Liquid profile tone stack accuracy.

1st Official Post

    I have not tried LP yet as I don't always have good luck with beta versions. I recall there there is a JCM 800 tone stack to choose from? I'm just curious as to how accurate it is to the actual amp. I have a hard to find Marshall manual that shows freq centers for the tone stack. I have surprised a few techs, even ones that have been working on them for 40 years with the info there regarding the EQ . Most people would assume Presence operates at a higher frequency than Treble but in 2204/2104/2202/2103 it's not the case. The only difference between the 50 watt models and the 100 watt 2202/2103 is the Mid center 50 watt is 500hz and the 100 watt 600hz So here is the 100W: Treble 35 dB @ 10kHz Middle 9.5dB@ 600Hz Bass 15dB@ 50Hz (pretty low huh?*) Presence 6dB@ 3kHz. I just wonder if you measured the liquid profile stack how close it would come to this. I have some JCM 800 profiles of my 800s and other 800s and always despised the tonestacks in the actual amp and appreciated the stock tone stack in the kemper that always seemed to me like everything was in the right place making it more like I was fixing it in the studio rather than that funky tonestack. You can of course make the original 800 sound great but often you have to have some odd settings to get it to sound right. Of course I see where some people might want the option ( I have no idea why) but personally you can keep that lousy 800 tonestack in the 800s and I'll take the Kemper one over it any day. When I do try LP I'm going to check it out and although I don't have the equipment to accurately measure the tone centers, I'll know right away how close it is to the "real thing" because choosing an 800 tone stack will make it hard to dial in and easy to make strident.


    * It's no wonder that with the bass centered @ 50Hz that the bass control in these amps seems weak as The lowest string on the guitar is like 80 Hz. I never understood why Marshall centered it at 50Hz where there is not much there from an electric guitar at all. Almost more like a shelve.

    Don´t overthink it.


    I just tried the liquid stuff with some fender amps and i was very positive surprised by the results:

    the profiles behaved more like real amps IF you fiddle with the knobs, and i got quicker to better results

    than with the generic (old) tonestack or with the eq.


    For me it´s a big improvement.


    p.s : pretty hard to read your post without paragraphs (for me).

    Quote from christianbad

    p.s : pretty hard to read your post without paragraphs (for me).

    I'll try to do better next time. I guess I don't fully understand how paragraphs make things easier to absorb. If you were having difficulty comprehending what I wrote, or I was going too fast, just stop there and wait till what I wrote connects then continue, your brain is in command of how quick you can read and move forward, not spaces in the visual.

    • Official Post
    Quote from Dynochrome

    If you were having difficulty comprehending what I wrote, or I was going too fast, just stop there and wait till what I wrote connects then continue, your brain is in command of how quick you can read and move forward, not spaces in the visual.

    It was a very valid request, no need to reply in borderline insults.

    The fact that written information can be absorbed quicker and easier with proper formatting instead of a wall of text is hardly up for debate.

    Quote from Dynochrome

    I have not tried LP yet as I don't always have good luck with beta versions. I recall there there is a JCM 800 tone stack to choose from? I'm just curious as to how accurate it is to the actual amp. I have a hard to find Marshall manual that shows freq centers for the tone stack. I have surprised a few techs, even ones that have been working on them for 40 years with the info there regarding the EQ . Most people would assume Presence operates at a higher frequency than Treble but in 2204/2104/2202/2103 it's not the case. The only difference between the 50 watt models and the 100 watt 2202/2103 is the Mid center 50 watt is 500hz and the 100 watt 600hz So here is the 100W: Treble 35 dB @ 10kHz Middle 9.5dB@ 600Hz Bass 15dB@ 50Hz (pretty low huh?*) Presence 6dB@ 3kHz. I just wonder if you measured the liquid profile stack how close it would come to this. I have some JCM 800 profiles of my 800s and other 800s and always despised the tonestacks in the actual amp and appreciated the stock tone stack in the kemper that always seemed to me like everything was in the right place making it more like I was fixing it in the studio rather than that funky tonestack. You can of course make the original 800 sound great but often you have to have some odd settings to get it to sound right. Of course I see where some people might want the option ( I have no idea why) but personally you can keep that lousy 800 tonestack in the 800s and I'll take the Kemper one over it any day. When I do try LP I'm going to check it out and although I don't have the equipment to accurately measure the tone centers, I'll know right away how close it is to the "real thing" because choosing an 800 tone stack will make it hard to dial in and easy to make strident.


    * It's no wonder that with the bass centered @ 50Hz that the bass control in these amps seems weak as The lowest string on the guitar is like 80 Hz. I never understood why Marshall centered it at 50Hz where there is not much there from an electric guitar at all. Almost more like a shelve.

    It is incredible how, across internet forums on any topic, if someone asks a straight question about a specific or technical point they always seem to get inundated with replies from people saying essentially: "I don't need to know this level of detail, so why do you - here's some general advice instead" - so good luck getting a clear answer to this, but it's a good question! Until using Kempers I was under the impression all amp EQ's operated this way, e.g. treble higher than presence - probably because I have mainly used/owned Marshalls - could be other amps do things differently. Also in audio engineering terms, presence generally does refer to the freq's around 3k (or anywhere between about 1k to 5k really), this being the region which helps a sound cut thru thru mix (hence giving it presence!). With the Kemper's generic EQ, presence is clearly higher than treble, so it would be interesting to know if this matches how other amps (than Marshalls) operate, and if, with the Liquid tonestacks, they've switched it around for amps where presence definitely is lower than treble such as the JCM800. Re. the bass centred around 50hz, does your manual say if this is a shelf or bell? Either way, I'd guess it's wide and affects freqs significantly above - maybe they set it low to avoid boosting too much the muddy lower-mids region (250-350hz)? Might be one of the reasons Marshalls sit well in a mix (once high-pass filtered...) btw, I'm usually a big proponent of paragraphs, but have abandoned them here in solidarity ;)

    Quote from alligatorlizard

    Re. the bass centred around 50hz, does your manual say if this is a shelf or bell? Either way, I'd guess it's wide and affects freqs significantly above - maybe they set it low to avoid boosting too much the muddy lower-mids region (250-350hz)? Might be one of the reasons Marshalls sit well in a mix (once high-pass filtered...)

    Almost every guitar amp ever (there are a few exceptions though) use a passive tone stack. These can only ever cut frequencies never boost them.


    Quote from alligatorlizard

    Until using Kempers I was under the impression all amp EQ's operated this way, e.g. treble higher than presence - probably because I have mainly used/owned Marshalls - could be other amps do things differently. Also in audio engineering terms, presence generally does refer to the freq's around 3k (or anywhere between about 1k to 5k really), this being the region which helps a sound cut thru thru mix (hence giving it presence!). With the Kemper's generic EQ, presence is clearly higher than treble, so it would be interesting to know if this matches how other amps (than Marshalls) operate, and if, with the Liquid tonestacks, they've switched it around for amps where presence definitely is lower than treble such as the JCM800.

    The Mesa Dual Rectifier also has the presence very low (possibly lower than treble) but most amps do seem to have the presence higher.

    Quote from DonPetersen

    It was a very valid request, no need to reply in borderline insults.

    I wasn't insulting, just offering helpful suggestions for someone reading something without paragraphs.

    If I was having difficulty comprehending text, I just stop there and wait till what I read connects then continue, My brain is in command of how quick I can read and move forward, not spaces in the visual. I guess it's personal preference as I really don't need paragraphs. I read and understood the above post from alligatorlizard just fine.

    Quote from alligatorlizard

    With the Kemper's generic EQ, presence is clearly higher than treble, so it would be interesting to know if this matches how other amps (than Marshalls) operate, and if, with the Liquid tonestacks, they've switched it around for amps where presence definitely is lower than treble such as the JCM800

    There have been some threads here in the past about where the tone centers are in the "generic" Kemper.

    I recall none of them agreed and some users were still trying to find out where they actually were. I can't remember if they were ever "officially" disclosed without going back to those threads

    One user JuLai tested/reported:

    Bass Shelf 150 Hz (steep)

    Mid Peak 600 Hz

    Treble Shelf 2400 Hz

    Presence Shelf 10000 Hz

    So here like you wrote, the presence is much higher than the treble and very different than a JCM800 tonestack (Thank goodness) Like I wrote before, I have no issue with the "stock" tonestack, it's tailored well for guitars.

    I did see a thread where C Kemper replied saying it was no secret and gave the exact EQ points - as I recall they were indeed either very close or exactly the same as you list here.


    As for the Kemper's generic tone stack - I do disagree a bit about it being better than most amps. What it is very useful for is, if you find a profile that's been captured with the amp's tone stack pretty close to where you'd set it if you plugged your guitar into it, then the points/curves seem very well chosen to apply a bit of gentle broad-strokes EQ to subtly refine the tone. However, if the original profile is way off tonally, it's not much help in tailoring it to your pickups - I generally find that if you need to apply more than about 0.5 cut or boost (the exception being bass, where bigger cuts do seem to work fine) then it no longer sounds much like a real amp. Which is frustrating, as if you had the actual amp in front of you, you probably would be able to get a good tonal balance with it's EQ knobs. Liquid profiling seems designed to solve this problem - looking forward to trying it out once the official release is ready!


    re. the original question - if no-one from Kemper answers, maybe someone with the beta could move the treble and presence knobs in a liquid 800 tonestack around a bit, and see if it sounds like the presence knob is now acting on lower freq's than the treble?

    Quote from alligatorlizard

    I do disagree a bit about it being better than most amps

    I wrote:

    "appreciated the stock tone stack in the kemper that always seemed to me like everything was in the right place making it more like I was fixing it in the studio rather than that funky tonestack" Intending I like the tonestack because of it's profile "fixing" ability, not so much its function replacing an actual amp tonestack. But of course (as I have wrote ad nauseum) I would take it over the JCM800 one.

    Interesting OP. I "want" to make the JCM 800 work for me but I find I much prefer a Super Lead or a modded Marshall sound, like the Friedman BE or JJ sound. I was trying to make some commercial 2203 and 2210 profiles work as the direct versions had all the settings so I could make them into LPs. However, whether it's the CM800 tone stack or the gain taper, anything approaching 7-8 on the gain made it into a wooly mess and nothing sounding like any of the classic sounds of hard rock and metal made with the 800s. Having never really played a real one, is that accurate for how they sound? Is it a case of needing the volume and mid gain to get to a tight and heavy rock sound with them? Not sure.

    Quote from Dynochrome

    I wrote:

    "appreciated the stock tone stack in the kemper that always seemed to me like everything was in the right place making it more like I was fixing it in the studio rather than that funky tonestack" Intending I like the tonestack because of it's profile "fixing" ability, not so much its function replacing an actual amp tonestack. But of course (as I have wrote ad nauseum) I would take it over the JCM800 one.

    Yes, I got that, but I was giving reasons why personally I'd rather have an authentic amp EQ (i.e. a "liquid" tonestack) than the generic one (though it might be useful to have both in series!)


    Put it this way - whatever the limitations of a JCM800 tonestack, I've played thru many JCM800's, and have always managed to dial in a useable tone with it's EQ knobs, no matter what type of guitar I've been using. However, most JCM800 profiles I've tried have apparently been captured with the amp's EQ controls quite a way off from where I'd ideally set them, and I've rarely been able to fix this using the generic EQ. Hence why I'd rather have the liquid tonestack. Presuming it works as advertised (like you I'm waiting for the official release) then I should be able to set the tone controls as with the real amp to get a useable basic tone, then refine further with studio EQ or in the DAW as needed. Again, in my experience, the generic EQ is only effective for very small adjustments - and it seems that Kemper have acknowledged this (at last!) by way of developing/releasing liquid profiling.

    Quote from mtmartin71

    Interesting OP. I "want" to make the JCM 800 work for me but I find I much prefer a Super Lead or a modded Marshall sound, like the Friedman BE or JJ sound. I was trying to make some commercial 2203 and 2210 profiles work as the direct versions had all the settings so I could make them into LPs. However, whether it's the CM800 tone stack or the gain taper, anything approaching 7-8 on the gain made it into a wooly mess and nothing sounding like any of the classic sounds of hard rock and metal made with the 800s. Having never really played a real one, is that accurate for how they sound? Is it a case of needing the volume and mid gain to get to a tight and heavy rock sound with them? Not sure.

    Have played thru many 800's, tho never owned one as it's not really one of my favorite amps - however it does provide a great workhorse tone, and probably most of the classic rock/metal tones involved a tubescreamer (or similar) upfront which tames the bass and means you don't have to have the gain so high.

    Quote from Dynochrome

    I have not tried LP yet as I don't always have good luck with beta versions. I recall there there is a JCM 800 tone stack to choose from? I'm just curious as to how accurate it is to the actual amp. I have a hard to find Marshall manual that shows freq centers for the tone stack. I have surprised a few techs, even ones that have been working on them for 40 years with the info there regarding the EQ . Most people would assume Presence operates at a higher frequency than Treble but in 2204/2104/2202/2103 it's not the case. The only difference between the 50 watt models and the 100 watt 2202/2103 is the Mid center 50 watt is 500hz and the 100 watt 600hz So here is the 100W: Treble 35 dB @ 10kHz Middle 9.5dB@ 600Hz Bass 15dB@ 50Hz (pretty low huh?*) Presence 6dB@ 3kHz. I just wonder if you measured the liquid profile stack how close it would come to this. I have some JCM 800 profiles of my 800s and other 800s and always despised the tonestacks in the actual amp and appreciated the stock tone stack in the kemper that always seemed to me like everything was in the right place making it more like I was fixing it in the studio rather than that funky tonestack. You can of course make the original 800 sound great but often you have to have some odd settings to get it to sound right. Of course I see where some people might want the option ( I have no idea why) but personally you can keep that lousy 800 tonestack in the 800s and I'll take the Kemper one over it any day. When I do try LP I'm going to check it out and although I don't have the equipment to accurately measure the tone centers, I'll know right away how close it is to the "real thing" because choosing an 800 tone stack will make it hard to dial in and easy to make strident.


    * It's no wonder that with the bass centered @ 50Hz that the bass control in these amps seems weak as The lowest string on the guitar is like 80 Hz. I never understood why Marshall centered it at 50Hz where there is not much there from an electric guitar at all. Almost more like a shelve.

    Just re-reading your post, hope I got it right:


    1) How accurate are the tonestacks - I suspect pretty accurate as they will have done their research and I imagine it can be measured. It will, of course, not account for different amp variables etc. but I suspect its close, certainly more accurate than the generic Kemper tone. Im sure some comparisons and maybe blind tests will follow!


    2) BUT is accurate better? This is the key point - JCM800's tone controls typically don't do that much! But we are creatures of habit and many people like the familiar, and can find their sounds better that way. There is no doubt in the case of the JCM800 tonestack its more "restricted"...the good news is of course we can select either, so no right or wrong methinks, just preference.


    3) Were the original amp tonestacks done deliberately to suit that amp or just design flaws/accidents/inherited etc. I would like to think the former but probably in some cases the latter...


    4) Are paragraphs important? Yes, hence why they exist, without them it is harder to read ( especially for people who digest information visually). In the same way as ifIdon;tleavespacesbetweenwords you can still read it but it takes longer. Its not really a debate, yes we can work round it and still understand it but its harder, hence the request, which didn't seem to be unreasonable...


    I suspect like me you will find little benefit for LP's so not worth making the upgrade in Beta ( although I have as I've always be happy/lucky with beta's).


    Hope that helps..

    Quote from alligatorlizard

    Have played thru many 800's, tho never owned one as it's not really one of my favorite amps - however it does provide a great workhorse tone, and probably most of the classic rock/metal tones involved a tubescreamer (or similar) upfront which tames the bass and means you don't have to have the gain so high.

    JCM800 was the first sound I fell in love with. I also think the 100w versions sound better than the 50w in my mind - more "open".


    I loved mine but it was very all or nothing...one sound at volume and that's it. Any other variation had to come from the guitar, pedals or fingers ( ahh, that's where I fell down!).