No, WE don't need a kemper2

  • I mean listen to the cheesy synth sound on Led Zeppelins All my love. It works becuase it's a great song. A great song is always most important. The guitar tone doesn't matter so much as guitarists like to believe.

    Absolutely.Back than you could do everything as long as it sounded good.But this changed during the 90s.Guitar solos became as "cheesy" as 10 minutes intros and psychedelic sounds..


    I believe after many years of "cheesy" being a deadly sin today musicians again go for "if it sounds good for me I don't care" attitude again..finally..

  • This debate is similar to the vst debates. I want better VST's I want more realistic VST's, more realistic string library etc. So does it matter if you can't make a good song with what you have? Guitarists should worry more about being a good guitarist, creating better, or more inspiring riffs, nail that cover song etc than worry too much about the tone. The same is true in the VST world. I mean listen to the cheesy synth sound on Led Zeppelins All my love. It works becuase it's a great song. A great song is always most important. The guitar tone doesn't matter so much as guitarists like to believe.

    Great tone and sound quality can only make a great song better. If the song sucks, there's not much point in polishing a turd.

  • Not really. The right tone and the right sound can make a song better.

    That's true, but if the core idea for a song sucks, tone is inconsequential, in my opinion. I mean, there are plenty of songs that I think have great guitar tone but that I have absolutely no interest in listening to because I don't like the musical ideas for the song itself. The same is true of mixing and mastering. I'll take a great song with mediocre production over a song that's perfectly mixed and mastered but that does nothing for me musically.

  • Sure, like

    nightlight:

    Dude. I said I do not complain and you keep asking why I complain, what's wrong? Being happy does not mean you can't do better and better, right? Technology keeps getting better. Even our goddammn ears and taste changes each day. Don't try to explain me.

    "Tweak a little more"? Huh? Are you serious. Anyways... Good night.


    Yup, tweak a little more. It might sound silly, but for example, explore your routing between the Helix and the Kemper. Is Kemper in the loop of the Helix or vice versa, just for a start.


    Yes, one can always do better, at least in theory. But I don't think availability of technology is the issue here, it's your need to have it all in one box.


    Have a look at this article, this is probably the best U2 tribute band in the world, or one of them. The guitarist offers some insights on what it takes to get The Edge's sound:

    http://u2-2.com/luke.html




    In your case, you obviously have the money, so GAS isn't an issue. But ask yourself, with an Axe FX and a Kemper in your arsenal, you are going on and on about the need for an even better Profiler/modeller? Seriously, that is probably better gear right there than Vai or Petrucci ot The Edge had when they were writing killer albums.


    And that's just my point. Call it simplifying your setup or whatever. But if you have top shelf gear and are then going on and on about how it could be better, you need to introspect whether your passion is about the music, or about the gear.


    Also, you did see the picture of Edge's rig, right? It is not feasible with any single piece of gear afaik, heck he has three Axe FXes in there, with one as a backup.


    In that regard, it just seems like wishful thinking that even if there is a Kemper 2, Alienator's tone will be like The Edge's. Indeed, it seems more about having it all served on a plate (without tweaking) rather than some urgent need to construct some sound in his head.

  • I would never get me a kpa2 just because it has more fx,a touchscreen,better UI and multiple rigs.


    Nothing of all these ^^^ is of any value for recording and playing live.In my eyes all these wishes above are just for "tweaking" and there are already better solutions on the market.Who really needs this...I guess indeed the af3 is your thing.Or the new quad from neural.For me personally it is just boring.Deadly boring.


    But Kemper for me personally is associated with "revolutionary solutions" doing stuff you could not do before.And this in a way which makes it easy to do so in the studio and on stage without to tweak yourself into frustration.


    A possible kpa2 in the distant(?) future should be the same game changer as the current one.And I mean the ability to create.Not to choose between a myriad of abilities I don't need.I dont see any other way for any future top tier guitar modeler than to give us new sounds.


    Nobody needs just "more and better of the same" we already have.

  • In your case, you obviously have the money, so GAS isn't an issue. But ask yourself, with an Axe FX and a Kemper in your arsenal, you are going on and on about the need for an even better Profiler/modeller?

    Personally, because I have both units, I don't necessarily have a dog in the fight, though it's because I have both units that I can see some of the shortcomings of the KPA. Just because I think the KPA can be improved doesn't mean I don't appreciate it for what it is. However, the entire reason the KPA exists is because someone saw an opportunity to improve on the technology that came before it.

    Seriously, that is probably better gear right there than Vai or Petrucci ot The Edge had when they were writing killer albums.

    Not a fan of either, so I'm not sure what they were using when writing their most popular stuff, but you can bet the engineer and studio involved in their recordings had a lot to do with the finished product.

    And that's just my point. Call it simplifying your setup or whatever. But if you have top shelf gear and are then going on and on about how it could be better, you need to introspect whether your passion is about the music, or about the gear.

    Envisioning areas where technology can be improved while appreciating what you currently have are not mutually exclusive positions. Improvement drives innovation. It's the reason top-tier modelers are as feature rich and sound as good as they do today. Personally, I'm all for it, but again, it doesn't mean I don't appreciate what I have.

    Also, you did see the picture of Edge's rig, right? It is not feasible with any single piece of gear afaik, heck he has three Axe FXes in there, with one as a backup.

    It really depends on why he needs three Axe-Fx II's. I wouldn't doubt if some of that is related to gapless switching, and in that regard, the Axe-Fx III is much more capable.

    In that regard, it just seems like wishful thinking that even if there is a Kemper 2, Alienator's tone will be like The Edge's.

    Maybe not, but he might be able to get closer, and if that's important to him and he has the money, well, I say more power to him.

    Indeed, it seems more about having it all served on a plate (without tweaking) rather than some urgent need to construct some sound in his head.

    I can only speak from my own experience. Personally, I don't really need things served to me on a plate(though I wouldn't balk); however, there are some sounds I can't duplicate in the Kemper, thus the need for the Axe-Fx III. Further, even if I could create those sounds with the KPA, there's the question of how much time and effort I'd have to spend doing it, and that's where features and flexibility can be important to efficiency and workflow. I mean, I can make a POD XT sound pretty good, but I'd have to spend a lot more time doing it vs. the Axe-Fx II or III, and it still wouldn't sound on par with the Axe-Fx III. For me, improving efficiency and workflow doesn't necessarily mean you need things handed to you on a silver platter. It just makes the process of actually getting from point A to point B easier, which, in the end, can help you focus on what's important; the music.

  • I would never get me a kpa2 just because it has more fx,a touchscreen,better UI and multiple rigs.


    Nothing of all these ^^^ is of any value for recording and playing live.

    More FX and dual rigs can be of value for recording. Yes, you can add plugins after the fact, but hearing the tone with effects in real-time can potentially shape how you play and/or what you play, and with the ability to reamp, there's no reason not to record with them.

  • Aha - I knew I knew it, I as thinking v-amp or pod. The v-amp was blue though. I used to have a bean - obviously the Edge has the professional version :)

    Actually it is a Pod Pro, yes. And he only used one drive effect from it live for the song „Vertigo“. That’s it, as far as I know. He (well, also Dallas Shoo) also replicates such things with his fractal stuff, nowadays, but if he wants to he does whatever he wants with his older and newer gear, who knows after all. I know somebody who also replicated that exact POD Pro drive with his AxeII, very well, for that particular song.


    Edge is a collector of gear and he looks for the one good thing a peace of gear can do. He then uses this one perfect thing for his chain and ignores the 1000 other things that unit maybe could also do. He is so picky with every single aspect and impact of an effect and he hears things no mortal would ever hear but these things matter to him. In an average concert (60.000 people) he uses about 18-20 different guitars with each guitar having individual tone and volume knob settings, strings, tuning and magnet height - only to stress one or two single strings a little more in his overall tone (!!!) only for that particular song! This approach is the most extreme there is out there but this is The Edge. He knows gear and he knows sound. And yes, he has a lot of people who carry his stuff for him and Dallas Shoo adjusting everything for him. To say that somebody who loves Edge’s sound eill ever reach exactly what Edge does with only similar guitars and different gear is wishful thinking, of course. Even if you are happy with your personal Edge sound, you never ever stop wanting and trying to get closer and closer (not to mention that Edge himself sounds differently over the years or at different concerts). That’s what musicians do, never stop experimenting (well many of us, at least), trying new gear and dedicating their time and passion to what they love. One thing IMHO is sure: it does not seem that the Edge will ever use a Kemper as long as his amps are being carried for him.


    So, „We“ need a Kemper II even if it is just for fun and for the economic well being of the company. If others do not „need“ a Kemper II, then yaaay. All is so good. Why on earth are there people who try to convince me that I don’t „need“ a Kemper II? A Kemper II will definitely come at some point of time. I am sure CK will pick the right point in time. Until then, yes, I am so happy with my personal Edge sound that comes from My U2 board with only a Kemper Stage and an HX Stomp on it. This does not mean that I ever stopped experimenting and tweaking around with that rig since I built it. Or that I won't buy or exchange new stuff like the QC for only that The Edge Board. That's what The Edge himself would do :D. Maybe a Kemper II will be that good that even The Edge will not need his amps any more. 8o

    Better have it and not need it, than need it and not have it! - Michael Angelo Batio

    Edited 5 times, last by Alienator ().

  • More FX and dual rigs can be of value for recording. Yes, you can add plugins after the fact, but hearing the tone with effects in real-time can potentially shape how you play and/or what you play, and with the ability to reamp, there's no reason not to record with them.

    There are so many ways today to track with fx without recording them..I only know of very few situations in which tracking with a lots of fx backed in is really needed.

  • There are so many ways today to track with fx without recording them..I only know of very few situations in which tracking with a lots of fx backed in is really needed.

    Thanks to reamping, you can change any effects you record later, so there's no good reason not to track with them, and like I said, there's a practical benefit to hearing all of the effects in real-time.

  • While Edge may well travel with a rack full of gear to obtain his legendary tone that is so easily identifiable in most U2 songs, That is not how he started.


    http://www.amnesta.net/edge_delay/


    I have looked over several sites like this one to get a U2 delay in Kemper that is close to the real thing. The one variable I can't seem to nail is the number of delays. Most instructions on this say "set to 2 or 3 repeats" while the Kemper only has feedback in its algorithm.


    Don't get me wrong, not only does Kemper have great delays, but the delay engine has the ability to capture the cross-talk portion of the original U2 rig which was originally obtained by the distance between the 2 VOX amps (closer together, more cross talk).


    I suspect when my band plays "Streets have no name" that the audience isn't out there saying "Hey, that guitar doesn't sound like U2". It is my experience that you can get a pretty convincing U2 from the Kemper. YMMV.


    As for the synth capability or running more than the 8 efx in the KPA, I guess I am just a more "great tube amp tone" kinda guy. A light touch of reverb, occasionally some delay, and lately a decent drive in front of the stack is all I generally use. I have been playing in a cover band for decades (since the 80's) and it has been my experience that this is all you need for 98% of songs.


    I realize that there are others out there that really love the efx laden sounds. For them, I would say that Fractal provides a better platform by far for using tons of effects in any routing arrangement your mind could dream up.


    For a live setting though, I have found that the best bands I have heard don't need the complex FX. Shoot, I watched a band a couple of years ago where the guitar player had just a little Mesa combo amp and a delay pedal. They were fantastic.


    There are many of us who subscribe to the "less is more" thought with respect to efx live, while others feel "more is more". For the "more is more" crowd, I can completely see why you want a KPA2 that is more Axe like ..... I just wonder why you don't go out and buy the Axe III Fx?

  • as a player, in cover bands, for 55+ years. I’m a less is more player.
    ‘I find an Amp, a touch of reverb, and a little delay occasionally, covers over 90% , 0f the

    100’s of songs that I play

    And to add to it, when you put lots of efx on the guitar tone, you start finding that your guitar doesn't sit in the mix anymore and you can't hear it ..... so you find yourself turning up the guitar .... and now the mix just sounds muddy.


    Yep .... I am a "less is more" guitar player ;)