My God these are good!
Ive got quite a few of Jimi's other packs including many of the Marshall based profiles but these are in another league.
in my opinion Jimi is the king of Marshall tones - no question.
Thanks Jimi
Cheers
My God these are good!
Ive got quite a few of Jimi's other packs including many of the Marshall based profiles but these are in another league.
in my opinion Jimi is the king of Marshall tones - no question.
Thanks Jimi
Cheers
Today's mantra:
Got profiles enough, got profiles enough, got profiles enough...
Not sure it is working!!!
I re typed that out to make sure... i just read that 10 out of 2 people are dyslexic....
Not enough profiles X3, gotcha CJ..thank you for your help
Ash
I was just noticing that the merged and studio profiles sound very different from one other. It looks like the gain and definition vary greatly. For example: TJ-800 Med M has 3.6 gain and 5.4 definition. TJ-800 Med has 3.6 gain and 8.7 definition. I'm perfectly fine with the greater variety of sounds, doing it this way, but I would have expected the merged and studio profiles to sound similar. I'm just curious as to the reason for doing it this way.
I was just noticing that the merged and studio profiles sound very different from one other. It looks like the gain and definition vary greatly. For example: TJ-800 Med M has 3.6 gain and 5.4 definition. TJ-800 Med has 3.6 gain and 8.7 definition. I'm perfectly fine with the greater variety of sounds, doing it this way, but I would have expected the merged and studio profiles to sound similar. I'm just curious as to the reason for doing it this way.
I have noticed this same. For some vendors the merged and studio profiles can sound veeery much alike and then on the other hand there are vendors that have clear difference between matching studio/merged. And this is many times rather systematic from pack to another. Would be very interesting to know the reasons behind this, but can only guess it has something to do either with the gear(DI box) or some processing. dunno!
I have noticed this same. For some vendors the merged and studio profiles can sound veeery much alike and then on the other hand there are vendors that have clear difference between matching studio/merged. And this is many times rather systematic from pack to another. Would be very interesting to know the reasons behind this, but can only guess it has something to do either with the gear(DI box) or some processing. dunno!
My initial guess was that it was related to the DI box, but I would think that would possibly attenuate the gain and definition a tiny amount. Probably not really noticeable.
We use a DI box supplied to us by Kemper. It looks like a tiny version of the lunch pail Kemper. It works well and seems to only color the sound slightly.
Merged profiling seems to be the most accurate, relative to the studio profiles, at higher gain settings (our High, VHi, and Max profiles). We rarely have trouble getting a good merged profile under these conditions.
Merged profiling can be rather frustrating at low and medium gain levels (our Cln, Low and Med profiles). The Kemper sometimes simply won't capture an accurate merged profile at low or medium gain levels, and you end up with something which doesn't sound at all like the studio profile. Sometimes it works great. Sometimes it doesn't. It's hard to predict when it'll be a problem and when it won't.
This is why we still include studio profiles in all of our packs, as they are the most accurate in capturing the sound of the amp.
One way we've found to get merged profiles to work at low and medium gain settings is to reduce treble and presence a bit on the amp. Sometimes this does the trick. Unfortunately, that means the merged and studio profiles are more different sounding than they would have otherwise been. We'll then adjust the merged profile after the fact, but there will still be some differences.
-Jimi
Display MoreWe use a DI box supplied to us by Kemper. It looks like a tiny version of the lunch pail Kemper. It works well and seems to only color the sound slightly.
Merged profiling seems to be the most accurate, relative to the studio profiles, at higher gain settings (our High, VHi, and Max profiles). We rarely have trouble getting a good merged profile under these conditions.
Merged profiling can be rather frustrating at low and medium gain levels (our Cln, Low and Med profiles). The Kemper sometimes simply won't capture an accurate merged profile at low or medium gain levels, and you end up with something which doesn't sound at all like the studio profile. Sometimes it works great. Sometimes it doesn't. It's hard to predict when it'll be a problem and when it won't.
This is why we still include studio profiles in all of our packs, as they are the most accurate in capturing the sound of the amp.
One way we've found to get merged profiles to work at low and medium gain settings is to reduce treble and presence a bit on the amp. Sometimes this does the trick. Unfortunately, that means the merged and studio profiles are more different sounding than they would have otherwise been. We'll then adjust the merged profile after the fact, but there will still be some differences.
-Jimi
Thanks for the info!
What is your naming convention for the ones marked "M" vs -2 or -3?
"M" stands for merged profile. A "-2" or "-3" is a variation of the amp at a particular gain setting, usually a different speaker, different mic, different EQ, etc.
-Jimi
Thanks
Just bought.
Hey Jimi,
When you say "Speakers Used During the Profiling Process: Celestion Vintage 30 and Celestion 25W Greenback"
Do you mean each profile is a combination, or some are one and some are the other.
Hi. We used either the V30s or the Greenbacks, but not both together. You can see which were used for each profile by looking at the profile details in Rig Manager or on the Kemper (I forget exactly how to do that on the Kemper).
Jimi
So you can, sorry my mistake, I must have accidentally overwritten that field when updating the tags.