M Britt Kemper Profiles

    There will be no sound difference either way so might as well upgrade.


    That said, if I had to go to a desert isle with Pack 2, Dumble, Pack 3, I'd be set for life. That's more amps than I could possibly have owned in reality.

    I have upgraded to 3.0 and it seems to be working fine for all I need it to do. My existing studio profiles sound the same to me. I'm assuming that with the new firmware, the new studio profiles won't be compatible with older firmware, so even those that want studio profiles will eventually have to upgrade. I think the benefit is that the studio profiles will sounds the same but will be more realistic when switching cabs between rigs, which is a plus. I'm not sure how feasible or beneficial it would be to go back and restore to older f/w to do basic studio profiles. I think the quality even on those will be slightly better with the new system.


    As for making DI profiles, I have to be honest. It kinda scares me a little. Without any control over what the finished product is going to sound like, it's hard to "tweak" to what I think sounds good. With everyone using different amps and cabinets there's no way of knowing if any tweaking I would do would be helping or hurting compared to how someone else is running their rig. With the studio profiles, I feel I can kinda tweak them to what I think sounds good. I can't listen to a straight DI profile and think it sounds anything other than heinous. All I can judge it by is the finished merged profile or how it sounds through my power amp and speaker, so it's going to be a little iffy at first, I think.


    And to my ears, the merged profiles don't sound the same as the studio ones. There is a mid hump in the merged profiles that sounds like it's some sort of summing or phasing. The low end also sounds a little different. The merged profiles aren't awful, but they just aren't the same. I haven't settled on exactly how to put out profiles in the future. Should I just concentrate on studio profiles or put out separate packs with DI and Merged profiles? I like the size/variety/price of the existing packs because, to me, they are affordable and there is enough variation in each pack to appeal to a lot of different styles. I'm not sure how many guys want the DI profiles and how many just want studio profiles or if I will have to include both kinds of profiles for each amp/setting, which is a little more time intensive. I'm open to suggestions at this point.

    I like the studio profiles cause I'm using them for recording. I would be pretty happy if next pack you used a different speaker configuration as it would add a slightly different texture when layering.

    Quote from lonestargtr

    I have upgraded to 3.0 and it seems to be working fine for all I need it to do. My existing studio profiles sound the same to me. I'm assuming that with the new firmware, the new studio profiles won't be compatible with older firmware, so even those that want studio profiles will eventually have to upgrade. I think the benefit is that the studio profiles will sounds the same but will be more realistic when switching cabs between rigs, which is a plus. I'm not sure how feasible or beneficial it would be to go back and restore to older f/w to do basic studio profiles. I think the quality even on those will be slightly better with the new system.


    As for making DI profiles, I have to be honest. It kinda scares me a little. Without any control over what the finished product is going to sound like, it's hard to "tweak" to what I think sounds good. With everyone using different amps and cabinets there's no way of knowing if any tweaking I would do would be helping or hurting compared to how someone else is running their rig. With the studio profiles, I feel I can kinda tweak them to what I think sounds good. I can't listen to a straight DI profile and think it sounds anything other than heinous. All I can judge it by is the finished merged profile or how it sounds through my power amp and speaker, so it's going to be a little iffy at first, I think.


    And to my ears, the merged profiles don't sound the same as the studio ones. There is a mid hump in the merged profiles that sounds like it's some sort of summing or phasing. The low end also sounds a little different. The merged profiles aren't awful, but they just aren't the same. I haven't settled on exactly how to put out profiles in the future. Should I just concentrate on studio profiles or put out separate packs with DI and Merged profiles? I like the size/variety/price of the existing packs because, to me, they are affordable and there is enough variation in each pack to appeal to a lot of different styles. I'm not sure how many guys want the DI profiles and how many just want studio profiles or if I will have to include both kinds of profiles for each amp/setting, which is a little more time intensive. I'm open to suggestions at this point.

    Before deciding on doing anything differently, I'd wait to see if they close the holes in the merging process on the (apparently) imminent FW update. I haven't tried your profiles (not even the new factory rigs; I'm waiting with 3.0 until a more stable release is out, as I'm a Power Rack/guitar cab player), but I've been keeping an eye on this thread, as everyone (well, almost!) seems to love what you do.


    Cheers,
    Sam

    Quote from lonestargtr

    I have upgraded to 3.0 and it seems to be working fine for all I need it to do. My existing studio profiles sound the same to me. I'm assuming that with the new firmware, the new studio profiles won't be compatible with older firmware, so even those that want studio profiles will eventually have to upgrade. I think the benefit is that the studio profiles will sounds the same but will be more realistic when switching cabs between rigs, which is a plus. I'm not sure how feasible or beneficial it would be to go back and restore to older f/w to do basic studio profiles. I think the quality even on those will be slightly better with the new system.


    As for making DI profiles, I have to be honest. It kinda scares me a little. Without any control over what the finished product is going to sound like, it's hard to "tweak" to what I think sounds good. With everyone using different amps and cabinets there's no way of knowing if any tweaking I would do would be helping or hurting compared to how someone else is running their rig. With the studio profiles, I feel I can kinda tweak them to what I think sounds good. I can't listen to a straight DI profile and think it sounds anything other than heinous. All I can judge it by is the finished merged profile or how it sounds through my power amp and speaker, so it's going to be a little iffy at first, I think.


    And to my ears, the merged profiles don't sound the same as the studio ones. There is a mid hump in the merged profiles that sounds like it's some sort of summing or phasing. The low end also sounds a little different. The merged profiles aren't awful, but they just aren't the same. I haven't settled on exactly how to put out profiles in the future. Should I just concentrate on studio profiles or put out separate packs with DI and Merged profiles? I like the size/variety/price of the existing packs because, to me, they are affordable and there is enough variation in each pack to appeal to a lot of different styles. I'm not sure how many guys want the DI profiles and how many just want studio profiles or if I will have to include both kinds of profiles for each amp/setting, which is a little more time intensive. I'm open to suggestions at this point.


    I see. Well to tell the truth, with 3000 profiles and all your wonderful packs, Im fine staying with 2.7. I see no real need for more profiles and since I go thru a CLR and dont need their FC, I see no real benefits for switching to 3.0. Im not one of those guys that has to compulsively upgrade all the time. Especially if there are no good reason to do so. If it aint broke....

    Quote from lasvideo

    Im not one of those guys that has to compulsively upgrade all the time. Especially if there are no good reason to do so. If it aint broke....


    What FW are you using on your Axe-FX...18?


    If you're using FW 2.7.4 on your Kemper then you've upgraded more than a dozen times in the last year.

    Michael


    I suggest you pop in a few Direct Amp Profiles in each of your future packs, maybe half a dozen per pack.


    Direct Amp Profiles are less of an "art" to produce than Studio Profiles that require micing a Cabinet...there will be a flood of excellent DA Profiles from Kemper owners because all they need is a cheap DI Box to produce, the poweramp and Cabinet will create the magic.

    Quote from sambrox

    Before deciding on doing anything differently, I'd wait to see if they close the holes in the merging process on the (apparently) imminent FW update. I haven't tried your profiles (not even the new factory rigs; I'm waiting with 3.0 until a more stable release is out, as I'm a Power Rack/guitar cab player), but I've been keeping an eye on this thread, as everyone (well, almost!) seems to love what you do.


    Cheers,
    Sam


    I hope that merged profiles sound exactly as the studio ones. I'm waiting for the bugs to be fixed in order to test the process by myself with a more stable firmware.


    If they work, I'll not buy any studio profiles anymore. If not, then merged profiles will not be valid to me and I'll stay with studio profiles.

    I'd like to confess I'm a compulsive upgrader....Britt, I would say focus on your studio profiles...just keep doing what your doing. I love that I don't have to tweak your stuff to me those are the best profiles.

    I hope you keep making studio profiles. I think a lot of merged profiles will sound great but a 100% like the studio profiles i dunno...
    I suspect everyone will update at some point because the updates will include features they want even if some people dont care about merged profiles.
    i surely will update but my priority will always be for studio profiles.
    of course preferences vary!

    I have liked the studio profiles I've done with 3.0. Hopefully, everyone will eventually get updated and I won't have to bounce back and forth from firmware versions. The studio 3.0 are equal to or better than the previous firmware versions to me. The only differences I'm seeing are differences between the merged and studio profiles of the same setup.

    I love the studio profiles myself. I understand what you are saying Michael about your hesitance on the DI profiles. No real control there. Maybe add a few in to test the waters.

    My name is Chris & I'm a guitar-a-holic!

    I'm not a compulsive upgraded myself. I just recently went to Lion for my mac after years of Snow Leopard, but for the new 3.0 rig pack I did upgrade to a 2.8 beta for those and having gone up to 3.0 now I haven't noticed any major issues for what I've been doing. I was a little worried walking onstage with the new firmware for the first time, but nothing really changed for me. I think many of the issues are related to the Remote and Performance Mode, which I'm not using yet. I'd like to get one of the Remotes, but I guess I'm waiting in line for that.


    I just finished up recording solos and extra parts for 4 new songs we've recorded and I used the JMP20, Mesa Lonestar, and the 5E3 deluxe (all from pack 3) for the solos. I used the AC30 from pack 2 on a couple of the main rhythm parts as well as a dumble and a marshall on the other songs. I've incorporated the AC15 and JMP20 on a few songs in our live show as well. I've gotten some emails for requests for amps and I've somehow ended up on a weird solid state kick of late. I wanted to get a roland jazz chorus profile and then someone asked for a polytone one and so I'm exploring a few other solid state vintage things that have unique sounds because maybe they're not so readily available everywhere else. At this point, I'll probably be using 3.0 for the new studio profiles so hopefully the bugs will get worked out and the folks that just want to keep using studio profiles will be able to move up to 3.0 without losing anything they've already gotten.

    Hi guys,


    Quick question.


    I have all Mbritt profile packs, and absolutely love the range of tones. I have found however the profiles a bit dark and flabby (No other word comes to mind sorry) playing through my music man petrucci jp6 + Atomic CLR cab. I would put money on there being a simple solution to this and have total faith in the Kemper community to help me get better tone out of this setup. All profiles of Michaels have the same characteristic, so I know its my setup thats is the problem and not Michael'' incredible profiles..


    Anyone else got a similar setup gear wise and have any tips or feel like throwing me some advice.


    Last thing, Michael i really appreciate the work you've done for the Kemper. Whatever your secret formula is, please dont stop. :)


    Take care


    Check out the supporting pdf's for the packs. Michael mentions adjusting the Definition control can be a big help. The profiles are meant to be neutral and allow enough leeway for you to adjust to taste. I find starting with the Studio EQ in the "X" spot works


    . Slight tweaks can make a big difference.

    Loose and flabby? Man sometimes I scratch my head when I hear comments like this. These are ALL super rock solid on the bottom, with no ridiculous sub low or obnoxious extended range muddying up the tight bottom end. Hell I would even bet money that some vintage enthusiasts might find his profiles of vintage Amps TOO tight because they do all have a similar characteristic.. He also mics them all through similar cabs as well.

    I would say that the pickups in the Petrucci are going to be a lot darker than the low output P90's and single coils that I tweak to. The Crunch Lab pickup has ceramic magnets and high output and the listed eq curve on the dimarzio site shows high bass and lower treble content, which probably works great for his Mesa amps which have a lot of treble saturation at higher gains. If that's the case, then find an eq module you can apply to most all the profiles to compensate. I'd reduce somewhere from 160-250hz by 3-4db and maybe boost a little around 2k. You can also try turning up the definition but if it starts getting weird, I'd go for the eq. I find a touch less negative effect on the overall tone if you use the studio eq as opposed to the graphic eq which can cause some weirder eq curves. Hope this helps. There may be others with higher output humbuckers that have found other techniques too.