Just read through this whole post. One thing that I noticed when watching review videos before purchasing was that the Kemper profiles often sounded a tad thinner than the reference, which is especially noticeable for chug-a-chug metal. Since getting the unit, I haven't actually tried to profile anything (who wants Pod HD rigs?!), but I am very pleased with the low end of the tone.
To contribute, for those who want to perform the EQ trick tgs describes using the Kemper's Studio EQ, keep in mind that the low and high shelves have rather round knees. I haven't sat down with the pink/white noise and visually checked it out yet, but I know I can set the high shelf to 33 kHZ and still hear it affect the tone (if you don't understand, human hearing doesn't go much higher than 20 kHZ). So my guess would be to set the low shelf to about 50 HZ and set the gain down to about -6 db. You won't match the slope perfectly, but with those frequencies being so low and softer than the peak frequencies of the tone, it'll be difficult to hear. You may get better results using a lower frequency in combination with a lower gain level, for ex. 30 HZ and -10 db.
Then you can just set one of the mid peaks to dial up the 110 HZ.
Trying to acheive tgs's EQ solution using the BMTP tone stack is lunacy. There are a couple posts on this forum that demonstrate the frequency ranges they cover, and they are VERY wide compared to what tgs is talking about. I think Bass will affect everything from 300 HZ and lower. Mids affects from like 200 - 1200 HZ.
To me the crux of the issue though is not the frequency response but the distortion characteristics. it'd be simple enough to compensate the amp settings or some post-eq to force the profiler to get that frequency response. But the roughness of the bass is why profiling is so great - you can snatch up those quirky nuances that a budget modeler just ignores.
...as to the "sound engineer" who believes it is due to the Kemper's low sampling rate, this guy obviously knows nothing about DSP. Any frequencies below 200 HZ can be accurately (i mean like 100 freakin %) represented digitally using a 400 HZ sample rate. This is why 44 kHZ is a common rate - it is 2x the highest frequency a human can hear. In theory, a human could never hear the difference between 44 kHZ and 96 kHZ sample rates. In practice, devices are subject to deviation from reference and higher resolution tends to capture things more accurately. Since guitar is primarily a midrange instrument, I think 44 kHZ is more than accurate enough. In any case, he has it backwards - HIGH frequency sounds require HIGHER sample rates to accurately represent. See Nyquist frequency.
Sampling rate in DSP is a totally different concept than bitrate in mp3 compression. AFAIK, the Kemper isn't using a lossy compression to perform profiling. I doubt it stores any raw audio signals, let alone compresses them.