Kemper Profiler MK 2

[Deleted member 1726]

Seems more likely that they don’t want to rewrite the engine that all of their products use to a different chip/instruction set.

If they can get the accuracy they are claiming out of MK2 process and maintain backwards compatibility with older units then I don’t see it as a bad move.

BUT the improvements in the profiling better bring it up to par (or better) than their competitors or then yes, it was a very stupid move, and will look even more so if this is what they are locked into for the next 5+ years

So...they've got to stay "backwards compatible" with 15+yo tech, which is impossible to port?

All while new tech is flooding "their" market, nonstop...

Got it

 

[Lysander]

Nothing that can’t also be done on Fractal and Helix, but yes. Call it unique.

To be 100% fair though, Helix has only gained this with Flux on the HX One - which i'd love to have on the rest of the Helix line.

 

[LP59]

Interestingly, one thing that did seem to change is the microcontroller CPU. The old Kempers use a NXP LPC2468, whereas the Player (and presumibly all "MKII" devices) use a NXP LPC4327 instead.

All Kemper devices have this CPU in a dedicated plug-in board, which makes it a relatively easy upgrade.

Yes. The operative word for Kemper for the Mk2 hardware upgrade is "easy". There might still be motherboard changes in the Mk2 though.

View attachment 46198

Not sure if this would have any real world performance impact though - the board controls things like the display, I/O and programming the main DSP chip. Maybe that's why MKIIs boot faster

That's right. The real world impact on performance is boot time and rig switching time.

 

[paisleywookiee]

Interestingly, one thing that did seem to change is the microcontroller CPU. The old Kempers use a NXP LPC2468, whereas the Player (and presumibly all "MKII" devices) use a NXP LPC4327 instead.

All Kemper devices have this CPU in a dedicated plug-in board, which makes it a relatively easy upgrade.

View attachment 46198

Not sure if this would have any real world performance impact though - the board controls things like the display, I/O and programming the main DSP chip. Maybe that's why MKIIs boot faster

I’m glad that microwave oven-style display will be even more performant.

 

[Karl Houseknecht]

To be 100% fair though, Helix has only gained this with Flux on the HX One - which i'd love to have on the rest of the Helix line.

You couldn’t assign parameters to switches or scenes or expression pedals on the Helix until then?

 

[JasonE]

Interestingly, one thing that did seem to change is the microcontroller CPU. The old Kempers use a NXP LPC2468, whereas the Player (and presumibly all "MKII" devices) use a NXP LPC4327 instead.

All Kemper devices have this CPU in a dedicated plug-in board, which makes it a relatively easy upgrade.

View attachment 46198

Not sure if this would have any real world performance impact though - the board controls things like the display, I/O and programming the main DSP chip. Maybe that's why MKIIs boot faster

I have had my Kemper Stage for close to 5 years now. I am a fan. I think it is easier to make tweaks on the fly if needed. The screen is more viewable in various lighting situations that other units I have used. The profiles I made of my own amps came out really good. I don't use any crazy deep effects. The effects in the Kemper do everything I need. It would be really cool if I could pull one board and replace it with a new one to upgrade it. I doubt they would make it that way but that would be great if they did.

I am going to take a wait and see approach on the new one. Mine is still doing what I need it to do so I don't feel like I need to run out and get the new one. I wouldn't buy it until the update is out and others have checked it out and done some videos on it. If I think the new features are worth it I will probably buy one but I will definitely wait to see if that is the case.

 

[Lysander]

You couldn’t assign parameters to switches or scenes or expression pedals on the Helix until then?

Sure you can, but actually morphing between them is not possible on Helix devices other than the HX One.

 

[Lysander]

I am going to take a wait and see approach on the new one.

I'm really looking forward for proper reviews once MKII firmware is out but, from the looks of it, there really should not be a whole lot of a difference.

 

[dws2384]

So...they've got to stay "backwards compatible" with 15+yo tech, which is impossible to port?

All while new tech is flooding "their" market, nonstop...

Got it

I wasn’t defending the decision, just voicing my opinion on why I felt they made it. Nobody but Kemper knows why they stuck with it and certainly not me, just speculating the same as everyone else here.

Makes no difference to me what they do, It’s only a guitar pedal. I use many of the brands mentioned here, no emotion tied to them.

 

[Karl Houseknecht]

Sure you can, but actually morphing between them is not possible on Helix devices other than the HX One.

Not even with an expression pedal?

 

[Lysander]

Not even with an expression pedal?

Try single footswitch Never used a Kemper with exp pedal myself.

 

[Desertdweller]

Sure you can, but actually morphing between them is not possible on Helix devices other than the HX One.

Morphing has been around for a long time. I was able to use CCs to morph from clean sounds with effects to heavy dry sounds in the 1990s with a Rocktron Chameleon. I kind of figure any MIDI capable device would do it.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Morphing has been around for a long time. I was able to use CCs to morph from clean sounds with effects to heavy dry sounds in the 1990s with a Rocktron Chameleon. I kind of figure any MIDI capable device would do it.

It's a super royal PITA setting CCs up to alter several parameters, especially in case you wanted to change one of them on side A or B of the morphed statuses.
On the Kemper, it's a piece of cake as all you have to do is to set the source and target parameters.
So yes, this actually *is* unique. No other modeler can do it as easily.

 

[LP59]

It's a super royal PITA setting CCs up to alter several parameters, especially in case you wanted to change one of them on side A or B of the morphed statuses.
On the Kemper, it's a piece of cake as all you have to do is to set the source and target parameters.
So yes, this actually *is* unique. No other modeler can do it as easily.

It's just as easy on a Helix or FM9 or QC or TMP, except you're not limited to 2 scenes like you are on a Kemper. If you really want them to slowly morph (although I think most Kemper users turn the morphing time all the way down) you can even adjust that time per-parameter on an FM9.

 

[paisleywookiee]

Morphing has been around for a long time. I was able to use CCs to morph from clean sounds with effects to heavy dry sounds in the 1990s with a Rocktron Chameleon. I kind of figure any MIDI capable device would do it.

Apparently MIDI is scary for some here.

 

[Orvillain]

Morphing is wank.

 

[paisleywookiee]

Morphing is wank.

Yeah, I’m kinda surprised we’ve arrived at that being a linchpin feature.

 

[Sascha Franck]

It's just as easy on a Helix or FM9 or QC or TMP

No, it's not. At least on the Helix you need to set up your "morphing" seperately for each and every parameter you wish to alter. That's a HUGE difference to how the Kemper does it.
Let alone once you might change a block, all assignments are lost and you need to start all over again.
And let alone you have to set the "morphing range" for each parameter, too. Withing the Kemperverse, the parameters just change from status A to status B.
Calling that "as easy" is, uhm... i dunno. You've possibly not done it often.
In fact, the way it has to be done on other devices shouldn't even be called "morphing".

 

[LP59]

No, it's not. At least on the Helix you need to set up your "morphing" seperately for each and every parameter you wish to alter. That's a HUGE difference to how the Kemper does it.
Let alone once you might change a block, all assignments are lost and you need to start all over again.
And let alone you have to set the "morphing range" for each parameter, too. Withing the Kemperverse, the parameters just change from status A to status B.
Calling that "as easy" is, uhm... i dunno. You've possibly not done it often.
In fact, the way it has to be done on other devices shouldn't even be called "morphing".

This is something I do every day on both the Helix and Kemper (and Fractal), so I'm sorry, but I don't follow what you're saying. I'm talking about snapshots, which is basically the same as morphing, except morphing is more limited (both in number of snapshots and in the types of parameters you can change). On both Helix and Kemper, you select the snapshot, then set the desired parameter value for that snapshot. Easy. That's how it works in most modelers, there's nothing unique to that about Kemper morphing.

Fractal has even more flexibility, especially if you want things like slow morphing, but I was just disagreeing with the comment that it's unique to Kemper. I suppose there are small differences if you look close enough, but IMHO I wouldn't call morphing unique to Kemper.

 

[Dom Mcsweeney]

Morphing is wank.