Kemper Profiler MK 2

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 490
  • Start date Start date
Well, maybe he just had a bad day then - I kinda "met" the guy many moons back (when Frankfurt Musikmesse was still a thing). In quotes because I actually just listened to him talking to a smaller group of folks I was among and instantly didn't feel like getting involved.
And honestly, the way their forum is operated doesn't exactly speak for them, either (no idea how much of an impact he has, though).

To say someone is creepy (which implies something worse, we all know it) without any evidence is really not on.
 
IMG_4287.jpeg


Guessing the forum poster formerly known as GuitarJon isn’t too impressed with V2 profiles
 
I don't think that's true of Tonex/NAM/QC. There's nothing characteristic to the platform you can detect across captures like the mid hump of Kemper MKI.

Yeah I think captures are a bit tougher to gauge there - unless someone has captured the same exact signal chain for each one back to back maybe? I stand by my opinion on modelers though
 
That was a pretty predictable result. You would have to be really tied to the Kemper ecosystem to chose it over the QC these days.

I don't think Jon tried profile V2, at least he doesn't have a video on it. Maybe he did try it and thought it wasn't good enough for a video, but that's difficult for us to know, unless he posts about it.
 
In standard US English usage "creepy" suggests sexual offenses.
That's not what it means in the UK or EU. It can of course. But it can also be meant as someone who is a bit weird, makes your skin crawl because they might be an axe murderer.

That's probably what Sascha meant.

And to that I say.. hurrr durrrr takes one to know one!
 
Been there done that with multiple amps, as have plenty of others. Kemper (MKI) is the only one that stood out as having a character.
Yeah it makes sense. The kemper has underlying models or saturation/drive styles and is then doing a bunch of EQ matching to the source. Those models cant magically create something from nothing or change their fundamental character.

A dumbed down version of the wavenet stuff is its starting from a blank slate and taking 1000 informed guesses to make the new signal sound like the source signal, there is no base characteristic or anything. I know you know this cause youre a NAM nerd but its still nice to lay it out and logically look at it.
 
Back
Top