** UPDATED ** Plexi and Fender Liquid Profiles vs Plexi and Fender Generic-Legacy Profiles -> Demo Plexi @ Post #1 and Fender @ Post #46

[Sascha Franck]

I think there are changes aren't there? There's an extra step now where you set the positions of the knobs versus the real amp and choose your tonestack during the profiling process right?

Well, I think that's just a sort of "cosmetical" or "organisational" thing to save some steps, but it could as well be done after the fact. I have not read anything about the profiling process to be improved with liquid profiles - and my guess would be that they'd make quite something out of it.
From how I understand liquid profiles, they're offering a variety of gain and tonestacks closer to whatever amp topologies to chose from - including an option to get your gain and tone controls closer to the amp you've profiled, but that'd rather be a calibration thing and not doing anything to the profile itself but just its "handling" (and I'd guess that this could be recalibrated as well).
Benifin's post seems to at least kind of support these assumptions.

However, from all I know/heard so far, while possibly being not exactly revolutionary in terms of technical means (after all we're talking different kinds of EQs inserted at different positions in the signal path), it seems to allow you to very quickly a) either allow for more "authentic" behaviour of your gain and tone stacks (which might be a huge plus for those complaining about the Kemper only doing one kinda static snapshot well) and b) have some options to tweak amps in ways that are neither following their original topology nor the previous "generic" one. Personally, I absolutely wouldn't mind to see that option on my modeling platforms of choice as they certainly unleash quite a lot of potential without having to fool around with additional EQs and what not.

I think it's very obvious that liquid profiling will have certain limitations. After all, some more complexed amp creations (such as the Mesa MK series) feature tone controls in various positions throughout the signal path - and I don't think a KPA profile is offering all these access points, should basically come down to pre- or post-profile and different EQ band values. Still a great improvement as it seems - and BenIfins examples seem to showcase those improvements nicely, the LP tweaked sounds are useable all throughout.

 

[JiveTurkey]

He may not be that far off… the first chiropractor I went to gave me pamphlets and a lecture about how the spinal cord drives basically everything for the body and that if I would begin coming to them multiple times a week for adjustments he could probably cure most of the things that ail me including seasonal allergies…. I just had him fix the spasm that I was there to get relief for and decided not to run an expensive experiment to see if he could cure all of life’s other inconveniences, so I’ll just have to wonder now if he’s a quack or if I missed my opportunity for immortality.

Second and third chiropractors were about the same. Quackery aside, they were able to take care of the muscle spasms with that handy electric shock machine so I’ll return again should I ever need to, tinfoil hat strapped on tight to block out the other nonsense.

D

Use your brain and don't get the subscription. Or find a chiro that doesn't pull that kind of subscription service nonsense

 

[dk_ace]

Use your brain and don't get the subscription. Or find a chiro that doesn't pull that kind of subscription service nonsense

You mean do exactly what I said I did?

D

 

[DistortedMind]

From what I've read, it seems that the Kemper Generic amp, which is what everything used prior to liquid profiles was more of a studio EQ, with fixed frequencies, widths and db ranges. So, for a lot of amps, it pretty much missed the mark when making adjustments.

Liquid profiles do not alter the profile in any way, but the tone stack of the amp chosen have the center frequencies, width and db ranges accurately modeled so that they sound the same as the actual amp. I believe things like the interactivity of the controls is also modeled. So, for instance, if turning up the treble makes the mids less effective on the real amp, then this is how the model will behave too.

Setting the controls to the actual position of the amp during profiling just makes it more accurate. So if you had your treble on 10 when profiling, and you set the modeled treble control to 10, then the profile knows that it can not add any more treble and again, stays more accurate.

I believe the same goes for the gain control. They now take into account the taper of the actual gain control and can increase / decrease the gain in the profile to better reflect how the actual amp does.

So, applying a liquid profile amp to an existing profile will make it sound a bit different because you are boosting / cutting frequencies closer to the real amp. A Marshal will 'sound' better if the frequencies we are used to hearing bumped are actually being bumped.

 

[yeky83]

it was sheer co-incidence that C.K announced L.P when he did ... if not I would *still* be using a Tonex in the Loop of my [ex] Helix and [ex] GT1000

If Liquid Profiling was the sole difference maker for you to use the Kemper, I dunno why you wouldn't just use an amp modeler...? Could you not find any amp models to your liking on the Helix? Do you make your own profiles?

 

[JiveTurkey]

You mean do exactly what I said I did?

D

 

[JiveTurkey]

If Liquid Profiling was the sole difference maker for you to use the Kemper, I dunno why you wouldn't just use an amp modeler...? Could you not find any amp models to your liking on the Helix? Do you make your own profiles?

Getting back on topic; Ben is usually "I just use the GT1000 original amps" line of thought. So caring whether Liquid Profiling is "more accurate" or not when you don't care about amp accuracy to real life in the first place seems like a pointless exercise

 

[DLC86]

From what I've read, it seems that the Kemper Generic amp, which is what everything used prior to liquid profiles was more of a studio EQ, with fixed frequencies, widths and db ranges. So, for a lot of amps, it pretty much missed the mark when making adjustments.

Liquid profiles do not alter the profile in any way, but the tone stack of the amp chosen have the center frequencies, width and db ranges accurately modeled so that they sound the same as the actual amp. I believe things like the interactivity of the controls is also modeled. So, for instance, if turning up the treble makes the mids less effective on the real amp, then this is how the model will behave too.

Setting the controls to the actual position of the amp during profiling just makes it more accurate. So if you had your treble on 10 when profiling, and you set the modeled treble control to 10, then the profile knows that it can not add any more treble and again, stays more accurate.

I believe the same goes for the gain control. They now take into account the taper of the actual gain control and can increase / decrease the gain in the profile to better reflect how the actual amp does.

So, applying a liquid profile amp to an existing profile will make it sound a bit different because you are boosting / cutting frequencies closer to the real amp. A Marshal will 'sound' better if the frequencies we are used to hearing bumped are actually being bumped.

That's exactly where I think the difference between those clips lies. The liquid profile thing is just a different type of eq in place of the old generic one, and probably still applied post distortion.
In this case LPs sound more musical at extreme settings just cuz the knobs have a much more limited dB range than the generic eq (try to play a bit with Duncan Tonestack Calculator to see if that's true)

 

[DistortedMind]

That's exactly where I think the difference between those clips lies. The liquid profile thing is just a different type of eq in place of the old generic one, and probably still applied post distortion.
In this case LPs sound more musical at extreme settings just cuz the knobs have a much more limited dB range than the generic eq (try to play a bit with Duncan Tonestack Calculator to see if that's true)

The Kemper does allow you to move the generic amp's EQ either pre or post distortion in the amp section, with the default being post. I would assume the LP tone stack is placed wherever it is located on the real amp. So, this could definitely have an effect on the distortion characteristics of the base profile.

 

[dk_ace]

To my ears, the LP clips with the controls not at noon sound more useful and musical. The original Kemper clips with the controls off of noon sound really rough to me. The LP clips to my ears do not sound like a plexi with the knobs at 9,3, or max though. Sounds like better eq, but it doesn’t do what the real amp does IMO. Still, it’s an improvement.

I’m just more interested in real modeling though, where the character of the distortion and how it responds changes depending on the tonestack settings. I wouldn’t want to manage those differences via a lot of different captures, I’d rather just be able to turn some tonestack knobs.

D

 

[yeky83]

The Kemper does allow you to move the generic amp's EQ either pre or post distortion in the amp section, with the default being post. I would assume the LP tone stack is placed wherever it is located on the real amp. So, this could definitely have an effect on the distortion characteristics of the base profile.

Yup. The tonestack is usually placed pre if vintage, post if modern.

 

[DistortedMind]

I’m just more interested in real modeling though, where the character of the distortion and how it responds changes depending on the tonestack settings. I wouldn’t want to manage those differences via a lot of different captures, I’d rather just be able to turn some tonestack knobs.

D

The Profiler always could do this. Here is a video of moving the EQ to the Pre position:

 

[Mongillo19]

The Profiler always could do this. Here is a video of moving the EQ to the Pre position:

I don't think we can kid ourselves the Kemper is a full modeler. It's not. Yes it can get by now with LP but it still isn't a full modeling device. It will not display the same BMT Gain interactions some amps are known for.

As always I have to preface with "the Kemper can still sound good but let's not make it out to be what it's not".

Just in the same way a helix is not a profiling device

 

[AutomationBias]

Use your brain and don't get the subscription. Or find a chiro that doesn't pull that kind of subscription service nonsense

Better yet, a physical therapist.

 

[dk_ace]

The Profiler always could do this. Here is a video of moving the EQ to the Pre position:

That ain’t the same thing as modeling, you’re just moving the position of their eq stack. Very different from what an actual amps tonestack is doing.

D

 

[DLC86]

The Kemper does allow you to move the generic amp's EQ either pre or post distortion in the amp section, with the default being post

Yeah, my brain wanted to type "pre or post" but my hands refused to do that for some reason

I would assume the LP tone stack is placed wherever it is located on the real amp. So, this could definitely have an effect on the distortion characteristics of the base profile.

I really doubt that cuz that would basically require to have two different profiles for what's before and after the tonestack. Maybe it's possible, I don't know, but being in the same spot doesn't mean it can replicate all interactions the eq has with the surrounding circuitry.

 

[BenIfin]

If Liquid Profiling was the sole difference maker for you to use the Kemper, I dunno why you wouldn't just use an amp modeler...? Could you not find any amp models to your liking on the Helix? Do you make your own profiles?

Getting back on topic; Ben is usually "I just use the GT1000 original amps" line of thought. So caring whether Liquid Profiling is "more accurate" or not when you don't care about amp accuracy to real life in the first place seems like a pointless exercise

Yep.

My approach .. not saying its should be yours :)

I think my approach to "non-real" Amps is a bit different to most here and on TOP.

I came from a Dual Showman, then a Mesa MK3, then an AC30 then an AC30HW and then finally a Ceriatone DC30.

Kemper was my first unit for about 3 1/2 years live but I moved on to component modelling for 5 - 7 years ... numerous Fractals - up to FM3 FW 5 ... numerous Helix and the GT1000 series .... loved the KPA Tones but lack of EFX Slots, the KPA "signature hump" and inability to tweak the profiles and have them respond like a real Amp was the reason I moved on. Plus to me, the KPA had/has a natural "bounce" when playing it that nothing else did

All great units but they ultimately never really fully-gelled with me ..... GT1000 [original] Amps and dynamics and feel was closest. The Original Amps are just fantastic.

Background .... regardless of whichever unit I played I never kidded myself that I was playing a real AC30 or real Plexi or real Deluxe .... I always knew that at best they were [good] approximations of the real thing.

My last rig rig was Tonex in the Loop of my [ex] Helix and [ex] GT1000 .... loved it .... but very quickly found the same issue as tweaking the KPA Legacy profiles ...move a bit ...its tolerable .... move a lot and its *sh%t* ... not *sh%t* in a terrible way, but *sh$t" in a way that it doesn't sound and respond like the Capture you started with ... it becomes a "different" thing.

I haven't had any real Tube Amps for many, many years anymore so doing my own profiles was/is not an option.

It really was sheer coincidence as otherwise I'd stillbe using a Tonex and GT1000.

I've said this before ..... to me .... to my ears and hands ..... I don't and couldn't give a flying-f%ck about what profile / capture / modeler I use ....all I want is a sound and feel that I can make my own.

All the best,
Ben

PS: homeopaths and chiropractors are *all* charlatans !!!! :)

 

[yeky83]

Yeah, my brain wanted to type "pre or post" but my hands refused to do that for some reason


I really doubt that cuz that would basically require to have two different profiles for what's before and after the tonestack. Maybe it's possible, I don't know, but being in the same spot doesn't mean it can replicate all interactions the eq has with the surrounding circuitry.

The Kemper manual and CK on the Kemper forum basically say distortion comes from the power amp in vintage amps and the preamp in modern amps. So the LP method is to put the modeled tonestack pre or post their distortion stage.

 

[Sascha Franck]

I would assume the LP tone stack is placed wherever it is located on the real amp.

Could it be that they're mixing positions of the individual tone stack bands? I mean, that's what's happening inside some real amps, too (namely the Boogie MK series).

 

[yeky83]

Could it be that they're mixing positions of the individual tone stack bands? I mean, that's what's happening inside some real amps, too (namely the Boogie MK series).

No, they’re not doing that.