Hmm. Just to make sure my message wasn't unclear, but I was trying to say I think there is a problem somewhere in Eltzejupp's setup which offsets the comparison (by having the reference wrong) and makes the biggest difference there.
Indeed. I pointed that out earlier as well.
My setup:
Kemper ( nearly new condition), no input sense, no distortion sence, output eq flat. No tricks.
Goes directly into Steinberg UR242 interface
2 rokit rp6 g3 monitors
8 diffrent guitars. Jems, gibson les pauls, stratocaster, musicman luke2, peavy van Halen Wolfgang
That’s all.
Same result when I go directly to the monitors without interface. No difference in the sound when doing that.
Display MoreMy setup:
Kemper ( nearly new condition), no input sense, no distortion sence, output eq flat. No tricks.
Goes directly into Steinberg UR242 interface
2 rokit rp6 g3 monitors
8 diffrent guitars. Jems, gibson les pauls, stratocaster, musicman luke2, peavy van Halen Wolfgang
That’s all.
Same result when I go directly to the monitors without interface. No difference in the sound when doing that.
Reading back your older comments I'd say this problem has nothing to do with kemper, but is somewhere in your playback->record->render toolchain/workflow that you comment shortly here:
No spdif in the ur242. But I think it's not a sdif thing. I didn't download the file from youtube. I used my inputs 3 and 4 to record directly from the vid into cubase when vid is playing. No download between that. When rordind like this way I hear exactly the same out of cube what I've heard before over my monitors and I wonder where the highst are in your recording of Rubens part.
ok, Julai, what about this test I made: took a seller BE100 profile, did a recording with my daw (sonar8) through a FireWire audioboard. Sent the take to the seller which had to recognize the huge difference. The sound he was selling was not the one I recorded.
So, no controversial playback things here.
And so, even if we have playback things going on, as you mentioned, we are back at the beginning with an unsolved issue. There must be a reason for this so that we can work it out
michaelmellner, I am NOT trying to say there are no differences overall NOR that this research would not be needed. Quite the opposite actually and I think overall this is a good discussion and study to be made! 
I am just commenting this one example that was put out here that there is something weird going on with it.
I haven't read the whole thread here, but just thinking that it is easier to comment and analyze the actual examples posted in this thread. Therefore I would encourage everyone making their own clips if possible to have everyone to hear the differences themselves.
ok, Julai, what about this test I made: took a seller BE100 profile, did a recording with my daw (sonar8) through a FireWire audioboard. Sent the take to the seller which had to recognize the huge difference. The sound he was selling was not the one I recorded.
So, no controversial playback things here.
And so, even if we have playback things going on, as you mentioned, we are back at the beginning with an unsolved issue. There must be a reason for this so that we can work it out
Just wanted to chime in and say that I don't think it's exactly fair to say the sound I am selling is not the one recorded. It is my BE100 profiles Michael is talking about. He did send me some sound samples and we tried a few various discussion points as something seemed off....Quite frankly, almost all of my customers are pleased with the results they get with no tweaks whatsoever....
This is a unique situation for me....I am monitoring this thread but wanted to clear the air. Yes, I recognized the "huge difference" in sounds between the recording posted online and Michael's recording. There are many other variables to look at before the Kemper or profile.
The demo in question was recorded by a customer using computer monitors and a phone. No smoke and mirrors.
I want to help in this and make things as consistent as possible.
ok, Julai, what about this test I made: took a seller BE100 profile, did a recording with my daw (sonar8) through a FireWire audioboard. Sent the take to the seller which had to recognize the huge difference. The sound he was selling was not the one I recorded.
So, no controversial playback things here.
And so, even if we have playback things going on, as you mentioned, we are back at the beginning with an unsolved issue. There must be a reason for this so that we can work it out
Could you link to the demo please? I'm sure Mattfig wouldn't mind sharing that specific profile so we can try (knowing him being very generous).
Edit: I actually own the v1 pack so for me a link to the demo would be interesting!
Display MoreMy setup:
Kemper ( nearly new condition), no input sense, no distortion sence, output eq flat. No tricks.
Goes directly into Steinberg UR242 interface
2 rokit rp6 g3 monitors
8 diffrent guitars. Jems, gibson les pauls, stratocaster, musicman luke2, peavy van Halen Wolfgang
That’s all.
Same result when I go directly to the monitors without interface. No difference in the sound when doing that.
Just to reiterate. No one is questioning your kemper recordings. It's your re-recording of Ruben that's off.
As far as I know the EQ,gain,definition,etc are there so you can adjust to the type of guitar you're using? Who cares what a video has? Adjust the settings until it sounds good.
Post a DI and if it's a free profile, have a link to it. I'd love to reamp it and dial in a tone.
Display MoreJust wanted to chime in and say that I don't think it's exactly fair to say the sound I am selling is not the one recorded. It is my BE100 profiles Michael is talking about. He did send me some sound samples and we tried a few various discussion points as something seemed off....Quite frankly, almost all of my customers are pleased with the results they get with no tweaks whatsoever....
This is a unique situation for me....I am monitoring this thread but wanted to clear the air. Yes, I recognized the "huge difference" in sounds between the recording posted online and Michael's recording. There are many other variables to look at before the Kemper or profile.
The demo in question was recorded by a customer using computer monitors and a phone. No smoke and mirrors.
I want to help in this and make things as consistent as possible.
Ok...I have to apologize with Matt (Mattfig). I have used the wrong words and really want to correct them.
I have written that "The sound he was selling was not the one I recorded".
Instead I wanted to say that I didn't achieve the same tone. Sorry again I did choose those words: it wasn't my intention to underestimate Matt's job which is fantastic and is really trying hard to get this thing fixed.
The profiles he sold me are genuine and for sure stunning.
As a matter of fact I've been Matt's client even with his first BE profiles.
hope this helps in my intention to correct the bad statement
All good Michael! I am learning from this thread. Thanks for the concern and all the best!
Mattfig
All good Michael! I am learning from this thread. Thanks for the concern and all the best!
Mattfig
Display MoreSo here is the next test:
M Britt Kemper free pack
Profile 69 Mars 50 9 3
First you hear Ruben presenting the profile. A clear and open tone with punch. Love it.
Next in a row
-Luke II
-Jem with evolution pu
-Jem with paf pu
-Strat american standard
-Gibson Les Paul
-EVH Wolfgang
Crazy eh?! None reach this sound. It's like a woolplate over my monitors.
External Content soundcloud.comContent 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.
Hi Frank, your LukeII sample compared to this original Ruben's one sounds like garbage 
why is that? 
Interesting debate !
First, you should check our Kemper's settings like pure cabinet... and adjust the gain to your tastes and your guitar's pickups.
I think some disappointement can come from "very well mixed an mastered" demos of some profiles, I heard that sometimes, even about quite expensive profiles packs.
There is no problem with that of course, because that's a good way to hear profiles in a mix situation, but you can be lost when you will test the profile alone at home, without the EQ, the reverbs and the great bass tone besides.
Personnally, I never add any EQ or reverb on demos to show the "raw" tone of the profiles because I think it's closer to what you really get at the end, even with 4 guitars and a bass. 
Are you sure about that? I have always assumed he only captured the speach in the rom and sent the guitar direct to DAW from the main outs.
you can hear guitar strings in his recordings - it must be captured with mic
Hi Frank, your LukeII sample compared to this original Ruben's one sounds like garbage
That is my big question. I dont know. It's not onky the luke. Nearly all of the gainy profiles from this pack dudnt sound like the vid and I tried it with many guitars. But I am really happy to have many pacjs which sound like heaven, so I dont care any longer about that.
What? Miced monitors?
You're kidding. Who will mic a monitor? His voice is recorded via a mic in the room but not the guitar sound.
That would be unprofessional. Why do think of this? I think nobody will have the idea to something like that when he recorded something with the kpa.
Frank, I can hear guitar strings being strummed in Ruben's sample... listen to it...
Frank, I can hear guitar strings being strummed in Ruben's sample... listen to it...
Yes, thats right I heard that. But finally it makes no diffrence. The core point is that cant reach that that sound. I wont buy a tele so i give up here and I go back to all the other excellent profiles I have in stock.
