Cameron Aldrich DI Profile - Cab Added

  • I had practice last night and loaded up the Aldrich Marshall profile, I play poweramp into a stock marshall lead cab loaded with rola 65s. The profile sounded incredible and cut in the mix, really like this profile

  • Which thread?

    I keeeell you!!!
    I'm sure the guy isn't interested in me after I was one of the most vocal skeptics before his thread got completely ransacked. His bogus asking price and justification thereafter put me off in a major way, too. His DI could be superior for all I know, but it's just a DI and only as good as the cab you match it with.


    It would be interesting for someone with the "Official Mark Cameron" DI to post a comparison to this one using the same IR.

    Is it wrong I kinda miss that thread?

  • On my Sony headphones I definetely liked the Cameron one better, it had less fizz and a bit more low mids. In the car (where I like to evaulate sounds because it's familiar and I don't prefer headphones these days), I would say the Cameron still edges yours out by a bit for the same reasons. However, they are very close, and it comes down to does someone want a little more high end or a little more low mids... Either way, I really like all of your Cameron and Aldrich profiles and I play them as much as any purchased profile. For $5 i'd defintely buy the Cameron profile (singular) and maybe even $10...but not $40. I'm really after that Dokken/80's sound I hear in my head (which isn't always what i hear when i go back and listen to the albums :) But the sound is what i heard from some old Cameron CCV Youtube clips or Mark Day's Friedman clips on youtube.

    Thanks for the feedback. I think my clip was using the T2 DI profile from 5/7. It has a bit more high end than the others. But now I find myself going back to the first one I posted (Aldrich 5/6 01 DI) as I think it sounds a little more balanced. I may try to reamp the above clip using that one to see how it sounds in the mix. Also, I plan on making a few more profiles of the Aldrich with different EQ settings and a bit less gain. If you have any suggestions, let me know.

  • Hey John, the actual Aldrich amp cleans up slightly better than the profiles but still not to the extent of some of my other amps (Cameron CCV, Wizard MCII, etc). As I mentioned before, it's kind of a one-trick pony. I'm also using a guitar with higher output pickups so maybe something like a Strat would work better when rolling the volume knob back.

  • I'm really digging these profiles. All three very useful. I combined 1 and 2 with the Bogner cab from Bert Meulendijks F-Man pack and am very pleased. Automatically started to play a lot of 1987 riffs :)


    Man, that is pretty specific time period...most people just say the Eighties, as in the decade. ;):P:D

  • Man, that is pretty specific time period...most people just say the Eighties, as in the decade. ;):P:D

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

  • @MichaelRiesenbeck


    Ahh, I see. Certainly a great album, and very definitive 1987 era tone. However, I guess I was thinking that your reference to 1987, in the context of this thread, was going to have some direct connection to either Doug Aldrich or some other guitarist using a modded Marshall.


    The 1987 Whitesnake album featured John Sykes on lead, playing through Mesa Boogie Mark III Coliseum heads (Mark III pre-amp section with six 6L6 power tubes and 180 Watts of power -- Yikes).


    In any event, it's all good! :thumbup:


    Cheers,
    John

  • Hey Webb,


    Send me a private message here or on RT when you have a chance, I owe you a profile or (pack) whenever you have a chance.


    Edited by me to remove "offensive opinion"


    Edited again to add I'm putting back my "offensive opinion" and post because I stand by it. I'm sorry if "my profile has more bass and the other profile has some digital artifacting in the higher frequencies is something unethical or mean or offensive thing to say." also not to mention people have bashed my profile in this thread.


    If you guys want to know Mark Cameron was really impressed with Webb's profiles, I'm being honest here but if you compare ours you get a lot more bass frequencies that just aren't there with Webb's profile. Also in the highs you can hear some weird digital artifacting thing going on, especially during bends. Like for example the inturlude to Metallica's "Orion" or AiC "Whale and WASP" or just a solo or song with the bends in the higher top part of the fretboard, play that with Webb's profile and then ours (if you have it) you can hear what we're talking about. Mark thinks it's not that bad and you can just play through it.


    Either way Mark Cameron himself thinks Webb did a great job. Best way I can summarize in my own words is with ours you get more bass frequencies and just more bass in general and there is no weird digital artifacting going on when you make bends in the higher part of the fretboard.


    Bottom line Mark Cameron gives Webb's profile his thumbs up.


  • I'm sorry, but that is just bizarre post, and a rather offensive way to interject and advertise your commercial profile business into a thread started by a member who freely shared his work. If you had just simply posted with a complimentary remark for @Webb, and left it at that, that would have been gracious and professional. Instead, you had to turn it into a back-handed compliment (a damning with faint praise), while proceeding to self-promote your own interests.


    Not cool, IMHO.

  • Nevermind was going to delete my post because of the post above but I really want to know how stating having more bass and no artifacting in the higher frequencies is really offensive and backhanded bashing while Webb's profles do not have the low frequencies our profile does and some artifacting in the higher frequencies.


    Mark likes Webb's profile either way.


    If I am a bad person for stating this then so be it. I guess if someone gives something away they can't have someone critique their profile even if they made the actual amp.


    I apologize I was out of line.

  • It's all good guys. I'm very much open to constructive criticism. Good or bad...I don't get offended easily. I'm obviously a fan of Mark's amps as I have a Cameron Aldrich and CCV currently and also had an Atomica in the past. Great amps that are not easy to come by. But the beauty of the Kemper is that people who may have never played one now get to experience a taste of it...so I'm all for more Cameron profiles (free or commercial).


    I did just retube my Aldrich with a matched set of Winged C's and NOS preamp tubes that I got from psychodave over on the Rig Talk forums. The amp sounds better now than ever and I plan on going back and making new profiles when I get a chance. Right now I'm working on a CCV pack that is sounding killer! It's gotten some pretty high praise from a few who have been testing them for me.


    Here is a quick mix test I did using one of my CCV profiles mic'ed with dual 57's through a Bogner 4x12 with V30's. No post processing at all on the guitars.


    External Content soundcloud.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

  • The stuff Webb's been working on is really, really nice. It may be less gainy, but check out Chris O's CCV and Atomica profiles on RE, some of the best profiles I've played period.


    And BTW, it's ok for Jason to constructively critique Webb's profiles. In fact, Webb invited feedback and criticism and clearly doesn't mind. If anything, that kind of feedback helps somebody like Webb potentially approach profiling differently to mitigate the KPA's tonal effect on the profile. The official profile does have less grain and smoother low end, not to mention more. Some of that can also be attributed to the amp settings, even some could be noticeably mitigated by tweaking the profile itself. I don't think the difference is $40 worth or much different than the "secret proprietary method" of DI'ing, but that's just me.

    Edited once, last by MementoMori ().