Posts by MistaGuitah

Quote from V8guitar

Going back to your original question....its really difficult to advise but this is how I see it:

1) The current KPA is 10+ years old, with very few physical changes made in that time

2) It still stands up well to the competition, with regular software changes

3) The eco system is sorted to make it a pro user choice

4) It is expensive, but no more expensive than any other high end gear

5) Its an all in one solution - lighter, more practical than non digital solutions - I like to included power amp in the Rack/head or powered versions of the dedicated kabinet. No other solution has this.

6) No one knows if a new product will be released tomorrow or never. It is pure speculation. Given Kemper's history/approach, we also won't know in advance so don't expect any statements ( its always counter productive anyway)

7) The risk that worry's you is relevant to any new tech - its risker with the KPA because of its age but conversely less risky....because of its age ( i.e. not changing every year)

If they released a KPA 2 tomorrow, I would buy one, purely for "new toy" reasons, rather than because its missing anything. So the "old KPA will still be good, solid and do everything you bought it for. Its value will be impacted no doubt but it won't be a waste if you use it.

You probably know all of this...

So, Is it worth the money - . I justify it this way, I have NEVER considered any other amp since I've had it. For me, its paid me back multiple times.

Is it the best digital solution on the market - unsurprisingly on a Kemper forum, 99% will say yes. The reality is the Axe, Helix, Quad are all really good but with their own strengths and weaknesses - so much so, my view is that set up is the key factor.

If it was me starting again, I would not hesitate, I'd buy another tomorrow.

Display More

There is much to agree with here, and I appreciate the sincerity of your evaluation. The perspective I'm describing is primarily from tube amp guy's perspective. I still find tube amps superior and most satisfying to hear and play so I'm not comfortable just owning modeling amps. It's understandable how one could build their entire rigs on a Kemper or two, or some combination of modelers thereof. That's something I came very close to doing for the past 2 years with my Kemper because I used it most of the time with only 1 Bogner tube amp as backup. Now I have 3 tube amps, a Fractal FM3, and looking to add a Kemper just to be able to take my tube amps with me in one box.

I know the concerns I have are valid and that I'm not the only one to express them. However, but if anything is to be said for Kemper, it would be that they've been very consistent from the beginning as far as I know. That says a lot, yet the underlying question is whether I can bank on that. Nevertheless, I've already decided to try and acquire another Kemper - especially because I have some outstanding profiles I made of previous amps I owned. It seems worth the risk, and even if Kemper came out with something new, it would appear that they won't abandon users abruptly as many other companies do these days.

Quote from Wheresthedug

I have seen a number of youtube videos about the Tone X. They all seem to suggest that it sounds as good or better than the Kemper, is a whole lot less expensive AND the really big bonus - it lets you use real pedals on a pedalboard.

I'm sorry but that is just totally faulty logic, akin to comparing apples to jet engines.

Before going any further I need to be totally clear. I am not writing this a Kemper fan boy trying to protect the reputation of "my" tribe/religion by attacking others. I happen to think that the Fractal AxeFX range are fantastic devices, same for Line6 Helix, Quad Cortex will probably also be a great unit once they roll out more updates. All of the existing devices are capable of providing excellent results if used well.

I agree because I own a Fractal FM3 and think it's better than the other modelers, but of all the modeling/profiling devices I've used, Kemper is my favorite. Now, I'm not going to say that would equate to it sounding or being better but it is my preference. I really regret selling mine because the price has jumped up since so there are some things to consider. I don't have any criticisms of the Kemper, however, there is a small limitation that I can live with. The gain, EQs, and other parameters seem to sound best only within a narrow range of tweaking or slight twist of the dial. I find that any more than subtle tweaks don't sound as good as leaving the profile just like it was modeled. Like I said though, it's a very small thing that I can live with. Maybe some people won't agree but that's my opinion. Anyway, in the end, I think I'll just get another Kemper and start enjoying it.

By the way, we use a lot of the same gear. My pedalboard is similar but I usually have my Fulldrive next to 2 other overdrive pedals. I still have my Mark 25 but just let go of my 2011 Dual Rect.

Quote from lbieber

Lacking in features means some features would be missing or removed. Your statement means you want nothing missing or removed, but at a cheaper, or more affordable, price. Based on the meaning of your words, I know exactly where Ruefus got 'that'.

FEATURE

noun

/ˈfiː.tʃər/

feature (QUALITY) - a typical quality or an important part of something.

Perhaps you should look up the term. Guitar input, FX loop, power switch, headphone jack, etc., are all 'features.' Anyone using common-sense can figure out that it means basic things and not leaving out something essential. I'm bored now so I'll leave you to ponder this.

Quote from goldensheaf

I just had it out on another post with him, He likes being difficult.

Don't pretend you know me at all. If correcting all of your inaccuracies and confronting the nature of your post is what you consider "being difficult" then perhaps you should be more thoughtful and precise in the future.

Quote from Ruefus

You said it yourself. Inflation makes everything cost more. Why would a Profiler be any different?

No, that's not what I said. Try quoting people verbatim so you don't rephrase it in your own terms.

"Not lacking in features but more affordable." - that sounds like you want them to give you the same thing, but charge less.

No, I never said that I expect Kemper to offer the same thing cheaper. I don't know where you got that, but anyone can look at the Fractal FM3 vs Axe FX III and see a perfect example of I'm talking about.

No company is ever going to tell the world (and their competition) "Here's what we're going to do next!!" That's bad business 101. What if something happens that prevents them from doing what they said? Or they come up with a better idea? Then they don't keep their promises. Nevermind the fact that their future plans are none of your or my business.

Sorry but you really don't know what you're talking about, nor does it appear you understand who you're talking to. Go to any company website and you'll usually see a section about company news and press releases. That is how they keep the public, customers, stakeholders, stockholders, etc. informed on company developments and outlook. You're acting like I said they should go and reveal research and development, but that's not what I said at all. Again, try relating to what people actually say and not what you assume they're trying to say.

The Profiler is unchanged except for (very) minor things since 2011. Prior to that, the Virus keyboards (Christophe Kemper's first revolutionary music invention) had a long life without resorting to 'new and improved' versions.

LOL! So the Kemper Stage doesn't count? Not only that, do you think Kemper develops products independently of public opinion, customer requests, etc.? Sorry but none of us would be on this forum if Kemper didn't keep their ear to the rails.

It's *not* likely to change. There is zero evidence to prove that claim and more than a couple decades of proof that it won't change. CK has said (repeatedly) the profiling process is as good as he can make it. When the second delay LED became obsolete, did they change the unit? Nope. There's a light sensor on the Remote that's never been implemented. Buy a new one today - it's still there.

Sorry but there are countless factors that influence companies and their products. Competition is one major example. If Kemper started losing significant market share because people start flocking to another brand or product, you can bet they'll adapt in order to stay competitive. Inflation, supply & demand, music industry, music schools, etc. all contribute to the direction musical instrument manufacturers go. So yeah, it is indeed likely to change.

If you were looking at Fractal, then yeah. Guaranteed they'll add the word Turbo, Ultra or go up a number I, II, III....etc to a unit and begin obsoleting the old one. Line6 hasn't changed the underlying technology for the Helix since, what? 2015? Is that obsolete?

Funny how you just said how unlikely Kemper is to change but that it's "guaranteed" Fractal will do what you expect. As for Line6, you're making a useless, irrelevant argument because I only mentioned that to qualify my assessment of modeling amps and support my preference for the Kemper.

As for YouTubers - their motivation is for you to look at their stuff. If that agrees or disagrees with reality, it'll make no difference. They'll stir the pot no matter what so you'll keep looking.

Another useless point of contention. I did regard YouTube and social media pundits as "talking heads" that "babble" and "propagate" certain ideas. Any monkey can get on YouTube and see a dozen videos titled something like, "Is Kemper Outdated?" In fact, mingled in the social media hype surrounding Quad Cortex is plenty of regard about Kemper falling into antiquity, being less authentic, etc. These are contrary to my opinion yet you seem to argue as if I'm speaking on their behalf. YouTubers, bloggers, or whoever do have significant influence as they are a ready resource for people evaluating the purchase of products. You might think little of them and perceive them as being unrealistic, or whatever, but I'm sober enough to understand how much they affect public opinion. It would be ignorant to write them off in such a sense that companies can successfully navigate the market sphere unaffected by their presentations. Look dude, when a good guitarist with a studio does a detailed demonstration of Kemper vs [X Product] and gives his opinion, even if they're just a shill or marketing whore, it's undoubtedly going to affect product purchasing.

Display More

I perceive you're just reacting like a naysayer wanting to disagree with things rather than someone thoughtful and considerate of what was actually said. Asking questions, seeking clarification, being accurate and not rewording people's statements with skewed thoughts are all marks of rational, intelligent discussion. If you can converse on that level then you're welcome to try again.

Well, I used to have a Kemper rack, sold it for a Kemper Stage, then kept that for a couple of years . I also owned an AxeFX II, AX8, FM3, and before that Line6 Helix, original Pod, Pod XT, and Pod HD. Of course, I went through some of the earlier stuff like from Boss and Rocktron before all that. However, I used them to practice, record some tracks, and jam but never in any serious or professional capacity. Nevertheless, I'm experienced enough to really appreciate the Kemper.

The thing is, people have been clamoring for a new Kemper or more affordable model for years. A lot of the talking heads on YouTube have also been propagating the idea that Kemper is outdated. Think of them what you will but they do influence public opinion. I assume Kemper has heard all this stuff long enough and probably has been working on something for a while. Kempers run about $1900 now and that's a ton of money! It used to be several hundred less, but I don't know when the price jumped so much, but it seems like it was much more accessible a year or two ago. $1900 is a LOT of money - especially now that more tax is deducted, tax returns are much smaller, and inflation has ruined everything.

Therefore, it takes a lot more to justify $1900 in the present time than it did to justify $1599 a couple of years ago. That's why I don't want to make such a big investment in something that seems likely to change. I wish Kemper would make a model that's not lacking in features but more affordable, and if that's in the works any time soon, I'd rather hold out and snag one of those when they're released. Otherwise, it seems like kind of a toss-up.

Perhaps Kemper should put out a video and explain their official position on the current products and the outlook of products in development. Agree or disagree (and I'm not aware of any Kemper press releases), it would certainly be helpful to know this stuff, and also probably quell a lot of the rumors and babble going on in social media, forums, etc. In any case, this has become a pretty hard decision because I want to go back to the Kemper but don't know if it's prudent in the long run.

I'm on the fence about buying a Kemper because prices have skyrocketed to boutique amp level. I don't want to make such a big investment only to find out they're going to release a new profiler a year or two from now. Anyone know what the deal with Kemper technology is and have they said anything about a new model? Is anyone else holding out? This is kind of a tough decision because if prices go up even more, I won't be able to afford one.

Quote from SteinbergerHack

Do we know whether or not this is 100% true? Are the D/As and analog output stages identical and laid out the same way in all three KPA products?

Well, I meant essentially the same overall. I wasn't trying to assert it was 100% component-for-component. I wouldn't know that at all without taking them both apart and comparing every little component, and even then, I'm not qualified enough to know exactly what to look for. However, I do know that innumerable factors can potentially affect sound. For example, I know that a wire cut in two parts would have a bit more resistance in the longer one, or that there are tolerances in precision of the microscopic sizes within electronic components, but whether any of it ever translates into something audibly perceptible is totally by chance in the aggregate variances of a device.

In any case, my assumption is that the same components. However, comparing toaster vs rack, the rack doesn't have the lights for rig volume. The stage though has several different or missing knobs/features, plus it interacts with a whole network of foot controller electronics, so you would think there's no avoiding some degree of audible difference. None of this I know with a degree of competency, so these are just some of the things I thought about in trying to account for what I'm hearing in my profiler stage.

Quote from Monkey_Man

I've a feeling there are slight differences, SH, but at the level of quality we're talking about here, if there were any, they'd be indiscernible-to-the-ear, you'd think. They'd certainly not constitute the difference between "shrill" and not-so IMHO.

The manual explains it better than I could, MG. I'll quote it here 'cause it covers disabling properly and also the override behaviour depending on settings:

PURE CABINET is available as a global setting in the Output Section and affects all Rigs that you listen to. However, the original sound of each Rig remains unchanged, and you can switch PURE CABINET on or off whenever you like. There are two parameters for PURE CABINET in the Output Section, on the “Output AddOns” page: use the corresponding soft knob to set the desired amount and use the corresponding button to do a quick A/B comparison against the original cabinet sound. To completely disengage the global PURE CABINET, you must uncheck the switch, as it still has an effect even when the controller is at zero.

If you would rather have individual settings of PURE CABINET per Rig or cabinet preset, there is a second parameter in the cabinet module. There is no switch for the local parameter - it is disengaged by setting it to zero. Both values of PURE CABINET interact such that the larger of the two values is always given priority and will be applied as the actual intensity of the PURE CABINET effect.

There is a possibility that your Rack unit had the global PC set to zero, whilst your new Stage in fact had it disabled which technically doesn't disable it, or vice-versa. Given that you found the Stage more-shrill than the Rack, if anything in this context, it'd mean that the Rack was the unit set to zero and the Stage disabled.

HTH, mate.

Display More

The settings are identical in everything as far as I can tell. I don't think anything came turned off or on that's aberrant from factory default.

Quote from Monkey_Man

Paul beat me to it, but PC was what sprung immediately to mind here, MG. Make sure both the Rig as well as Global statuses are switched-off, just to be sure.

It's a pity your rack has already gone 'cause a side-by-side spectral comparison (using a plugin or app) of each unit using identical settings might've been instructive IMHO.

As for the part-tolerance possibility Ruefus kindy suggested, I'm not buying it 'cause it's a digital device, so the number of areas where such a thing could come into play is greatly-reduced compared to a traditional amp. We'd be talking op amps and ADC / DAC's basically, wouldn't we? If so, hard to imagine that such an obvious difference to your ears could eventuate thusly. Hmm...

What do you mean by rig and global status? Where can I find those settings?

I think so, but not sure about the pure cab thing. Let me check, thanks...

I'm wondering that. I once had an amp repaired and they only replaced a single capacitor, same value, but different brand, and it was brighter after the repair. Who knows but I bought it directly from Kemper several weeks ago and regret waiting too long to exchange it for the head version. I recently sold my rack so now I'm kinda stuck with it. It still sounds amazing, just that little extra sizzle.

I bought a Kemper Stage a while back to replace my Kemper rack. The plan was to sell the Rack and keep the Stage, and until I got all my stuff setup on the Kemper Stage (because busy at work), I used them side-by-side for a few weeks. Well, I started noticing that the Stage seems to be slightly less warm, slightly more shrill with the exact same rigs/settings.

Yes, this sounds rather dumb since it's just the same thing in a different enclosure, but I've been tweaking to no end trying to get rid of the shrillness. It's not a real noticeable difference but it's something you notice after a while. Without saying anything to them, I have heard from a few other players who thought my rack sounds a little warmer. I use Analysis Plus cables and good equipment, so it's not anything in my setup. Am I missing something here? Is there some kind of setting that I need to tweak on the Stage to get it to sound warmer, more natural like my Rack?

Thanks guys. This is going to be a big help dialing in some sounds. I appreciate it.

I don't know what it would be called, but I was wondering if anyone knows of a free app or Windows software that can show an EQ graph of a guitar track or song. Maybe something that shows like a bar or line graph across hz frequency range or whatever. I'd appreciate the help, thanks in advance.

Ah, didn't think to check Rig Exchange. I'll look for them. Thanks.

Quote from Zappledan

Bill Ruppert did a rig and put it on the Rig Exchange back in 2013 called "Kemper Cathedral". I suspect he could do even better with the new delays, and especially when the new reverbs come out. @billruppert

I saw his pitch shifter demo for the Kemper, but nothing on cathedral sound or with the reverb on beta OS 5.6.2. Haven't seen any OS updates for delays though. Where can I find that?

What settings would replicate the cathedral sound on 2:05-2:20 of this video?

Quote from Monkey_Man

I didn't specify because your thread will be moved, as Paul said, MG, but the one I was referring to was the "obvious" one "everyone's" heard of. PM me if you're still unsure, mate.

Phase cancellation in the capsule? Due to its design, "weird" angles are more-likely to force sound waves to take paths of differing distances to the diaphragm, introducing comb filtering. Didn't quite understand your description, but personally I'm not a fan of purposeful phase cancellation (angled mic'ing). You noticed something going on in the low end too - IMHO, pointing the '57 perpendicularly to the target will maximise accuracy of all frequencies, including lows.

As we discussed in another thread, I think that if this works for you, then go with it man. If nothing else, your approach makes logical sense to me.

All I can say is I love your attitude, man. Science sans ego is the only way to go and it's been my (fruitful) M.O. since my 3rd birthday studying aquaristics.

Ah, I somehow overlooked Paul's post. I'll go searching that forum then. As for the angle of the mic, I have a weird issue with my hearing I guess because I was taught basic micing by a guy who runs a studio. He told me the usual inner/outer cap, off-center, pointed straight or horizontal, etc... I don't know how credible his info was, but it was what I had to go on at the time. I never looked into it, but over the years have seen similar things, so I always assumed there wasn't much more to it.

It was my understanding that if you have a directional mic, putting them at a horizontal angle, say set off-center and pointed toward the cap, it would essentially be the low-end of the off-center position, but also more of the inner frequencies. Hell if I know man. I've spent all these years learning how to play and gear-whoring, so this is the first time I started looking into recording, profiling, etc. As for the vertical angle, well I thought about it and it probably has to do with my cheap-ass mic stand. For whatever reason, it won't let me position it at just the right horizontal angle, so I've noticed that that lowering the mic stand about 1" and pointing it a bit upward and from edge of cap horizontally a bit towards off-center (up to the right from edge of cap), seems to be the sweet spot. That's what I always use and never really screw around with mic positioning.

Funny thing is that I got a deal like 7 years ago on on a couple of SM57's where each came with a free mic stand. Now that I think of all this, I freaking hate those things, they've never adjusted right, and it's about time I threw them out and got some better quality mic stands... so that solves that whole angle thing.

Nothing like that. I was a network engineer and programmer for 21 years, so I guess that's why I like to sit around tinkering with stuff.

OK, so having listed all of these notes I've been taking, I'd like to understand more of how/why these things work. I also know that there is a distinction between these things where it's part of the profiler's actual computer processing and other things that experienced recording guys would know like mic placement, etc. Pickups are an interesting aspect, and so are the complexities of how different preamps respond to input, or the way different amps dampen speaker impedance (or whatever that's all about), diode clipping, tube rectification, etc...

I'm not saying I need to know all of this stuff or can understand the technical complexities of it, but I think gradually working towards a better understanding will help me not only craft better profiles, but also get better tone on anything I play or record.

As a disclaimer, I've said none of this with any authority and make no claim that all these things can be heard or discerned. Maybe some of stems from a lack of mistaking something or another, misunderstanding some concept, or just somehow tuned into something I picked up on and assumed it's a factor. In any case, I'm only looking to expand my understanding and hopefully verify that I'm not the only one picking up on certain things.

SPEAKERS:

So far, I've used a variety of 1x12 cabs, only one 2x12 cabs, and only 1 4x12 cabs to profile amps with. Here they are:

1. Friedman Dirty Shirley 1x12 Creamback 65

2. Mesa Boogie Lonestar 1/2 open back Weber Silver Bell 75w moderate doping (If you're wondering about "doping," high doping makes a very tight speaker that settles vibration quicker, so the a 15w speaker, for example, would typically have light doping because people like the sound of the speaker breakup in vintage amps. Whereas, higher doping lessens "cone cry" and is better for louder, ganier amps. Therefore, at 75w, moderate doping is the right balance of the sticky stuff around the speaker cone to handle the wattage and gain, but still allow the speaker character to come through very natural). Think of this particular speaker like a Celestion Gold but with more low end, a little warmer, a little woodier, and a less speaker breakup.

3. EVH 1x12 Celestion Gold (Note: my first two profiles {Friedman Pink Taco} with this cab was with a 15"w WGS Blue Alnico)

4. Zinky 2x12 Celestion G12H30 + V30

5. Marshall 4x12 with 2 Eminence Wizards & Private Jack & Governor

6. I used the 15w Greenback from a Fender Blues Junior to profile a Bogner Metropoulos once

As you can see, I've used a pretty good variety of speaker cabs. I no longer have the 2x12 or 4x12 since I'm a home player and find that 1x12 cabs with a single mic records everything just fine for me.

Here are some observations I've noticed about profiling with different speakers:

* Alnico speakers seem to have a little more of an attack that might equate to something like the effect of the "pick" option on the Kemper. Alnico speakers can have a very sweet top end, or they can be too bright.

* When you get breakup from low wattage speakers like the Alnico Blue and Greenback, then when you try to add more gain, use a stop, or an external overdrive, it seems to add something kind of shitty to the tone. As far as I have been able to tell, once you profile an amp with speaker breakup, then it needs to have all the overdrive already dialed in, and the profile is useful pretty much only as-is.

* Eminence speakers make profiles 'feel' a little dryer. I LOVE Eminence speakers with tube amps, but they seem to profile with a bit of a resistant sag to your pick attack or a dryer, less greasy feel. The Wizard profiled with the least affect on feel.

AMP SETTINGS:

* Presence & Volume - This is a tricky setting. I'm not an amp expert by any stretch of the imagination, but from what I know, presence is mostly effective as the amp is louder, affecting the high frequencies passed by the power tubes (forgive me if I'm not describing this in the correct technical way). I haven't been able to get great results profiling a very loud amp, so I fiddle with the presence vs treble settings, then have to profile a couple of times until it sounds right. Moreover, amp EQ's interact differently and sometimes turning up/down other knobs (I think treble usually has the greatest effect on the other frequency controls) has a better effect than adjusting the presence very far before/past 12:00.

As for volume, distortion, etc., I know there are several settings that can be tweaked. I haven't played much with them yet. However, using the default return level (4 or 5 I think), I've discovered a general rule that seems to work for me. At barely above the point so the profiler doesn't complain that the volume/input is too low, raising the amp volume about a loud cellphone ring higher from that point seems to be just right. It's definitely too loud for an apartment or nighttime, but not as loud as I've heard some guys profile their amps. I've tried other profiles where they seem to try and do the opposite and get it just under the point where the little red light comes on from being too loud, but that doesn't seem to have any benefit at all.

* I have not had good success profiling pristine cleans at all. It just sounds a little lifeless and kind of dull. Best results have been dialing my clean channel a bit past that "edge of breakup" point, then later lowering the gain a notch once the profile is finished.

MICING:

I have too many questions in this area, but so far my observations have been:

* Typically off-center, with an SM57 pointed a bit inward and either and up or down angle (above or below center of cap) seems to be the easiest way to get decent profiles. About 1/2 inch away from the grill cloth seems to be easiest. I have not had much success trying to point the mic straight toward the speaker at any point inner or outward. Only at a little left or right + up or down angle have I been able to get it right. Farther than 1/2 to 1" away from the cab grill, well, I don't even know how to describe it but something about the low end doesn't sound as good. I don't know how people get such good sounds 2-3" away from the grill cloth. Right against the grill cloth doesn't sound quite right either. I'm not sure what, but 1/2" seems easiest.

Maybe that's because I'm mostly using 1x12 cabs? I'd also like to know why it seems to be easier to mic with both a horizontal + vertical angle towards the cap. What makes the difference that just pointing it at a horizontal angle?

* I have a Sennheiser E609 which is clearer and I think a little brighter than the SM57, but that one is even harder to figure out. It seems to like being pointed straight at the speaker around the edge of the cap, and about 1" away. For whatever reason, this mic seems to be a little better for clean or metal, whereas the SM57 seems to lends itself better from edge of breakup to old school metal.

This is totally what my ears have been hearing. I'm not making any of these statements except based on what I've noted as I experiment with profiling.

GAIN:

* I think a lot of profiles are too gainy and distorted to the point where they all sound like the same amp with a different EQ. To me, the best profiles respond to your pick attack almost like a high gain amp (but not too sensitive), and have as much gain that stops at the point where it needs more than minimal noise suppression and doesn't have a lot of over-sensitive string noise. I know guys who use rubber bands or hair bands to help with unwanted string noise. I have tried this, but I think it doesn't do anything for me because I don't use over-the-top gain like they do.

Honestly, I like SOME of the very gainy tones, but I never sound good playing like that. However, I think I use more than moderate gain because a Friedman Smallbox full on gain + a tube screamer at least 9:00-11:00 would probably be just about right for me most of the time.

REFINING PROCESS:

* Lastly, I'm not sure about this refining process. I have read conflicting things. On one side, refining isn't necessary past a certain software update, and some say it's an important part of the process. Since the manual describes it, I always do it exactly as the manual says.

* I use a 30-40 second procedure of of strumming chords across all strings, in lower, middle, and upper neck positions; then power chords and 3-finger chords on lower, middle, and upper strings; and in between doing some palm muting, variance of pick angle, and a finish with about 3 seconds of muted alternate picking and legato kind of stuff ascending and descending.

This method I started using after several experiments. I started exactly as the manual said, striking hard chords continuously without any soloing, then did the exact same profile over again only soloing with alternate picking and legato, then hitting the chords a little softer, then again the same profile with lots of bar chords and palm mutes, then a combination of them all. It seems like you have to have mostly chords, some palm mutes peppered here and there, some big chords and little chords, different positions up and down the neck, lower and higher strings, and despite the manual's suggestion not to break into a solo, that little 2 or 3 seconds of shredding and bending at the end seems to add a tiny bit more complexity to the distortion character.