• New Sponsor: ShipNerd, Ship Your Gear with Us... for less! Click Here.

I gots me a Kemper today. First impressions.

MaxTwang

Senior Member
Messages
3,690
I profiled a $100 Roland Micro Cube last week and a used $500 Fender Hot Rod Deluxe today.

They're now yours for $0.00

Enjoy!
It's the quirky amps that can make a Kemper gem. My first profile was a $100 Black Heart Killer Ant into a Palmer speaker sim - the profile gave edge of breakup Marshall - best I've heard. Sold the Kemper and that profile is gone. I bought another Kemper and made another profile of the Killer Ant and a couple other cheaper amps that can sound pretty big and sweat. The Kemper seems to like the simple circuits or high gain.
 

OutterLimits

Member
Messages
1,099
Wait, how can stock profiles not be good?!?! Isn't that kemper's claim to fame, instant success?! You can download AxeFx presets too, but the majority of Kemper users claim it is perfect out of the box?!

Does not sound it the way a few of you describe it. If you had to shop around for profiles that sounded good, then it is not exactly the great modeler as claimed. Because the stock presets would be already perfect and just like the amps.

I might get one on the cheap anyway, just to bang around with it. But I am a bit perplexed at the conflicting stories from users.
 

dyer_maker

Member
Messages
625
It's boils down to personal preference and what your needs are. And once again, the Kemper isn't a modeler.

Wait, how can stock profiles not be good?!?! Isn't that kemper's claim to fame, instant success?! You can download AxeFx presets too, but the majority of Kemper users claim it is perfect out of the box?!

Does not sound it the way a few of you describe it. If you had to shop around for profiles that sounded good, then it is not exactly the great modeler as claimed. Because the stock presets would be already perfect and just like the amps.

I might get one on the cheap anyway, just to bang around with it. But I am a bit perplexed at the conflicting stories from users.
 

OutterLimits

Member
Messages
1,099
If not a modeler, what is it? It doesn't model other amp tones?!? Then why do you record the waveforms into it?!? Not sure what you mean ...

But either way, it either captures the tube amp or doesn't. Bad profiles mean it did not do a good job. How can that be? Isn't this what it has over the other digital units?
 

db9091

Member
Messages
3,330
Wait, how can stock profiles not be good?!?! Isn't that kemper's claim to fame, instant success?! You can download AxeFx presets too, but the majority of Kemper users claim it is perfect out of the box?!
Patently untrue. Most owners find they don't like most of the stock. There are some amazing stock profiles, but only a handful. The free rig packs Kemper now has given over the last year are as good as Commercial profiles too. And the Free Exchange has gotten better these past few months with a higher percentage of hits than misses. The only ones I've ever heard proclaim that stock sounds are perfect, whether that be KPA, Fractal, 11R, POD, Tonelab, etc are fanboys. Most say the opposite.

Does not sound it the way a few of you describe it. If you had to shop around for profiles that sounded good, then it is not exactly the great modeler as claimed. Because the stock presets would be already perfect and just like the amps.
Stock profiles don't sound fake. They sound either RAW (meaning no effects processing, i.e. reverb, compression, eq, etc) or they are not recorded with as robust a signal chain.

Remember, profiling can be done with a simple SM57 straight to the Kemper, or you can use a R. 121 or dual mics, through Neve or UA, etc preamps to the Kemper with quality cable, not to mention the great ear of a sound engineering pro. Clearly the latter option will yield sonically more classical tones, since we used to professional studio recordings.

I might get one on the cheap anyway, just to bang around with it. But I am a bit perplexed at the conflicting stories from users.
The 5 stock profiles that wowed me were the best amp simulation I've ever heard when I first bought it, but I was taken back by most of the profiles not being of similar caliber. Now that I know WHY most profiles are not of similar caliber, it makes sense.

What ALSO makes sense is that a person won't always like every amp they hear, nor every setting. So if you don't like a Fender Champ, no amount of profiling it is gonna make you like it either.

That said, yeah, get one cheap. Still has a warranty, so you can't go wrong even if it's broken.
 

db9091

Member
Messages
3,330
If not a modeler, what is it? It doesn't model other amp tones?!? Then why do you record the waveforms into it?!? Not sure what you mean ...
The Kemper HAS models within it whose parameters are plugged in by profiling.

If you have a question about Profiling, google what Kemper or Cliff has to say about it. Even Cliff admits Profiling is superior at capturing individual sonic characters that Fractals Tone Matching may not if it's initial Model isn't close to the amp being profiled/matched. The Kemper too has some types of amps it's currently not the best at modeling.


But either way, it either captures the tube amp or doesn't. Bad profiles mean it did not do a good job. How can that be? Isn't this what it has over the other digital units?
The Kemper is CAPABLE of capturing the sonic individuality of an amp at that amps current settings, yes. If it does NOT profile it well, it's the person who is doing the profiling that is fault for any number of reasons:

1) Inferior Mic placement
2) Poor or no Preamps
3) Poor Preamp settings
4) Poor cords
5) Not refining, or using a bad sounding guitar to refine with. (if the guitar sounds like crap, the profile will grab that crappy dynamic, distortion, etc quite well)
6) The profiler hasn't a good ear, not only for mic placement as said, but for using effects to bring that profile closer to what you hear in the room (reverb, a little EQ, etc) as opposed to what you hear through a microphone

I'm sure there is more, but that's the gist of it. It's a Magic box, but it also needs a Magician to profile well.

Or else buy profiles from the Magicians.

One last thing: The person who buys the Kemper should NOT expect ANYTHING to sound well if they use a crappy guitar or play through crappy headphones or out crappy speakers.
 

dyer_maker

Member
Messages
625
If not a modeler, what is it? It doesn't model other amp tones?!? Then why do you record the waveforms into it?!? Not sure what you mean ...

But either way, it either captures the tube amp or doesn't. Bad profiles mean it did not do a good job. How can that be? Isn't this what it has over the other digital units?
I'd rather not argue with you. Kemper website has plenty of info on what profiling means and there isn't a mention of modeling to be found. The stock profiles reflect specific configurations and settings that some may prefer as-is, with a little tweaking or not at all, just like the amps they represent. Let me remind you of your own comments regarding tube amps in general.

I have never, in 40 years of playing, had an amp sound good out of the box. You have to tweak knobs, try the volume at different levels, try it at gig volumes, try your different guitars through it, different effects, etc., etc..
 

VCuomo

Member
Messages
16,687
If not a modeler, what is it? It doesn't model other amp tones?!? Then why do you record the waveforms into it?!? Not sure what you mean ...

But either way, it either captures the tube amp or doesn't. Bad profiles mean it did not do a good job. How can that be? Isn't this what it has over the other digital units?
It is a profiler, not a modeler.

And it does capture the tube amp.

A "bad profile" means the person doing the profiling didn't do a good job of it.

Does that clear things up?
 

db9091

Member
Messages
3,330
I need to make another point. Stock profiles have been added to since when I bought it, so I haven't tried them in over a year. So today I grabbed them to give them another go.

There are more that are better than before. But the big thing to remember is Commercial profilers raised the bar, making what sounded better than previous amp simulations seem weaker in comparison.

If someone profiles an amp and you have that raw sound, it's not as "flashy" as one dripping in reverb, compression, eq to boost some volume and frequencies, etc that make it more "plug and play"
 

JackJordan

Member
Messages
1,357
I'm really not trying to argue here, just trying to understand, and please correct me if I'm wrong:

A modeler uses an algorithm designed to try and copy the sounds of an amp.

A Profile creates an algorithm based on what it hears through the mic.



If the above is true what's really the difference, as both are just algorithms of your favorite amps? Is the only difference how they got to the algorithm and how accurate that algorithm is? the later being subjective to the users ears an tastes.
 

jmtaylor22

Member
Messages
1,160
It is a profiler, not a modeler.

And it does capture the tube amp.

A "bad profile" means the person doing the profiling didn't do a good job of it.

Does that clear things up?
I am sorry but that is just semantics. The Kemper absolutely is an amp modeler, what he has done is automated the amp parameters.

In a traditional amp modeler the programmer hand tunes the various model programming internals to make it match the amp they are creating.

It is very much akin to video games that release an editor with the game so users can create content, he has essentially allowed users to generate the content by the automation of the fine tuning needed to create an amp model for a particular amp.

The genius of the Kemper is that it has a very generic set of internal models and allows the user to create the final amp without having to program each one of them themselves.
 

VCuomo

Member
Messages
16,687
I'm really not trying to argue here, just trying to understand, and please correct me if I'm wrong:

A modeler uses an algorithm designed to try and copy the sounds of an amp.

A Profile creates an algorithm based on what it hears through the mic.



If the above is true what's really the difference, as both are just algorithms of your favorite amps? Is the only difference how they got to the algorithm and how accurate that algorithm is? the later being subjective to the users ears an tastes.
A modeler models discrete components, and the vendor puts those models together (based on an amp's schematics) to model amps' preamps and power amplifiers. Your guitar signals can then be fed into the models and output is generated based on the models' output.

A profiler sends reference signals into an amplifier and captures the amp's output characteristics for each of those reference signals. With that information, it can take your guitar signals and output what the amp would have output for that same input signal. So a profiler does not have algorithms of your favorite amps - it has "profiles" of them.

This is, of course, a very simple summary of how they work...
 

VCuomo

Member
Messages
16,687
I am sorry but that is just semantics. The Kemper absolutely is an amp modeler, what he has done is automated the amp parameters.

In a traditional amp modeler the programmer hand tunes the various model programming internals to make it match the amp they are creating.

It is very much akin to video games that release an editor with the game so users can create content, he has essentially allowed users to generate the content by the automation of the fine tuning needed to create an amp model for a particular amp.

The genius of the Kemper is that it has a very generic set of internal models and allows the user to create the final amp without having to program each one of them themselves.
And I am sorry, but you are wrong, it is not "just semantics". The KPA is not a modeler.
 

jmtaylor22

Member
Messages
1,160
A modeler models discrete components, and the vendor puts those models together (based on an amp's schematics) to model amps' preamps and power amplifiers. Your guitar signals can then be fed into the models and output is generated based on the models' output.

A profiler sends reference signals into an amplifier and captures the amp's output characteristics for each of those reference signals. With that information, it can take your guitar signals and output what the amp would have output for that same input signal. So a profiler does not have algorithms of your favorite amps - it has "profiles" of them.

This is, of course, a very simple summary of how they work...
The Kemper absolutely has algorithms you describe it like a static IR capture and that is not what it does.
 

jmtaylor22

Member
Messages
1,160
And I am sorry, but you are wrong, it is not "just semantics". The KPA is not a modeler.
Yeah you might want to read this.

http://www.guitar-muse.com/kemper-profiling-amp-2949-2949

When it came to the task of creating an accurate simulation of a distorting tube circuit I realized, after a while, that my previous approaches to distortion did not match the dynamic character of the real thing. The tube is not only special because of its soft distortion curve, but especially due the fact that it sucks current from the surrounding circuit, when it is driven into its saturation. This changes the behavior of the circuit dramatically, but only for the moment of distortion. This is the crucial point for a tube simulation, and some modeling amps obviously have great approaches for these dynamic sounds. I also found a great way to parameterize this circuit and behavior, but it took a very long time, and was very cumbersome, to match these parameters to those of a specific tube amp.For my circuit, there were simply too many interdependent parameters, and it would have taken ages to model just one or two dozen amps.
As a basically lazy person I spent my time trying to find an automated method, rather than modeling amps by hand. The problem is there are many equations, with even more variables, that need to be solved; I wanted these equations to be solved by the system listening to the original amp.

He created a generic model of equations and the profiling process solves for the solution to that set of equations.
 

JackJordan

Member
Messages
1,357
A modeler models discrete components, and the vendor puts those models together (based on an amp's schematics) to model amps' preamps and power amplifiers. Your guitar signals can then be fed into the models and output is generated based on the models' output.

A profiler sends reference signals into an amplifier and captures the amp's output characteristics for each of those reference signals. With that information, it can take your guitar signals and output what the amp would have output for that same input signal. So a profiler does not have algorithms of your favorite amps - it has "profiles" of them.

This is, of course, a very simple summary of how they work...

I'm really trying to understand the difference:

So you are saying the Kemper does not use algorithms to copy sounds? How can that be?

I've read, and re-read your post several times and I don't seem to get the difference. Both take your input and try to output what the profiled/modeled amp would have with that same input...
 

jmtaylor22

Member
Messages
1,160
I'm really trying to understand the difference:

So you are saying the Kemper does not use algorithms to copy sounds? How can that be?

I've read, and re-read your post several times and I don't seem to get the difference. Both take your input and try to output what the profiled/modeled amp would have with that same input...
Just read the article that I linked, it works as I described it. Profiling is simply the automation of the fine tuning that goes on to go from a generic amp modeling framework to the actual amp.

There is no magic it works like any other amp modeler once the profile is complete. Obviously it is then the quality of the modeling at that point that makes it sound good/like the original amp.
 

VCuomo

Member
Messages
16,687
Yeah you might want to read this.

http://www.guitar-muse.com/kemper-profiling-amp-2949-2949

When it came to the task of creating an accurate simulation of a distorting tube circuit I realized, after a while, that my previous approaches to distortion did not match the dynamic character of the real thing. The tube is not only special because of its soft distortion curve, but especially due the fact that it sucks current from the surrounding circuit, when it is driven into its saturation. This changes the behavior of the circuit dramatically, but only for the moment of distortion. This is the crucial point for a tube simulation, and some modeling amps obviously have great approaches for these dynamic sounds. I also found a great way to parameterize this circuit and behavior, but it took a very long time, and was very cumbersome, to match these parameters to those of a specific tube amp.For my circuit, there were simply too many interdependent parameters, and it would have taken ages to model just one or two dozen amps.
As a basically lazy person I spent my time trying to find an automated method, rather than modeling amps by hand. The problem is there are many equations, with even more variables, that need to be solved; I wanted these equations to be solved by the system listening to the original amp.

He created a generic model of equations and the profiling process solves for the solution to that set of equations.
No, he created a set of algorithms that, in conjunction with an amp's profile, can mimic an output signal based on the input signal. If the KPA is indeed a profiler, then he did not just create a "generic set of internal models" and just adjust parameters accordingly. He is using a set of transformation equations that take the input signal and, based on the values stored in the profile, transform that input signal into an output signal. That is not the same thing as using models of discrete components (such as tubes, transistors, rectifiers, etc.) and subassemblies (such as preamps and power amps) to replicate an amp's output.

Please point me to anything in writing, or a video, where that's what he says he does. If there is such a reference, then the KPA should not be called a "profiler". In the engineering world there is a distinct difference between "profiling" and "modeling".

And just to be clear, I'm not talking about the KPA's effects (distortion, etc.) - those are most probably implemented using a combination of techniques.
 
Last edited:

jmtaylor22

Member
Messages
1,160
No, he created a set of algorithms that, in conjunction with an amp's profile, can mimic an output signal based on the input signal. If the KPA is indeed a profiler, then he did not just create a "generic set of internal models" and just adjust parameters accordingly.

Please point me to anything in writing, or a video, where that's what he says he does. If there is such a reference, then the KPA should not be called a "profiler". In the engineering world there is a distinct difference between "profiling" and "modeling".
All any amp model is is a set of equations. He created a set of algorithms (equations), I am sure that he also creates some sort of cab IR from the profiling process.

In the article above he says it right here

I also found a great way to parameterize this circuit and behavior, but it took a very long time, and was very cumbersome, to match these parameters to those of a specific tube amp.For my circuit, there were simply too many interdependent parameters, and it would have taken ages to model just one or two dozen amps.

(This is describing a generic amp model but it was hard to program each individual amp).


As a basically lazy person I spent my time trying to find an automated method, rather than modeling amps by hand. The problem is there are many equations, with even more variables, that need to be solved; I wanted these equations to be solved by the system listening to the original amp.

(This describes what profiling does, solve for the parameters for the particular amp you are profiling).
 

JackJordan

Member
Messages
1,357
JimTaylor22 Thank you for that article! :aok

What is the difference between modeling and profiling?
Personally I have two views on modeling and profiling: one is technical and the other is philosophical.
Modeling, in the first sense, is bringing the physics of the real world into a virtual world by defining formulas for the real world and letting them calculate on a real-time computer (such as a DSP or a plug-in environment). I don’t know how other companies model their stuff, but I tend to listen more to a circuit rather than studying its theoretical background. By treating models on a theoretical basis, one tends to oversee some very important side effects that can later be heard clearly, so you end up listening to it anyway.
I did our models of the distortion pedals just by listening to them, and matching my model to perfection just by ear.
Profiling is an automated approach for reaching a result that is probably too complex and multidimensional to achieve by ear, or by capturing the behavior of individual components in isolation. This is the case for a tube amp.
By philosophy, “modeling” was used as a marketing term by some companies. It says: “Here is a valid virtual copy of a valuable original”.
What I have rarely seen is an A/B comparison between the original and the virtual version. Why is that? Profiling, in our sense of the word, (yes, take this as a marketing term, too) is a promise to create a virtual version of your original, but with the ability to qualify the results by a fair A/B comparison. You get what you want, and you can check what you have just got.





So in other words they both use algorithms. Christoph Kemper just found a way of automating the process so that he didn't have to do it all by hand. He even admits to using the same modeler approach to designing his effect algorithms.

It was clever to make the new marketing term of "profiling", as it does muddy the issue and make theirs sound as though they are doing something much different (and yes, it's different, but not as different as many may be led to believe). I don't think the term an "automated amp modeler" would have made the splash that "profiling" did.




By no means am I dissing the product. It sounds amazing! I'm just trying to understand it before I purchase it or another competitors product. :beer
 




Top Bottom