I think the whole premise of the OP is a flawed one.

When I was a kid in the fifties, the 'next big thing' was going to be flying cars. My dad did not buy his '57 Belair expecting that in '66 he could fly over route 66 instead of driving on it. Note to those still waiting; the FAA has enough trouble dealing with air traffic without flying cars.

I even question whether the title of this thread is valid. Virus is not in the "tech graveyard". I saw an interview from Burkhard a year or so ago in which he said that he might revisit the Virus development at some point after the point at which he felt he'd nailed the Kemper. He is obviously still working on the Kemper.

But more importantly, the Virus A, B and Indigo just got a huge upgrade from Spectrasonics. Not only is there now hardware integration with Omnisphere 2.5, but there are Virus specific features and presets in Omnisphere 2.5 that are exclusive to the Virus.

The hardware integration more than adds the Virus' physical controls to Omnisphere's sounds. As you adjust any hardware control on the Virus, the two way communication between Virus and Omnisphere updates the on screen graphics and actual Omnisphere sounds in real time. In effect, Omnisphere 2.5 has become a new engine for the Virus hardware.

Want more than a new synth engine? Add Keyscape. It has 36 modeled instruments covering acoustic pianos, electric pianos, clavinets, harpsichords, etc.

Keyscape is fully integrated into Omnisphere. So you can use Virus' hardware controls to control Keyscape's models. From the website:

Quote

As a bonus for Omnisphere 2.5 users, Keyscape also integrates fully as a satellite instrument within the Omnisphere® interface. Keyscape will simply appear as a library inside Omnisphere’s browser for users of both plugins. This capability allows Omnisphere 2 users to harness additional functionality like Live Mode, Stack Mode, Multitimbrality, endless FX routings and the full synthesis power of the STEAM Engine® to explore endless new sonic possibilities and combinations.

Keyscape also has a way to meld two of the models (like a clav with a Rhodes) to create an entirely new instrument.

Quote

Along with the hundreds of patches based on the 36 instrument models, Keyscape includes special hybrid "Duo" sounds which combine two of the instruments to create something entirely new. The unique timbre of these Duo patches make them some of the most creative and inspiring sounds in Keyscape!

So Virus now has a second new engine.

Who cares that it was made by a different manufacturer? I know I'd buy a set of wings for my Buick Encore if Ford made them. As long as it turned my GM car into a tiltrotor so I could fly over traffic, I'd shell out the money.

Quote

That Strymon echo thing seems cool but maybe a bit redundant from them at this point.

Agreed. It's an El Capistan with more algorithms and control knobs. In fact, in the intro video, the commentator even said it was El Capistan "on steroids". If tape delays are your thing, it might just hit your sweet spot. Moreover it is certainly a let down considering the way Strymon hyped the announcement.

I say why not do some real improvements to existing pedals across the entire line?

I was hoping the announcement was that they were releasing Rev 2 versions of their pedals, starting with Mobius, Timeline and Big Sky. I want to see digital I/O (USB, S/PDIF, or both).

Having a great digital engine that is hobbled by being forced to do A/D and D/A in every pedal is a waste IMHO. I'm not saying that they should replace the analog I/O. I am saying that they should have supplemented it. Adding digital I/O would make these pedals far more useful with other instruments and in a studio setting.

With digital I/O you could assign a Strymon pedal to Logic Pro X's I/O plugin to use the pedal as if it was an in-the-box software plugin. Yes, you can use the analog I/O that the pedals have this way too. But why should you have to go through unnecessary A/D and D/A with each pedal?

Furthermore, while the A/D and D/A in the Strymon pedals is very good, most top notch audio interfaces have better conversion (UA Apollo X series, or MOTU AVB interfaces, for example). And you'd only need to convert your guitar's analog signal to digital once, even when using three pedals.

With the Kemper, I suspect that eventually there will be an update that will allow the S/PDIF I/O to be used with the X slot.

There is one good news / bad news aspect to the power amp in the powered unit. It is 600 watts.

Good News: that is enough power to run just about any cab.

Bad News: you cannot use it with this...

https://www.tedweber.com/z-matcher-100

... because it can't handle the 600 watts.

Thx, Guavadude.

Stereo is really useful when making recordings. Not so much in a typical live session.

I am about to start to use my KPA to re-amp in hexaphonic mode. Yes, you read that right. Each string will be recorded on a separate track and the KPA will be used to re-amp the individual string's sound.

I am getting a CycFi Nu2 Multi 6 hexaphonic pickup for my Hamer Duotone. It is a low impedance/high output design with a full frequency response (20 -20kHz). See the Nu2 Multi here: https://www.cycfi.com/product/nu-multi-6/

I will be sending the signal from each string into Logic Pro 10.4.2 on separate tracks. To get the six strings' mono streams into Logic, I will use a CycFi Nexus 2 breakout box. See it here: https://www.cycfi.com/projects/nexus-v2/

Once in Logic, I can re-amp and/or add effects to each string's stream in almost infinite ways. I will definitely use my Kemper for this task. For example, I can use a clean Fender Bassman profile for all strings on a rhythm part. Each track would need to be re-amped one at a time. But that costs only a little time.

If I am mixing to stereo, I can place each string across the sound field. Or I can put half of the strings on each side.

Also, I could reamp two profiles on two sets of three strings, creating stereo that way. Maybe a Marshall Plexi crunch on the bottom three strings and an AC-30 crunch on the top three strings.

The potential to create new tones once you have recorded a hex output of your guitar is almost boundless.

Balanced or unbalanced cable?

Try a mono source like a synth instead of the KPA. Check the input gain level in the Console 2 app. If there is a large difference between the synth and the KPA, the problem could be the output level from the KPA.

Quote from Glowing_Tubes

I'm using analog, 1/4" jack to my UA Arrow.

I'm definitely having a very low output problem from the Kemper and have to run the volume pretty high in comparison to my usual (Powered Atomic speaker cab).

If you get a satisfactory level without the Arrow (ie. KPA --> powered Atomic cab) then there is likely a gain staging problem. Make sure that the Arrow expects a line level input. This is done in the UA Console app.

See this UA support article:

https://help.uaudio.com/hc/en-…put-Connections-Explained

I voted 'somewhat' because there are two types of profile methods which I use.

One uses only a close mic on the cab. This obviously makes the room virtually irrelevant.

The other uses a combination of close mic and an ambience mic mixed to mono. Depending on the level of the ambience mic, the room can become very relevant.

Once you have an excellent set of profiles of your amp I think you will be more than happy with the results. Notice I said 'set of profiles'. A set would include profiles with different parameters such as volume and gain.

So here is a suggestion that will help you make profiles without bothering the neighbors. Rent a studio with excellent acoustics for a few hours. If you have friends with other amps, consider borrowing them to get the greatest value out of the rental.

Also, try to create a group of Kemper owners in your area who might want to share amps and profiles. Someone in the group might have a space where you can make profiles. And you could potentially learn how to make great profiles from someone in that group.

There are always some issues with respect to damage or theft when you take gear to a gig. Not to mention back pain!

The Pros for the AX8:

I think the AX8 is made for the rigors of the road. It's also smaller and lighter than the KPA. AX8 is less expensive than the KPA. So if damaged or stolen, it will be less of a monetary loss. Further, it undoubtedly adds to your sound arsenal.

Potential Cons of the AX8:

Will you will be satisfied with the sounds you get with the AX8? And what will be the required learning curve that you will need to overcome just to get to a point where you are satisfied with your sound with the AX8? Also, speculation of an AX8 version 2 release in 2019 seems to be rampant. So you might have buyer's remorse if you pull the trigger now.

The Pros for the KPA:

Proven sound quality. Ease of use. No new learning curve.

The Cons of a second KPA:

It is tough to lug around. You are paying twice for something you already have. You need a Kemper remote or some other MIDI pedal for live use. That increases the overall cost and therefore the potential financial hit with damage or theft.

So here is a suggestion. It might be an impractical one for you. It might not.

Pull your KPA from its fixed rack and put it into a portable one. Take it with you for gigs and you have only spent a little on a portable rack. Find a good place for your KPA in its new rack in your studio. I suggest putting it on your studio desk in the portable rack so you have easy access to the KPA front panel.

RJM Mastermind LT

On sale now for $339

https://shop.rjmmusic.com/mastermind-lt/

Quote from nightlight

Why are you so stuck on using SPDIF? Send a cable from your Kemper into an analog input of the Apollo. Then apply whatever FX. Then route that output back to the Kemper and create the required FX loop.

Short answer:

Staying in the digital domain lowers overall noise by eliminating redundant conversion steps. Further, using the same clock on both devices reduces jitter, which I find is the most detrimental cause of harshness in digital audio.

I currently use a Strymon AA.1 in the X module to interface with my analog pedals. The Strymon AA.1 takes the line level send from the Kemper and attenuates it by 18 dB. That signal is connected to the input of my pedals. The output from my pedals goes back through the AA.1 which brings the signal back to unison by boosting it by 18 dB. Then the AA.1 stereo output goes to the return of the Kemper.

Of course, it would be optimal to have a second X module that could use the digital in/out to connect to devices like my Apollo at the same time.

Quote from Burkhard

Have you ever tried to play a tube preamp A for example via its fx send into the fx return of tube power amp B? And based on that experience is it worth the effort? Already today you could create a PROFILE of that setup, even a Direct PROFILE via a suitable DI box plugged between that power amp B and a guitar cabinet. The result would be a Direct PROFILE of preamp A combined with power amp B. I'm not aware anybody has ever done that.

I think I might not have fully gotten my main idea cross. Anyone with a Synergy, Egnator or Randall modular preamp system combines different flavors of preamps with either vintage or unconventional pairings of power amps all the time.

The modular preamp concept is that most of the sound of a tube amp is generated by the preamp. So you can use different preamps with the same power amp and get to maybe 85 to 90 percent of the sound of a given tube amp with a different tube compliment and even circuit design.

Look at the Synergy Syn 50 head, for example. It has two slots for 2 Synergy preamp modules with a 50 watt 6L6 tube amp. Say you have a Twin/DLX module and a Plexi module. The Fender preamp module matches perfectly. But what about the Plexi, which used a power amp section with EL34 tubes? There is definitely a difference, even if it is subtle.

Next, consider that most vintage amps have no effects loop. You can't make a physical connection between a Vox AC 30/6 Top Boost preamp and a Marshall Plexi power amp section because neither have effects loops.

But with Split Stack capability on the Kemper, these hardware limitations would be irrelevant. Make DAPs of the AC 30/6 and the the Plexi. Then simply use the AC 30/6 preamp merged with the Plexi's power amp section.

Unless you can make a DAP, then split the stack into a preamp section and a power amp section, you can't get a profile of a power amp by itself. That limits your ability to mix and match vintage preamps and power amps the way you can use a DAP with any cab you want.

To answer your question, "Is it worth the effort"? Absolutely.

I have four tube preamps. Two are in combos, and two are stand alone. I regularly use two of them feeding my Mesa Boogie 20/20 (EL84) stereo power amp. The preamps are from a Marshall JCM 2000 DSL 401 combo, an Ampeg AX-70 combo, a Mesa Rectifier Recording Preamp and a Fender AB763 (Blackface) clone.

I regularly take the send from the effects loop of a combo and connect it to the input of one side of my Mesa 20/20 . The DSL connected to the 20/20 is quite different from the EL34 tubes in the Marshall's power amp regardless of the cab I use. However, it sounds glorious.

I cannot do the reverse, sending the output from my Mesa Boogie rectifier Recording Preamp into the Return on the Marshall. The Marshall's effect loop is parallel and sends at least 10% of it's preamp to the return of the effects loop. I am going to get it modified to make the effect loop mono with a 100% wet input at the return.

The AX-70 is a hybrid. It has a tube preamp with a spring reverb and a solid state power amp. It does have preamp out and power amp in jacks. I plan to use the power amp section with DAPs to power various guitar cabs.

I have not tried to make a DAP of the DSL --> 20/20 combo yet, though I plan on doing so. My Kemper DI box came just after I had to tear down my studio. I have since moved and am building custom furniture for the studio in its new room. Once I have the studio up and running, I plan to start profiling my amps.

But Burkhard you did not comment on the Split Stack concept. Is it possible and if so, would you consider implementing it? Could an X module be placed between the stack's preamp and power amp sections?

Also, is there any chance that the S/PDIF jacks could be used as a second effects loop with a second X module? As I said above, I use analog pedals now with the analog connections on the X module. I'd love to be able to do both analog pedals and digital effects on my Kemper.

Thanks, Steven.

Quote

You can connect the Kemper to spdif directly (not adat) with rca/optical konverter though.

True. But the Twin will lose its expansion. So now you have a maximum of two inputs. As I said above, that is very limited input solution.

Quote

KEMPER PROFILER Main Manual 5.5

• A PROFILE of a guitar amp, tapped at its effect-loop send jack, representing the preamp section of this amp. This

  Direct Preamp PROFILE can then be played back into the effect-loop return of the guitar amp, and further through its power amp section and a guitar cabinet. The following graphic illustrates this configuration for information only - we don’t recommend this setup.

It is unclear why the manual doesn't recommend creating preamp profiles. I suspect that Kemper believes that the results are usually sub-optimal.

There is no supported way to profile a power amp by itself. The signal must first come through a preamp. However, it would be possible with a split stack. You can already use cabs from other profiles which are part of the stack. Why not have the same ability for the preamp and power amp sections? If split stacks were possible, you could create a DAP, then split its pre and power amp sections for use as individual components in a stack the way that cabs are selected.

Here are some examples of split stack uses and benefits.

You could make DAP profiles of an amp covering all of its multiple wattage and configurations. Take the Mesa Boogie 5:25 or 5:50 Express Plus amps for example. From the manual:

Quote

Each power mode has it’s own tone-spawning operating class and wiring configuration! Choose the full power mode of either amp (25W in 5:25+ or 50W in 5:50+ ) for Class AB running in a Push-Pull configuration for punch, authority and headroom. Or, kick down to 15 watts (25 watts on the 5:50+ ) for Class A Pentode for a more silky, vintage voice with enhanced clip potential. And for the ultimate in low wattage power expression knock it down to the 5 watt mode... now you’re running one tube in Class A Pentode wired in a Single-Ended configuration.

These are in effect three totally different power amps. The idea is to get profiles of all of the circuit configurations of the power amps. I'd make three or four profiles with varying gain levels from the preamp to cover gain level input of each power amp circuit. Note that the preamp's only contribution to the power amp's profile would be gain output at the power amp input. Once you have made these DAPs, you could use a totally different preamp profile assuming split stacks were available.

Now you could place a Vox AC30/6 Top Boost preamp profile in front of a Class A 5 watt Single Ended Mesa with a single EL84 tube. Or try a Fender 5F4 Super preamp profile with the 15 watt 2 X EL84 tube Class A Mesa power section profile.

Sure, you could profile these amps with their own preamps, but the ability to mix and match and preamp profile with any power amp profile would greatly increase available tone pallets. Also, these classic amps had no effects loops. That means they can't mix and match pre and power amp sections without hardware modification. That would greatly drop their value.

Not so with Split Stacks. With Split Stacks, any vintage amp without a hardware loop can have one. No mods needed.

I like to use multiple Preamp profiles with a hardware amp and cab. I can do that now by loading a preamp profile on my Kemper, sending the signal to my Mesa 20/20 power amp. The 20/20 uses two EL 84 tubes.

But what if I had a Synergy Syn 2 hardware system and I want to match the Marshall Plexi module with EL34 tubes, like the actual Plexi amp? The effects loop on my Marshall JCM-2000 DSL 401 combo is parallel, and feeds the dry preamp into the effects return. So I can't feed the power amp section with the Syn 2. With Split Stacks, I could profile the DSL and just use the power amp section.

The Kemper currently has 4 mono stomp slots, the stack, and then four stereo effect slots. With Split Stacks, you could potentially place effects between the preamp and power amp sections instead of after the stack. That would be a more traditional placement for effects.

You could also potentially run a hardware multi effects unit between the pre and power amp sections if the X slot could be placed there . This scenario would require that that the hardware effects be mono. However, potentially Kemper could make the redesign allow for a stereo return from the X slot into the power amp section of a split stack. There might be enough DSP to handle a dual mono (parallel) amp section. Or possibly, since effects DSP load could be lightened by using an external hardware multi effects unit, limiting the use of on board effects could make enough DSP could be made available to make this possible.

At present, I use my Kemper with my UA Apollo 8 interface to combine UA effects plugins with my Kemper. I use the X slot, placing the Apollo 8 there, connecting the two units via the analog send and the stereo returns on the Kemper. Having the fantastic sound quality and near zero latency of the UA effects is awesome.

However, I haven't been able to figure out a way to connect via S/PDIF, placing the Apollo 8 into the X slot. (Anyone who can show me how to do that, please speak up.) I will say it now. There should be a way to use the S/PDIF ports as a routing option for the X slot hardware connection, even without Split Stacks.

I have also used the Apollo 8 as a power amp section for a preamp profile. Some of the UA amp sims (Fuchs, Freidman, Suhr ) let you bypass the preamp or the power amp sections. So, I have profiled my Mesa Recto Recording Preamp , my AB763 clone (Fender Blackface), and the Preamp from my Marshall JCM 800 DSL, and I use the power amp sections of the Fuchs Train II, and Friedman BE-100 and DS-40 UA plugins.

So what does this have to do with Split Stacks?

With Split Stacks on the Kemper, I could use the UA effects and guitar pedal and amp sims in a totally flexible manner. The split Stack architecture would allow combination of any preamp, power amp, cab, or effect from either device to create a custom rig.

Of course this would also work as well with Line 6 Helix, Fractal FX, Mooer, Boss, etc., hardware units.

A quick note about UA satellites. The UA Console application does not recognize them. So their DSP cannot be used with Unison technology. And they are limited to Live Track Mode (LTM) use during tracking. Satellites are mainly useful for adding available DSP to cover plugins loaded into your DAW's slots. LTM does lower round trip latency, but it is not as fast as the near zero latency you achieve when using an Apollo.

Furthermore, a satellite cannot relieve DSP load requirements for an Apollo or Twin during tracking.

Only the Universal Audio interfaces support Unison plugins and near zero latency. To use either of these features, UA plugins must be loaded into the Console application.

The Twin is extremely limited. Let's use a Twin Quad MK II ($1299) and Apollo 8 Quad ($1999 with a free Quad satellite) for comparison.

• There is a maximum of 10 inputs (2 analog + 8 via ADAT expansion) and four analog outputs.
• If you get a S/PDIF to ADAT adapter, you can connect the Kemper to the Twin digitally, but now you are down to four inputs and you've used two of them.
• Even with a Twin MK II Quad, without adding ADAT expansion you can only use two of the DSP chips for tracking. OK. Say you added an ADAT expander with equivalent audio quality as the UA hardware to use those chips. A MOTU 828ES would do the trick, now you'd be at $2298 total cost.
• The Twin has only one Hi Z input, and when you use it, it takes away one of the Mic preamps.
• A Twin Quad + a Quad satellite is $1998. That is a dollar less than an Apollo 8 with a free Quad satellite.

Compare that with an Apollo 8 Quad.

• 2 Hi Z Unison inputs.
• 4 Unison mic preamps
• 4 line inputs
• 8 analog outputs
• stereo monitor outs
• 2 headphone outs
• 4 cue buses (2 on the Twin)
• S/PDIF stereo in/out
• 8 ADAT in/out for expansion

Let's look at the real world, and how you'd use either interface with a Kemper. Say you have a session with two guitars and two vocalists. There is no way to cover them without a Twin with ADAT expansion. Even with ADAT expansion, a Twin can't have both guitars using a Unison amp sim.

An Apollo 8 can have two Unison amp sims for the two guitars, two vocalists with Unison channel strips, and it can connect to the Kemper digitally. All at the same time. Apollo 8 also does easy re-amping in the digital domain. I do it all the time with my Kemper. Before the Kemper allowed for sample rates over 44.1 kHz, I used to have to re-amp in the analog domain. In my experience, digital re-amping is cleaner.

Quote

It hasn't hurt UA

UA is the only seller of UA plugins. When you first load the UA software on your computer, all plugins are included, whether or not you have a license. That includes all plugins created for the UA platform by third parties.

UA plugins require both a UA interface or Satellite and the UA software to be running on your computer. Without both, you cannot authorize a demo or even instantiate a plugin for which you own a license. That is because the UA software runs on the computer and the plugin is hosted by the UA hardware's DSP.

When you turn on UA hardware, the software on the computer sees it, then goes through a boot process that lets you instantiate any plugins authorized for that hardware. If you want to try a plugin that you don't own, you can start a 14 day unlimited use demo. The demo temporarily adds it to your list of available plugins. Once the 14 days are up, you can buy a license. If you've bought a plugin since your last demo, your demos will reset, giving you another 14 day period.

Splitting the demo authorization process between the hardware and software is an effective way to eliminate piracy of any plugins. Even if a plugin was hacked and fully copied, you couldn't load it unless your UA hardware was also hacked to authorize it.

The UA model just doesn't translate to the Kemper. It would add complexity to both the Kemper's operating system and to commercial profiles to make demos available. Think about it. There are less than 200 total UA plugins. There are thousands of Kemper commercial profiles. The Kemper OS would have to have a database to contain demo info on every commercial profile available. It is just not practical.

Use a MIDI foot controller like the Profiler Remote or an RJM Mastermind to select the preset you want on both units at the same time.

The KPA has an insert slot type that is specifically made for external hardware effects. Check it out in the Kemper's documentation.

Quote from Monkey_Man

The new AVB mixer and routing system is ridiculously-powerful. Analogue-modelled dynamics, EQ, 'verb, grouping and complex routing (if you so desire).

I am going to chime in here. I had a couple of MOTU Travelers that, as Lightbox said, had some really poorly designed software. Having said that, I could not agree more with Monkey_Man about MOTU's AVB networking software suite. And the quality of the MOTU AVB hardware with the new ESS converters is top notch, too.

The software suite includes a decent mixer with plenty of aux and cue mixes. The mixer is well laid out and the hardware has enough onboard DSP to run some pretty nice plugins while you track. RTL during tracking is negligible even while running the MOTU effects on all of your tracks.

The AVB networking part of the software is where it really shines. MOTU's implementation of AVB is more expandable than any moderately priced range of interfaces.

You can set up global presets that creates a customized setup for many different applications. MOTU provides a group of 8 presets you can use as starting points. Of course you can save your own custom presets, too.

The MOTU Routing Grid is absolutely awesome. It lets you connect any audio stream from anywhere on the network to any input port.

I already own UA Apollo SF (1st gen) and an Apollo 8 (2nd gen) interfaces. I love the platform and believe you should look into it. But I am adding at least one and maybe two MOTU 828ES AVB interfaces to my studio. I absolutely love the routing grid. It will allow me to wire all of my studio gear on an almost permanent basis. And with the routing grid I can
re-patch anything in software.

So, for example I can set up my Apollo as an effects box for my Kemper. With the AVB Routing Grid, making the connections is a snap. And I will save a preset for this application so I can instantly set up both devices to do it again.

Or I might load a Friedman amp sim on my Apollo and turn off the pre and power amp sections of the sim. That leaves the cabs available for use with a Direct Amp Profile loaded into my Kemper. With the Routing Grid, I can set this up once and save it as another preset.

With AVB you have total control over where your audio streams flow.

Note that I will connect the Apollos to the 828Es interfaces via ADAT. In my DAW, I will select the 828ES as my interface, not the Apollos. The Apollo's will appear in the routing grid as ADAT in/out and those inputs and outputs will show as ADAT tracks in my DAW.

I must admit to a bit of obfuscation. I have extensive experience in studio mic placement for both electric and acoustic guitars. I wanted to get a feel for whether a commercial profile of a specific amp using an extensive mic collection might have more appeal. My current mic locker includes an SM-57, an NOS Panther Mk2 and a Sterling ST-159. It's a utilitarian collection, but I plan to add to it.

Specifically, I am considering purchase of a Townsend Labs L-22 Sphere, both for recording and for making profiles. Between the Townsend plugin and the Ocean Way plugin, the L-22 has 30 models of some of the best mics ever. It is 10 X the price of any of my current mics, but it would cover 10 x the actual mics I'd be able to afford for $1500.

Quote from bshaw92

Try some DI profiles and use other cabs so you can see what you like or don't like when compared to your own cab profile. I have started doing this more often as it provides a consistent profile for me and I can utilize other cabs that have various speaker/mic combinations that I don't have. The only problem with this is that when you find a speaker combination that you like you are compelled to buy it for your own....crazy how that works.

Thanks. My studio is currently not set up due to a move. I am building new furniture so all my gear will fit into a smaller room. Hopefully that will be done by September. Once I am back up, I will be trying out the Kemper Toast Me editor to try different cabs from others' profiles.

I already have used my Apollo's effects in the Kemper's loop block with great results. I also use my Kemper loaded with a Direct Amp Profile sent to my Apollo with some of the cabs from the amp UA sims that can turn off the preamp and power amp sections. This gets me some very nice results.

I am even more excited about the idea of using my Kemper with a UA OX Box. I've tried my '68 Bandmaster with OX Box cabs. They are sweet! Sadly, UA didn't put a line level input on the OX so it requires a speaker level output from a tube amp at its input.

However, I believe that I have figured out a way to safely connect my Kemper (loaded with a DAP) and the UA OX Box. I want to use its digital side as the cab / room / post KPA effects back end. I will let others here in on the secret if it works once I've tried it out. If I'm correct, the combination of the Kemper (preamp and power amp) and OX (cab) will be stunning.

Q1: Does the mic you choose make an audible difference in the profile?

Q2: What is your favorite type and brand of mic to make a profile?

Q3: What polar pattern do you find works best for profiling?

Q4: Have you used multiple mics (and a mixer) to make a profile?

Q5: What mic placement(s) do you use?