Very much looking forward to trying out Liquid profiling - but I foresee a lot of trial and error when it first arrives trying to match the right tonestack with the right amp, and finding profiles where the original amp settings are known (so as to be able to set up the liquid tonestack to react authentically - and also for gain settings).

It would be great if Kemper could add a Rig Pack with a few profiles of amps where they know the settings used when they were profiled, and set up liquid tone stacks to match - that way we can quickly demo how it works, knowing it's all set up as intended.

Then we can dive into all our old profiles and try and figure out which tone stack works best and what settings the amp was profiled at... I think profile-makers are going to be getting a lot of e-mails asking what setting they used!

And if possible, some DI (or merged) ones would be great - for me, a Liquid DI profile, which reacts to EQ/gain adjustments like a real amp, and that I can then combine with the IR of my choice, would be the ultimate way to find the perfect guitar tone

Using 3rd party IR's (e.g. Celestion/Ownhammer etc), where each cab usually comes with a whole range of mics and mic placements, already allows you to do this. Unlikely a modeled mic/mic position (which is presumably what you mean by "liquid mic-ing") is going to sound as good. e.g. Axe FX relies on cab IR's (the same type you can load into a Kemper), even tho everything else is modeled.

STL are VERY overpriced. Bought 3 packs from them (in a sale) a while back, mostly unusable - there were about 3 profiles in one of the packs that were OK, but still not as good as other (much cheaper!) profiles I have. The Chris Krummet pack (which I've seen numerous recommendations for here and elsewhere) was the worst!!

Choptones are another very overpriced company - however I have got some great sounds (using their DI packs with 3rd party IRs) so at least I feel I've got something for my money!

But then compare to e.g. Guidorist - about £5 a pack, and some of the best sounding profiles I own - also mostly merged, which always expands the potential of any profile. Value and Quality is possible!

I've said this before, but Liquid Profiling is either one of two things:

1) Simply a custom EQ (with EQ points and curves matching the amp in question's tone stack) placed before or after the profile. This will be nice, but nothing revolutionary. We can already apply custom EQ with studio EQ (pre or post profile), or really detailed EQ in the DAW (post profile). This still won't make the profile really respond to EQ like a real amp, as most tone stacks are between pre and post amp (hence interact with gain)

2) Something deeper - if they've come up with something that can interact with the gain structure of the profile in the same way EQing a real amp does, then this could be great. Fingers crossed...

One thing is for sure - there's no way they can actually insert the tone stack between pre and post amp stages (e.g. as most modern modelers do) to achieve this. Even a direct profile is the sound of the whole amp, you can't separate pre and post amp stages like you could with a modeled amp. So if Liquid Profiling is option 2, it would have to be something whereby the gain structure of the profile is altered "after the fact" (i.e. an "artificial" adjustment of the gain structure that was originally profiled). Could work tho. The existing definition knob does something like this, but in a very broad stroke.

And if anyone in the know could comment on which of these 2 options it is, that would be great!

Quote from Kellerblues

You can apply LP to any of the existing profiles, no need for new ones

This is what I understand too - tho I do wonder how well that's going to work e.g. depending on if you know the original settings, or if the seller provided the original settings how accurate these are, or if you can find the correct tone stack for the amp. Quite possibly new profiles designed with "liquid profiling" in mind might be end up working the best. All speculation tho - time will tell!

Quote from G String

alligatorlizard

Can you please contact support, we need to take a look at this.

Have now done so

Since updating to the latest RM (3.4.32) I've noticed the virtual knobs behave slightly differently. In general they now seem more fiddly/less predictable, but the main problem is that on the parameters that start from 0 and go to 10 (e.g. bias/sag/comp etc) they now move straight from 0 to 0.2 - even using shift+mouse you can't get to 0.1. May seem like a small gripe, but often 0.1 is all that's needed! Similarly, at the top of the range, they now go from 9.8 to 10 - less of a problem for me, as usually I prefer very small amounts of these parameters, but still...

And I realise you can still access these values using Kemper's physical knobs - but I've always found these fiddly to work with due to their non-linear nature - I can see the thinking behind them being non-linear, presumably so you can quickly move by large increments using fast turns, fine tune with slower turns - but in practice, it's just fiddly... would much prefer linear behaviour, like a real analog dial. But, that's a side note - so long as the virtual knobs in RM behave predictably and allow you to access the full range of values for each parameter, I much prefer to use these anyway.

And one other very minor gripe, but something that has made RM just slightly less convenient to use - previously, the mouse wheel moved the values in equal increments of roughly 0.3 in any direction - when testing a profile out, I'd typically set rough values using the mouse wheel just to get a quick idea if adjusting said value was going to work. Now, on the positive/negative dials, if you turn it in the negative direction it behaves much as before, but in the positive direction (using mouse wheel), it goes from 0 to 0.1, to 0.4... I warned you this one was a minor grip But still, was much more useful before to have it go 0 / 0.3 / 0.5 / 0.8 etc, and to have it move in the same sized increments whether you turn it negative or positive.

Summary - could the "virtual knob" behaviour, go back to how it was before, or at least be tweaked to follow some other logical/consistent/predictable pattern? But mainly, we need to be able to access all the possible values using the RM knobs - I think I'm not alone in far preferring RM to tweak profiles with than the Kemper's physical knobs.

SOLVED: heard back from Kemper support (very quickly, as usual, thanks!) - 22khz spike a known issue, noise lower down the spectrum normal (part of amp hum in the profile, as I surmised), and also normal that restoring a Kemper backup only affects content, not rolls back OS. So, all good basically.

Quote from GLParrishmn

saw this not sure if it's related

EQ spike at 22khz since updating to OS 9.05

Just read through this thread in case it was related - sound-wise, I actually can't hear any didifference since I updated, tho it is really hard to tell without re-amping - I just re-recorded some gtr parts that I had recorded before the update and compared by ear - definitely no major difference, but from one performance to the next, different picking strengths etc, it always sounds a bit different - doesn't help that the Kemper is so realistically responsive

The EQ spike at 22khz itself is inaudible, but the reason I'm looking into it is in case it's indicative of any more substantial change/problem, which I may not have noticed yet.

Quote from Ruefus

A backup restores the content, not the OS.

To do that, you need the KAOS file.

Thanks, good to have that confirmed! Was a bit worried my Kemper's restore process had gone haywire too

And yes, I presume I can get an older OS file somewhere on the Kemper site, but thought I'd wait to see if other's also are seeing this spike. Was 100% definitely not there before the update, so has to be connected somehow, or a massive coincidence if something else is causing it.

Hi,

Anyone else got a weird little EQ spike around 22khz since the latest update? (to OS 9.05 - I was on OS 8.7 previously)

It wasn't there on guitars I recorded the day before updating (and I would definitely have noticed this before anyway while EQ-ing in ProQ), but it's there now on any profile I try. Thought it might be spdif related, but get the same thing via the main xlr outs. If you've got a noise gate on, you'll need to gently strum the guitar to see it on a spectrum analyser (or turn the noise gate(s) off).

Pic 1 is with some open strings gently strummed - Pic 2 is with noise gates off and gtr volume pot at zero. On pic 2, you'll also notice some noise a bit lower down the spectrum (marked by the green circle) - not sure if that was there before or not as I've never had any reason to look at the spectrum anaylser with noise gates and gtr vol off before - and this varies in shape and size depending on the profile - so maybe it's normal "amp background noise"? But the little spike at 22khz is definitely new, and is constant in shape and size on any profile. It's inaudible - but still... it wasn't there before the update, hence wondering if something's wrong. Nothing else with my setup has changed other than the OS update.

btw, I made a backup directly before updating the OS from 8.7 to 9.05, and tried rolling back to this - however, I notice that when the Kemper starts up, it still says OS 9.05 - tried restoring the backup twice, seemed to be successful each time, but still says OS 9.05 on startup. So does restoring a backup just restore content, and not the OS the backup was made with? (and EQ spike still there even after restoring backup)

I've contacted support, but could anyone else who's updated to OS 9.05 let me know if they're also now seeing this spike at 22khz?

Thanks!

SOLVED: heard back from Kemper support (very quickly, as usual, thanks!) - 22khz spike a known issue, noise lower down the spectrum normal (part of amp hum in the profile, as I surmised), and also normal that restoring a Kemper backup only affects content, not rolls back OS. So, all good basically.

Well it looks like Marshalls are pretty well covered - presumably an 800 tonestack would suit a jubilee or AFD?

Not seeing a Fender Princeton on the list, that'd be nice.

"orange overdose" - would this cover a Rockerverb tonestack? A Tiny Terror one would be nice too - and that's only one knob

HiWatt DR/Engl Savage/SLO would also be useful!

Oh, and what's an "orange overdose"? Hoping these ones will work with Rockerverb profiles, as this is one of my favourite amps, but have struggled to find many where the EQ's been profiled to suit my pickups.

Quote from BayouTexan

That's what A.I. wants you to believe so you call it god. It's just math but a lot of it in just milliseconds.

Exactly! A lot of people saying "modelling tone stack during profiling can't be done" - but it would just be a more detailed/multifaceted version of processes we already know are possible (IR's/"profiling"/EQ matching/machine learning etc). However, maybe there's a good reason whey they've not gone this route - and from the demonstration in the video above, am increasingly hopeful that whatever "liquid profiling" is, it might actually do the trick.

OK, that does sound pretty convincing! I like the reaction when they switch back to the generic tone stack: "yeuck!" - yep, that's what it's felt like trying to EQ profiles thus far... at least by more than about 0.5 in any direction. The proof will be in the pudding, but feeling a little more hopeful after watching this. Maybe I don't need an axe fx after all

Would still be great to get some explanation of roughly how it works - presumably it's not just a custom EQ placed before or after the profile, but somehow interacts with the dist character, to simulate how an actual marshall tone stack is placed between preamp and postamp - ?

Quote from Freshwing

Doing "some magic" is not the criteria.

It's a turn of phrase

Quote from BayouTexan

I'm a little disappointed to learn that Kemper provides the model. I originally thought the "model" would be created when a user profiles the amp and would be baked in to the new profile. That's the merger I would like.

Here's how I'd imagined something like this might work - and without a deep understanding of the technical processes involved in processing, it's only a conceptual idea - but say you started the profiling with tone knobs at noon, then there was an additional step where you turned each tone knob fully left and right in turn so the EQ points, shapes, and effect on dist character of each one could be calculated. Of course, even presuming this was possible, there would be issues, e.g. could it work out this way exactly what happens if one knob was on 3 and another on 8? Obviously going thru EVERY possible combination of knob positions would not be practical...

Now it could be that whatever they've done with "liquid profiling" may be work far better than a more detailed profiling process. But so far it's all speculation what it does and how. The proof will be in the pudding of course, and hopefully it really does solve the problem of not being able to realistically EQ profiles - if so, I'll never look jealously at any modeler (with it's realistically modeled tone stacks) again

Quote from Wheresthedug

That is why Liquid Profiling is such a game changer and puts the KPA back in a unique position.

IF it's more than just a custom EQ placed before or after the profile - still worried it might just be this, as how do you insert an EQ stack "within" a profile (e.g. between pre and post amp stages like it is in most amps). On the other hand, the current definition control works some magic beyond just EQ (affecting dist character too) so, maybe they can pull it off. Fingers crossed!

Quote from Ruefus

I'd be surprised if they don't have that as an option or baked-in to the particular model of tone stack.

But how exactly would this be implemented? I can't see how putting the tone stack between the various stages of an amplifier can be done with a profile.

With modelling, I can see how this could be done - even "digital circuits" can be arranged in series - so you'd model the preamp, insert the tone stack, then into a model of the power amp, for example - not sure if this is actually what modellers do (Fractal maybe?) but I can see how it'd could work. But even a DI profile is snapshot of the complete amp. How can you accurately insert the tone stack "within" this profile? Before or after, yes, easy - but how do you insert it between the pre and power amp stage of a snapshot profile?

Whether or not "liquid profiling" can accurately model how a real amp's EQ controls affect it's tone - and whether it's actually as revolutionary as being claimed - really does seem to me to hinge on how they deal with the fact that most tone stacks are not pre or post the entire amp, but somewhere between the various pre and power amp stages of the amp.

Who knows, maybe they've figured out some algorithm to simulate this - again, would be great if anyone on the Kemper team could comment on whether this will just be custom EQ-point and curves that can be placed either before or after the profile, or if it's something "deeper" that can accurately simulate a tone stack inbetween the various stages of the amp.

Definitely worth buying some 3rd party profiles. But...

Just because some are very popular, doesn't mean they're going to work for everyone - I've bought far too many profile packs, from dozen's of different profile-makers, and very few have really given me anything like the tones in the audio/video demos - all depends on your gtr/pickups. You might be very luck, and the first ones you try sound great thru your gear - but you might have to try a few before you get what you want.

However, once you find some tones that really work for you, you'll be glad you did!

Just hope Kemper introduce an official market-place soon where you can actually try profiles before you buy - would save Kemper users a LOT of money and frustration!