How close does kemper direct profile get to axe fx

  • Hi all

    Would anyone know if a kemper direct profile and axe fx profile using same settings and impulse response sound the same?
    As if you profiled a plexi all settings dimed with di, then got the same plexi model on the ace fx with same settings and run both though same ir.


    Thanks

  • Hi all

    Would anyone know if a kemper direct profile and axe fx profile using same settings and impulse response sound the same?
    As if you profiled a plexi all settings dimed with di, then got the same plexi model on the ace fx with same settings and run both though same ir.


    Thanks

    first, the is no such thing as an 'AxeFx Profile'.
    The AxeFx is a modeler, profiling is proprietary to the PROFILER.


    A Profile taken from an amp recreates all of it's nuances, and all amps are unique, even two of the very same Plexi models wouldn't sound the same.
    A model is based on, I don't know what, actually. A schematic? The designers impression of that amp? Manufacturers of modelers don't really disclose this kind of info often. Even if the model is based on a real amp, then it's just one example of it's species.


    We must have hundreds of Bassman Profiles in the Rig Exchange by now and even over a guitar cab they are all different.

  • Using the same IR would likely lessen any differences, but, there are still many variables.


    Do you have enough information about the AxeFX plexi model to locate a Marshall similar enough to their concept of what a Plexi should sound like to make a Profile of it?


    Not all dimed Plexi profiles sound the same, because not all dimed Plexis sound the same.


    As I'm sure you know: A Kemper Profile is of a specific amplifier, control settings, with its specific tubes, and the age of the components in the amplifier, as well as different circuit changes that Marshall may have made over the years could also have an influence on the sound.


    Edit: I typed too slow - DonPetersen said this already ;)

  • I think a better question would be "Which one sounds more like the Plexi?". I have to say that I have never used an AxeFX but I did spend years with a Helix before getting the Kemper and I have to say that the Kemper 100% sounds more like the original amp. I used to use the Archon patch a lot but could never really make it sound like the Archon I owned. When I finally profiled my amp I could not tell the difference and in fact you can check out that video. I have had another people on the forum say that they were amazed with the A/B comparison between the two.

  • You never realize quite how brilliant the kemper is until you profile something yourself. That’s the only time you get to do a direct comparison. And the only time you get the chance to realize that there is no comparison. I laugh to myself every time I hear someone say their axefx(insert any other modeler here) sounds more amp like. Without having exactly the amp modeled next to their axefx. It’s complete nonsense.

  • I've had an axe fx3, and a kemper since it came out...and many plexi style amps...


    All make great sounds - but the kemper will give you 95% of the real amp when it is profiled with particular settings.


    If you then grab another 'real' plexi amp from the same run, and have them side by side through the same cab and microphones, they will at best be 95% similar too. Tubes, component age/wear etc


    So nothing is identical to anything else - and thats great news for people on the never-ending tone quest - and horrendous for our poor dusty cobwebbed wallets.


    The axe fx, sounds like a plexi or a boogie or a fender - but before deep editing, it will sound like the specific one they modelled, and it does a great job at doing it.


    Unless you are profiling your own amp...then it is best to get into a mindset that modellers are giving you a flavour of that style of amp...and profilers are giving you a snapshot of a specific amp...at a specific setting.


    Especially with the deep deep editing available on the fx3 - where you can edit controls that are not included on the original amplifier - the whole purpose of that is to manipulate your sound 'beyond' that of the original - for better or for worse - is for a different day. From my experience, the fx3 doesn't sound great until you start deep diving into the controls available to you - something which anyone that has scrolled through fractal presets will corroborate. It's all about the deep editing capabilities, which if that is your thing, are wonderful.


    So short answer is - nothing is identical to anything...but thats great. Until we have all, as a planet, agreed on a consensus on THE perfect plexi sound, THE perfect Mk 4 boogie sound, THE bassman sound...then its a big merry-go-round of exploration. Even then...someone will say....hang on hang on...I play P90's...

    PRS Custom 22's - Fender Strats - Diezel VH4 - Carol Ann OD2 - Toneking Imperial MK2 - Colin the Kemper - CLR Neo ii.

  • I've had great success doing profiles of the axe-fx.....some are easy and sound 90/95%+ ...others are a bit more tricky.

    If its a FX filled profile well it becomes tricky...if its more a raw one ...generally no problem

  • You never realize quite how brilliant the kemper is until you profile something yourself. That’s the only time you get to do a direct comparison. And the only time you get the chance to realize that there is no comparison. I laugh to myself every time I hear someone say their axefx(insert any other modeler here) sounds more amp like. Without having exactly the amp modeled next to their axefx. It’s complete nonsense.

    This is where I realized how good the Kemper is. I made some direct profiles of my Silver Jubilee and I seriously couldn’t tell the difference. It was simply amazing. When using the Axe I was always wondering how close the model was to the real thing, when I profiled for myself with the Kemper, I knew it was spot on.