Kemper Amps Forum

Yikes!, we can't even get two Strats or Les Pauls to sound the same, even with identical pickups, we can't get two vintage JCM800s or Deluxe Reverbs to sound the same, here we are trying to get digital machines to sound identical to ALL tube amps.

But, if a pro studio engineer took a KPA Profile, recorded with it, pre and post processed it, would you be able to tell with 100% certainty that it wasn't a real tube amp that was used?

Quoted from "Radley"

Please do not over-react: I am simply saying that the natural sound of tube amps is usually not good enough (by itself) to make a great modern recording. PS: I've been a rather successful LA studio musician for 25+ years. The Kemper's high frequencies give it away - we are listening to numbers, not a paper cone into a mic.

You are not making sense to me though. So you are saying a tube amp isn't good enough to make a modern sounding recording and the Kemper doesn't sound as good ad a real tube amp


So what is left? An axe fx cause it sounds better then a real tube amp? Once again no offense but I think you have proven you don't really understand what all goes on in recording. And btw I have a degree in audio recording and it's my livelihood. Of course recording a good sounding amp is how we get a food sounding recording. Then if we want we double track. And then if it needs it we eq To fit in mix. This process is no different from a moddeller or a real tube amp. But the only time I have ever heard someone say a real amp isn't good enough to make a good recording was by a young Un experienced person who doesn't understand the process. This has nothing TI do with axe or Kemper but now saying even a real amp isnt good enough? Ha.

I have never been told my real amp wasn't good enough. Actually it was the other way around. I have told my moddeller at the time didn't sound good enough.

Once again let's try not to make this a putdown contest. I'm simply saying that a typical tube amp 'warts and all' is usually not ideal for a modern recording 'without additional processing' and that's where the rubber meets the road. I will usually pick a preset that sounds great over one that sounds just like such and such an amp 'warts and all', whether I'm using my Kemper or my AFXII, but that's just me.

Quoted from "Radley"

Once again let's try not to make this a putdown contest. I'm simply saying that a typical tube amp 'warts and all' is usually not ideal for a modern recording 'without additional processing' and that's where the rubber meets the road. I will usually pick a preset that sounds great over one that sounds just like such and such an amp 'warts and all', whether I'm using my Kemper or my AFXII, but that's just me.

Whatever sounds great for you might not be so great for somebody else since that is totally subjective.

The Axe FX II and KPA main focus is to replicate real amps and it is very easy to compare how close each one of them they are to the real amps modeled/profiled. That is objective.

Postprocessing will be required depending on what type of sound your a looking for in your mix and how good or bad you recorded the track. But I tell you this, what I don't want is to waste time postprocessing a guitar track to make it sound more like a real amp. Instead I will use postprocessing just to fit the track into mix to my taste. And that type of postprocessing goes the same way for a real amp, the KPA and the Axe.

If you record something were the guitar is the main instrument you will usually try to get the best tone you can get from your amp+cab+mic, avoiding as much as possible postprocessing. I will give you an example, Andy Timmons: Resolution album. Incredible guitar recording tone. Basically no postprocessing based on what I have read/heard from him.

hi guys,
I don't know what you wrote in theese 15 pages...I've just found this video on You Tube and maybe you are intrested
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_V7hQm4nS…feature=mh_lolz
bye

Quoted from "Sollazzon"

hi guys,
I don't know what you wrote in theese 15 pages...I've just found this video on You Tube and maybe you are intrested
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_V7hQm4nS…feature=mh_lolz
bye

Completely useless with that cam sound. I just dont get why people always post such videos.

ohw!
sorry i did'n see/listen.

well.. i don't know.
people are discussing about that ''test'' at the link in the description ... on accordo.it
it's a big comunity and, reading fast, i didn see anyone saying it's so bad, so... sorry!
i supposed it could be also intresting for you here!
cheers

Quoted from "Sollazzon"

ohw!
sorry i did'n see/listen.

well.. i don't know.
people are discussing about that ''test'' at the link in the description ... on accordo.it
it's a big comunity and, reading fast, i didn see anyone saying it's so bad, so... sorry!
i supposed it could be also intresting for you here!
cheers

Well, obviously it's tough to hear tone through a cam mic, but, on a positive note the guitarist was excellent and he played some smoking hot stuff.

Quoted from "Guitartone"

Quoted from "Sollazzon"

ohw!
sorry i did'n see/listen.

well.. i don't know.
people are discussing about that ''test'' at the link in the description ... on accordo.it
it's a big comunity and, reading fast, i didn see anyone saying it's so bad, so... sorry!
i supposed it could be also intresting for you here!
cheers

Well, obviously it's tough to hear tone through a cam mic, but, on a positive note the guitarist was excellent and he played some smoking hot stuff.

Thanks for the link anyway sollazzon. I just wanted to express that it just pisses me off to have all those youtube videos with great players and thousands of bucks worth of gear, but its not possible to use a audio interface and a mic for 100 bucks