Kemper Profiler MK 2

[crispsandwich]

I still have my Kemper, and those 2.0 profiles are definitely higher-fidelity and sound fantastic. I had my doubts, but I am happy to see/hear that I was probably wrong. Looking forward to trying it.

 

[LP59]

Around 5:30, he's saying those sound the same. Am I the only one who thinks they sound different?

 

[2dor]

Around 5:30, he's saying those sound the same. Am I the only one who thinks they sound different?

There is a difference but profile quality is considerably better than old Kemper

 

[Mongillo19]

Idk, I'm not claiming to have GOLDEN EARS and while it sounds much better than Kemper 1.0, I can still hear a lack of treble and a mid boost in the Ola comparison to the real amp.

Still, sounds good!

 

[Jarick]

Around 5:30, he's saying those sound the same. Am I the only one who thinks they sound different?

With nice headphones it sounds only very slightly different, just a touch less low end and a touch more attack maybe.

However, is this actually a 2.0 profile or is this just a 1.0 profile with the new capture method? I thought the 2.0 profiles required a computer?

 

[2dor]

With nice headphones it sounds only very slightly different, just a touch less low end and a touch more attack maybe.

However, is this actually a 2.0 profile or is this just a 1.0 profile with the new capture method? I thought the 2.0 profiles required a computer?

It's 2.0 - he said that in the vid

 

[texhex]

How many Kemper videos have I watched where the host A/B tests the Profile and they sound the same? Hell, how many times I have made Profiles of amps and they sound "the same"? TONS! (until I hit an amp it just won't work with).

For me I don't really care until I can make my own Profiles of my own amps and A/B them.

Too bad for Kemper I won't be buying a Mk.2 Profiler. I already spent my money on a QC and it just works, with every amp I've tried so far. I just can't see myself saving up for a Mk.2 Maybe a Player if I could get one for $450-$500 but that would really be pushing it.

You have to own a Mk. 2 to make v2 Profiles. Kemper has to compete with everyone else now... good luck.

 

[LP59]

With nice headphones it sounds only very slightly different, just a touch less low end and a touch more attack maybe.

However, is this actually a 2.0 profile or is this just a 1.0 profile with the new capture method? I thought the 2.0 profiles required a computer?

I'm listening on Focal monitors in a treated studio and they sound distinctly different to me. I'm used to A/B comparisons that sound a lot closer than that.

He's definitely creating 2.0 profiles using a computer. See how he started the profiling from the RM? You can tell at many points in the video where the screen on the toaster is showing it's a 2.0 profile.

However, he should have created a direct profile for the test at the end where he runs the KPA through the cab. If you saw that EVH fiasco a few days ago, Ola is really rushing through these videos .

 

[Chocol8]

How many Kemper videos have I watched where the host A/B tests the Profile and they sound the same?

Yep, if you know the flaws, it is fairly easy to do a test with Kemper 1.0 profiles where they sound very good, or do a test where they don't. Comparison videos limited to things Kemper does well don't mean much. It is going to have to be public and tested by people trying to push it before we know much of anything.

 

[PhilA]

Sounds a lot better from the limited testing and the cab resonance feature looks really good. It's a shame they didn't either release it on time or provide an actual update to customers as I already sold off my Kempers. And given how they treated customers and the view farming shenanigans, I no longer have any interest in their products.

I decided to sack off Kemper after they miss sold the Access Virus synth with the none functioning (on Mac) total Control software. I had a total nightmare with them and only got a refund after trading standards dispute. Shame it was the ultimate VA synth ever created and they utterly ballsed it up.

 

[OneEng]

Not to be a debbie downer, but we had a gozillian videos in 2012 showing Kemper and the real amp being identical. I think the real test is when non-PAID people get it in their hands and compare real, MK1 and MK2 (and mk2 V2 profile on MK1).

 

[paisleywookiee]

Not to be a debbie downer, but we had a gozillian videos in 2012 showing Kemper and the real amp being identical. I think the real test is when non-PAID people get it in their hands and compare real, MK1 and MK2 (and mk2 V2 profile on MK1).

No we didn’t. And it’s been proven multiple times in this thread that they’re discernible.

 

[Gary_W]

I have no regrets jumping platforms but I’m pleased for the loyal Kemper users that they’re finally getting this; I genuinely hope for them that it’s as good as it can possibly be and make them think it’s been worth the wait.

 

[crispsandwich]

Re: Ola's video, the Mesa MkIIC+ profile he made sounded brilliant. In fact he said it sounds way better than the one he made years ago using mk1 capturing. That was always Kemper's weak spot - certain high gain amps just never sounded right. Looks like 2.0 has sorted this out.

 

[bucephalus]

Maybe.

 

[BenIfin]

Re: Ola's video, the Mesa MkIIC+ profile he made sounded brilliant. In fact he said it sounds way better than the one he made years ago using mk1 capturing. That was always Kemper's weak spot - certain high gain amps just never sounded right. Looks like 2.0 has sorted this out.

Seriously ... what would the guy in the room who did it actually know <- sarcasm :)

You're %100 right ... Kemper Mk1 Profiling was always shit with Amps with multiple-cascading gain stages -or- Amps like a DC30 that were driven hard into Pre-Amp -and- Power Amp distortion .... it *seems* this may no longer be the case => based on the very limited snippets we've heard so fare.

But of course there are some around here that say the Kemper is "20 years old" and Ola's V2 Profile sounds like a "wet fart" ... no I'm not making this shit up, both these statements were posted here today

To be somewhat more rational and logical and factual .... we can all agree that V1 [ Legacy ] Profiling had / still has major shortfalls

-> Pick attack was / is not brilliant
-> Dynamics were / are never "class-leading" even though it "sounded" nice when you rolled down the guitar volume
-> Low Range Freq's were initially terrible and then partially made better but never "ideal"
-> a mid-range hump baked-in on every V1 profile ever made and that ever will be made
-> Pre + Power Amp Distortion was / is always a mess
-> Cascading gain stages like some Mesa's was / is always a mess
-> a broad'ish mid-range compression baked-in on every V1 profile ever made and that ever will be made
-> a Terrible IR Block for IR loading
-> very average "artificial" Amp/Cab separation
-> a few other much more minor things that elude me at the moment.

So ... has the new V2 process fixed all this ?

None of us here know yet ..... however the extremely limited signs however do seem potentially promising.

Will it be "comparable" / "as good" / "better " [whatever these tersm mean] than the AI/ML tools in copying an Amp ?

Again, none of us here know yet ..... however, again, the extremely limited signs however do seem potentially promising.

How will anyone [hey Dom :)] objectively prove it is "worse" / "same" / "better" than the AI/ML tools in copying an Amp ?

Good luck to anyone on that front

 

[BenIfin]

...oh and further confirmation from the Kemper FB site .. V2 is coming this week

 

[MirrorProfiles]

just listening to Ola's example. IMO it sounds close enough in the way that Kemper always did. I think the very high gain sounds seem better here than before.

There are pretty obvious differences to me - the top end of the real amp has a stringy/aggressive upper mids, the Kemper is smoothed out there. The gain character sounds slightly different too, the real amp is faster with more attack. I also think the low end of the amp blooms a bit differently.

That resonance control seems like all the stuff about Kemper that adds in extra indecision into making a model. Editing stuff just sounds like mangling an mp3.

 

[BenIfin]

just listening to Ola's example. IMO it sounds close enough in the way that Kemper always did. I think the very high gain sounds seem better here than before.

There are pretty obvious differences to me - the top end of the real amp has a stringy/aggressive upper mids, the Kemper is smoothed out there. The gain character sounds slightly different too, the real amp is faster with more attack. I also think the low end of the amp blooms a bit differently.

That resonance control seems like all the stuff about Kemper that adds in extra indecision into making a model. Editing stuff just sounds like mangling an mp3.

So you think its great then

Jokes aside - I've relistened again to it a few times during the day and to my ears I just don't hear the things you mentioned ..... but that's me .... no 2 sets of ears hear the same ..... however unlike many others, you articulated what you heard the differences to be and explained them ! :) .... and this actually adds to the discussion ... be it subjectively good or bad

I actually agree and disagree about your general Resonance [Deep Controls] point. Some of the Kemper "deep" controls did / do things, but not things that make the Profile better or add any sonic value - i.m.h.o.

The only deep parameter I ever [very lightly] adjusted was Definition .... but a very little bit always went a very long way.

Capturing and exposing the Cab Resonance of a "Studio Rig cab" I think is a brilliantly useful control .... and having the Intensity on it variable in both directions is a huge plus.

Like the Definition Deep control, it was very clear from Ola's demo - and TJ and MBritts video - that a little bit + / - on the Resonance Intensity goes a very long way.

On a side note - once its out and about in normal people hands, its going to be very interesting to see how even remotely data-objective comparisons between v2 and Tones, NAM, QC etc... are done. I cant think of any (?)

I suspect Y/T's and some forum-ites will choose some very interesting "hills to die on" in order for their their preferred format to "win"

 

[MirrorProfiles]

I've relistened again to it a few times during the day and to my ears I just don't hear the things you mentioned ..... but that's me .... no 2 sets of ears hear the same ..... however unlike many others, you articulated what you heard the differences to be and explained them ! :) .... and this actually adds to the discussion ... be it subjectively good or bad

It’s not just ears, but the playback environment and speakers. I’m listening on decent studio monitors in a well treated room. I think other ears would hear the same things in here, but they wouldn’t on my mums kitchen radio (for instance).

On a side note - once its out and about in normal people hands, its going to be very interesting to see how even remotely data-objective comparisons between v2 and Tones, NAM, QC etc... are done. I cant think of any (?)

Blind test is ample for me. I’ve done many and Kemper usually fares poorly, especially when there are lots of random participants and all biases are removed. The differences on Ola’s example still seem somewhat easy for me to pick out, so I don’t really see it faring better than other methods. I guess we’ll see once people do some blind tests.

I suspect it’s an improvement from before, and largely good enough for most people. I don’t really hear or anticipate it being something that breaks new ground, and for me, only being able to run on its own HW is a massive compromise to other platforms. That kind of rules me out of testing it, but hopefully some others are up for it