Posts by OneEng1

    That's clearly an opinion. I've Tone Matched Kemper profiles using the Axe-Fx II and the results were indistinguishable in blind tests. That's really one of the biggest advantages of the Axe-Fx; it can Tone Match live or recorded tones.

    Ok, you are right. The Axe-Fx II is clearly better than a KPA and all those that say different are blithering idiots. Do you feel better now? Seriously? Let it go man.

    There are quite a few users who wish the profiling process would get updated because they can hear a difference between some Kemper profiles and the reference amps they're based on. I mean, the profiling process isn't perfect, but Christoph has said there's virtually no room for improvement. So, yes, while a profile created in 2012 will sound mostly the same today, quite a few people wish profiles sounded more accurate now than they did in 2012.

    No they don't. Most people don't give a crap if the profile sounds exactly like the source. Most people NEVER profile an amp with the KPA. MOST people just love the way it sounds.

    People who play live REALLY don't want their rigs to change in tone. Once you are dialed in with a rig for a song, you simply want to keep getting that same great sound every night. The LAST thing you want is for a firmware update to change it for you without your consent!

    Have you ever done a gig? Ever do it on a steady basis? If so, then I can't see how you don't see this logic.

    That's the difference. The profiling process isn't perfect and has no room for improvement, while the Axe-Fx sounds close to perfect and is still being improved.

    No, no, no. As I keep saying to you, people DON'T WANT their existing rigs to change! They already have them sounding like they want. It is fine for new profiles to start differently than an older firmware would have because people still tweak them to their liking....... but once that is done, NO ONE wants the device to simply change it for them when a firmware update is applied. I KNOW that this is what the Fractal offerings do, and therefore YOU think this is somehow a GOOD thing! IT ISN'T!

    When I state that this is a unique selling point for the KPA, it is now completely clear to me that you think it ISN'T. You just don't get it.

    I can't personally think of a SINGLE reason anyone would WANT their device to arbitrarily change all their tones for them. Can you? If so, please ...... enlighten me.

    The release notes for firmware 2.6 specifically stated that the changes affected previously created profiles.



    Version 2.6.0 is a feature update which allows you to switch rigs faster, features Improved Profiling and refines the interaction in between Kemper Profiler® and Rig Manager.

    The whole IDEA you are presenting is so wrong headed and anti-Kemper. Performances and rigs NEVER CHANGE when you update the unit and I LOVE THAT about the Kemper.

    In fact, every new release keeps backwards compatibility. You can still use the old reverb engine if you like or the old delay engine. They are ALL STILL THERE. Any rigs you made with the old firmware will sound exactly the same after you update to the firmware with the new reverbs and delays. ONLY THE NEW rigs you create with these new features will have a sonic difference.

    You seriously WANT the device to change all your tones when you update the firmware? Really?


    Here are the facts.

    The Kemper sounds noticeably better than the Axe FX II by any reasonable measure.

    The Kemper and Axe Fx III both create a similar tonal and touch experience with the Kemper having an edge in soft breakup tones.

    A profile created in 2012 still sounds IDENTICAL today on a KPA. A patch created on the Axe Fx II the day it was released will sound quite different on the last firmware released for the device. I never said that the profiling algorithm did not change. I SPECIFICALLY said the rigs made don't change with new firmware releases.

    The Kemper is a MUCH easier device to learn than the Axe III Fx especially for guitar players used to the controls of a tube amp.

    I think I am done arguing with you. You seem to simply want to continuously move the goal post of every discussion point in every new reply. This is simply not productive.

    When a newer version is released, it's initially worth more than previous versions, which is another way of saying that previous versions are worth less than newer ones. However, in the long term, prices vary considerably.

    Yes, but that is NOT what you contended. You contended that each new model would go up in price because it had more features and capabilities. I simply pointed out that this is not how things work or CPU's in your computer would now go for a million dollars each.

    The Kemper is nowhere near as flexible as the Axe-Fx, nor is it trying to be. Further, the KPA will also be competing the Quad Cortex, which offers a number of features the KPA doesn't have at a lower price point, so unless a revised version of the KPA had similar (or better) features, it would be foolish to charge more.

    And if flexibility was the ONLY measure of value in these products, I might agree with you. I have noticed that you appear to assume that since flexibility is the most important measure to you, that the entire market feels the same way. Not so I assure you.

    Kemper already has many advantages over Axe-Fx III and already offers features that neither Axe-Fx III or NQC offer. Price point is determined by the market based on the features the majority of the market values most.

    My contention still stands. I believe that there is room for a price increase on the KPA2 (hopefully ck isn't listening ;) ). We can agree to disagree on this point.

    It's not unique to the KPA.

    First, the ability to have all updates throughout the history of the hardware NOT have a tonal effect on your gigging setup is totally unique to KPA. This is NOT the case with any Fractal product I have ever heard of, and is not the case with Line 6. I seriously doubt it will be the case for NQC, but since it isn't even available to buy yet, it is a silly argument at this time.

    And again, I get the feeling that you do not value this feature and therefore you dismiss it completely. I can tell you that for those of us who gig live with the KPA, this feature ALONE is pure gold.

    What are you talking about? The Axe-Fx III runs circles around the KPA in terms of features and flexibility. In my opinion, the number of features that have been added to the Axe-Fx over the years makes KPA development look like it's been standing still. Don't get me wrong, I love the KPA, but it's obvious you've never used an Axe-Fx.

    Obviously you are wrong. I have spent DAYS with both the Axe-FXII and Axe-Fx III. And again all you talk about is flexibility?

    Over the years, Fractal has added TONS of processing widgets and settings in each widget. They have created paths within paths within paths of processing. At the end of the day, the KPA is still most frequently chosen as the best guitar tone by more tube amp audiophiles.

    True story. A friend of mine got a shiny new III fx. I came over with my KPA so we could mix and match guitars and amps for comparison. 5 hours later we both came to the conclusion that the tones in my KPA were killer as were those in the Axe III Fx, but it was SOOOO much easier to get there on the Kemper. The Axe III Fx has a crazy wonderful powerful editor and signal path, but that is NOT what most people are looking for. Most people just want it to sound great. The truth is that we both thought the KPA sounded better; however, considering that I had been using my KPA to gig live for a couple of years and he had only had the Axe III Fx for half a year (and no gigging) we agreed that there was room to grow in the Axe III.

    With respect to ease of setup and use, I would argue that the KPA "runs circles" around the Axe III Fx. If you are going from a tube amp to digital, the KPA is simply a more natural choice.

    What improvements have been added that most other modelers didn't already have?

    Any other modeler have an interface to a real life cab with its own custom imprints for various speakers like the Kabinet?

    Still, that is hardly the point I am making (you seem hell bent on moving the goal posts on your replies). The point is that every feature that the latest firmware has in it works on EVERY KPA that has been produced in over the last 10 years! This was NEVER the case with Fractal products.

    Fractal Audio doesn't release new MODELS every 2 years. They release REVISIONS every 2 to 3 years. There's a difference. Revisions are FULLY COMPATIBLE with previous and future versions of the same MODEL(which is why a lot of users don't upgrade when a revision is released), and MODELS are released about once every SEVEN years.

    Really? Again you miss the point entirely. So while it may be true that Fractal hardware FUTURE revisions are FULLY COMPATIBLE with PAST revisions of the same model, PAST versions of the same model are NOT compatible with all features in FUTURE revisions. Surely you see the point?

    People CHOOSE to buy whatever they buy. I wasn't forced to upgrade to the Axe-Fx III. I WANTED to upgrade, and anyone who owns an Axe-Fx II (or previous model) isn't forced to stop using it. It'll continue to function just fine.

    I think we can all agree that the purchase of the KPA over 10 years ago yielded much more value from then until today than whatever version of the Axe Fx was offered when KPA first came out.

    Care to do a head to head comparison of the Axe II Fx (released in 2011) to the KPA (released in 2012) today?

    I'm sure you get the point.

    The newer version will inevitably cost more due to updated hardware and features, but if you look at the market now, you'll see that prices for the MK II vs. XL+ are comparable. If you look at the sold listings on eBay, you'll see that used MK II's sometimes sell for more than used XL+'s.

    No. That isn't how it works at all. Under this idea, current computer processors would cost millions of dollars! The cost of computation goes down over time (exponentially for the most part), and over the last 20 years, the cost of outstanding D/A and A/D has also dropped tremendously. If you make a new product more expensive for a new generation, it is a completely different problem/reasoning. You can't charge more for a product simply because it costs more. Pricing is determined by the market. In the case of Fractal and Kemper (and a few others now), the "High End, all-in-one, digital amp" is the market.

    Having said that, I believe that the KPA has some room to move pricing upwards with a next gen if they so desire due to the Fractal price being what it is (and still offering a similar set of features and tone quality).

    No, all Axe-Fx II models sound identical. The complaint you're referring to has nothing to do with any difference between the models. It's related to updates to the modeling algorithms.

    True that. I guess it is still worth mentioning as yet another unique selling point for the KPA.

    As someone who owned an Axe-Fx II, I'd say there are most definitely advantages to updated hardware when it results in new and improved features that weren't possible with previous versions.

    Possibly true, but only because the original hardware wasn't thought out as well as the KPA has been. The KPA has managed a vast array of improvements without the need to update the hardware. The KPA has developed an entire ecosystem of support for a range of physical form factors of the same product architecture (smart IMO).

    There is definitely a business case to be made for Fractal. If there is a market for a shiny new product every 2 years, why not make it? Keep in mind that this only works when there is insufficient competition which is NOT making you buy a new (and very expensive) piece of hardware every 2 to 3 years).

    Inevitably, if a KPA2 is ever released, the price of the KPA1 will initially drop in value

    Yes, that is true.

    All of the Axe-Fx II models (eg. MK I, II, XL, XL+) were completely compatible, sounded identical, and had the same software features. Most of the differences were hardware related(more flexible routing, brighter screen, etc.) I upgraded to the Axe-Fx III from the XL+ and it was some of the best money I've ever spent. The improved sound quality and features are worth every penny.

    Possibly so; however, the original Axe Fx II lost value the moment the MKII was released. There is a knock on effect of releasing hardware every 2 to 3 years. Additionally, I am not certain I agree that those models all sounded "identical". In fact, with each firmware release, a major complaint of the fractal products was that the tone was frequently changed with the update.

    I'll give it to you that the Fx III does indeed have better sound than the Fx II and variants.

    Still, the point remains that there is a definite customer advantage when your hardware does not change for some time and the firmware updates do not affect the tone..... at least with a guitar processor.

    When there is inevitably a release of a KPA2, I think that an original KPA is still going to be worth some scratch as it is a fantastic gig rig. A new KPA2 will not change that.

    If the purpose is for you to hear the sound pleasing to you, and you don't care if you make some noise in the room, then a good pair of studio monitors would be my advice. The Yamaha HS8 is about the best bang for the buck you can get IMO.

    If you want to spare others your playing, then you will want something nice on your head. I use the afore mentioned ATM M50x which is a "decent" and relatively cheap headset, but it certainly won't hold up to those HS8's or any headphone that is much more expensive.

    I use relatively inexpensive ear buds too for live (Shure E215's). They are horrible monitors with respect to the sound of the actual PA sound.

    For PA sound, you really need the PA. Since I own my own, I setup an EQ for the PA, and then another EQ for my headphones. That allows me to make tweaks to my tone at home on my headphones, then get a reasonable approximation of "good" on the PA when I transfer to the PA. It took a little time to work out those EQ settings for my system, but it works fairly well now.

    Good luck!

    Wow. Impressive.

    You guys have really put the X32 Rack to good use!

    I am still running an old Furman HDS system with 5 mixes:

    1) Stereo Main

    2) Mono lead guitar (mix of lead guitar and lead guitar player vocals)

    3) Mono Rhythm Guitar (mix of rhythm guitar and rhythm guitar player vocals)

    4) mono bass guitar (mix of bass guitar and bass guitar players vocals)

    5) mono drums (same as above ;) ).

    The furman control boxes have only 5 knobs. My band members manage to get their mix messed up with just these simple controls :)

    I am considering what I will do when the old analog monitoring system gives up the goat.

    Are you guys using wireless IEM's or wired?

    You know, there is another way to look at this.

    Does anyone think that a Fender Blackface is obsolete today? How about the SM57 microphone? Gibson Les Paul?

    Still, as I stated, those of you who want a KPA2 will get your wish. Chips can't be purchased forever, and if ckemper is going to make a redesign, I am certain that the new version will have several advantages over the old version ;).

    I DON'T think there will be a new KPA2 based on some new kid on the block like the QC though. I suspect that ckemper finds them as fascinating as we do. If a new KPA2 is in the works, it will be for many other reasons than this.

    Perhaps this little replaceable board which can be found inside is the key? ;) CPU, memory and flash it seems.

    Hi delgato,

    I suspect that this CPU is running the GUI, input/output, configuration, etc while the signal processing is likely done in a chip that is specialized for DSP tasks .... which the Kemper does a great deal of I suspect.

    I am intrigued by the DIMM slot which (as you point out) seems to indicate a potential for an upgrade path (or ease of repair). Considering the resources this chip has and the external RAM and ROM it is hooked up to, I would be surprised if this was the limiting factor in the design. Still, it may be an issue with parts availability that they were trying to protect against.

    I would be amazed if Kemper decided to upgrade using this method though.

    Thanks for the link! Very interesting information.

    Ok, my 2 cents:

    There will be a Kemper 2. No doubt about it. The real problem for ckemper is that eventually, the internal major chips (DSP) will be considered EOL. It is likely (I haven't checked) that they are already listed as "not recommended for new designs".

    Now, this doesn't mean that Kemper couldn't just stay within the same DSP family, tweak a bit, and make a "refresh", but that wouldn't give you a new architecture or fundamentally different work-flows.

    FWIW, I have been doing engineering for so long, I have forgotten what it is like to look at a device and not immediately mentally disseminate the device into its likely architectural components ;). Sad, but true. The point is, MOST companies don't throw out an architecture that works well. They tend to grow from the same base.

    I believe that a Kemper 2 would certainly bring some new goodness though. Color LCD, more flexible signal routing, higher quality sampling that better eliminates the potential for aliasing, etc.

    I still have my money on Kemper releasing an even less expensive FC with the existing architecture that can only be edited off-line. Shoot, I might buy one just for the backup capability at gigs.

    We will see!

    This is brilliant if I understand you correctly, you get your profiles to sound good with the FOH and then listen to those profiles through the headphones and adjust the output EQ until they sound similar. Save both presets then you can tweak your profiles with the headphones and it should sound similar with the FOH preset?

    Yep. Exactly this.

    Years ago, I had all my band gear in my own basement (before I finished it and the kids took over my cave!). It is always better to tweak your tone within the context of the PA you use AND with the all the other instruments together.

    Since I can't use the PA all the time (and don't want to drive to where it is all the time either), I figured out a way to get headphones to give me good sound.

    I use a multi-track playback to listen to the guitar in a full band context.

    What I haven't done yet is to record the raw guitar track going into the KPA, then use re-amping to send the signal back into my mixer along with the multi-track of the band (minus the guitar track). Then I can tweak everything in full context.

    We sure have come a long way from the good ole day's when the only option to hear how things sound was to get a long guitar cable and walk out front to listen ;).

    I have found that if you don't use the full band in context, you tend to get guitar sounds that are too warm and don't cut into the mix .... or muddy up the mix. Sometimes the best live sounds don't sound so great by themselves.

    I use headphones, FRFR and a full PA.

    Here are my observations:

    1) Headphones have a fantastic stereo image that does NOT translate to a live situation even if you send stereo out to the PA.

    2) The efx you hear using headphones is ALWAYS lighter sounding than it is through FRFR or PA

    3) The FOH with its ability to REALLY amplify the sub frequencies will make any tone that sounded "perfect" through headphones or FRFR sound bass heavy.

    4) Even the FRFR eq is not the same as the headphone eq which is not the same as the FOH eq.

    Use presets.

    Have a preset output setup for FOH and one for Headphones. Get your FOH right first. You really need to get this down when you have the entire band. I am fortunate in that I can playback multi-track recordings from the entire band and then work on the guitar EQ until the band sounds best together.

    After you get the FOH right, make an output preset that makes the tone sound the best in your headphones.

    From there on out, you should be able to get an OK tone by using your headphones... but I would still check it on the real PA in the context of the entire band playing ;)

    I would hate to be a manufacturer of anything today, everybody keeps whining and wants a different options for minor things .

    When the tuner was # I never complained, and lived with it and never had a problem using it but i do prefer it flat b but its not a major issue..

    I think most of us can read it either way ;)

    I went from a VHT UL, 4x12 and 2x12 VHT cab to the Kemper DI into the PA with IEM's.

    I was in the same boat as you in that I just hated the load in and load out of my guitar rig. I wanted to downsize and was (just like V8guitar) even willing to lose a bit of tone to get there.

    Since I use IEM's (and don't play many leads as I am also the singer in the band), the "amp in the room" feel wasn't a big thing for me.

    I have several friends that had big tube rigs (even stereo as you discuss) that now run a Kemper live after a few times out with me on a gig. The sound through the PA is simply perfect.

    Now, for guys that like the sound of a 4x12 on stage (or two 4x12's), I would recommend a pair of Kemper Kabinets with a Kemper power head (I prefer the rack, but others may like having a traditional head unit), and of course, the Kemper foot controller.

    If that is too rich for your blood, then a Kemper Stage with a DXR10 will do the trick nicely. You could still get the Kemper Stage and a Kemper Kabinet, but you would also need to purchase an amp. If you search the forum, you can find lots of good, small amps that work well with the Kabinet for <$400.

    I have not missed a thing about my tube amp rig.

    FWIW, I always love the sound of a Mesa Boogie (I like the 1x12 combo and Mark IIc head the best).

    Can you find someone in your area that has a Kemper to come over and profile your amp and let you play for a while? That would certainly take some of the scary monsters out of going digital ;).

    I applaud your energy ;).

    I have found that for most live venues, stereo output doesn't work well. The main problem is that when placing speakers stage left and stage right, the majority of the audience only hear one side. So most of the audience would hear half of the output of the Kemper/Keys/efx/etc. Now, having said this, I do run my PA in stereo. This is simply because I like the way it sounds in the IEM's. Having stereo efx for the keys, Kemper, and Vocal reverb DOES make a difference to the performers..... just not the audience.

    I am looking forward to your X32 scene as I have an X32 Rack that I can review it with ;).

    Naw. I don't see it.

    Kemper will come out with a $500-$700 Profile Player before they move to a KPA2. They need this to round out their product portfolio IMO.

    When they DO make a KPA2, they have LOTS of room to make up to fill out their product portfolio:

    1) Head (Powered and Unpowered)

    2) Rack (Powered and Unpowered)

    3) Foot Controller for #1 and #2

    4) Stage Version

    5) New version of the rig manager to handle the new capabilities of the new hardware

    As for capabilities of the KPA, it already makes an extremely convincing profile of the original amp. I suspect that CK will keep making the current generation until the processor/DSP chip goes EOL.

    The next gen will likely have a color LCD, possibly more routing options that are natively easy to setup, but I would bet that sound quality will not be on the list of reasons that a KPA2 is created.

    Just one man's opinion ;)

    I believe that you can uncouple the main and monitor volume, then setup a morph on the monitor volume to control your output to a powered speaker to your liking in real time on stage while leaving the FOH to handle the volume through the mixer.

    I am not sure this works since I don't run my rig like this (I have an IEM monitor that I have a separate volume control panel for at my finger tips).

    Can someone else verify that this would work?

    No - no "smooth Chords" enabeld.
    I use the transpose "casualy" (when i´m to lazy to pull out a guitar with a different tuning). So it´s not a drama by any means.
    I never noticed a latency before. Just since i´ve made the latest update.

    But anyway - thank you!

    Hi RichPich,

    I have always noticed it. Like you, I use it when I am too lazy to grab another guitar. The latency with it does bother me. .... enough that I never do it live, only at home for practice. I am sure others use it live successfully.

    I get roughly the same effect if I practice through my PA speakers pointed at me from across the room (~20 ft). That messes with me too ;). The thumb rule is 1 mSec per foot, so at 20 feet the latency is about 20 mSec. I am guessing that this is about the delay Kemper Transpose has. I could measure it for more accuracy, but my ear says around 20mSec.