Kemper Profiler MK 2

[Mongillo19]

Which person at their forum is the one you can trust.
It’s confusing over there. I see Burkhard does the update announcements when they are ready but don’t think I’ve seen him answer questions. A few others over there are probably in the know but too much contradictory back and forth to be sure.

Seems like most questions are either shouted down or conflicting answers are offered which leave the question hanging.

Idk it sounds pretty legit to me

 

[AFKAEjay(retired)]

that make no sense. They still sold mk1 this winter knowing they would release a mk2 in June.

I don’t understand your post maybe.

Is that a strange thing to say that a so well known company with a legendary product could have waited to release the new product with the proper firmware? And not release a new product without any of the new possibilities ?
Especially the profiling ones when your product is called an amp profiler?

I’ve never seen any company actually freeze sales, and my assumption is that new hardware has at least a timeline of a year, so no company can do that.

I can only speculate, but there are several scenarios where it makes sense to do what they do.

One of them could be…they figured out a new capture method, determined new hardware requirements, and decided they get that out to customers asap to keep new customers with old hardware to a minimum. In my mind the best for new customers, not the best for their marketing story…choose your poison

Another could be that they aimed for a synchronized release of hardware and new firmware, but that firmware update got some setbacks, and the changes to the hardware planning/production line already had been made. Both things that are planned months, maybe years ahead, and are probably not easily adjusted last minute.
IME, hope that you actually gonna make the planning of software development, is a delayed dissapointment (Across industries)

 

[OneEng]

Fangurls in the thread acting like it isn't an objectionable change to the very ethos of Kemper.

As I said below, I don't see it as a problem after thinking it over a bit. What difference does it make if it needs to be hooked up to Rig Manager? FWIW, no one has yet confirmed that the profile isn't still produced entirely on the unit. That is speculation. It may be that they are using this connection for authentication since I am relatively certain that MK1 and MK2 DSP hardware can both do this new profiling.

View attachment 46018


Awww shucks. I love it when EE calls me a Null-O.

You are welcome! I thought it was a very well thought out nick name for those that spend hours debating null tests. Glad you are embracing it .

Does the RM thing mean you can optionally use just a computer and reamp/loadbox, without the Kemper hardware to reamp/capture?
Or is it a requirement to need the Kemper hardware for routing?

Great question. There are several possible answers:

1. The entire new algorithm is done on the device, but since MK1 and MK2 DSP hardware are identical, MK2 requires authentication with the Kemper server to "enable" the feature. This would allow a paid upgrade to MK1 .
2. Some of the work is done on the device DSP, but the final product is done on the PC. This would be a "Hybrid" approach. This would still allow an authentication step to allow an MK1 paid upgrade.
3. The PC is doing everything and the device is just acting as a hardware authorization key AND an audio interface for the new profiling that is done on the PC. This also allows an MK1 upgrade.

Uh, because of all the other things Kemper does better than the ToneX?

After all, creating the ‘profile/capture’ is a small part of how you use it to make music.
I’ve had a ToneX Pedal and a Stage and I’m positive I would grab the Stage every time over the Tonex.

In my mind a lowly mkI Stage is worth every extra dollar they charge above the ToneX price.

Completely agree. The difference between ToneX and Kemper is summed up by saying you can gig with Kemper.

Kemper forum just confirmed use of rig manager for new profile creation

Thanks for that.

 

[madmarcus1960]

The problem is having to pry this info out of them insead of releasing concise explanation of what the new hardware can and can't do on its own.
Customers should not have to do so much digging.
I'd venture to say, they really don't have a release date and did not want to any potential sales of the MKIIs by admitting how long it would take until the new profiling software is released.
Once again cloak and dagger, disingenuous marketing. Just be upfront, with an established loyal customer base.

 

[KingsXJJ]

Everybody talking about Camper making marketing mistakes and a misstep with no firmware well they certainly have y’all’s attention.

 

[KingsXJJ]

 

[Southpaw-DD]

I think they would have been better off just citing "new horsepower to allow for future enhancements on the Mk2 models and player line of products" and left it at that. The original Kemper was clearly underpowered (I've owned on two occasions) for the housekeeping operations and manager (profile loading, deletion, etc.) and boot times (yeah, I know).

 

[paisleywookiee]

Completely agree. The difference between ToneX and Kemper is summed up by saying you can gig with Kemper.

Why can’t you gig with a ToneX pedal? Is it missing IO that I’m not familiar with?

 

[JiveTurkey]

Better to be a Null-O than a Dild-O

 

[paisleywookiee]

Better to be a Null-O than a Dild-O

Or an arrogant prick.

 

[JiveTurkey]

Or an arrogant prick.

 

[Enchilada Jones]

Why can’t you gig with a ToneX pedal? Is it missing IO that I’m not familiar with?

Well you can. Like Jack White did a performance using a 2x4 with 6 penny nail stretching a guitar string and had a single coil pick up on the board and played slide. Kind of cool really.
But unless the theme of your performance is along those lines I bet you would pick a Stage over a ToneX evertrime after the one time you picked the ToneX.

 

[Lysander]

Anyway, you're right, no point in arguing this over forum posts. Let's go empirical instead: take the flattest headphones/IEMs you own (or calibrated room and monitors+sub if you have them) and listen to the two files in the link below at a high enough volume and then tell me in which of the two you perceive the two sine waves in the files (41.4 and 1000 Hz) as having roughly the same volume.

Dude, if you're trying to prove a point with sine waves, you're missing the point entirely What i'm trying to convey is that loudness correction doesn't mean shit when one can still hear differences between sounds. If you're bored, try this out:

1. Record a 10 seconds guitar track with amp A, and another 10s track with guitar amp B.
2. Create a new track C mixing A+B, with everything under 100Hz from track A filtered out, and everything over 100Hz from track B filtered out.
3. Adjust the mix until C and A (or B) yield the same average LUFS figure.
4. Now listen them back. Do they sound identical? Similar, even?

 

[Karl Houseknecht]

Nah they actually give an estimate, not SOON

They said summer. They failed to say summer of any particular year. Or summer in which hemisphere.

 

[Richard_G]

Why can’t you gig with a ToneX pedal? Is it missing IO that I’m not familiar with?

Well you can. Like Jack White did a performance using a 2x4 with 6 penny nail stretching a guitar string and had a single coil pick up on the board and played slide. Kind of cool really.
But unless the theme of your performance is along those lines I bet you would pick a Stage over a ToneX evertrime after the one time you picked the ToneX.

Instead of a Kemper Stage I'd rather choose a Tonex (or Tonex One) on a board with a few select pedals. Or a Tonex (or Tonex One) in combination with a Fractal VP4. Or a Tonex (or Tonex One) in the loop of a HX stomp.

 

[Deleted member 490]

Dude, if you're trying to prove a point with sine waves, you're missing the point entirely

The point incontrovertibly proven with sine waves is that you perceive as having roughly the same volume two signals that are at the same LUFS level, not two signal at the same true peak dBFS level.

What i'm trying to convey is that loudness correction doesn't mean shit when one can still hear differences between sounds. If you're bored, try this out:

1. Record a 10 seconds guitar track with amp A, and another 10s track with guitar amp B.
2. Create a new track C mixing A+B, with everything under 100Hz from track A filtered out, and everything over 100Hz from track B filtered out.
3. Adjust the mix until C and A (or B) yield the same average LUFS figure.
4. Now listen them back. Do they sound identical? Similar, even?

Wtf does this have to do with a null test?
Continue with that experiment by perfoming a null test between C and A (or B) and do a LUFS measurement on the difference file: it will show exactly the difference between C and A (or B), i.e the LUFS of what's left under 100 Hz (or over 100 Hz).

Jesus F. Christ!

 

[Enchilada Jones]

Instead of a Kemper Stage I'd rather choose a Tonex (or Tonex One) on a board with a few select pedals. Or a Tonex (or Tonex One) in combination with a Fractal VP4. Or a Tonex (or Tonex One) in the loop of a HX stomp.

Ok. But the Stage will make lots of things easier. It doesn’t need midi to switch things around that the pedalboard would. And, in the context that the two devices were pitted against each other…the mkII aspect…assuming Kemper has raised the ‘profile’ quality to the Tonex standard…
I’d rather have a Stage mkII instead of Tonex with a pedalboard full of pedals simply for the ease of use.

And remember the cost of building a pedalboard with all the routing, effects and switching a Stage does with no extra gear needed would cost near twice what the Stage costs.

 

[Lysander]

Wtf does this have to do with a null test?

Well, this you?

Sure, and in that case the LUFS measured on the null test between those two profilers will reflect that difference. If it's huge to your ears it will be huge in the measurement as well.

A loudness filter is not magic. It just compensates for different perceived frequency volumes at a given level.

Anyway, this is no longer productive methinks.

 

[banned]

I'm pretty sure this guy is an EE - he was somehow able to make sure that his entire guitar tone signal is aliased. Definitely got an A on his 'Crystal Lettuce' 401 course

Newsflash, just cause something doesn't fit in with what folks conventionally deem "good tone or playing" doesn't mean they can't but rather they chose not to.

That is devoid of:

• melody
• Harmony
• Timing
• Rhythm

Anything that would constitute music for me. If you're going to tell me it's some high falutin atonal, jazz-fusion that I just don't understand because I'm not musically educated enough...go ahead. I'd still say it's garbage and that the guy can't play.

I'm happy to be corrected otherwise but not with examples like this.

 

[Deleted member 490]

Well, this you?



A loudness filter is not magic. It just compensates for different perceived frequency volumes at low levels.

Anyway, this is no longer productive methinks.

I still don't get exactly what you find is wrong in that statement