When you an STFT over an audio signal, you're sliding a window across the data and converting from the time domain to the frequency domain. If you also extract the phase information, you end up with magnitude and phase data for each frequency bin.
So it will account for any existing phase relationships.
However, the STFT can introduce a phenomenon known as FFT smearing, which is essentially a loss of time or frequency resolution due to the fixed size of the window. This is a result of the time-frequency trade-off, whereby a narrower window gives you better time resolution but worse frequency resolution, and vice versa.
You can tackle this by choosing an appropriate window size for your signal, by having an overlap of each window to reduce discontinuities, changing your window type (Hann versus Blackman-Harris for example), or more advanced multi-resolution techniques; like Wavelet analysis.
I'm not a Richard Cranium. But I am quite a fan of irreverant humour. I also like sexy burds.
Thanks.
The processor on the Player is like 200 MHz while the old one was something <100 MHz. While this might seem like a huge upgrade...it shouldn't really make a difference for anything but faster boot time and more responsive GUI. We are still talking about a chip that is less capable than what you find in a Tonex One.
If the DSP is the same, why can't it run those new profiles on the MK1 hardware too at the same quality? That's what's confusing to me.
First, the Mhz don't always tell the whole story (rarely), and a much faster boot time IS actually a nice upgrade; however, since the DSP is the same I can find NO reason that MK1 cant run the new profiles.
This launch is total gobshite, whatever anyone says. Basic information is just not obtainable.
You don't "soft launch" hardware. You simply don't do it.
Not sure about your definition of "soft launch" as they actually have the unit on sale. Generally I have considered that term used when you market launch a product with limited or no actual supply.
Still, I get what you are saying.
6 months from now when you can unlock MkII profiles for your MkI for the low price of $250. So many times the internet reminds really smart people can say stuff that means absolutely nothing, lol.
Not that I intend to start profiling; however, I would likely pay that without blinking in order to fully utilize the new profiles created by others on their MK2.
I am afraid that Kemper might well charge more than that though. Every time I have gauged the market and thought they would come in at $X, they ended up at $X*1.4. In this case $350!
So the answer to question about why the DSP chips in the devices being the same only the CPU chip was upgraded is as I thought, they are doing a hybrid process and like TONEX and NAM the extra work is off loaded to an out board CPU.
Not sure of this. It is possible, but it seems a bit disjointed. Still, it might be so.
So in this case, you would gather and record the capture on the device, copy it up to a cloud service that would then crunch it into a profile, then send it back to the device.
That actually seems very plausible. If that is what they are doing, then it would be completely reasonable to expect that they could create a profile that was very accurate.
The current DSP is good enough to create the Kemper profiling as we know it and the effects and processing sound. Is it possible by increasing the onboard CPU, as they have now done, to enable the incorporation of an outboard CPU to add quality? Some kind of hybrid process that makes the Kemper results remarkably better than it was?
I don’t think they have done this knowing it’s really just some new effects blocks, better boot time and black paint. That would be a ridiculous thing to do. Might be fun for some people to say it’s what they have done but some people do and say all kinds of ridiculous stuff just to troll forums. It is how the fanbois fight, safe behind a keyboard in moms basement
I don't think anything they have done to the hardware has enabled ANYTHING except faster boot times and better USB connectivity.
If they are indeed using off-device resources to actually do the profile, then they have everything they need to increase their CPU power by a factor of 10000.
Since the DSP has not changed, I also believe that the MK1 will be hardware capable of running the new profiles at full resolution as well..... if they allow it.
