So I bought an Axe Fx Ax8 and I have been profiling my preset as I make them...

    I thought the unrefined profile turned out well so I thought to save it without refining and give it another shot with refining. I was surprised when the refined profiled sounded even better, IMO, though I still really like the Ax8 version, maybe even more. This was actually a preset I downloaded from the Fractal forum. The preset had no amp active creating its tone using compression etc...


    1. Unrefined
    2. Ax8
    3. Refined

    Quote from deadpan

    I thought the unrefined profile turned out well so I thought to save it without refining and give it another shot with refining. I was surprised when the refined profiled sounded even better, IMO, though I still really like the Ax8 version, maybe even more. This was actually a preset I downloaded from the Fractal forum. The preset had no amp active creating its tone using compression etc...


    1. Unrefined
    2. Ax8
    3. Refined


    Great job profiling!! That is also an awesome testament to the power of the Kemper. Refined sounded best, unrefined sounded 2nd best and AX8 was third. In general they all sounded too close that they can be considered the same sound. If someone likes that sound, any of them can be used as a baseline where effects or EQ can be added and it wouldn't make a difference which one is used.


    This clearly shows beyond the shadow of the doubt that KPA can include all of your favorite patches of the AXE FX plus all the other profiles of real world amp all in one box.


    When I first got the KPA, I thought I would use it in this manner to store my other plugins AMP sim + ELeven Rack, and POD HD. and maybe some AXE FX II profiles in case there were any that were worth it. I quickly changed my mind as when and decided it was really waste of space because the good KPA profiles always sounded and felt leaps and bounds better to my ears.


    I had originally played the AXE II in person and didn't like it, but when I got the Kemper, I figured that maybe I did something wrong when I tried the AXE II so why not try some AXE II profiles. I tried a few AXE II profiles and I was hit with the same annoying artifacts that drove me away from the real AXE FX II in the first place, it's the plastic like harsh unnatural upper mids and the annoying fizz specially in the mid gain tones. Actually even the clean tones of the AXE FX II to my ears suffered from this unnatural crispness or unrealistic sheen that you would expect from a synthesizer; that might work great for experimental synth music, but not for organic tones.


    This is not necessary a bad thing as not everyone is interested in organic natural sounds, but the amazing thing about the KPA is that it can capture it all, the unnatural synthesized guitar sounds of the AXE FX and the real warm natural tube tones that come from real world tube amps.


    deadpan
    I wonder if you considered at some point, after you have accumulated a bunch of AX8 presets inside the Kemper, if you would just sell the AX8 as fortunate for you, it's quite easy to get rid of it, as it seems that there's a very loyal fan base for these synthesized guitar tones that the AXE does very well.

    Quote from ColdFrixion

    I own an Axe II XL+ and will probably be buying a Kemper soon to add to my arsenal.


    All I can say is, when top artists and engineers are using both units in their studio and on the road, it says something about the accuracy and authenticity thereof.


    That said, I haven't used a Kemper heretofore, but my impression is that the amp models may sound slightly more accurate / authentic right out of the gate, though that isn't to say the XL+ can't be made to sound practically indistinguishable with a little (or a lot) of tweaking. I don't know and won't know until I get my hands on a Kemper. My plan at this point is to run the Kemper into the Axe in order to use the XL's effects with the Kemper's amps, though that isn't to say I'll be abandoning the Axe's amp and cab sims. I won't. It's mainly because Axe-Edit is awesome, and will simplify adding effects regardless which amps I use.


    I have all three units (KPA, AxeFX XL+, and Helix) I love each of them! I use them separately and all three sometimes together mixed into a single tone. I have not liked the KPA "profiled" tones of the Axe, nor do I like the tone matched amp tones from the Axe. Its like they sound best doing what they do and sound worse trying to sound like the other. Neither sounds as good as a real amp to me if I'm being honest. All 3 sound good and can be made to sound great in the service of music making. In the service of anal-lytic tone surgery, each has their own rabbit hole. But the true test of value is which one would I keep if I only had one. I would choose the Axe Fx. Why? Because it does more things well than the other 3. It doesn't do Amp tones as well as the KPA, nor does not have the ease of use, or all the routing options of the Helix. As raw amp tones are most visible in isolation, that is the probably the only situation where one might prefer the more natural tones of the KPA. In every other situation, the Axe does it and does it extremely well. If I had to choose between the KPA, Axe8 and the Helix, I would choose the KPA. But if the Axe2 is one of the choices I would take it over the others. I have come to this realization after many years of owning Fractal (Ultra, Axe2 and now XL+) and almost 2 years of owning the KPA, and about 6 months of owning the Helix. They are each very capable devices and not likely to be the weak link in your music making. JMO and YMMV etc.

    Yeah @Dean_R my random playing doesn't exactly showcase a sound to its best potential.


    It's possible at some point I would sell the Axe. Not soon I am sure if at all. I really like it as I really like the Kemper. I love some of the profiles I have made of it, even more than real amp profiles. It's all personal preference. I highly doubt I would ever sell the Kemper though. I surely am not not trying to quantify one as better. It is just currently recording is my main focus and the Kemepr is better for that but the Axe is a great tool for making profiles, for me.

    deadpan:


    You're just being humble. Trust me, your playing will showcase anything to do with guitar. I think you, like most of us who are into digital modeling, are faced with Plethora of options and it's somewhat hard to commit. I wonder back in my day when I used mainly one 50 watt tube amp and another 5 watter and that was it. I used effects and was completely satisfied with that one amp, there wasn't a sound that I didn't get.


    When I moved to digital, I wanted to do the same thing. Two amp settings in their respective sweet spot, add effects as needed an be done with it. After testing everything, the Kemper won by a landslide and I picked the Kemper.


    Now that I got a few commercial profiles, I'm faced with the many options again, but after five months using KPA, I think I'm set, I just narrowed it down to Guido's profiles. I'm rationalizing the whole thing based on previous satisfaction with one amp with two channels and now that I know beyond any doubt after profiling my own amp that the Kemper accuracy is more than close enough for any difference if it exists to be of any significance.


    I still look around and participate in the community to make sure I'm not missing on anything.


    I really appreciate what you've done here, basically confirmed to me that I wasn't crazy when I picked the KPA for amp modeling. You're nailing those profiles of the AXE and I have no doubt that you would also do an awesome job profiling real tube amps.


    I'll keep checking and see if you ever get around to doing that, because I think you have great ears and if this is what you're doing with the AXE, I would really love to see what you would do profiling real tube amps. I bet you, I'd buy some if you make them.

    Quote from 7StringJazz

    I have all three units (KPA, AxeFX XL+, and Helix) I love each of them! I use them separately and all three sometimes together mixed into a single tone. I have not liked the KPA "profiled" tones of the Axe, nor do I like the tone matched amp tones from the Axe. Its like they sound best doing what they do and sound worse trying to sound like the other. Neither sounds as good as a real amp to me if I'm being honest. All 3 sound good and can be made to sound great in the service of music making. In the service of anal-lytic tone surgery, each has their own rabbit hole. But the true test of value is which one would I keep if I only had one. I would choose the Axe Fx. Why? Because it does more things well than the other 3. It doesn't do Amp tones as well as the KPA, nor does not have the ease of use, or all the routing options of the Helix. As raw amp tones are most visible in isolation, that is the probably the only situation where one might prefer the more natural tones of the KPA. In every other situation, the Axe does it and does it extremely well. If I had to choose between the KPA, Axe8 and the Helix, I would choose the KPA. But if the Axe2 is one of the choices I would take it over the others. I have come to this realization after many years of owning Fractal (Ultra, Axe2 and now XL+) and almost 2 years of owning the KPA, and about 6 months of owning the Helix. They are each very capable devices and not likely to be the weak link in your music making. JMO and YMMV etc.


    That's cool. Personally, if I had to choose, I'd keep whichever unit had the best amp tones vs. effects because I can always add effects after the fact if I have to. I agree with you about the Axe's routing capabilities, though. They're awesome, and I think the unit has some excellent effects. That's the main reason I'm using it with the KPA. In my opinion, they're superior to the Kemper's built-in effects, though I think the Kemper has slightly more authentic / organic amp tones overall. After listening to a lot of demos with both the Axe and Kemper, it seems to me the Kemper's amp tones tend to sit a bit better in a mix. They just blend in very naturally and gel extremely well. The differences probably wouldn't be noticeable to the general listener. A lot of non-musicians don't exercise a high level of scrutiny or listen with a critical ear, and that's fine. On the flip side, that isn't to say I haven't heard some excellent demos using the Axe. Some of them sound just as good, so I'm not suggesting the Axe isn't capable. The Axe can be made to sound as authentic in a lot of cases with a little (or a lot of) tweaking.


    However, when I watched Michael Wagener talking about how he's used every modeler out there and honestly couldn't tell the difference between his real amps and the Kemper, that pretty much sold me on its authenticity. Wagener has produced some of my favorite melodic rock albums, so to hear him put it in those terms means a lot to me.

    Quote from fredrikn


    Oh, come on :whistling: Why didn't you come to that conclusion before the answer was revealed?


    You're right in that regard, but if you think about, my statement that you quoted above actually is not in favor of KPA if you really want to follow what the KPA is supposed to do as advertised.


    Mr. C Kemper himself said, he design the KPA, not to sound better than the amp it's modeling, he specifically said he expects the KPA to be the same , not better or worse rightfully so.


    You cut the rest of my quote, I also added that the difference between all three is insignificant .


    The only reason I posted my statement is that accidentally I looked at ColdFrixion post above the reveal post and I thought that was the reveal.


    So initially, I thought the AX8 sounded ( based on confusing the wrong reveal post )better but they all sounded very close, then when I realized that my quick reading caused me to misinterpret the actual reveal that followed on the next thread, I was actually surprised, that I thought number 3 sounded best which is the refined profile.


    Unfortunately, in this situation, saying that anyone of them is better than the other, is really not in KPA's advantage because as a product, it's intended to copy, not make any profile better (because better for me could be worse for someone else). But again the differences are insignificant, but as KPA keeps improving, based on my understanding of what C Kemper wants, we will eventually get to a point, where the profiling is simply identical in copying most products (it already does that for tube amps with no difference that can be detected )


    Keep in mind the KPA was profiling a modeler here, and in this particular example is not even a tube amp which might not be captured correctly by KPA.


    The fact remains though, that when Profiling Tube amps, the KPA is indistinguishable from the amp because , in that regard, a profiles tube amp, for most amps, is profiled without any detectable difference.


    That means that Mr. C Kemper has actually accomplished 100% what he set out to do of creating and truthfully advertising a device that captures the sound of 99$ of all tube amps where the profile is not better or worse, it's just the same. This has been accomplished in the initial release of the KPA over 4 years ago. There are countless videos that demonstrate this fact by showing how most if not all professional guitar players can't tell the difference in the profiling sessions.


    That's is in complete contrast with all other modelers including the AXE II and Helix where they claim to model amps, but there isn't one single showing or demonstration of the actual amps they Claim to have modeled. I think any consumer should ask that question, do these amps exist ? show me the amps you modeled to support the claims you're making. otherwise, it's false advertising with the intention of preying on gullible consumers . That situation is not helped when other players muddy the water further by saying such irrelevant statements as " they're all professional grade products and they all sound good"; it should always be added that all these products don't demonstrate or support their claims of what the intended purpose of the product they designed except for KPA,


    That's a fact and not just my personal opinion. You or anyone can't point me to any Line 6 or Fractal link on their website where they demonstrate their claims by showing even one single amp to support their fundamental claim that their products model real amps, . I'm sure someone will jump in and say it again and their post will get more likes than mine "They both sound amazing" because people like to be politically correct. "They both sound amazing" doesn't capture that only one of them has support for the claims to the advertising.


    I personally also work and advocate for non profit organizations dedicated to empowering consumers to protect themselves against false and deceptive marketing, so it's offending to me also as a guitar player when I witness deception.


    If a guitar player is misguided enough by all the "they all sound good" crowd, goes and buys a Helix or AXE II and thinks to disable the speaker simulation and use real world guitar cabinet, the odds are that neither product will sound anything that resembles the amp modeled even if the model is included in both products. Neither of them captures or models the speaker impedance and a laundry list of items that aren't captured by the algorithms, that's why you will never ever see a demonstration from Fractal or line 6 of the real amps, the modeled amp knobs will react so different than the real world amps and they know it, yet they continue with their false claim, and whenever I have some free times, I will try to help fellow guitarists who don't have the time to do the research by pointing out the obvious to many of us including those who chose to say"they all sound great" when they clearly know that KPA is identical to tube amps and the rest of modelers are simply not. False advertising is false advertising even if they all sound good.


    If you go with KPA, there's no false advertising and I have no problem reiterating this fact anytime the other products are mentioned.

    Edited 8 times, last by Dean_R ().

    Quote from deadpan

    I thought the unrefined profile turned out well so I thought to save it without refining and give it another shot with refining. I was surprised when the refined profiled sounded even better, IMO, though I still really like the Ax8 version, maybe even more. This was actually a preset I downloaded from the Fractal forum. The preset had no amp active creating its tone using compression etc...


    1. Unrefined
    2. Ax8
    3. Refined


    Wow, that's totally unexpected and I'm really surprised! I was fairly certain the 3rd clip was the Ax8 because it sounded the best to my ears. When I originally listened to all three clips I ruled out the 2nd clip as the Ax8 because it stood out as being the grainiest, so I focused on the 1st and 3rd clip. On close A/B'ing, the differences were pretty hard to distinguish but the 3rd clip had just a hair more clarity and definition in the highs. It's really surprising because I originally would've bet money the 2nd clip wasn't the Ax8.

    I'm glad to know that I'm not the only one who thought that the refined KPA profile sounded slightly better.
    So far, it looks like this thread gave some evidence that Even though KPA doesn't profile other modelers as well as it profiles tube amps, the KPA simply can make the profile of a modeler sound better than the actual modeler. Monkey Man alluded to this in one of his posts in this thread and it seems that he was right.


    Of course some will disagree because they might like 2 better, but I think we can all agree that the KPA does an outstanding job profiling modelers and not only tube amps!

    Edited once, last by Dean_R ().

    Agreed.


    Another test, I know the Axe doesn't have a Framus Cobra sim but I was trying to recreate an old amp I had:


    External Content soundcloud.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    Quote from Dean_R

    The fact remains though, that when Profiling Tube amps, the KPA is indistinguishable from the amp because , in that regard, a profile tube amp, for most amps, is profiled without any detectable difference.


    Whether it's indistinguishable depends on the listener. For example, Anderton and Rob Chapman profiled a Cornford, and after repeated refinements Chapman could tell the difference and so could I. To the Kemper's credit, the profiler actually improved the lowend character, but the differences didn't require golden ears.


    Quote from Dean_R

    That's is in complete contrast with all other modelers including the AXE II and Helix where they claim to model amps, but there isn't one single showing or demonstrating the actual amps they Claim to have modeled. I think any consumer should ask that question, do these amps exist ?


    Profiling is an end user process, thus it makes sense that Kemper would demonstrate it publicly. By contrast, modeling is a developer dependent process. It doesn't strike me as suspicious that it's not demonstrated publicly anymore than it strikes me as fishy that companies that make hardware emulators don't publicly demonstrate the emulation process or show the actual hardware that the emulation is based on.


    Quote from Dean_R

    it should always be added that all these products don't demonstrate or support their claims of what the intended purpose of the product they designed except for KPA,


    They don't demonstrate their claims of the intended purpose of the product they designed? The intended purpose? You mean like recording, gigging, practicing, etc.?


    Quote from Dean_R

    You or anyone can't point me to any Line 6 or Fractal link on their website where they demonstrate their claims by showing even one single amp to support their fundamental claim that their products model real amps


    What reason would anyone have to doubt their amp models are based on the actual amps they claim they're based on? Because you haven't seen them? Because Line6 and Fractal Audio haven't publicly disclosed and demonstrated the emulation process? Are you suggesting they didn't use the actual amps their models are based on?


    Quote from Dean_R

    the modeled amp knobs will react so different than the real world amps


    I've read multiple accounts from amp owners who claim knob interactions on Axe XL models are pretty consistent with the behavior of the real amp. Not perfect, but pretty consistent. Check out the video review from Guitar Interactive, for example.


    I appreciate the detailed response and you taking the time, but the general intended purpose of all musical equipment is "recording, gigging, practicing, etc.?". This intended purpose you're proposing applies also to saxophones, drums, keyboards etc and clearly evades the specific reason how the AX FX II or Helix etc are advertised. Their advertisement doesn't even mention the general intended purpose you suggested as it's presumed relevant to all musical equipment..


    From my recollection, their advertisement literature mentions such things as " accurate component level modeling" that "MIMIC". If they don't demonstrate "MIMIC" or "accuracy ", it's deceptive marketing by the simplest form of any standards. of basic logic.


    If they claim to have modeled a 1959 plexi, it's very very reasonable to expect to see a video or sound clips that shows how accurately, they MIMICKED a 1959.


    Some of their adds used to say "No compromise" yet the consumer, is expected to compromise when it comes to them demonstrating their claims of accuracy.


    Again, they're welcome to show all of us who are calling their bluff that we're wrong and that their modeling is actually accurate.


    Let them show one amp demonstration. I'm more than certain they won't because I know for a fact, and so does anyone who takes a few minutes to investigate,.their modeling is not accurate. Sure they sound good and are gig worthy but accurate, they're not.

    Edited once, last by Dean_R ().

    Quote from deadpan

    Agreed.


    Another test, I know the Axe doesn't have a Framus Cobra sim but I was trying to recreate an old amp I had:


    External Content soundcloud.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.


    I'm guessing one is the AX8 and two is the KPA.

    Quote from Dean_R

    I appreciate the detailed response and you taking the time, but the general intended purpose of all musical equipment is "recording, gigging, practicing, etc.?". This intended purpose you're proposing


    I wasn't proposing anything. I was inquiring as to what you meant by "purpose" when you stated, 'it should always be added that all these products don't demonstrate or support their claims of the intended purpose of the product'.


    Quote from Dean_R

    If they claim to have modeled a 1959 plexi, it's very very reasonable to expect to see a video or sound clips that shows how accurately, they MIMICKED a 1959.


    There are plenty of comparison videos on YouTube. I put a lot more stock in actual user comparisons than videos made by companies that are likely to cherry-pick their best examples. And for better or worse, all companies hype their product regardless of the industry. That's the nature of the beast. User reviews and samples typically tell me a lot more about the quality of a product than marketing material. I also look at who's actually using the product. For example, aside from the numerous samples I heard on YouTube and elsewhere, Michael Wagener's endorsement of the Kemper is what ultimately drove me to purchase one. Wagener was involved in the mixing and/or production of some of my favorite albums and I trust his ear. However, this applies to the Axe, as well. I trust Alex Lifeson and Neal Schon's ear and they both use an Axe II. Combined with the samples I've heard on YouTube and soundcloud and in addition to the large number of reviews I'd read, I was sold.


    I have no allegiance to any particular company or modeler, and having owned and used both, I certainly don't regret my XL+ purchase. It was money well spent, in my opinion. I have every intention of using both units together. Each have their strengths and weaknesses. There's no reason not to have the best of both worlds if you can afford it.


    I also don't have any allegiance to any company. Alex Lifeson and Neal Schon are two of my all time favorite players and they both use the AXE II for FX not amp modeling.


    All I'm saying is that it's clearly obvious that for amp modeling Kemper is simply more accurate and that has been demonstrated. time and time again, even in this thread. So for amp modeling, I personally don't think it's fair that the topic should be dismissed as "they both sound great". specifically when others who don't own either unit are asking because they're interested in buying one unit for amp modeling. Which one would you recommend for Amp modeling only?


    Effects are completely different thing, even an old Digitech GSP2101 was used on countless platinum records more than 20 years ago for almost 10 if not more years in a row, some of the effects in even a POD 2.0 appeared in many major records. Good effects aren't that hard to find and isn't the subject of comparisons when Helix, AXe II or Kemper are concerned. The primary issue is amp modeling , so why should anyone hesitate to say that KPA is more accurate for amp modeling when it has been proven and demonstrated for everyone to see? Is it because some who own the other products should get offended? That's a bit crazy if you think about it.


    There's a small fortune involved for most guitar players,. so why can't those who know and who have done the research sate the obvious, for AMP modeling Kemper is more inclusive, more accurate and you also can have the AXE II profiles and Helix if someone desires that as has been shown in this thread also.Clearly for many if not all who own the Kemper, the interest or curiosity about the AXE FX models fizzles as soon as they compare the AXE FX profiles with real amp profiles available. It becomes very clear that there is so much hype surrounding the AXE FX modeling. and at 20% or more than the KPA, it's criminal to recommend the AXE II for amp modeling to anyone.

    Edited 2 times, last by Dean_R ().

    Quote from ColdFrixion


    However, when I watched Michael Wagener talking about how he's used every modeler out there and honestly couldn't tell the difference between his real amps and the Kemper, that pretty much sold me on its authenticity. Wagener has produced some of my favorite melodic rock albums, so to hear him put it in those terms means a lot to me.


    Yes, seeing Michael Wagener and many top producers using kempers in studio on so many albums is very impressive.
    The real benchmark for digital amp gear is always the real amps when comparing. When I play traditional modelers like Axe fx 2, pods etc. I can always tweak them to sound good or great but what's unique and a huge win and pro for the kemper to many users is that it captures the users real amp rig and signal chain. Not possible before for studio or live playing. We users finally no longer have to rely on modeling companies creating and giving us their programmed versions of amps.


    I agree with producer Lasse Lammert when it comes to modelers vs Kemper.
    "pros and cons vs a fractal?"
    -"Lasse Lammert: easy answer:
    Fractal sounds like a really good amp modeller that mimics the tone of someone else's idea of how a miked amp should sound.
    Kemper: sounds like your rig/an actual amp (not like a modeller).Both have great FX."


    A Wagener video found in this long list of hundreds of bands and producers using kemper on albums and live.
    Maybe it's this video you referred to?
    http://www.wikpa.org/Various_stuff


    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    I also watched that video before I bought the KPA and it did have a lot to do with my decision, specifically when he talks about how those who get used to modeler no longer remember how real amps react. When they get back to playing real amps, it takes some adjusting to re learn how real amps respond.


    So sure someone would be comfortable with the AXE II, Helix, Eleven etc. but their comfort is based on unrealistic response that isn't captured by the various modeler of how a tube amp should sound and respond. The way I interpreted what Wagener said is similar to those who use unnatural sugar substitutes. They get so used to it and they get to a point where they prefer it over the actual natural sugar (or honey) when in the end of the day, they all know it's fake.


    When I initially fired up the KPA, it did feel strange compared to my Eleven Rack and Amplitube, so I pulled up my tube amp and used an ISO cabinet to profile it. As soon as I did that, I remembered what Wagener said about having to re learn how tube amps actually sound and respond because my profile sounded exactly like the amp I was profiling and both felt weird compared to the modeler. Took a few days to readjust and I quickly decided that the Kemper is definitely staying because it was for all intended purposes identical to tube amps.