Power Rack amplifier vs. Matrix GT1000FX?

  • Hey everyone! This is my first post on your fine forum here & I am still weighing the pros & cons of which KPA to buy. I have an order in with Sweetwater for a KPA rack that I was going to eventually pair with a Matrix GT1000FX 1U rack amp. I like this option because of it's added flexibility & it's almost the same price as getting the integrated amp of the power rack. The problem is, Sweetwater is back ordered until the second week of January on the non-amped KPA's, but the Power Rack & head are both in stock. That being said, I do like that I could save that rack space by having the amp built into the KPA. I'd really like to hear from someone that has run both power amp options into a guitar cab & what they thought about each regarding feel / headroom / etc. if the KPA's power amp is really worth the $$, I'll probably just pull the trigger and get one now. Thanks!

  • well, well: i'm glad I can give you the welcome greeting as the first!! :thumbup:


    I run the lunchbox into a Mesa 290 with 2 2x12 V30 cabs for live use.


    I don't own the Matrix even though you are sure it is one (if maybe the best) of the best amps on the market. I have heard it on a test run by Pete Thorn with the axe fx and it does wonder. and I read with the kemper is incredible as well.


    so I won't share the experience with it. but I can share some thoughts you might or not find useful.


    My side of the story:
    lunch box vs rack version
    lunch box advantages: lunch box is very versatile e goes in almost every bag. it is easy to carry both in the rehearsing room or else.
    lunch box disadvantages: not for me, but for the sake of honesty the disadvantage could be if you go on tour you might be better of with the rack version so that it is all there. I have seen lunch boxes in rack too (if an amp head goes into the rack, so can the lunchbox).
    rack advantages: goes into a rack easier of course
    rack disadvantages: cannot be carried easily unless you have a dedicated rack


    lunchbox vs powered lunchbox
    non powered lunchbox advantage: can be used with a power amp which is stereo and plays the incredible KPA stereo FX at their best.
    powered lunch box: is all in there but it's a mono amp, as it would be an amp head.


    My call is the lunchbox and a separate power amp, Mesa in my case. as a matter of fact I have two rack cases, one for the mesa 290 and one for the power station, a Furman AR230, for constat power to every device I have.


    so you would go for a lunch box and a rack with the Matrix: it'll be even lighter than mine (the mesa is very heavy).


    but as mentioned: it is my call. many other in this forum would swear for other combination.


    I think you should make up your mind on the basis of what you will most likely do. If you go on tour, rack would be a nice call.


    I go on tour (by the way, I bought the lunch box when nothing but the lunchbox was available) but I have to use a tiny corner in my house to compose and record music, but then I have to go on rehearsing and back to a sudden clinic into a pa. I found the lunch box, for me, impossible to be better off with something else.


    hope this helped you


    michael

    "...why being satisfied with an amp, as great as it can be, while you can have them all?" michael mellner


    "Rock in Ecclesia" - new album on iTunes or Google music

  • Welcome Silence :) :D


    Well, the Matrix can be used in stereo, this might be or not a strong point for your uses. Also, when bridged in mono it is more powerful, which might be another bonus (ymmv).
    Either way, if I were you I'd not choose on the basis of what's available ATM. Don't let your enthusiasm let you make the wrong choice.


    OTOH, the Kemper module is certainly excellent, and if it satisfies your needs you won't go wrong with it.


    Let us know! :)

  • I have the power head and love it but, if I needed stereo I would have opted for the non powered head. I guess if you don't need stereo all the time the powered kemper makes sense. You have everything in one package (that's why I bought it) when you need stereo just bring the power amp and run the power head that way.

  • Hi Silence2-38554, I would say that it completely depends on your performance situation and preference for monitoring.


    As mentioned before, the head vs. rack argument depends largely on what kind of gigs and how much gear you are shifting (also the transport used).
    If you are planing on shifting a lot of external gear, such as external effects (chorus, harmoniser, reverb/delay, pedals etc.) then you are probably better going with the rack option; as then you will be able to save time, effort and space.


    If you aren't taking this route, and are sticking with the effects inside the Kemper (which are amazing; btw), then you may be better suited going with the head; as then you may find it easier to shift (you can purchase bags to carry the head in; a good option if you walk to any gigs/rehearsals). However, in the case where you only have the Kemper (and maybe a cabinet), I feel the rack vs. head argument is resolved more by your personal preference of aesthetics, and your predictions of gear you may want in the future.


    As for the internal power vs. external power argument. It largely depends on whether you are using FOH, and if you are using passive monitoring. If you aren't using FOH, and you want a stereo image on stage with your passive monitoring, then you are probably better with an external amp. It's the same story for if you want to use multiple cabinets.
    Keep in mind that, whilst the power amp in the Kemper is mono, you can still send your reverb and delay effects down the line, it'll just be in mono. You can change the signal that is sent to each output individually on the kemper.


    You can, by the way, use the main output (stereo) of the Kemper whilst you are feeding the monitor with your own signal at the same time.
    I don't think there is any argument to be had on whether the Kemper's power amp is going to be loud enough. It runs at 600W RMS for an 8Ω load. That will deafen you quickly if you were to play that loud, and you'd probably be instantly disliked by your neighbours.
    So the Kemper's amp definitely has enough headroom, and can achieve pretty much any gig.


    If I were you and you had decided to go with the external amp, then I would definitely choose the rack Kemper, as I would find that to be far more convenient.
    Of course there may be a price argument to be had, but I can't be bothered to go into that, and that's your business anyway.


    Hope that helps, and that I haven't confused you.
    Most of all though, welcome aboard. I hope you enjoy your Kemper very much.

  • I'm currently using a non-powered lunchbox with a GT1000FX, AND I have just ordered a Power Rack version of the KPA.


    The GT1000FX sounds absolutely fantastic toghether with the KPA, both through a regular guitar cab with cab sims off in the KPA, and through FRFR cabinets. I've tested this against the GT800 and Marshall tube amps, and actually prefer the GT1000FX.


    These days, when I'm not flying or otherwise doing gigs where it's more convenient to go directly to the PA, my KPA is feeding the Matrix and a Scumback equipped 2x12 Port City cab. What I've done is that I've profiled my Marshall + my Friedman using the Port City cabinet. On stage, I run the KPA with cab sims off throuhg the Matrix and into the Port City. Simultaneously, I feed the PA with the entire profile, where I used the same cabinet. IMHO, this sounds absolutely huge, using the real cab onstage and the profiled one through the PA.


    So why order the power rack? I really want to scale down as much as I can with as little as possible compromise to the sound. The Matrix needs to sit in a separate rack, and it means messing with extra cables etc. I'm hoping that the internal power amp in the Power Rack is as good as, or close to, the Matrix.


    I've been using the Axe-FX for years, the Axe 2 for the last year, and I don't want to be too conclusive when judging sound -- things change and we listen for different things in different contexts, but my current setup with my own (simple, really) profiles of my favourite rigs really does it for me.


    You can't go wrong with the Matrix, anyway. I'll post back with my experience with the Power Rack compared to the Matrix when it arrives.

  • Hi Boanerges,


    I am in the same boat as you a love the tone of my non-powered head into my Matrix GT1000FX and two 2x12 cabs. I too would love to go the powered Kemper route (probably powered head) but am having trouble giving up the stereo option in the Matrix as the powered Kempers are only mono. I wonder if any of the powered Kempers will ever offer a stereo power amp option?


    Thanks,
    D

  • lol...it's actually just for my home studio use as I don't play live at the moment :)


    It's not so much that stereo is necessary, I have just grown used to it and the spacial sound it gives as I presently run my Kemper (and Axe FX II) either:


    1. into Matrix GT1000FX and then into two 2x12's (stereo)
    2. into Mesa 2:90 and then into two 2x12's (stereo)
    3. into 2 active CLR cabs (stereo)


    Thanks,
    D

  • I am not sure about the OP (and hopefully I didn't highjack the thread as that was not my intention) but I have looked at the 3rd party retro fits such as Camplifier 360 and they look great.


    To be honest, for me, it is not so much that I need another power amp option, it is mainly the thought of having the quality and performance of a Bang & Olufsen based power amp built into the Kemper is very attractive.....and pretty darn cool :)


    Thanks,
    D

  • I have the power head and love it but, if I needed stereo I would have opted for the non powered head. I guess if you don't need stereo all the time the powered kemper makes sense. You have everything in one package (that's why I bought it) when you need stereo just bring the power amp and run the power head that way.


    So my question is. If i go with the Power rack and then decide I need stereo can I use an external power amp?

  • Yes, you can use the non-powered monitor or main stereo outputs on the power rack. The only difference in the powered and non-powered version of the KPA is the one extra powered output. All the other outputs on the back are identical.

  • Yes, you can use the non-powered monitor or main stereo outputs on the power rack. The only difference in the powered and non-powered version of the KPA is the one extra powered output. All the other outputs on the back are identical.


    Thanks ! That solved my problem I'll just get the powered rack and then just bring along my power amp when I need to go stereo. AWESOME :thumbup: