Kemper Profiling pre-amp it's for Bass too

[JimmyM]

Originally Posted by Bassmec

That's very useful to know, how long do you think I should wait before
selling my vintage amp collection and all my studios analogue equipment and moving into much smaller premises?.
Is there a kemper app yet for my Ipad?.

LOL! Don't forget the V-Drums

It all has a place, but I'm with you...I have been pretty enthusiastic about some of this digital stuff, and I use it sometimes to avoid waking the family at 1 am when I want to cut a track, but if I'm cutting tracks for reals, I want the real stuff...output transformers and tubes.

[seamonkey]

Originally Posted by johnpbass

I think one of the things that's going on out in "Kemperland" is that players are profiling some of the rare amps in their collections and making them available for download.

Wow - just checked and there pages and pages, must be a couple of thousand profiles available.

[Bassmec]

Originally Posted by seamonkey

Wow - just checked and there pages and pages, must be a couple of thousand profiles available.

Is there any money for pro studios in recording and selling profiles
to acne challenged music tech students with bedroom studios. I don't think so.

[fdeck]

You can have all of your digital tomfoolery, but you'll never reproduce the "touch" and "dynamics" of my GK MB200 and 1x8 speaker. Never, I say.

[Johnny Crab]

Originally Posted by fdeck

By simultaneously measuring and comparing the input and output signals. That's just a guess. Whether it's feasible or not depends on the exact nature of those signals.

Generates a set of complex transfer functions for each amp & when you send it an input from your bass, you are effectively dumping your input into the same equation(s)......dunno how else he's gonna do what he says it does.

[JimmyM]

Here's where modeling goes wrong, and quite frankly, I don't know what they can do about it. All these modelers use waveforms made from recordings of popular amps to arrive at their sounds. So then the final product reflects that. It's good, sure, but the mic adds its own characteristics, as does the recording process. It's not a pure process by any means. And aside from using recordings, it also reflects the tastes of the developers in that they have their favorite settings and they don't necessarily nail every sound you can get out of the originals.

Some will find it acceptable...some won't. I find the modeling gear quite acceptable when toting my stuff up to the 4th floor of a small gambling boat, and I'm quite glad that we have stuff out there that brings solid state to this level of tone these days, because up until a few years ago, you had tubes or solid state, and digital was a complete joke. But whenever I have a tube amp for the stage and modeling in the house or vice versa, I can still hear a pretty significant difference. All the shows were a success because that's how we roll but I notice and so do others.

[Codger]

Originally Posted by JimmyM

Here's where modeling goes wrong, and quite frankly, I don't know what they can do about it. All these modelers use waveforms made from recordings of popular amps to arrive at their sounds. So then the final product reflects that. It's good, sure, but the mic adds its own characteristics, as does the recording process. It's not a pure process by any means. And aside from using recordings, it also reflects the tastes of the developers in that they have their favorite settings and they don't necessarily nail every sound you can get out of the originals.

It doesn't really use recordings of amps, it records the output of an amp/speaker when driven with a peculiar signal designed, among other things, to drive the amp into non-linearity. Then it does some math and comes up with some non-linear transfer function (as I understand it). It does model the recording environment though. A recording of a Kemper modeled amp sounds darn close to a recording of the amp that was modeled. I watched one youtube session where the player claimed that the feel of the guitar through the Kemper felt darn close to the original but that there was perhaps a small processing delay.

To your point, there is no technical reason why the speaker voice coil voltage couldn't be modeled rather than the output of the modeling mic's preamp. Then playing the instrument through the Kemper with a solid-state amp between the Kemper and the original speaker cabinet could give a better idea of how close the model is to the original. Still, what's the point in that? Save weight? It seems that modelers are intended to capture the sound and feel of both the amp and cabinet while playing back through a high fidelity playback system. The only way to do that is with a microphone capture.

[johnpbass]

Originally Posted by Bassmec

Is there any money for pro studios in recording and selling profiles
to acne challenged music tech students with bedroom studios. I don't think so.

Maybe.
As I mentioned earlier, some players with some nice vintage amps in their collections are profiling them and making them available for download. Some free some not.

If you have a sought after amp in your collection you'd probably get some takers.

[johnpbass]

Originally Posted by JimmyM

Here's where modeling goes wrong, and quite frankly, I don't know what they can do about it. All these modelers use waveforms made from recordings of popular amps to arrive at their sounds. So then the final product reflects that. It's good, sure, but the mic adds its own characteristics, as does the recording process. It's not a pure process by any means. And aside from using recordings, it also reflects the tastes of the developers in that they have their favorite settings and they don't necessarily nail every sound you can get out of the originals.

That's a good point about the modelers reflecting the tastes (settings) of the person doing the model. The Kemper allows something a little different though in that you can tweak the baseline profile. You up the Gain, for example, and the profile reacts the same way the amp would when you up the gain. You don't have to take 5 different profiles with 5 different gain settings.

[JGR]

Originally Posted by JimmyM

All these modelers use waveforms made from recordings of popular amps to arrive at their sounds.

Not true for the AxeFx.

[johnpbass]

Originally Posted by fdeck

You can have all of your digital tomfoolery, but you'll never reproduce the "touch" and "dynamics" of my GK MB200 and 1x8 speaker. Never, I say.

Well, I'm certainly not going to pronounce the Kemper as the replacement for the real thing, but it is a very interesting technology, IMO. The amp does get some of those touch and dynamics nuances - more noticeable on guitar profiles though I think.

[coreybox]

Originally Posted by JGR

Not true for the AxeFx.

I believe the axefx models electrical components (right?). So a resister is modeled, a capacitor is modeled.... and a tube is modeled. The amp patch is actually these modeled components hooked up as per the amp's schematic.

At least that was my understanding after doing a bit of reading about it.

[JGR]

Originally Posted by coreybox

I believe the axefx models electrical components (right?). So a resister is modeled, a capacitor is modeled.... and a tube is modeled. The amp patch is actually these modeled components hooked up as per the amp's schematic.

At least that was my understanding after doing a bit of reading about it.

Yup, I think that is a good way to put it in simplified terms. The modeling algorithms, which mimic the dynamic behavior of tubes and other components is the secret sauce.

[seamonkey]

For software modelers,
IK Multimedia starts with a schematic and models down to components.
Peavey Revalver looks the same, except it lets you adjust every components, including internal components in the tubes. Revalver does not have any SS amps in it's library at this time.
The other modelers seems to do combinations. Some just analyze the sound, like the Kemper.
Either method is working and sounding great. Either ends up in the same results - duplicated sound and dynamics.

And I'm sure there's even more ways to model/emulate/simulate

In the long run Kemper's method would be best for Archiving existing amp. Letting somebody grab their own amp and A/B it right next to the original is creating believers. Myself, I wouldn't need all the features of profiling my own amp, I would just buy already Archived sounds. Kemper could probably do a model only to playback archived profiles. Or even a VST plugin.

IK, et. al. method best for creating new, never heard before amps. Amps that may not even be able to be physically created. Like adding phase aligned EQ which can only exist in the digital domain. IK has some great sounding, original equipment manufacturer certified models. They sound great.

Eventually, maybe libs could be shared between the different tools. Pick up a Kemper lib and play it using IK Amplitube. What a dream.

[bigsnack]

I had to be in front of the Kemper personally before I was officially blown away. I don't really have a need for one, but if I had the cash to burn I would most certainly dive in. If someone ever gets Brendan O'Brien to commit to building bass profiles, I will sell my first born child to pick up the Kemper!

[johnpbass]

Originally Posted by bigsnack

I had to be in front of the Kemper personally before I was officially blown away. I don't really have a need for one, but if I had the cash to burn I would most certainly dive in.

Same here. I was very skeptical until I actually saw/heard it in action. I hear that Kemper is designing a class D amp that fits in the head - so you could use it live with a speaker cab to monitor.

[will33]

Originally Posted by Flux Jetson

For that matter, what of human vocals? Profile some singer, then when someone else sings ~through~ the profiling gadget they'd sound like the famous singer. There's a thousand problems with that notion, I'm just letting my imagination run with it.

If this thing can make me sound like Frank Sinatra on one song, Rob Halford on another, and Johnny Cash on yet another, I don't care what my bass sounds like through it...I'm getting one.

[Passinwind]

Originally Posted by johnpbass

That's a good point about the modelers reflecting the tastes (settings) of the person doing the model. The Kemper allows something a little different though in that you can tweak the baseline profile. You up the Gain, for example, and the profile reacts the same way the amp would when you up the gain. You don't have to take 5 different profiles with 5 different gain settings.

I read the Sound On Sound review and it says otherwise: that when you tweak the baseline as you describe you get something new, not an interpolation of nonlinear behaviors that you have not actually profiled. That's actually a very cool feature in many ways IMHO. My favorite thing about the VG-8 system I owned was that it could make cool new sounds, whereas the modeling part was somewhat static and "snapshot" like, which the SOS article also cites as an attribute of the Kemper system. I've noticed the same thing in convolution apps I've tried loading online impulses into too. I like all this stuff for creation, but not so much for re-creation so far. Looking forward to trying the Kemper and Axe-Fx eventually, but for now I'd rather invest my time and money in just building bass preamps.

[JimmyM]

Originally Posted by Passinwind

I read the Sound On Sound review and it says otherwise: that when you tweak the baseline as you describe you get something new, not an interpolation of nonlinear behaviors that you have not actually profiled. That's actually a very cool feature in many ways IMHO. My favorite thing about the VG-8 system I owned was that it could make cool new sounds, whereas the modeling part was somewhat static and "snapshot" like, which the SOS article also cites as an attribute of the Kemper system. I've noticed the same thing in convolution apps I've tried loading online impulses into too. I like all this stuff for creation, but not so much for re-creation so far. Looking forward to trying the Kemper and Axe-Fx eventually, but for now I'd rather invest my time and money in just building bass preamps.

Yep. I may stand corrected about how they arrive at their profiles or models, but there's still a layer of translation that's noticeable.

[Flux Jetson]

The thing that I find odd is that some people keep calling the Kemper something other than "the real thing".

It IS "the real thing". 1st thing that has to happen to make either argument valid is to define "the real thing". So what that it captures the sound of the environment of the venue, and the mic's flavor, and so on. So often times you hear purists say "follow your ears, and don't listen with your eyes" (which is actually wise advice). Well ..... touche. What does it matter if the mic is included, or the cab is included, or the sound is arrived at through this process or that process.

Foundation Question: Does It sound good? Is it something you can use? Does it respond to your input well enough? Done!

Why do the means matter so much? The age old "double blind test" scenario applies here ... in shiploads.

So before there is any validity to the claim that the Kemper isn't "the real thing" .... I would suggest that the Kemper .. is INDEED .. the real thing. It's OWN Real Thing. It's just not the same "thing" as ~transformers and tubes~. But the Kemper can provide sounds that tubes and transformers will never ever be able to provide.

How does anyone know that a given profile won't sound better than an SVT played all by itself? Don't most people add some sort of modifiers to the signal chain anyhow? The speakers, the cab, hell placement of the cab ... those are modifiers .. ~filters~ if you will .. all by themselves. All of which contaminate "the real thing". Even different instrument cables contaminate "the real thing". Not to mention what the engineer and producers do to a given track once it's recorded.

So it comes down to a matter of pragmatic acceptance or flat-earth stubborness. You either accept and embrace change and progession, or you do not (there is something positive to be said for either approach by the way). But to say that the Kemper is not ~the real thing~ is to compare it to a very narrow frame of reference.

The Kemper protocols are simply another tool in the box. It is not the same a modeling, it isn't the same as anything, it is it's own self-standing method of creating sound. Adventurous and willing players will learn to use it to it's fullest extent and benefit from that in spades. It's one of the most high -potential inventions to come long in quite a while. It will be interesting to see (hear) what talented users of this new tech come up with, and as available technology improves by leaps and bounds due to the smartphone races, this set of protocols will do nothing but get more and more refined.

It is very much The Real Thing.