aren’t historically accurate, but they are usually much better if you know how to use them.

 

[LP59]

Amps have knobs on them for reasons. I like modeling, because it also models the function of the knobs on the amps.

With liquid profiling, the eq controls are accurate and act just like an amp in my experience. This is a thread about Kemper, after all. So, I don't understand the comment that a Kemper is different from a modeler in that respect.

 

[paisleywookiee]

With liquid profiling, the eq controls are accurate and act just like an amp in my experience. This is a thread about Kemper, after all. So, I don't understand the comment that a Kemper is different from a modeler in that respect.

Unless there are EQ settings for every amp out there, even that's not the case, much less other capture platforms.

 

[Chocol8]

Unless there are EQ settings for every amp out there, even that's not the case, much less other capture platforms.

But the EQ doesn’t need to work exactly like the real amp controls to get the job done well. Most of the real tone controls are horrible anyway. Even the basic Tonex EQ is far better for the normal tone shaping tasks we want to do than baked in passive BMT stacks.

It’s a matter of do you want it to sound good or is it more important that it accurately model something you don’t even have to compare to? This whole thing is an excuse capture haters have fabricated to justify their capture hatred, not a real world limitation that would keep you from dialing in a decent tone.

 

[ian_dissonance]

With liquid profiling, the eq controls are accurate and act just like an amp in my experience. This is a thread about Kemper, after all. So, I don't understand the comment that a Kemper is different from a modeler in that respect.

*more like an amp. Since there’s no circuit being modeled the EQ kinda has to be either pre-profile or post-profile.

 

[LP59]

Unless there are EQ settings for every amp out there, even that's not the case, much less other capture platforms.

That's one way to look at it. Or, you can observe that there are many tone stacks to choose from, and one of them will likely fit the amp I'm profiling.

I'm just saying IMHO liquid profiling mimics amp controls pretty damn well, so I disagree with the comment that it doesn't.

 

[ian_dissonance]

But the EQ doesn’t need to work exactly like the real amp controls to get the job done well. Most of the real tone controls are horrible anyway. Even the basic Tonex EQ is far better for the normal tone shaping tasks we want to do than baked in passive BMT stacks.

It’s a matter of do you want it to sound good or is it more important that it accurately model something you don’t even have to compare to? This whole thing is an excuse capture haters have fabricated to justify their capture hatred, not a real world limitation that would keep you from dialing in a decent tone.

The whole point of a capture/profile system is accuracy to a source.

 

[Chocol8]

The whole point of a capture/profile system is accuracy to a source.

No, the whole point is to create good guitar tones. The rest of the shit is all in your heads.

 

[ian_dissonance]

No, the whole point is to create good guitar tones. The rest of the shit is all in your heads.

Well no, lol. It’s to create good guitar tones that are as accurate to a source as possible. Otherwise you wouldn’t capture/profile anything.

 

[LP59]

*more like an amp. Since there’s no circuit being modeled the EQ kinda has to be either pre-profile or post-profile.

Kemper has never revealed the implementation details, but the fact remains that liquid profiling works quite well for many cases, so I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Kemper with the comment that it can't mimic amp controls.

 

[paisleywookiee]

But the EQ doesn’t need to work exactly like the real amp controls to get the job done well. Most of the real tone controls are horrible anyway. Even the basic Tonex EQ is far better for the normal tone shaping tasks we want to do than baked in passive BMT stacks.

It’s a matter of do you want it to sound good or is it more important that it accurately model something you don’t even have to compare to? This whole thing is an excuse capture haters have fabricated to justify their capture hatred, not a real world limitation that would keep you from dialing in a decent tone.

If you say so. Again, MY favorite amps are Mesas, and they're poorly served by changes in EQ on the captures platforms I've tried (Tonex, NAM, Kemper).

That's one way to look at it. Or, you can observe that there are many tone stacks to choose from, and one of them will likely fit the amp I'm profiling.

I'm just saying IMHO liquid profiling mimics amp controls pretty damn well, so I disagree with the comment that it doesn't.

Whatever floats yer boat.

 

[ChordInversion]

With liquid profiling, the eq controls are accurate and act just like an amp in my experience. This is a thread about Kemper, after all. So, I don't understand the comment that a Kemper is different from a modeler in that respect.

That was not my experience with it, but I also admit that I didn't dig into it for days, because I had no reason to. I am very happy with modeling. At this point, I don't honestly care whether it does or not, because I have no reason to change. So I won't argue it any more stridently than to say I prefer modeling for the reasons I say I prefer it.

 

[ChordInversion]

But the EQ doesn’t need to work exactly like the real amp controls to get the job done well. Most of the real tone controls are horrible anyway. Even the basic Tonex EQ is far better for the normal tone shaping tasks I want to do than baked in passive BMT stacks.

FTFY.

Seriously, how would you even know what I want to do? Have we met?

And I am not a 'capture hater.' I keep stating over and over that I play with guys who are long time friends and rely on capture devices. They're just not for me. I'm not saying modeling is for you, either. Why does everything on the Internet have to devolve into "preferences that are not mine are wrong until proven with the rigor of a PhD dissertation in nanochemistry." Why can't people just prefer what they prefer for the reasons they state?

 

[JiveTurkey]

If you say so. Again, MY favorite amps are Mesas, and they're poorly served by changes in EQ on the captures platforms I've tried (Tonex, NAM, Kemper).

Whatever floats yer boat.

As each yeae passes and I continue to reiterate my own the preference of Mark circuits; I continue to realize that no one does that better than Fractal. It's fun trying other shit but nothing ever ends up "replacing" it.