All yall crack me up! 
I was having issues with my powered toaster into a 4x12.
I used the monitor output eq and boosted the bass ( that thump) and the presence ( my sizzle ) and then everything was tone af.
I also did similar things in the main output eq section when editing profiles with headphones (beyerdynamics dt someting or another).
Would anyone like a sour patch kid? 
@ 'Cederick' . This stuff is way over my head and since I don't record or profile with my KPA ( ... and in trying to learn something from this thread 
) , as an ignorant layman , I have only a single suggestion to put forward :-
Can you perhaps hook up with another KPA user nearby you , that is happy with their results and use their KPA to try achieve what you are trying to do ?
Perhaps it is a setting somewhere in your KPA that is hindering you ?
Please Note: I'm not suggesting you don't know what you are doing , I'm just making simple suggestion .. 
( This is a very informative thread nonetheless . Lots learnt here already . Thnx for that 
)
"Each clip is first album tones from various bands
Then followed by different Josh Middleton Kemper profiles. Tried to choose the closest."
you are surprised that a mixed guitar signal has more bass/treble and less mids than a signal taken straight from the mic?
that's basic guitar mixing in a nutshell, get rid of lo-mid buildup, enhance/sweeten the definition (if needed) and make the bass work nicely with the signal from the actual bass guitar. over-generalizing, of course but this is VERY common.
The Profiler gives you authentic tube amp tone, if you want a perfectly polished 'straight from the record'-sound, you'll need to put in the work like everybody else. These tones are heavily shaped to fulfill a function in a larger picture.
Mixing is an art and a science and it takes even very talented individuals with the right guidance (like a few semesters of MP&E classes) years to hone their skills - I really feel like you are attempting too much and blaming a tool for not getting you there.
I LIKE sharp precise sounds, but I think I often (as in always
) exxagerate that with just adding highs on everything, especially the overheads and snare usually gets sharp and unpleasant.
Make everything louder than everything else is not a good way to mix. 
You want sharp and precise sounding guitars, cut those frequencies from the other tracks. Small things added up amount to a big difference. Getting snappy snare sounds is easier witth compressors or transient designers than eq fwiw. As for guitars those samples you posted have pretty much zero midrange happening, which only leaves the sharp attack.
you are surprised that a mixed guitar signal has more bass/treble and less mids than a signal taken straight from the mic?
that's basic guitar mixing in a nutshell, get rid of lo-mid buildup, enhance/sweeten the definition (if needed) and make the bass work nicely with the signal from the actual bass guitar. over-generalizing, of course but this is VERY common.
The Profiler gives you authentic tube amp tone, if you want a perfectly polished 'straight from the record'-sound, you'll need to put in the work like everybody else. These tones are heavily shaped to fulfill a function in a larger picture.
Mixing is an art and a science and it takes even very talented individuals with the right guidance (like a few semesters of MP&E classes) years to hone their skills - I really feel like you are attempting too much and blaming a tool for not getting you there.
Well, my understanding is that guitars are supposed to be the midd (you know the good ol DONT SCOOP YOUR AMP!!!) so this has maybe fooled my ears during the last couple of years.
There has been sharp and middy sounds alright, but that made my brain think that this is what guitars are supposed to sound, so now I may have to readjust my ears. It has caused my mixes to become sharp and unpleasant too, because the drums have had to compete with the razor edge Kemper profiles I've used
This is something I haven't understand until now.
Or yeah of course I know most sounds are just miced up tube amps and nothing else.
But I was expecting at least SOME of the available to be recorded with multiple mics via mixer and using various EQ to get it "right" even tho... that would be for one mix, and maybe not another. So it could be sort of counter productive way to do like that.
Would you say THIS sound is usable by the way? I just loaded some old Michael Wagner profiles I haven't touched for a year or so but it SEEMS nice but I need some outside opinion because my ears are adjusted for razor sounds... 
Make everything louder than everything else is not a good way to mix.
You want sharp and precise sounding guitars, cut those frequencies from the other tracks. Small things added up amount to a big difference. Getting snappy snare sounds is easier witth compressors or transient designers than eq fwiw. As for guitars those samples you posted have pretty much zero midrange happening, which only leaves the sharp attack.
Nah, of course it's not. I try to keep faders down. But I DO have a tendency to max out certain EQs because I have always liked that sharp sound but I have no reazlied that I have been going the wrong way
I PARTLY blame this on Kemper tho; since I bought it, my brain must have adjusted to the "unprocessed" sounds, and I thought that this is how guitars must sound, because Kemper is a kickass amp, right???? But I never understood I had to do so much worh on my own with these sounds.
Of course, I KNOW they are often only miced up with a single mic and no post EQ but I have been under the impresseion than at least many are "mix ready" but apparently I've been wrong
I hope I'm on the right track now..., would you say this guitar tone is usable? 
Sounds good to me!
after a quick listen - I like example with the MW sounds
This sounds way better than the sounds in you first post.
What did really solve your problem you mentioned in the first post?
hope I'm on the right track now..., would you say this guitar tone is usable?
Sounds great. What profile did you use exactly?
Sounds great. What profile did you use exactly?
I think it's from MW's rig pack (look at the name in the soundcloud file). Recently I found a gem that (so far) sound perfect to me with a couple of minor tweaks (the Eggnata EG Five).
C
I think it's from MW's rig pack (look at the name in the soundcloud file). Recently I found a gem that (so far) sound perfect to me with a couple of minor tweaks (the Eggnata EG Five).
Checking that Eggnata profile now 
Thanks
Unrelated, just similar type of amp (like one of them is JCM800 Bias vsKemper and one is 5150 Bias vs Kemper)But the point I'm trying to make is that the Kemper versions, have the same downfall as the others I compare to album guitars.
Just look at the pictures in the OP how much high end they need to be boosted according to Ozone, and thats all of them.
They all sound muddy in comparison
Not much, maybe a little gain
Two points:
1) I'm glad you came around to the view of getting a studio to create profiles for you, like I suggested in that other thread where you thought the profiles you were using were sub-par.
2) Have you ever tried @djemass John Petrucci profiles? I have used those profiles and then ozoned them to a/b against JP's tone.
It was very, very close.
There was very little need to max out the Ozone effect to 100%, which is what you are doing in those graphs you have posted. There really isn't a need to do that.
Cederick, that last sound sample sounds a lot better. You can hear the kick drum and bass and guitar much more clear. It sounds tighter.
Would you say THIS sound is usable by the way? I just loaded some old Michael Wagner profiles I haven't touched for a year or so but it SEEMS nice but I need some outside opinion because my ears are adjusted for razor sounds...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.
Yeah, sounds good, kick ass playing! Ship it.
p.s. If you need a producer (not an audio engineer), I am available
FOR ME, this mix sounds DULL, but maybe it's just a process of listening/learning???
I like this one the best..I'd be more than happy with this mix if it was mine
Ced, dude I think your are being way too picky. That last sample you posted sounds fantastic (as many others have already pointed out). YES it's more dull than the sound on "War of the roses" f.e. but not in a bad way,more like in a ... more "modern" kinda way. And it's miles ahead of the "No sign of glory" sound. I think you could even brighten the drum sound a little bit without sacrifising the guitar tone that is already there.
P.S. Out of curiosity, what did you use for the guitar sound on the previous two Blazon albums? Whas it real amps? Roses in particular sounds really good.
Display MoreTwo points:
1) I'm glad you came around to the view of getting a studio to create profiles for you, like I suggested in that other thread where you thought the profiles you were using were sub-par.
2) Have you ever tried @djemass John Petrucci profiles? I have used those profiles and then ozoned them to a/b against JP's tone.
It was very, very close.
There was very little need to max out the Ozone effect to 100%, which is what you are doing in those graphs you have posted. There really isn't a need to do that.
1. We will see, there's some cost to this and I dont have too much money.
I could research some studios in Sweden, and what they could do. It could be an interesting process.
And of course, if this ever happens, I will share my Cederick Approved Kemper Profiles for free with everyone
2. Nope, but it sounds interesting. I've never listen to Dream Theatre but I imagine them having good guitar tones. I will check them out!
Yeah, sounds good, kick ass playing! Ship it.
p.s. If you need a producer (not an audio engineer), I am available
I dont know exactly how that would work online? Anyawy, I'm happy producing my own recordings.
I just need a serious re-adjustment of my ears to get away from my latest bright and icepicky shenanigans I've been fooling around with lately
I like this one the best..I'd be more than happy with this mix if it was mine
Haha, well thats some progress I guess
Ced, dude I think your are being way too picky. That last sample you posted sounds fantastic (as many others have already pointed out). YES it's more dull than the sound on "War of the roses" f.e. but not in a bad way,more like in a ... more "modern" kinda way. And it's miles ahead of the "No sign of glory" sound. I think you could even brighten the drum sound a little bit without sacrifising the guitar tone that is already there.
P.S. Out of curiosity, what did you use for the guitar sound on the previous two Blazon albums? Whas it real amps? Roses in particular sounds really good.
Haha I am super picky. It's just I sometimes dont know what the hell I'm doing.
War Of The Roses is SERIOUSLY crippled by it's mix and master. It's so thin and light you could mistake it for a feather.
But I still appreciate that you like it
No Sign Of Glory was a Engl E530 with a Marschal 1960 IR cab
War Of The Roses was recorded with The Amp Factory free profile called Van \m/ Halen that comes stock with Kemper. However, it's tweaked, and I might have a different cab with it. But the amp itself has a very strong "personality" and shines through practially every cab you get your hands on. I'm aware it's not a DI or merged profile (it wasn't even a thing back then) but pretty cool profile, even tho I'm looking for other tones nowadays
It was actualy the profile that made me consider buying Kemper, since I borrowed it from local music store, and that profile itself made me "ah, I need this!"
So I would like to hunt down a factory stock Van \m/ Halen profile, just for novelty and nostalgia sake, maybe even record something with it every now and then
I dont know exactly how that would work online? Anyawy, I'm happy producing my own recordings.
This is exactly the reason you need a producer (not an audio engineer, again).
but for me as a studio owner when i track bands, I do Mixing as I go.. so I will try and mix the song in the live room, with the right sound, right mix, and attitude. so when it hits the board its already going to sound the way I want it too. - this you cant adjust in post without loosing a great deal to "processing". - this way at Mixdown, you can simply just sweeten. no corrective stuff done. this is why commercial records sound the way they do. because the Live room is where its all at!. and rather turning 540 knobs to get you there, you simply multitrack the band and move mics instead of reaching for EQ knobs..
In fact, I dont use EQ either unless I really have too. - this is the benefit of having such a great Live Space and accurate mixing room, is that you can really hear the details of what you need or what you dont.
100% agree on this, best method by far. However I've found most people do not use this approach, Either out of ignorance or lack of skills or just plain being in a rush.
However, none of that has anything significant to do with the missing upper end gain structure elements in the KPA tones that some people are greatly concerned over. And this is not much of a post-processing matter Nor due to room effect (in terms of reverb or other such reflections). Rather it's largely due to what is captured from the original source. That said, I concur there are things that can be done in post. And that it is also very possible, maybe even more commonplace, now days for such additional post work in order to properly morph "amp emulator" tracks to sound more real. But make no mistake, back in the day (70's, 80's) any such work was definitely not commonplace, nor necessary, for proper sounding guitar tracks. All this fancy tweak-a-thon post stuff is more of a modern development. So I'm not of the thinking the KPA gets a pass on that premise. It still however remains to be determined if the issue is attributed to the KPA, or the profile techniques.
BTW, I mentioned distant micing earlier not in the context of reflections or room capture, but rather WRT actual frequency & proximity impacts, as well as the mic types used in that configuration. Since it seems most (if not all) profile makers appear to be in the habit of doing close micing only, I was merely raising the possibility that maybe the lack of distant micing could be playing a factor in what is being heard (or not) in the KPA profiles to some extent. That said, I doubt highly this will solve the upper gain structure elements that remain elusive.
Sonic
