Kemper Profiler MK 2

[paisleywookiee]

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.

Ah, you’re just being snarky, got it.

 

[paisleywookiee]

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.

Oh no, MIDI?! The humanity!!

 

[Enchilada Jones]

Snark served with real meat though.

And why use midi if it isnt necessary?

 

[paisleywookiee]

Snark served with real meat though.
Why use midi if it isnt necessary?

Why go with something that doesn’t sound good, if you can build a board around something you do like?

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

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.

I'm saying just because he chooses to make weird shut d isn't mean her can't. End off story.

 

[Enchilada Jones]

Why go with something that doesn’t sound good, if you can build a board around something you do like?

You missed the whole premise.
All that was prefaced with- “Assuming Kemper brings the sound of amp/cab sim in mkII profiles up to match or surpass Tonex…”

Without the parity in toanz the Tonex is a contender.
I’m saying, simply, if it *doesn't* have the toanz advantage it has last place in the race.

 

[Mongillo19]

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

Now I think we are being way too picky

 

[paisleywookiee]

You missed the whole premise. All that was prefaced with- “Assuming Kemper brings the sound of amp/cab sim in mkII profiles up to match or surpass Tonex…”
Without the parity in toanz the Tonex is a contender.
I’m saying, simply, if it *doesn't* have the toanz advantage it has last place in the race.

I didn't miss it. I just remain unconvinced they will, when they can't even acknowledge an aliasing issue.

 

[Richard_G]

You missed the whole premise. All that was prefaced with- “Assuming Kemper brings the sound of amp/cab sim in mkII up to match or surpass Tonex…”
Without the parity in toanz the Tonex is a contender.
I’m saying, simply, if it *doesn't* have the toanz advantage it has last place in the race.

Hmm? Your post that OneEng quoted and said this in response to:

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

was:

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.

But OK. Let's just hope the updated Kemper profiling will be a vast improvement!

 

[Orvillain]

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.



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!

I don't know why you're putting all your heart and soul into LUFS. LUFS is no more trustworth nor infalliable than any other weighted measurement.

 

[Dom Mcsweeney]

"Do you believe in Luff after Luffs" by Ch.EE.r

 

[OneEng]

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.

I think that they understand that having the same DSP on MK1 and MK2 contradicts the idea that you NEED MK2 to do the new profiling... thus impacting sales. Better to just stay silent. Then again, most companies don't talk about hardware architecture much anyway.

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).

Agree. The MK1 application CPU is clearly the weakest link in the device.

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

You can of course. I have gigged many times with a single channel tube amp. The ToneX lacks the quantity and quality of efx of the Stage, it lacks the number of foot switches and capabilities, it lacks morphing, latency in patch changes, no spill over, etc. The stage is just a better tool for gigging hands down. This is assuming you need a variety of sounds for your gig and need to change within a song of course.

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.

Agree.

What i'm trying to convey is that loudness correction doesn't mean shit when one can still hear differences between sounds.

For many people that gig, loudness correction is more important that capture quality.

 

[Orvillain]

For many people that gig, loudness correction is more important that capture quality.

Yeah?? How so????

 

[Dom Mcsweeney]

For many people that gig, loudness correction is more important that capture quality.

what has this gotta do with EE ?

 

[Dom Mcsweeney]

If an EE EEs in the forest, but no one is around to hear it, does it make an EE?

 

[OneEng]

Yeah?? How so????

How good is the capture quality of the AxeIII Fx? How does anyone gig with it?

 

[Orvillain]

How good is the capture quality of the AxeIII Fx? How does anyone gig with it?

It is excellent. Very good captures. The best captures. Everyone says it. The best.

 

[KingsXJJ]

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.

He’s huge in India though.

 

[KingsXJJ]

 

[Deleted member 490]

I don't know why you're putting all your heart and soul into LUFS. LUFS is no more trustworth nor infalliable than any other weighted measurement.

Not doing that at all, I know very well it has its own limits and it's not perfect.

But saying that in two null tests that measure the same LUFS level, one shows a HUGE difference to the ear and the other doesn't... sorry but that's total BS.
As it is total BS saying that you hear a huge difference on the low end but the null test LUFS measurement represents it as minuscule.

That goes way beyond any limitation of the LUFS measurement and weighting, and can be easily proven.
I could believe those statements only if they came from someone with serious hearing loss and who can only hear a narrow band of frequencies.