Posts by lbieber

Old thread, but I prefer to avoid the studio eq as it 'wastes' a slot. I use a combination of definition, presence, treble and hi cut to get rid of fizz. If I can't remove it with those, then I move on to a different profile. Presence followed by hi cut are usually the most effective IME.

So, if anyond has created a studio eq to convert SC to HB and visa versa, can you please share it? I'd love to hear how well it works.

No experience with the Laney unit.

I almost always use non guitar cabinets. Whether you would call the cabinets that I use FRFR or not is up for discussion. I am skeptical of anything called FRFR because I see FRFR as a sales moniker created to specifically entice users of digital modelers/profilers to part with their money. I see nothing special about these so called FRFR units. I have gotten great results with some PA cabinets that are not labeled as FRFR. In any case, the Kemper is very sensitive to the design and quality of the cab that you attach it to. This is only my experience. I mentioned this is another thread where I listed some examples of cabs that I have used. In the end, there are a wide range of results and buying an FRFR unit is not a guarantee of anything other than your money is now someone else's.

Sorry, but I have no experience with the EV PXM-12MP.

I am simply using what I have on hand and have accumulated over the years. I have not purchased anything special for use with the Kemper, but I have been loaned several FRFR units as well as a Kab. Some of the speakers that I already own sound better or as good and none merited spending more dollars.

1. JBL SRX series is absolutely the best for all uses - live and in my studio/home
2. EV floor monitors that I obtained in the 80s. Not sure of the model. I would have to check
3. Turbosound ip2000 line array - not quite as good as the previous 2 but I use it on some live gigs. Relatively transparent and tweeter can be a bit harsh
4. Adam A7 for studio/home use. Not high powered, but transparent. Tweeter can also be a bit harsh
5. The list of boxy sounding speakers is long but includes JBL MRX and PRX and many of the others that I mentioned above. I would have to spend more time to provide details on those

A main consideration for me is that I moved away from guitar cabs with the Kemper because I want a good FOH and monitor sound. This forces the use of cabs with tweeters. Tweeters can make profiles(and mic'd guitar amps) sound unpleasant. Before Kemper, I always rolled off the high end off the mic'd guitar amp signal at the board to get it out of the tweeters. Most guitarists don't like and are not used to the guitar in the tweeter sound. I am one of them. I think this is a big contributor to the amp-in-the-room phenomenon that is talked about here a lot. Profiles have to be tweaked properly for cabs with tweeters or the result is harsh, tinny, digital, etc... The Kemper is especially prone to producing harsh tweeter content IMO. I use definition, presence, hi cut, treble, studio EQ to tame it. I find that some profiles can't be tamed and I quickly move on from those. So, I EQ profiles around the harshness that can be part of the guitar plus tweeter sound. On a side note, I suspect that I don't like some of my speakers because the crossover frequency in the unit is not to my liking.

That's some of my experience and opinion. I hope it helps.

I have had similar experiences with cabinets. I stopped using guitar cabs completely with the Kemper. The sound is bad for the reasons stated above by V8. I should say that I don't believe the amp in the room thing so consider that as you will. I only run the Kemper through full range speakers - many different PA and studio monitors. Speakers have a huge effect. I am able to get great sounds out of great speakers. The same profiles on lesser speakers don't sound nearly as good. For me, the quality of the Kemper sound is ALL ABOUT THE SPEAKER.

I have EV monitors, many models of JBLs, Turbosound, Community, KRK, Adam, Alesis, Klipsch. Some sound great and other don't. The range of quality is very wide. I now only focus on tweaking profiles with what I know are good speakers for the Kemper. Otherwise, I view it as wasted time and I have found that I can tweak endlessly with a 'bad' speaker and never achieve an acceptable sound.

Quote from JuLai

In the 2023 Rig Rundown Warren tells his Soldano's are all modified to maintain low end even with low gain settings. It is said that in practice this mod is basically just removing the bright cap across the volume pot. And I've understood that this (bright cap value change) can be now done also with newest firmware?

So in theory, it should be possible to nail these tones.., at least equipment wise.

I mentioned the bass content in my post above. This set of profiles is REALLY good, but were extremely bass heavy and congested before tweaking. I would say I had the opposite problem that you describe in your post.

Clean means different things to different people. I found what I call 'fat' cleans by using a 1960 crunch profile. I turned the gain down, adjusted the definition, and bass knob to get rid of 'congestion'. The result is a very nice profile with good cleans and touch sensitivity. It requires very light picking to maintain an acceptable clean for me, but I can push it into overdrive by increasing my pick attack.

I also use this profile by increasing the gain to get into heavier drive when I want it.

This profile has become one of my favorites.

It will work. Will it sound good? That depends on how you configure the Kemper and the quality of the amp/PA speaker. Even with a well configured Kemper, the results are very dependent on the amp and speaker cabinet. In my experience, I would want some time with the full chain to get it configured well or to conclude that the speaker isn't going to provide a quality sound. Plugging a Kemper into an 'untested' PA speaker is a gamble that may or may not pay off and one I am not willing to take.

Quote from breu

Thank you. A feeling is starting to creep up on me that I have set the introduction price way too low....

I myself use my profiles without cabs both in the studio and live....

So I'm particularly fixated on making it sound super good in the studio and on inears. In addition, of course, I check on real cabs. Could it be that you have a cab with a lot of low?

Anyway, as long as it sounds good in the end ...

I only listen on studio monitors or good PA cabs. I wouldn't characterize any of them as having a lot of low end. The quality of the speaker has a large impact on the sound IME. Cheap to mid-level speakers and PA monitors color the Kemper tones to a great degree and the variation is wide. I have some PA cabs that I won't use with the Kemper because the reproduction is so poor.

In any case, I was simply curious how you monitor. I can easily tweak your SLO LP profiles to get VERY good tones. Thanks again.

Just wanted to mention that those SLO profiles are VERY good after tweaking. And thanks for 'giving' them away.

I am curious how you tweak them and how you are listening to them. I find almost all to be very bass heavy and in need of large tweaks to definition and to the bass. These are really good profiles once I adjust them. I really enjoy the fatness especially on the unwound strings which often sound thin to me on most profiles. This aspect is really good for me. Also, the touch sensitivity can be adjusted really nicely.

Thanks for the great profiles.

Quote from alligatorlizard

... I think the whole discussion about feel is a bit of a tangent - Kemper haven't claimed any advancements here, and have made it clear the profiling process is no different. Unless they've secretly added some extra "feel ingredient", and for some reason don't want to admit it, then any perceived difference in feel is simply due to being able to dial in a tone that really works for your instrument, and this being more satisfying to play.

Or it's just in your head. I have yet to experience any difference in feel.

Quote from Danyx

...

What do you think guys?

I think it's nonsense...you asked. Shame on Kemper for wasting 15 to 70 seconds of valuable time.

Funny how we all have different experiences and viewpoints. I bought a Mesa Mark iii 60/100 (head and 4x12) in 1985 which I still own.

That amp can be punishingly loud in a way that I never experienced with any Marshall or any other amp for that matter. It made every Marshall sound like crickets on a cool night. Not saying louder is better, just stating the fact.

The Mark iii in rhythm 2 could be tweaked to sound almost exactly like a 1959, for better or worse. The 1959 was never my cup of tea, but it is a data point for tone.

Quote from GCNC8068

... I've always thought that running a tube screamer or rat into a clean marshall was basically just hearing the pedal, not the amp so much. One of the reasons touring pro's have multiple amps (in addition to backups).

The tubescreamer/tube driver with min gain and max volume works really well into an already cranked plexi, Fender, etc... This is proven to work very well. Most guitarists don't recognize that, in my experience, and put them in front of a clean platform and the result is poor.

The MXR+ was not a treble booster. For me the trick was to use an almost dead 9V battery. It was maybe the best drive pedal ever in that configuration.

The DA treble booster was a great unit as well. Plugged right into the guitar. Did way more than the name indicates.

We have a slighty different perespective. Maybe due to location? I appreciate your viewpoint.

I had a Dan Armstrong treble booster, a big muff, an MXR distortion +, and Fuzz face myself. I bought the treble booster in 75 and all others came after that.

From memory Maestro fuzz, Fuzzrite, Tonebender, Rangemaster, Boss offered a few I think.

Along the way 80s and beyond I owned many others

Quote from Nikos

Things developed rapidly in the '80. Ultra Fast. Mods,racks,"boutique"..Ofcourse for us europeans..whatever came from the USA..we copied it.

But pedals were never part of the hype in the "golden era". Not at all. Rather the "enemy no1".

I remember vividly when I noticed this "pedal-revival" at the beginning of the 2000s and young lads asked "what OD used Eddie on eruption" or Ingwie on far beyond the sun..

That was an interesting time.

Display More

I guess it depends on how you define the 'golden era'. Pedals were being used in the 60s and 70s A LOT. And I don't remember them being the enemy no1. Didn't happen IME. It seems you and I are from different generations with different memories or viewpoints. All good...

FYI, the Dumble FET is not a traditional clipping circuit where the signal is driven into an upper or lower rail. It is a FET based preamp circuit that can add mild (even with a touch of odd harmonic) drive in its standard configuration. Most Dumbles, especially ODS types, are insanely good with humbuckers, but not nearly so with single coils. The FET is a common way to to obtain some extra drive when using single coils. Some of this is open for debate, but this is my experience.

There were lot's of 'traditional' amps modded with cascaded gain staging, diode clippers(silicon, germanium, LEDs), different types of master volume, PAB, biasing, etc... Most were looking for more, like goes to '11'. Also, music was changing and super high gain became a thing guitarists desired.

Boutique became a thing, but mods came first simply because so many amps already existed and it is easier to mod an existing amp rather than build a full amp from scratch.

Judging by the effect pedal market, it seems not that many ditched pedals for very long if at all. Guitarists seem to be on an endless, outward search for some 'magic'. IME, most never look inside of themselves.

The Kemper viewed as a Whizzer is a powerful concept, but I don't play metal and don't need that heavy buzzsaw drive. With a good rig the Kemper provides the ability to get all the gain I need without a drive pedal. As a side note, I find it easier to morph an amp and get the volume set correctly. When using a drive, I often find the volume level isn't really what I intended. Anyone else have the same experience?

One specifice advantage of the Kemper is that you can morph the amp. This is essentially what Neil Young implemented with The Whizzer.

I don't need drive when I have the ability to morph gain, TMB, and volume. Plus I can morph things like reverb, delay, compression etc.... in addition. I just need the right amp profile for the tones I am after. Otherwise everything is there.

As stated, fuzz is a different effect.

I asked HW about liquid profiling via email. He responded that he did not save the knob settings on most, if not all, of his profiles. He will not be providing them as a result.

I also notice that he is selling liquid profile packs on his site.

This is what i expect from most if not all 3rd party providers. It's a new revenue stream that most businesses will most likely leverage.