Posts by Ibot39

    In addition to my post above:

    Tested... there is NO difference in sound and feel when using unaltered, untweaked profiles (when adding different tonestacks).

    Also made myself some liquid profiles where I know the settings (set gain pot reference and EQ then burn and save); after that it still sounds absolutely the same as the original profile. But now can be tweaked with the original amps EQ in mind.

    I think there are 3 main points that make some think liquid sounds or feels better:

    1. People using it "wrong" / did not understand it completely yet: They flip tonestacks to random, already tweaked profiles and of course in this case there is a difference. No problem using it this way if it sounds good. But making wrong conclusion is misleading...

    2. They now have the courage to finally tweak the knobs and use Kemper EQ (and it's maybe easier now). Adding some treble... makes it instantly feel better...yeah

    3. Just imagination...even if the creator itself says there is no difference


    Everyone says including kemper there no change, but if you flip through the tonestacks i find there is. Its slight but when you turn a knob just a little its then you realize that the profile now feels better an clearer than the stock. But you cant hear it when you flip through?

    What profiles are you using? Completely unaltered, untweaked profiles? If there has been any small changes in the gain setting and tone controls after profiling (made by the author / seller / user), that profile will sound slightly different when flipping through tonestacks, because the "tweaks" now translate different.

    I’ve been using 2mm mandolin picks for years but you’ve convinced me to give the dunlops a whirl don’t let me down 😎

    Depends on what sound you are after. Dunlop Ultex picks are brighter sounding picks (but in a good way, not cheap).

    Some people don't like Ultex and favour something like the Dunlop Flex picks that are pretty warm sounding, but not very dynamic imo (some people call this consistent and great for shredding). All have their operation area.

    The Dunlop Primetone Small Tri picks are very versatile and dynamic - with some practice you can achieve cutting bright or balanced smooth tones with the contoured bevels. And you can naturally control the loudness and character of the attack with the angle and amount of force you put into it.

    For example this works better with Primetone picks than with the praised BlueChips. BlueChip picks sound pretty similar to the Flex picks (but feel different): clear and warm attack with lack of some dynamic (and character), but nice consistent tone for mandolin, bluegrass...

    The Dunlop Flow picks are great universal picks that get fuller and warmer sounding with increasing thickness, but you also get more and more chirp and clicking sound (1,5mm sounds best and very balanced imo).

    Dunlop Flow Gloss are great picks too and feature a different bevel - it's an almost tactical weapon, vey precise, but still plays very "flowish".

    My love for Primetone Small Triangle picks is unbroken, but I also use the Hetfields's White Fang Custom Flow Pick from Dunlop in 1.14mm when I need some more snappy character in a still fully controllabe pick. It is not the same as the standard Flow pick in 1.14. It has a very different blended bevel (more like the Flow Gloss bevel) that makes it a tad brighter and with more snap.

    Because I also use them very often for "not metal stuff", I sometimes find the printing on the pick a bit goofy. So I made some picks with the printing removed (ultrasonic cleaner). Now they look very serious 8)

    I also like the "custom" Ultex picks I make myself using the Dunlop Ultex Sharp 2.0 as base material. In the end I have a pick very close to the Flow Gloss 2mm with a similar contoured tapered edge, but without the finger indentations.

    The very early profiles from Mattfig were all profiled with settings on noon. Maybe they get a revival soon...

    Not the gain...;)

    Now the manual says

    For [Liquid ] PROFILING, it is preferable to set the gain control of your reference amp to the maximum position

    Now I really should try out the very first Mattfig rigs, because on paper they seem perfect for adding LP / Tonestacks?!


    External Content
    Content 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.

    Yes, Axe-Fx III

    I don't get how the "new gain" control will work and bring realistic gain structure? And also when the profile stays the same it will still react like we are used to. For example when I profile a Supro amp at edge of break up. Then when I boost the profile with a pedal it sounds very different than the real amp boosted. The real amp brings in more fuzz tone for example and the Kemper does not. So I learned to profile with way more gain and other tricks, then bring the gain down when using with drive pedals. I can't see how the new features will solve this?

    External Content
    Content 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.

    I like to discuss this topic here :

    IMHO does profiling the complete chain (Amp, Speaker, Mic (placement)...) sound the best.

    (the good 'old school' original profiles - now called 'studio profiles')

    Profiling just the amp and use any other speaker cabinet or external IR sound different - but IMHO not better or at least not realistic.

    Funny. After reading your latest post showing your nice room with amps and gear I thought it would be great to have some direct profiles from you and some IR to combine.

    I was a long time defender of authentic profiling chain...some remember.... Today, in my experience properly refined direct amp profiles combined with IR sound closer to the source chain than studio profiles of the same setup, most of the time. Despite direct amp profiles are being profiled after power amp section and IR shooting with neutral power amp for example.

    I think refining only direct am profiles can get the amp part closer to source (bass, lower mids). While I often struggle to get studio profiles refined, sometimes no refining works better. IR work at least as good as Kemper cab, but I get the cabs, speaker, mic captured quicker, more reliable and can mix IR (different mic combinations...).

    External Content
    Content 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.

    Sounds (almost) the same. I guess it gets truncated and will loose some bass in the area I high-pass anyway.

    I have MANY Choptones IR packs. But the cab and speaker combination in the brit rock are not my cup of tea. So I don't bought it. But I don't think they sound "artificial". My experience with Choptones is, they really capture how this cabs and speakers sound miked. But there is a tendency for mix-ready tones, especially in the mastered packs. You have to try them in a mix to really judge if they work for you. Could sound artificial and weird out of context.

    And Choptones often use a specific MD421 in their mixes that I don't like that much. In some of the big packs there is an alternative, less harsh MD421 added.

    One of my favourites is the Roadking 4x12 V30/C90 blended pack.

    Kemper automatically converts IR to 44,1 kHz and 24 bit.

    I have tried thousands of Kemper cabs and IR. In the end Choptones always sounded best for me. (Their newer profiles are all DI profiles with copied IR.)

    I like their big IR packs for picking exactly the mics and combinations I prefer. Works better than everything else for me.

    Kemper is an all-in-one solution. But regarding pure "amp tone" Tonex did surprise me (and I think many others). In a fair comparison (not presets, but with the same setup captured) Tonex does a better job atm. It's even closer to the source, feels great and can easily capture amps, pedals and setups that Kemper struggles.

    Also how well the gain knob works on Tonex (even adding quite an amount of gain) and how it reacts with pedals is just really awesome.

    For getting best results when using drive pedals with Kemper, I need to search for a profile with more gain than needed, than reduce the gain to around 2.1 and adjust some more parameters to get it working right.

    With Tonex I just engage the drive pedal and it sounds as expected from the start.

    And it is dirt cheap imo!! I bought a second Walrus Ages overdrive for my pedalboard and these two alone cost more. Now I can even make captures of my favourite settings and put them before Tonex in Amplitube for example. Just fun for me.

    I really hope Kemper does introduce some kind of "automatic improved refining" process. That could be a strategic move to keep up with the evolution and give better results for people struggling with how to refine a profile the proper way.