A little disappointment about the profiling results

Mhhh... your latest post suggested a number of thoughts to me.

Do you know this trick? It's a quite famous optical illusion. It came to my mind because, when you study the way it works as an illusion, you discover that a sum of many very small details makes the difference in the end.
When you listen to a demo online you're listening something quite different from you playing the profile at home, even though through the same speakers. Many small differences which make... a very perceivable difference.

First of all, the player makes all the difference in the world and in itself this can change everything. Think of signature sounds; Knopfler, Clapton, Metheny, Pastorius... if we played their rig(s) we'd not even come close instruments.
Also see this post.
Not to speak about picks, attack position, string gauge, PUs, and guitar in itself.

Then we don't always know how the recording has been made. A bit of verb, the mix with other instruments at times, some light Eq, a gentle compression or limiting for keeping the track in the face and not distort. And, the interface's sonic personality (converters, or impedances...)?

Then the file is put on the Net. It's rarely au uncompressed, bit-to-bit file. Then you listen to it through your computer's converters, through player's APIs or dll, through drivers.

Then you load a profile in your KPA... are all the parameters always exactly as they were in the OR? What about Clean Sens and Distorted Sens? And the instrument, with all its parts... and our hand, position, pick type, attack angle and position, strings, strength, forearm weight and length, picking-hand's resting technique... And the choice of the notes, the strings we choose, left hand's pressure and position...

Then we have the psychological fact of us listening to a performance where we don't play vs. a performance of ours: the attention, the approach, what we privilege and disregard subtly change.

Then there are the expectations about the sound we're chasing, about how the guitar should sound like, and bla bla bla...

I think the "lost square" might be hiding scattered among all of this.

I agree with pretty much with the previous post, Sound is a big part in your hands !!!! how you play affects everything,... Soft attack , hard attack, the way you play...ect...and sometimes profiles need to be tweaked to your playing \liking....

From my experience i would say that most problems with unsatisfying/nonmatching profiles result from levelling or clipping problems.
- pay attention to the input level that enters the KPA return extra carefully. Especially when the input is so hot that you need to set the return level near to its minimum value (-32 db). Since the profiling "UFO" signals sometimes will be a lot louder than your guitar playing you might still get clipping even if you think that the level was ok. So make sure there is enough headroom in both the negative as well as the postive direction regarding the return level.
- Clipping might not only occur at the KPA return but also before. Those who who use a submixer or mic preamp before the KPA return should also make sure there is enough headroom for louder signals at the mic channel inputs as well as the rest of the signal path. As a test you can set your amp volume a bit higher than you will use for your profilling. Setup the levels, then reduce the amp volume again.
- Clipping can also occur at the mics themselves if they just can´t handle the signal level. Keep in mind that the KPA profiling signals normally produce a lot more low frequencies than your guitar. If you are not aiming for special speaker clipping, it´s not necessary to set amp volume very loud to get good profiling results.

Quote from Stratosurfer

Thanks viabcroce! Clean and distorted sens make sense! maybe that info should be included in the read me documents of the profiles along with the guitar info. As i mentioned the anderton's guys' profiles sounded almost the same when i played. Maybe their kpa had the same sens settings...

When i decided to purchase a commercial profile i listen to the demo. If i like it, i buy it. After installing it to my kpa, if there's a difference i get dissapointed. Simple as that

P.s.
Been through the same situation with the axe fx and s-gear and some other software amps. I think this is the awful truth about the guitar sound unlike the synth sounds for keyboard players.

I never asked Andy directly, but i got the feeling that some of the profiles were heavily modified to create the demos on his site.
Some were completely different for me (Soldano Hot-Rod, Hayden Mofo) while some were spot on (Toneking Galaxy, Marshall 1987x) and there's no real way of telling -
that said, what you know you're buying is the internal parameters that make up the profiler version of the amp -
so if you manage to understand the 'nature of the beast' from the demos (youtube clips of the real thing can also help), you can have that character in many different versions, one of which will sound like the demos.

Just playing with the 'definition' setting can make a profile unrecognizable.

Talking about the demos of TAF profiles, I think it's important to know that for example Leroy Miller did some of them and he wrote a great post about his experience a while ago. You might want to read that to get an idea what he did.
In my own words: He took the soul of the profiles and added his own spices. Not a bad thing, imho. But it's certainly helpful to know.

Don't know exactly which demos he did and I don't know how much own spices the other guys added when they did demo tracks. But what I do know: It's there, enjoy the amp and make it yours. It perfectly works for me.

Cheers,
Martin

Quote from lightbox

Talking about the demos of TAF profiles, I think it's important to know that for example Leroy Miller did some of them and he wrote a great post about his experience a while ago. You might want to read that to get an idea what he did.
In my own words: He took the soul of the profiles and added his own spices. Not a bad thing, imho. But it's certainly helpful to know.

Don't know exactly which demos he did and I don't know how much own spices the other guys added when they did demo tracks. But what I do know: It's there, enjoy the amp and make it yours. It perfectly works for me.

Cheers,
Martin

Funny thing, i remember this post but somehow managed to skip the part where he used hardware pedals
Thanks, Martin! This does shed some light on the event. And new ideas

There's a little misconception in your post, Stratosurfer.
The profiles aren't modified. The actual amp (and cab) is there. The rigs are modified, that's a difference you need to understand. Many have the same problem. They do not distinguish between profiles and rigs.
Of course I do understand that you would prefer to listen to demos of the actual rigs provided in the pack. I for one prefer to listen to inpiring demos of what a true artist can achieve with them. I don't want to play a 100% copy of Andy's idea of the amp and effects. I want to find my own sound based on Andy's awesome profiling work. Maybe it would have been a good idea to point out the difference in the pack's description.

Quote from meambobbo

t I know many people have done profiles with mic pre's and have said the profiling is perfect.

I did my first profiling session yesterday, profiling my partner's beloved Millennia STT-1 preamp, and I have to say it totally nailed it 100%. I spent some time reading the manual on the subject and getting the volumes 100% between the reference amp and the test profile ( I used the Avalon 757 profile uploaded by Downfall Studios, a very good profile similar to the VT mode of the STT-1). However once the 45 second profiling was complete (and in every new profile I saved I had to raise the volume +12dB to reach unity gain with the test profile, that is something I never saw mentioned in the manual) and I further refined it (not sure if anything changed here but I did it anyway), well after that I swear I would switch between the profile and the reference amp and could NOT tell the difference. Subjecting my partner to the same test got the same reaction. It captured that magic sound in a bottle so to speak, I'm completely blown away at this point.

Probably profiling amps with multiple mics will be the acid test, but from this early test have very high hopes.

Quote from Stratosurfer

Profiles dont sound the same when i play.

"I" being a keyword here. Kemper doesn't profile fingers yet. I am glad you sorted out your profiling problems. Levels are critical.

Quote from Stratosurfer

i know that the player's fingers and guitar will change the sound to some degree.

make that: "to a huge degree" - one of the best features of the Profiler is for me it's sensitivity towards the input signal: different pickup selections/pickups/guitars...
It's the way it should be - like a good tube amp.

I'd add:

consider the KPA also as a versatile amp: don't be afraid of the sounds it can produce;

start enjoying the way you sound: you sound like no-one else, it doesn't make sense to try and imitate someone else's sound;

start building your sound: it's what you can give to music.

Quote from Stratosurfer

As a summary what i've learned from this tread;

Don't use a mic pre if you are not experienced.
Don't have the amps too loud (in my case they were).
Be very careful about the kpa amp and return levels.

Thank you all!!

This is something I've noticed as well. Could be just the Mesa though, but the profiles come out far more fuzzy/blurry/loose with the master at 11 o'clock than at a hair above 9 o'clock.

Quote from viabcroce

I'd add:

consider the KPA also as a versatile amp: don't be afraid of the sounds it can produce;

start enjoying the way you sound: you sound like no-one else, it doesn't make sense to try and imitate someone else's sound;

start building your sound: it's what you can give to music.

Display More

+1

I've been profiling my Marshall, a lot, trying all kinds of mic positions, and there is always a little difference in the low end.

The kemper is a bit "lighter" and it's not just my ears, I have wavelab recording while i'm comparing and you can see the wavefile of the real amp is a bit different.

The bottom end is not as fat. Still close but the bottom end is definitely different !!!
[Blocked Image: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/92675783/kemper%20v%20real%20amp.jpg]

Here is a pic, you can see at 42 to 52 there is more content. from 30s to 42s it's flatter. I'm just playing the same riff

Quote from kriswylde

I've been profiling my Marshall, and there is always a little difference in the low end. the kemper is a bit "lighter" and it's not my ears , I have wavelab recording while i'm comparing and you can see the wavefile of the real amp is a bit different. The bottom end is not as fat. Still close

Many get excellent profile results that will fool the ears in an A-B blind test.
How the refining is done affect the results a lot.

real amp vs kemper profiler amp
[YOUTUBE]

okstrat posted this eq comparison in another forum thread with the real boogie amp vs the kemper profile.
Purple = kemper, yellow = boogie.
"I just did this as a test in ozone - top is kemper profile, bottom is a boogie I was profiling... they aren't 100% but pretty damned close!"

[Blocked Image: https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/1149365_10200721040047580_1707167739_o.jpg]