Liquid profiles of Marshall JVM

Nobody can make liquid profiles of JVM, because Kemper is not offering any JVM tonestack yet!

Quote from JohnnyBee

What are the "specials" of the JVM Tone Stack?

The voicings (and gain levels) of the 12 channels (Clean, Crunch, OD1 and OD2 all of which have a Green, Orange and Red mode).

The JVM aimed to cover every classic Marshall tone in one box and it did a great job. I regularly gigged a JVM410 tattoo half stack with a TC Electronics G-System before going digital.

4 main amp models should do the job. The modes mainly represent different gain stages.

I’m not great with schematics but fr0m what I can see the JVM410 only has 2 different tone stacks. The clean stack which is before the gain stage like a Fender. The design is probably pretty close to a Fender Twin or similar.

The Crunch and both OD channels share the same tone stack values which look very similar to the 2203 values. Only one Amp Model would be required to cover all of these modes in a Liquid Profile. The current JCM800 might be close enough to get there.

I realise that the JvM410 doesn’t sound the same as a JCM800/Plexi/etc but the differences in the 12 modes is something that would be captured making Liquid Profiles of each mode rather than using 12 different Amp Models in the Kemper.

OD1 and OD2 have a different resistor value in the Tone Stack

Chrunch and OD1 are the same.

But every chanel have different values bevor the gain pot. This is why i think 4 amp models would be better.

Quote from JoePVblue

OD1 and OD2 have a different resistor value in the Tone Stack

Chrunch and OD1 are the same.

But every chanel have different values bevor the gain pot. This is why i think 4 amp models would be better.

Sorry just checked the schematic again. You are correct, there is a single resistor different between OD1 and OD2. So it would need two different models to capture this.

The question which needs to be answered in order to know whether every channel would need a new model or not is what the model actually “models”. I believe it has been described as a tonestack model. If this is the case then everything before and after the actual tonestack would need to be captured by the profiling process rather than a tonestack model. This would imply the all the components before the gain pot need to be profiled so aren’t included in the amp model anyway.

I admit that I am not totally sure pf the technical aspects and am merely speculating. Perhaps some kind 0f statement from ckemper clarifying this would be helpful and would assist people in determining what amp model to use where the exact model doesn’t exist yet and also help focus the requests for new models on genuinely relevant amps rather than just asking for everything to be modelled.

As far as I understand it, includes the amp model the tone stack and the gain structure (bright cap, etc)

To make the EQ behave like the amp and the gain (vol) pot behave like the amp.

I think they will never present amp models for these “new” Multichannel Amps with tons of tweaking switches.

For me the classic amps would be enough.

I think to build an amp model needs a schematic, it’s easier.

The schematic of Classic Amps are well known, some of the newer too. But many boutique builder, Bogner, Diezel etc, don’t share schematics.

Classic amps have classic tone stacks, there are not many ways to build them. But there are many ways to vary resistors and caps. Not easy to rebuild them without knowledge of the values.

Even very simple classic amps like the fender deluxe 5e3 tweet amp are not easy to rebuild, because everything interferes…

But may be KEMPER surprises us with a lot of well made amp models and also models of boutique or exotic amps.

In my opinion, Kemper has dug itself a very deep rabbit hole with liquid profiling.

One of the selling points of Kemper Profiling, namely creating profiles of amps that lie outside the main stream, is now absurd. For me, liquid profiling is pointless - mixing modeling with profiling makes me dependent on which ToneStacks exist in the Kemper. So I can stay with a modeler like QC or Fractal.

Only because LP is there, nobody forces you to use it for everything. The Profiler still can do all what was always possible. Is the Tonestack of the amp not available? Just profile it at your sweet spot as before, it will not sound any worse.

Quote from Yoda Guitar

In my opinion, Kemper has dug itself a very deep rabbit hole with liquid profiling.

One of the selling points of Kemper Profiling, namely creating profiles of amps that lie outside the main stream, is now absurd. For me, liquid profiling is pointless - mixing modeling with profiling makes me dependent on which ToneStacks exist in the Kemper. So I can stay with a modeler like QC or Fractal.

Hm true. Also many more players have entered the capture market lately. At cheaper prices. So it makes sense that they need to position themselves differently.

Quote from Kellerblues

Only because LP is there, nobody forces you to use it for everything. The Profiler still can do all what was always possible. Is the Tonestack of the amp not available? Just profile it at your sweet spot as before, it will not sound any worse.

As I already wrote, "For me, liquid profiling is pointless" I don't question it in general, but the hype surrounding the whole thing does.

It could help KEMPER to find new customers.

The profiling itself didn’t improve since the machine is in the market.

The guy who knows his amp exactly and wants the Kemper to behave the same way has a chance with LP.

But I’m afraid the most user don’t know the amp their profile came from…

Are there any videos out yet that show how to profile an amp to work with liquid profiling? I’m still not sure how the whole liquid process will work.

I’m in the process of making a lot of my own profiles. I’m not on the liquid firmware yet and feel like I may be wasting my time making these before I make the switch to liquid

Quote from Amcolan

Are there any videos out yet that show how to profile an amp to work with liquid profiling? I’m still not sure how the whole liquid process will work.

I’m in the process of making a lot of my own profiles. I’m not on the liquid firmware yet and feel like I may be wasting my time making these before I make the switch to liquid

From KemperAmpsOfficial:

Quote from Amcolan

Are there any videos out yet that show how to profile an amp to work with liquid profiling? I’m still not sure how the whole liquid process will work.

I’m in the process of making a lot of my own profiles. I’m not on the liquid firmware yet and feel like I may be wasting my time making these before I make the switch to liquid

you don’t waste your time, but you should document your pot positions

They recommend profiling with maximum gain and pots in the middle position or profiling at the sweet spot ( then you have to know the pot position later)

LP doesn’t change the core profiling Prozess

I think it is the same since day 1, a decade ago.