Posts by mtmartin71

I'm a previous customer of the MattFig profiles. Like some of those for sure...pre LP treatment.

Bought the '71 Modded Super Lead LP pack. Is it just me or are the bass frequencies WAY too heavy? In comparison, I had a 76 Super Lead per Reampzone that I gave the post LP treatment too and the bass is controllable within the amp EQ...as it should be.

I'm hesitant to try others if they're all the same i.e. too bass heavy. I'd need to use post EQ shaping to get the low end mud out on the '71 LP pack. Maybe that's a feature of the Friedman mod, but it's not really worth trying to make it work by tying up a slot to EQ out the low end.

For clarity, this is on the DI profiles both using an Ownhammer IR and the Kemper Kab with Greenback imprint. Bass is too present in both scenarios.

I'm fine with someone doing new packs that allow us to dial our own amp in, but, could someone explain why you need profiles made at all the different points on the amp if it's liquid? I would expect you'd only need one profile per amp channel.

Ideal for me is that someone captures one awesome amp at "noon" for everything and gives me a studio and direct version of that. Reampzone kind of did that on a number of their profiles made in the past. He did it that way and also noted his direct profile EQ/Gain settings in a file. I prefer to use the latest OH IRs though so direct is more important to me as I'm using the Kemper Kab or a Power Station + Cab.

If I were doing studio only to a FRFR wedge again, then TJ's reswizzles would interest me. As it stands, they are less interesting due to the lack of direct profiles.

The main amps on that list that aren't as intuitive from the names are the Orange channels. I think those are AD30 amps channels...not the Rockerverb. But, I could be wrong. Would be nice to know.

Interesting OP. I "want" to make the JCM 800 work for me but I find I much prefer a Super Lead or a modded Marshall sound, like the Friedman BE or JJ sound. I was trying to make some commercial 2203 and 2210 profiles work as the direct versions had all the settings so I could make them into LPs. However, whether it's the CM800 tone stack or the gain taper, anything approaching 7-8 on the gain made it into a wooly mess and nothing sounding like any of the classic sounds of hard rock and metal made with the 800s. Having never really played a real one, is that accurate for how they sound? Is it a case of needing the volume and mid gain to get to a tight and heavy rock sound with them? Not sure.

Note that I'm only going with the retrofitted profiles I had so I didn't really test a ground up LP yet. Primarily, I was trying it out on Reampzone direct profiles (as he posts his settings) as well as Tim Owens HAWP 27 for the BE100 amp (where he also posted his settings).

First off, the workflow of retrofitting wasn't super intuitive to me. It goes something like this...
1. You hit the restore buttons for gain, amp EQ, and amp model. You "hit the button once" but is it all three at the same time or just reset them one at a time? Confusing as to why this is needed.

2. You then select the tone stack

3. Set the origin gain pot ref if you know it

4. This is where it gets more confusing to me. At the point you select the tone stack, it puts the amp EQ knobs at 50%. But, the EQ is still "working" on the new amp model knobs prior to getting the knob values to what the profile was originally made with. So, if you select an amp tone stack model that defaults Bass, Middle, Treble, and Presence all at 5, and your original profile had BMTP settings of 6,7,6,6 (let's say), turning to those settings does audibly change the EQ of the model...it seems...before you burn it in. I would assume the way it should work is that the EQ should have no effect until you set it and burn it? Otherwise, aren't you kind of getting a double EQ thing happening unless the retrofitted profiles were done with all EQ on 5? Maybe I'm not doing something right.

In terms of sounds, my observations...

• I found I didn't like the real amp tone stacks and behavior for the vintage Marshalls. I tried a Reampzone 76 JMP (modded though) and a JCM 800 2203. Adding gain there was loose, woofy, and bassy and the amp EQ didn't correct what I wanted to hear for me ears. I think these would need pedals to sound how I liked or just the right guitar to match the original profile better. I don't care for Kemper's pedals as a means to tame and shape that, as people did with the real thing. In this case, score one for the original Kemper EQ
• I tried MBritt's pack and did find the EQ more useful in his vintage Marshalls, but the gain structure had similar limitations. Again...probably how it's meant to be in real life, and why people use real pedals in front of the amps. The EQ did at least perform better on the MBritt Liquid Profiles.
• With Tim Owens BE100 HAWP 27, I found the LP eq more useful, but, in comparing direct to the profiles with the old EQ method, the latter had more life and clarity. Maybe I could have got there with more EQing, but just my observation.
• With the Reampzone JJ100, I found the LP more useful to get to the gain and EQ I wanted in a better fashion. Score one for LP
• With the Reampzone Soldano 100, same as above. This one was the biggest beneficiary of LP because with everything at 12o'clock on the dials, it was pretty dark and not a great sound. The real amp EQ stack of the SLO100 was much better than trying Kemper EQ or gain. Score another for LP

So it was a mixed bag for me. I think what I found is for amp profiles done by the profiler where the EQ and gain was very close to what I wanted, Kemper EQ and little to no gain adjustment is the way to go. This was especially true for vintage style amps. For profiles where the original amp EQ is more interactive or useful, and where the profile was done with everything at 5, Liquid Profiling for the gain and EQ makes a big difference to getting what I originally wanted from the profiles and it kind of saves a few of them for me.

What I'm thinking about is, did the profilers I bought from record their settings and if they published them before, will they provide them? I do know Reampzone does that especially for their direct profiles. I'm super excited to try and get the gain and EQ I want vs. accepting how they profiled it.

Quote from Dynochrome

I'm sure USB audio is a great update for many. It's impressive that Kemper can add this to everyone's unit without them having to buy their 4th Kemper to get it. I can't think of another manufacturer that would do this. It's clear Kemper isn't just after your money. How many different AXFX have been released since Kemper arrived? For me, I don't care about this or "liquid profiling". Just give me layout D!

Layout D? Curious what that is?

Liquid Profiling, in theory, would be great for me because you could just take your very favorite profile of an amp and more naturally adjust the gain and EQ to different snapshots. I guess the current EQ approach is "OK" but the gain staging and response is definitely not if you're trying to adjust it from breakup to full crunch.

If you profile your own amps, then liquid profiling isn't much of a enhancement as you can just profile exactly what you need. For those who rely on buying profiles to get our amp sounds though, it's a big deal and time saver for me to get the amp into my Kemper and then reliably work the gain and EQ for all the snapshots I need. That's if it works well. TBD.

So 9.0 beta is primarily the USB audio, not the liquid profiling? Liquid profiling is coming down the road?

I take the OP's post to basically be saying he longs for the warts and rough edges of analog devices and performing with them. It's more human. We have all this AI crap and other de-humanizing technology that is rapidly advancing...does it really make us better musicians or are we producing more organic and interesting music? Is this kind of what you're getting at OP?

Digital or analog...they're just tools. You can get inspiring sounds from both. I do feel like many tube amps that are cooking in their sweet spot offer a sound, interaction, and experience you just can't get with digital. I personally feel like the Kemper does the best job of recreating a tube-amp experience, in a simple way, of any digital device I've used to date. It does have its own tonal footprint, but I'd argue that's why it's stood the test of time despite no relentless release of HW. When you throw in the volume control and simplicity of routing and set up, it makes it hard to go back to tube amps just for that special sweet spot feeling.

Sounds like you have both, so enjoy whatever floats your boat that day and make some cool music.

Thought I'd try keeping this alive. Both some observations and some likes around direct profiles.

• I have seen some profilers move to a "neutral" tone stack approach i.e. everything at noon. I'm not sure I like it. The problem...as I see it...is I can't get the high end to sound present and right through use of amp treble and presence on the profile. And, sometimes the low end is too woofy. I could use other types of EQ cuts but don't want to have to do that.
• I wish more profilers would share their EQ settings, especially direct. Reampzone is great about this.
• I also wish I had my own amps, or, dare I say it...a modeler. It gets expensive searching for your ideal sound by trying out commercial profiles.

I've got 3-4 profiles that really work for me in terms of my set up. I'm using a Kemper Kab and an Ownhammer IR. Mostly I'm playing and rehearsing through my Kemper Kab these days whereas I was all MBritt profiles and direct to my CLR and/or the board before. The direct profiles I like the most for my current set up are:

• Tone Junkie 72 Superlead Direct profiles (Jumpered) - my favorite current setup. Minimal adjustments on the EQ and the low end, mids and high end are all where they need to be. Sounds like the Marshall sound in my head. To a lesser extent, I like his Purple Plexi direct profiles but they need less low end and more high end, at least for humbuckers. If I didn't have another profile, I'd keep my Kemper for the 72 SL.
• Reampzone Friedman JJ100 - Reampzone is hit or miss for me. I like a few of the JCM800 profiles (just not enough in there) but really like the JJ100. I always liked the Mbritt Soldano pack but the Reampzone direct profiles are just too dark and don't have any presence relative to some others. This JJ though is nicely dialed in and is in the same neighborhood as the TJ 72 Superlead
• Tim Owens HAWP Freidman BE 100 - these are free. Lots of detail around the EQ and setting used. He's done various shoots on request of others with certain EQ set ups. My favs is the HAWP21 BE 100 session. The bass is a bit a little lower than others, the different saturation settings and such are off, and the high end and mids are dialed in right...all for humbuckers. Pretty similar to the JJ100 but like it, more gain on tap than the Marshall Superlead if needed.
• Tone Junkie AC 50 - These are cool for a vintage Marshally vibe. Nice cut (more tweaking needed for me) but a little less gain on tap than the 72 SL. I like these better than the 68 Purple Plexis.

For those familar with these profile packs and sounds, I'd be interested to see if there are any others I should check out that you feel are in the same neighborhood. Seems like Tone Junkie gave up on direct captures as I haven't seen any in the last number of profile packs he's done. Still looking for a really good vintage JCM800 sound. The Reampzone is close, just limited in terms of which captures I actually liked.

Quote from Heartkiller

Some of the best DI profiles I've ever gotten were from Lenz Profiles. All of his modded Marshalls are truly out of this world and required VERY minimal tweaking, and a lot of that is just preference anyway. Some really great stuff he has.

So I tried a few. The 80 JMP 2203 Slash mod and the 69 1987 50W.

I really like the sound of the 69 amp. It's great! However, all 6 DI profiles are effectively at the same gain structure (cranked, I'm guessing) so if you're going to want them for a performance, you can only use one shot or you'll have to cut the gain to get clean and low/mid gain. Depends on your needs though. You could certainly use it as one slot in a performance but I don't like to cobble together different amps because it can be hard to balance it out right in the mix and get the volumes correct.

I'm not 100% sure on the 80 JMP 2203. It does sound like Slash but it's pretty nasally. However, in a mix, I think you could shine. Same thing as the other amp...all high gain profiles. The lowest gain of any of the profiles on this one was 5.8. No mid gain or cleans. Not a deal breaker of course.

Quote from Heartkiller

Some of the best DI profiles I've ever gotten were from Lenz Profiles. All of his modded Marshalls are truly out of this world and required VERY minimal tweaking, and a lot of that is just preference anyway. Some really great stuff he has.

Do these lean on the brighter side or darker side out of the box?

Some great feedback. After taking in that info and thinking it through, I'm going to use my approach of one amp profiled and shot at 3 points with clean, mid gain, and high(er) gain. Then my slots will look like this...

Slot 1 - Clean/Rhythm - probably no morphs

Slot 2 - Dirt/Rhythm - in the 4-5 gain range depending on the amp - use morph to adjust some combo of gain, definition, and EQ to go from light crunch to a heavier crunch

Slot 3 - Lead - profile of the amp at a higher gain setting and EQ'd for lead (less bass and treble, more mids) - morph from an un-effected lead sound to effected to add compression, maybe a little fuzz (amp dependent), and delay. Gives me a raw lead tone or a soaring lead option

So 5 sounds out of 3 slots and no need to use my size 14 feet to tap dance to the upper row for boosts or lead delays during the performance of a song.

Quote from Nikos

Often I also use the definition function in the amp section to get the "right" gain boost. A little bit more..worth a try..

But it depends a lot on the profile ofcourse.

How so? You add some definition as you raise the gain?

Quote from Finally

One point - when you say "punch up" I think of turning the gain down a bit and the volume up to give it more punch and dynamics.

Probably a bad term to use. I want to crunch it up a little more. I think I'm going to play with the morph parameter and try that out with adjustments to the gain and potentially the amp EQ.

For playing live or jamming with folks (which may or may not happen again for me), I've decided to really simplify my Performance approach. I'm down to a clean rig, a dirt rig, and lead rig. With the dirt rig, I'm staying somewhere around 4-5 gain on the profile. For the lead rig, it's 5-7...maybe a bit more...for the gain. However, I do want to add a means to bump that dirt rig by about +1 in the gain dept, relatively speaking. There are times where I want the tone that lives in that 5-6 range for my rhythm, but I'm trying to see if I can get it by pushing the dirt profile vs. setting up another profile that I have to balance. I've played around with:

• Pure Booster - Simple...1.0-1.5 value. It seems pretty natural and transparent. However, it does boost the bass which I'm not a fan of. This is the same thing a boost on an amp tends to do and I don't like it for that reason either.
• Kemper Drive - going for a Timmy approach i.e. transparency and accommodating for the gain increase by slimming the bass so it's just more of the same core dirt tone without boosting the bass frequencies too much. This is probably my favorite approach of the two, but, it does color the tone and definition of that profile when added...moreso than the pure booster.

I'm also kicking around trying the morph button for a simple gain increase of 1 to the profile itself and adjusting down the bass if necessary.

What do you find works best in this use case? Anything else you guys are using?

Quote from alligatorlizard

Sounds like similar pickups to mine - but I didn't like either studio or direct from Tone Junkie (bought 3 packs and gone thru all the free stuff), and with Reampzone they're all merged but didn't like them with either with their cabs or mine - can't get anywhere with M Britt profiles either!! Seeing as how many people do like these profiles, I have wondered occasionally if something is wrong with my Kemper... but then there are plenty of other profiles out there that do work for me (see my original post at the top), I guess it's just down to taste. And I've noticed opinions do vary, even on M Britt, so it's not just me.

Using Celestion IR's thru studio monitors btw - have quite a wide range of their IR's now - G12M65 and G12H75 creambacks tend to be my favourites - M25 and V30 also come in handy now and then, and the alnico ones nice for cleaner/fender-y tones. Also have some York ones, but don't like these as much. Might try Ownhammer at some point tho am pretty happy with Celestion for now.

Hmmm...what type of tones are you after? Do you like more sparkle? What about the low end?

Old MBritt profiles are pretty dark at low volumes. They're really meant to come alive at gig level volumes. His profile packs of the last few years are brighter, but still a little on the dark side. Tone Junkie profiles are pretty close to MBritt but I don't like them quite as much for Studio profile sounds. MBritt also has ample low end and I think the cab he uses is a big part of that. But I don't think it's too much, at least going direct to the board. Sometimes I had to cut the bass but I haven't used his profiles in a while because I'm using my Kab direct now. I found Top Jimi profiles to be thinner and not full for live/loud use. In general, I haven't really liked many of the metal profiles I tried from folks who provide those. Too much low end and too little mids but my typical amp tone is low(er) bass, ample mids, and treble/presence to taste and for the guitar/pickups...but I like some upper cut.

Part of the issue for you could be that you like that sparkle at maybe less than live volumes. In that case, you'll have to tweak further. I'm not afraid to turn the knobs and can mold some profiles my way.

You might try a Selah Sounds profile or two. They do a Single Coil and HB version of their profiles and make more tweaks across the advanced parameters. I like them for recording something to fit in a mix. Nice EQ profile for that and they sound pretty good a home jamming volume. But, I'd say they are in the MBritt/Tone Junkie universe in terms of how they're made.

My recollection of the Celestion IRs was that they were thinner and brighter than MBritt studio profiles or Ownhammer IRs. If you like that sound a bit, you might consider the York IRs.

Quote from alligatorlizard

Interesting - I have two of the packs you mention above, Reampzone's Rockerverb & Tone Junkie's Purple Plexi - both sound and feel terrible thru my pickups! (Dimarzio humbucker, and single coil) Just out of interest, what pickups are you using?

FWIW, I've purchased a few more Choptones DI packs since posting, and they're fast becoming some of my favourite profiles. They need a bit of EQing to be perfect, but - unlike e.g. the two packs I mentioned in the previous paragraph - the amount of EQ needed is well within the bounds of what the kemper can do before it starts sounding un-natural.

As for the Matt Fig ones, I do quite like some of his profiles, tho overall there's quite a lofi sound to them (for want of a better adjective) that generally isn't what I'm after. I do really like his "KPA bass pack" tho (Ampeg B-15) and have made these even better (at least to my ears) combining the direct profiles he provides with Celestion Pulse 2x10 bass IR's.

I'm using Dimarzio, Seymour Duncan, and Manlius humbuckers. Most are PAF range. I have one Super Distortion in there. I haven't gotten into the Rockerverb yet.

Could be the different IRs or perhaps the speakers. What were you testing it to with Direct profiles (amp/cab?)? Was your assessment of them being terrible based on Direct or studio profiles? I am using direct profiles with Ownhammer IRs and monitoring via the Kemper Kab with a few imprints. On the Tone Junkie 68 Purple Plexi, his first version didn't come out well and he released a v2. I'm using the Treble channel profiles and I had to play with the definition and the bass. I think the TJ 72 Superlead was the best direct profile, with minimal adjustments. The 68 took some more work but it's "woodier" and less gainy so they each have a place for me.

Have you tried MBritt studio profiles? Do you like those? I feel like I've dialed in my direct profiles with Ownhammer IRs to get very close to that as far as my direct sound.

I guess it depends on your sound preferences, as you say, but I've been really happy with Reampzone, Tone Junkie, and to a lesser extent, MattFig.

For context, I've shifted to mostly playing my Kemper w/ imprints through a powered Kab. I'm not gigging or jamming with others at the moment. Prior to going to the Kab, I was using MBritt profiles and my studio monitors for home use and then a CLR to monitor myself live. If I were to play that way jamming or live again, I'd probably run the MBritt profiles. Now, I'm using direct profiles from the three above and adding Ownhammer Revolution IRs...specifically the Tight 1/Full IRs of mostly the greenback, H30, and Blue speakers/cabs. I like the sound direct and of course through the Kab. So, my recommendations below are focused on the sound of direct profiles into a powered Kab vs. the full studio profiles of each.

My favs from Reampzone so far...the AD140 and JCM 800 2203. Going to try the JJ100 and Rockerverb for heavier stuff. What I like a lot about Reampzone is he publishes the settings he used to profile for Direct so I know quickly how to get to my favorite EQ spot. I like to cut the bass pretty low, push the mids a bit, and set treble/presence to taste (but ample).

For Tone Junkie, I like the 68 Purple Plexi and the 72 Marshall Superlead. I did need to push the definition on the 68 to get it where I wanted. The 72 Marshall Superlead Jumpered profiles are really good and didn't require that much tweaking for my tastes. I've been noticing lately that TJ is seemingly moving away from Direct or Merged profiles as his last batch of packs have been studio only.

I probably need to spend more time with the MattFig profiles. He has a lot of the Marshall and Marshall flavored amps I dig, but I'm not sure of his baseline settings and I find them to be maybe a hair less lively. Probably just need to really spend time. I guess like many, if I get to what I want faster with one profile maker, I tend to stick with them. I have found some that I like though.

One thing I've realized...I should get the DI box, "borrow" a few amps, and just shoot my own direct IRs. I've done it once with a OR50 and it worked well.

Quote from Wheresthedug

You need to turn Kone on in the Output Menu.

You need to have the Cab section of the Rig turned on which often isn’t the case with Direct Profiles as they have no speaker by definition so you need to load one.

You must be connected to the Monitor Output (or speaker output of powered versions) not the main outs.

I'm not having problems operating it with the Kone. I'm all good there. I have added the IRs, know how to select the imprints or keep the default, and I know about the settings to add more low end, handle Directivity, etc.

The question I had is when NOT using the Kemper Kone/Kab, do I have to turn the Kone off in the Kemper itself or does the Kemper sense there is no Kone attached? I'll check out the manual, but since there is a spot to turn it on, I'm guessing it does not automatically turn the Kone off, so I'd need to do that if connecting to a regular amp/cab. That would explain why I thought the Kemper sounded so poor going into the regular amp/cab.

Circling back around and given I know how to operate it in Kone mode, I'm still interested to see if others have to cut lows often with their direct profiles into the Kab. Does the Directivity setting play into that at all? I know it does in terms of cut and high end.

I'm not bumping the lows with that setting on the Kone page. I'm using the powered Kab by the way. Maybe it's the Tone Junkie direct profiles and how they were shot. I've read various opinions on studio vs direct when it comes to the best profiles to run with the Kab and how they translate. I have tried the MBritt studio profiles in the past and had to cut some low end as well. Having said that, I personally try to dial into midrange to upper midrange tones and leave the low end for the bass and kick.