No need to be facetious, mate.
The YouTube and Soundcloud uploads undergo the same degradation as everyone else's offerings, so it's a level playing field.
The differences between the KPA's analogue and S/PDIF outs, your Apogee A/D and other vendors' conversion systems and so on are relatively-minuscule and IMHO esoteric in the context of comparing YouTube or Soundcloud demos of naked guitar tracks online.
Tape emulation and deliberate dynamic-range compression OTOH do not require bat ears or state-of-the-art monitoring systems to detect.
I can't help but feel you were baiting me and I'm in two minds as to whether to post this or not. As a professional, I'd have thought this stuff would be obvious to you.
Let's "keep it real" by observing Brian's experience quoted below. Even if you don't state the obvious, most potential customers will be assuming a no-nonesense recording M.O. in the interests of fairness / a level playing field.
Display More
honestly I wasn't trying to be facetious, I was saying that the subtleties of what I used on one particular 'demo' were very subtle and I could guarantee I can upload the same files with out it and no one would be able to tell the difference. If you read my replies I was saying I take on board what you say and will bear that in mind next time.
I think you've taken this the wrong way, and that's a problem with internet communication I believe. My whole premise of profiling is keeping it real I was only trying to be open and transparent about how and why I do what I do. I still stand by the fact that 99% of people auditioning profiles on their laptops/phones prosumer monitors would not be able to hear a tape sim used lightly or 2db of master bus compression hence me going down the line to the AD convertors.
Again, I'm saying I'm with you on this whole processing to enhance profiles thing so I don't know why you would think I was being facetious. It's why I was interested in this thread. I want to make the best profiles around and keep up a high standard in the whole 'service' hence I've just spent a lot of money on a new web site to incorporate a proper 'shop' with instant downloads.
Thinking about this: even if people put a disclaimer saying post processing was used, would that mean that most people then wouldn't buy the profiles? an analogy: I walking down the market and I want to buy some golden delicious apples, there are two stalls with the same apples, one vendor has polished up his apples and put the best looking ones on display, the other has the raw, dirty apples, who are most people going to buy from? if you have a choice of two JCM800 profiles, even if there's a disclaimer saying post processing was used in the demo, are people 1: going to buy the one that sounds best in the demo or NOT buy that one because it mentions processing and buy the one they don't think sounds as good because it hasn't? Personally I feel most people will go for the one that has the best sounding demo regardless. It reminds me of the loudness wars with music, louder always sounds 'better' to people so music got mastered louder and louder so their record sounded better than the competition, no one was brave enough to say enough as they didn't want THEIR record to be the one that was quieter 
just throwing some stuff into the mix here over coffee.
I'm still learning about all this stuff and there's a lot to learn after you've done the hard work of profiling, so threads like this and communicating on the forums are an integral part of learning what people expect, want , are happy with, not happy with, again I said I would take on board what you said, I can't do anymore that that
M
