Kemper Profiler MK 2

[Orvillain]

Kemper doesn't use anything remotely like neural weights, so... you're asking for completely impossible things. Might as well ask for world peace.

 

[ian_dissonance]

Well, not for the 15 YO units, for the brand new ones that have triple the DSP power.

The new ones don’t have triple the DSP, though.

 

[quadgear]

Kemper doesn't use anything remotely like neural weights, so... you're asking for completely impossible things. Might as well ask for world peace.

You could profile a nam profile....

Yes, I agree the implementation of the Profiler is not a direct mapping (and the representation is far more compact).

 

[Orvillain]

You could profile a nam profile....

Yes, I agree the implementation of the Profiler is not a direct mapping (and the representation is far more compact).

7-10 underlying models tone-matched to sound like a reference amp, is not decent capture technology in 2025. TBH. It was kinda clever in 2011.

 

[JiveTurkey]

The tones in that video don't sound good. You can get away with it through real guitar speakers because it imparts the speaker on top of the profiles really favorably imo.

 

[hunter]

@GuitarJon is not impressed

less clicks because too many youtubers and sinking interest in their ever repeating content. Like the newspapers, they need to make up negative loud stories to attract clicks. Pretty desperate in my opinion and nothing I will engage with.

 

[LP59]

Haven't watched the video but I believe some of the recent capture packs he's released have not included Kemper

I have the Kemper SLO30 he did recently, and that came out great, but a Kemper will never be as versatile at matching a wide range of amps as NAM or QC are. There are just some amps like this where the Kemper can't capture it.

 

[Chocol8]

You could profile a nam profile....

Yes, I agree the implementation of the Profiler is not a direct mapping (and the representation is far more compact).

A profile of a NAM capture would have all the faults that a profile of an amp has. They would need to be able to play a completely different software architecture on the same hardware.

 

[Chocol8]

Well, not for the 15 YO units, for the brand new ones that have triple the DSP power.

The ones with triple the DSP power have not been announced or even rumored yet. Unless they are planning a MKIII to follow shortly behind MKII, the hardware is not going to run native NAM. Period.

 

[Dimiguitar]

The ones with triple the DSP power have not been announced or even rumored yet. Unless they are planning a MKIII to follow shortly behind MKII, the hardware is not going to run native NAM. Period.

I've seen a couple of posts from people thinking a "true successor" will follow up soon, but it feels like wishful thinking.

 

[nicolasrivera]

The new ones don’t have triple the DSP, though.

Ohh thats so sad to know.... double?

 

[Chocol8]

I've seen a couple of posts from people thinking a "true successor" will follow up soon, but it feels like wishful thinking.

Yeah, I am not crediting wishful thinking as even a rumor. There is no reasonable expectation of another hardware generation in the next 24 months.

 

[nicolasrivera]

The ones with triple the DSP power have not been announced or even rumored yet. Unless they are planning a MKIII to follow shortly behind MKII, the hardware is not going to run native NAM. Period.

I really thought that, after soooo many years the new ones would have so much more powerful DSP units in it. Seems like more bad noews for potential new buyers down the road.

 

[dws2384]

Ok ... this is weird ... apparently the exact same profiles and same efx and same settings etc.... on MK1 and MK2 - the Gain profiles sound *totally* different ... the Clean profiles much more "identical"

This should not be the case as (a) they cant be MK2 profiles as that FW isn't out and (b) being [ MK1 ] Legacy Profiles, they should sound identical on each unit I would have thought (?)

To the best of my knowledge, C.K / Kemper have made zero claims about the MK2 playing back MK1 profiles "differently" or "better" (?)

Something very strange going on either with this video -or- the MK2 playing back MK1 Legacy Profiles really changes their sound (?)

Kemper reps have already said the sounds are the exact same. If they had a reason to say it was better they would.

The player already has the MK2 signal path and sounds the same, nobody said a peep about it sounding different.

Would be pretty idiotic to make their biggest advantage, the vast back catalog of profiles in MK1 format sound completely different.

 

[dws2384]

I really thought that, after soooo many years the new ones would have so much more powerful DSP units in it. Seems like more bad noews for potential new buyers down the road.

They are using a very specific chip which would involve a complete re-write of everything. They aren’t going to do it (they should) it’s either arrogance or lack of resources. Also they reason the plugin has never come out.

 

[dws2384]

I've seen a couple of posts from people thinking a "true successor" will follow up soon, but it feels like wishful thinking.

Thinking and it happening are not the same. They had 15 years to upgrade, released a MK2 that’s basically the same, and now all of a sudden there’s going to be major upgrades? Those people should lay off the crack pipe

 

[dws2384]

Ohh thats so sad to know.... double?

The same

 

[nicolasrivera]

The same

Well. R.I.P Kemper

 

[dws2384]

Well. R.I.P Kemper

It’s not RIP (yet) as they have a devoted user base, but the decisions made on the MK2 release are pretty head scratching. It sure seems as a typical we know better than the customer type scenario.

I do actually quite enjoy the Kemper workflow, effects, and simplicity. Funny enough, for me a Kemper stage with a NAM player amp block would probably be my top choice. I’m using an FM9 and Kemper player right now but will likely try out a new stadium once they are available. Nothing I’ve tried sounds as good as hyper accuracy NAM captures though

 

[OneEng]

Btw, following the "doesn't feel like the real deal", "only a real amp/cab experience is acceptable" (add a bit of amp-in-the-room flavour to it...) and what not discussion throughout the last pages, I feel like an outlier.

In all seriousness, if anything, the greatest aspect of modeling for me as a live player (at least once modeling had crossed a certain "quality threshold", which IMO it has) is that I *don't* have to deal with all that archaic, inconsistent mess anymore. Which is especially true for cabs. If I wasn't using modeling for my core tones but wanted to keep using whatever real amps, I'm sure that by now I'd run them through a load box and then into whatever FR system.
The differences in projection of one and the same cab under different conditions has been driving me bonkers as long as I can think of. I own (or owned, some are still there) some great sounding cabs and while they were fantastic at times, *all* of them sucked so much ass at other times, it's simply been maddening. Even my 70s Orange 4x12 (/w well worn in old Greenbacks), possibly the best cab for my taste I've ever played through, has been a victim of that more than just once (let alone the handling aspects).
I really did everything to adress these issues. Got a Deeflexx, came up with a modified variation myself, installed "speaker donuts", whatever. And as far as the FOH signal goes, I always brought my own mic, mounted with a mic clamp straight on the cabs, the position carefully measured.
In the end, it was all working fine, sometimes great - just that more often than what I found acceptable, it wasn't.

Add to all this that with FR solutions, I can have the same sound (minus the dreaded Fletcher Munson thing...) while practising at home, playing on small vs. large stages, playing with IEMs vs. monitors, etc. Especially being able to have my live sound at appartment volumes is possibly worth more than anything else.

In a nutshell: Someone would basically have to point a gun to my head to make me use a real cab ever again (unless the situation dictates it, such as on sessions or rental backline gigs).

Oh hell yea!

I loved everything about how my VHT UL and Fender BF sounded .... and I hated any gig I had to haul them to and do setup on. A VHT P90 4x12 cab is about 3 times as heavy as any other cab I have ever lifted as well!

Give me my Kemper and IEM's any day!

Ok ... this is weird ... apparently the exact same profiles and same efx and same settings etc.... on MK1 and MK2 - the Gain profiles sound *totally* different ... the Clean profiles much more "identical"

This should not be the case as (a) they cant be MK2 profiles as that FW isn't out and (b) being [ MK1 ] Legacy Profiles, they should sound identical on each unit I would have thought (?)

To the best of my knowledge, C.K / Kemper have made zero claims about the MK2 playing back MK1 profiles "differently" or "better" (?)

Something very strange going on either with this video -or- the MK2 playing back MK1 Legacy Profiles really changes their sound (?)

This has been reported by a couple of people, but I still don't believe it for all the reasons pointed out in this thread.

Could you imagine the uproar if the MK2 played MK1 made profiles but changed their sound ???????

Would make the Player $$ upgrade "issues" look like a convivial tea party !

Yep. One of the key features of Kemper has been that rigs don't change tone ...... EVER. Imagine if they DID? That means you can't actually use your Kemper Player as a backup because it doesn't sound the same!

Remember this - whenever you buy a profile, you have no real idea of whether it is accurate or not. Could be the maker just churned out some shite and charged you 20 bux for it.

This is true no matter what capture device you purchase a capture for. You can either get something that sounds great, or like crap. The key IMO to all of these types of devices is how easily you can tweak the original to something pleasing to your own ears. "Accuracy" is largely unimportant if you are purchasing a profile/capture .... only "sounds great" matters.

I've seen a couple of posts from people thinking a "true successor" will follow up soon, but it feels like wishful thinking.

Not even a whisper of a rumor of it. I have to admit that their engineering effort on MKII was nearly non-existent. I am currently of the belief that they didn't even change the DSP board in the Rack, Toaster or Stage. They simply reused the mainboards and stuck an updated applications processor in the DIMM slot.

This is why features like integrated WiFi and True Impedance circuits are missing from the Rack and Toaster ..... the main board is not changed at all..... just the application processor in the DIMM slot and a new paint job.

They could have released something as trivial as a new foot controller having a fancy OLED scribble strips .... shoot, they could even have decided that the new foot controller would only work with MKII. At least then MKII would have some meaningful changes.

Kemper reps have already said the sounds are the exact same. If they had a reason to say it was better they would.

The player already has the MK2 signal path and sounds the same, nobody said a peep about it sounding different.

Would be pretty idiotic to make their biggest advantage, the vast back catalog of profiles in MK1 format sound completely different.

This is why I also doubt that there is any change in the sound between MK1 and MKII ..... also, from above, I have a feeling the actual main board didn't change making it impossible for there to be a real difference.

Another piece of anecdotal evidence ..... if there was a tonal change, why wasn't this reported by the plethora of Kemper Player users who also have one of the other models?