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

I gots me a Kemper today. First impressions.

VCuomo

Member
Messages
16,687
All any amp model is is a set of equations. ...
Correct.

Traditional (i.e., non-KPA) "modelers" implement a specific amplifier by "modeling" that amp's circuitry and running your guitar input through the "virtual amplifier" that the model represents.

A profiler has a snapshot of a specific amp's output signals (for a given configuration of gain and tone settings) and runs your guitar input through a set of equations that represents the "snapshot" of that specific amp and amp configuration's output.

Therein lies the difference.

/explanation
 

JackJordan

Member
Messages
1,357
Of course they both use algorithms - all computer software uses algorithms...
I know it used algorithms all along, it has to.

I was just clarifying your comment as you made it sound like it didn't:

So a profiler does not have algorithms of your favorite amps

In the end it sounds like a competition between whoever has the most accurate/best sounding algorithm. That all it is, math and the different approaches to a solution.

"modeler" or "profile" you're paying for an algorithm and an approach to defining that algorithm. In the end, it kinda is semantics, as both are virtually doing the same thing: copying the sound of an amp.
 

VCuomo

Member
Messages
16,687
... In the end, it kinda is semantics, as both are virtually doing the same thing: copying the sound of an amp.
Well, not quite really. A modeler copies the "design" of an amp and that's what lets it create the "sound" of that amp. A profiler does actually copy the sound characteristics of an amp.

But you're right in the sense that both end up creating facsimiles of the sound of the original amp (hopefully, accurate facsimiles).
 

JackJordan

Member
Messages
1,357
Well, not quite really. A modeler copies the "design" of an amp and that's what lets it create the "sound" of that amp. A profiler does actually copy the sound characteristics of an amp.
I see your point, but I don't think that the Kemper is the only one that copies the "sound characteristics" of an amp by listening to it.

Even Christoph Kemper acknowledges that in this statement:

" 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."


What the Kemper does is forego the technical side of an amps build and just goes directly to how an amp sounds.

What a traditional modeler does is create a sound based on the original amps technical build and then refines the sound characteristics to match the amp more accurately.

Both listen, just a traditional modeler incorporates an extra step... I will say that it was genius to automate the process and skip much of the leg work. In the end both do the same thing: copy the sound of an amp via algorithms. I still think "modeling" or "profiling" are more marketing techniques than anything else:

"By philosophy, “modeling” was used as a marketing term by some companies. It says: “Here is a valid virtual copy of a valuable original... 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." -- Christoph Kemper



I highlighted his words about the difference between the two: virtual copy and virtual version. Honestly, this is more semantics than anything else.
 
Last edited:

dkelley

Member
Messages
85
Good points.

Modeling actually typically means building a virtual amp circuit by creating virtual versions of each electrical component and dropping those into a "connected" virtual schematic with hopes it ends up behaving exactly like the real circuit. Maple and similar software has done this for many years, and it does work.

The kemper seems more like an impulse recorder in that it works the same way that we already record reverb and hall acoustics in a series of impulses. This is also how some of the better cab sims have worked for years.

How kemper deals with tone controls I dont know.. but results are amazing

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using Tapatalk 2
 

1fastdog

Member
Messages
411
I think it's fine to banter over semantics and technical discussions are dandy fine when they matter.

My approach to playing has involved understanding the technical side with enough attention to accomplish the final results I seek. The joy for me is in the aural experience as opposed to the mathmatic understandings of every facet of music theory. Understanding as much as possible of music math IS valuable. The proof will always remain in the validity of the music which results.

I also have experience as an audio engineer. There as well, the knowledge of some "science" and math comes in handy. Keeping that in mind was never all that difficult. The point for me is always how it sounds.
Trust that I don't suggest technical understanding does not matter, nor suggest they aren't worth exploring. The saying that "the proof is in the pudding" is about as on the mark as one can get.

I'm certain many here have experienced several different brands of amplification, guitars, effects, string, etc, etc. ... Folks likely form preferences and for a myriad of good personal reasons.

I'm sure that everyone that has played extensively has run into identical brands and models of gear that aren't as right sounding or feeling as other "identical" gear performs.

Maybe they have found a particular vintage, series, whatever that has something "better", something "preferred", or something that is less than right for them. I've run into this countless times. I have come to know I better try a guitar, amp, whatever , before I buy it. Some may disagree, but I'm driving my own money.

In my experience I have firmed this opinion repeatedly. I discovered that not all vintage Les Pauls < as but one example > are "all that". 1959 is touted as a "Holy Grail". My experience is that I wouldn't bet my life that some aren't that good, and some are definitely fabulous to play and hear.

The same goes for amps. Tone is often nuance. Nuance is something some people are touched by or uninspired... maybe even unable to ignore a little something that doesn't seem right can come down to what others might call nuance....

This sort of thing is exactly why I am so pleased with my KPA. My "amp" collection is vast. It's fluid and the space is available for a great capture of an amp I know well or just sounds right to me. I'm always on the lookout. There's still amps I have access to that time and circumstances have caused to be un-profiled.

The Kemper works much like a camera. It's great for portraits or snapshots. It can capture a specific subject. Kind of like taking a picture of not just a girl, but THE beautiful girl in just the right light.

Modelers, in my experience, can sound great depending on the capability of the particular unit.

With modelers, IMO, the nuance needs to be in the "math". Modelers, in my experience, can sound great depending on the capability of the particular unit. And the choices made by the designer in the parts choices, algorhythms, and how it accomplishes the desired result when in the hands of a capable player.


With a profiler, the nuance needs to be present in what's placed in front of the microphone or run through a DI.

The designer and the route to get there work or they don't. The profile is accurate to the amp sound captured or not. The "original" is there to be compared. It's right or it isn't. That's my view in a nutshell.

Yes, I have oversimplified it, perhaps.
Just trying to share what motivated me to go with what I am using.

Both designs can give great results. Both get to the "point", as it were, in different way.
 
Last edited:

OutterLimits

Member
Messages
1,099
Guys, Kemper themselves make the stock profiles, no? So some of you are saying Kemper can't make good profiles?

db9091, thanks for checking that on the new profiles included with the unit.


Ok then. I am still pricing the rack version, non-powered. I will not use any profiling myself, I thought I would have a ready to go unit out of the box.
 

Rod

Tone is Paramount
Gold Supporting Member
Messages
23,647
Guys, Kemper themselves make the stock profiles, no? So some of you are saying Kemper can't make good profiles?

db9091, thanks for checking that on the new profiles included with the unit.


Ok then. I am still pricing the rack version, non-powered. I will not use any profiling myself, I thought I would have a ready to go unit out of the box.
You will have a unit ready to play out of the box. You don't need to buy any profiles. There's some great ones that come with the unit. But, The TAF profiles are special..Some are included with the unit
 

db9091

Gold Supporting Member
Messages
3,329
My understanding is that Kemper profiles are made by a number of folks who got Kempers early on. And some have added to the Free Exchange or Rig Packs since.

Yes they can profile, some of them very well.

I think Andy sort of spoils the curve with his profiling due to his studio experience, but mostly his trained ears.

So what would have been top dog before Andy would appear secondary now. So we are talking about VERY picky things here. Sort of like saying "Well, it's a B compared to Andy's A" where the B is a grade 92 and Andy's is a grade 98

92 is quite respectable and depending on the genre, song, usage, and playing, is absolutely recordable.
 

Rod

Tone is Paramount
Gold Supporting Member
Messages
23,647
My understanding is that Kemper profiles are made by a number of folks who got Kempers early on. And some have added to the Free Exchange or Rig Packs since.

Yes they can profile, some of them very well.

I think Andy sort of spoils the curve with his profiling due to his studio experience, but mostly his trained ears.

So what would have been top dog before Andy would appear secondary now. So we are talking about VERY picky things here. Sort of like saying "Well, it's a B compared to Andy's A" where the B is a grade 92 and Andy's is a grade 98

92 is quite respectable and depending on the genre, song, usage, and playing, is absolutely recordable.
That's a really good way to explain it db:agree:agree:agree
 

OutterLimits

Member
Messages
1,099
There are presets in the Axe Exchange too, you don't have to tweak the Axe either ... and since I don't own tube amps, the first real interest in the Kemper was it had exact models of great amps already on it. It either does or doesn't, I don't have one yet to put my 2 cents in. However, surfing for better profiles takes time, you can do that with the Axe and the Eleven Rack too. I would rather just adjust what I have, than have to go demo hundreds of profiles.

It sounds like the secret souce is in creating a great profile. But can the average guy, without high end studio equipment, do that themselves?

I listened to a nice demo sent by db, it was very helpful ... stock presets vs downloaded ones. Definitely a piece of gear I want to own ...
 

VCuomo

Member
Messages
16,687
Personally, I think the whole "is this profile/model exactly the same as Amp X" is meaningless. I'm just looking for tones that I like and want to use. The KPA gives me those tones in spades, and although I've never owned an Axe FX I'm sure it could too.
 

dyer_maker

Member
Messages
625
It sounds like the secret souce is in creating a great profile. But can the average guy, without high end studio equipment, do that themselves?
This is my own personal dilemma. I have some nice gear at my house that I think sounds good, and assuming I profile it at home, with what I have available to me, will hopefully sound the same or better.

If I were to take that same gear and put it into the hands of someone with the ear and expertise it takes to record great tones, the result probably wouldn't sound the same and likely would sound different, hopefully in a very good way.

That ultimately may be the difference in many of these profiles. Call it amateur vs professional, although those are broad categorizations.
 

stratzrus

Philadelphia Jazz, Funk, and R&B
Gold Supporting Member
Messages
22,963
There are presets in the Axe Exchange too, you don't have to tweak the Axe either ... and since I don't own tube amps, the first real interest in the Kemper was it had exact models of great amps already on it. It either does or doesn't, I don't have one yet to put my 2 cents in. However, surfing for better profiles takes time, you can do that with the Axe and the Eleven Rack too. I would rather just adjust what I have, than have to go demo hundreds of profiles.
This is why some of us have said that a significant difference between the two is workflow.

Some would rather audition profiles, others would rather adjust a given amp model to their own preferences.
 

JackJordan

Member
Messages
1,357
I for one appreciate the candidness of this thread. I know the Kemper is good, but now I see that there is a little more to it than just plug and play:

To get the best tones you will have to download them and possibly pay for those downloads. I appreciate all those that posted that they weren't too happy with all of the stock tones. (and yes you can probably expect that from any modeler).

Too often threads have degraded to Kemper versus Axe FX, and in the heat of the battle no-one really expresses what they don't like about their respective units.

Knowing what I know now it looks like I will probably have to save up a few hundred dollars for extra profiles on top of the recent price increase.

:aok
 




Top Bottom