What don't you like about your KPA?

  • I do not regret the purchase even with any negatives I can think of. I think @viabcroce nailed my biggest complaint which is preset management. I have no experience with an editor but if it means something more robust than rig manager or enhancements thereof, I am intrigued by the idea.

  • After seeing what you have said about it working so well, I sat with the KPA for a while before updating to 4.00. The thing I didnt like was that it cleaned up a little, but muffled the sound. I have messed around with the noise gate and now it seems to be perfect. I think the noise gate was cutting too much. It sounds great now! I use hand wired Rude Rock Pickups from South Africa and P90's.

  • After seeing what you have said about it working so well, I sat with the KPA for a while before updating to 4.00. The thing I didnt like was that it cleaned up a little, but muffled the sound. I have messed around with the noise gate and now it seems to be perfect. I think the noise gate was cutting too much. It sounds great now! I use hand wired Rude Rock Pickups from South Africa and P90's.


    It is natural for the tone to roll off when you turn down the volume.
    If the roll off is too much for you you can add a RC circuit on your guitars volume pot. Simple but effective

  • The only thing I dont like is that when I dial back the volume on my guitar, it does not resonde like a valve amp and get a clean sound. Ive tried messing with the compression and power sagging, but the sound still is not the same.


    I disagree completely though I suppose it varies with the profile. Using mbritt's robin ford ODS 100 profile, the amp reacts just about as well as any dumble amp I've ever played through or owned including many of the big name clones. It is much more amp-like in that respect than the axefx. I like the axefx models very much but your description applies way more to axefx than kemper. The kemper seems to be much more amp like in terms of the guitar's volume affecting the tone than any other modeler.


    In terms of what I *DON'T* like:

    • The effects are generally weak, particularly the time based effects
    • no spring reverb
    • no multi delays (impossible to get a holdsworth clean sound because of this)
    • No univibe
    • non realistic trem
    • choruses don't compare to axefx choruses
    • overdrive and fuzz pedals have way too much gain
    • no zendrive
    • no editor software


    However, in terms of realistically modeling a tube amp, the top of the heap. The real issue it has is not enough CPU horsepower. The single processor just doesn't have the bandwidth to do what axefx does in terms of effects. But in terms of sounding like a real amp, IT DOES THAT REALLY, REALLY WELL!

  • I disagree completely though I suppose it varies with the profile. Using mbritt's robin ford ODS 100 profile, the amp reacts just about as well as any dumble amp I've ever played through or owned including many of the big name clones. It is much more amp-like in that respect than the axefx. I like the axefx models very much but your description applies way more to axefx than kemper. The kemper seems to be much more amp like in terms of the guitar's volume affecting the tone than any other modeler.


    In terms of what I *DON'T* like:

    • The effects are generally weak, particularly the time based effects
    • no spring reverb
    • no multi delays (impossible to get a holdsworth clean sound because of this)
    • No univibe
    • non realistic trem
    • choruses don't compare to axefx choruses
    • overdrive and fuzz pedals have way too much gain
    • no zendrive
    • no editor software


    However, in terms of realistically modeling a tube amp, the top of the heap. The real issue it has is not enough CPU horsepower. The single processor just doesn't have the bandwidth to do what axefx does in terms of effects. But in terms of sounding like a real amp, IT DOES THAT REALLY, REALLY WELL!


    This was resolved a few days ago. There is nothing I don't like now.

  • I disagree completely though I suppose it varies with the profile. Using mbritt's robin ford ODS 100 profile, the amp reacts just about as well as any dumble amp I've ever played through or owned including many of the big name clones. It is much more amp-like in that respect than the axefx. I like the axefx models very much but your description applies way more to axefx than kemper. The kemper seems to be much more amp like in terms of the guitar's volume affecting the tone than any other modeler.


    In terms of what I *DON'T* like:

    • The effects are generally weak, particularly the time based effects
    • no spring reverb
    • no multi delays (impossible to get a holdsworth clean sound because of this)
    • No univibe
    • non realistic trem
    • choruses don't compare to axefx choruses
    • overdrive and fuzz pedals have way too much gain
    • no zendrive
    • no editor software


    However, in terms of realistically modeling a tube amp, the top of the heap. The real issue it has is not enough CPU horsepower. The single processor just doesn't have the bandwidth to do what axefx does in terms of effects. But in terms of sounding like a real amp, IT DOES THAT REALLY, REALLY WELL!



    About the drive pedals: You should try the new mix parameter in drives. Makes them much more useful. Oh, and don't worry delays are coming and they are gorgeous.

  • OP, why don't you ask these clowns, they seem to have a massive following of three people on facebook:


    https://www.facebook.com/KemperProfilingAmpsSuck/


    This was the first (and only) post I read on their page.


    "One consistent factor to Historic Tone: no Kemper Profiling Amps. Greats like SRV know that the *only* way to ever get good tone is with a tube amp, speaker, and a microphone. You'll never get it with "profiling"."


    Their stupidity cracks me up. I 100% agree that SRV knew that the ONLY way to get good tone is with a tube amp, speaker and mic. The part they failed to leave out is that this statement was correct for THAT TIME PERIOD, because the KPA wasn't even around as a choice for SRV. Their idiotic statement is like saying someone in the 1700's knew the best and only way to get from one place to another is by horse and buggy . . . . . . BECAUSE CARS WEREN'T AVAILABLE YET!!!