Kemper Power Head: what is the verdict?

Welcome YOGA

For me the verdict is, UNBELIEVABLE!

Hard to believe you have a unit that looks like a regular head, yet inside it has a 600watt Bang & Olufsen Class D poweramp, and it basically weighs the same as the Head without power amp.

For me it's a no brainer, if you're deciding between the non powered head and the poweramp head and you haven't purchased yet, and you can afford the poweramp unit, then go for it.

Trust me, we've demoed it many times in music stores through various cabinets, side by side with tube amps, and it was thunderous.
All the tube amp junkies standing around and playing admitted the tone was astonishing...in fact they found it hard to believe what they were hearing, they looked to see if the tube amps next to the Kemper were on or off.

This was through a Marshall 2x12 with one Vintage 30 and one Heritage 30...the 85th Anniversary Cab.
The music store sold the Powered head a few days earlier, so here we were using a Powered Rack.

The guitarist playing here gigs a TSL100 with his pedalboard, using the TSL clean channel, 100% clean.
No matter how hard he hit the strings on the guitar he could not get the tone to even slightly breakup, it was 100% clean.

[Blocked Image: http://imageshack.com/a/img62/782/j6u7.jpg]

Hi Yoga, welcome here

You're right, a guitar cab influences the sound of an amp much more than switching between amps. You might want to refer to this post for examples of different cabs applied to the same power amp.
IOW, a guitar cab will always and strongly superimpose its sonic signature to any sound.
Like someone said elsewhere, amp = feel, cab = timbre (more or less, because the interaction between amp and cab is specific to that amp and that cab).

So yes, by using a guitar cab you could get a gorgeous sound (when choosing the right cab), the Profiler is second to no amp. But you'll get more or less that sound, which - generalizing a bit here - won't change much between rigs.

To be more precise, the sound will change more than it would with real amps, because the mics are part of the rigs and something remains in the profile's sonic DNA. But, in order to unleash the full potential of the KPA in terms of versatility and ability to reproduce exactly the rig as it had been profiled, no doubt you'll need a transparent and linear solution. This will also help you to have a feeling for what he audience is hearing from the PA.

Finally, it's a mater of choice. If you find a cab which gives you chills with the Profiler and care less about sound fidelity, go for it. If you put sonic richness on top of your expectations, go for a (good!) FRFR cab. You night opt for a passive cab as well, if you plan to buy the Powerrack. But at that stage I'd go active, for a number of reasons.
One midway solution could be to opt for a cab which is flatter than a monitor/PA but keeps some of the characteristics of a guitar cab. The flatter, the more faithful the reproduction. Matrix and KPA Solutions among others offer several models which fit these specs.

Last, but not least: I usually say that those who are/have been unsatisfied with the FRFR route (using of course a great digital device, like the Profiler) have been exposed to poor FRFR cabs

... and go active FRFR for the optimum in sound quality.

Hey guys,

I've got the Power Head and until last evening had been playing through monitor speakers. Decent ones but not the highest end stuff. BUT, at 8:30 pm last night my Atomic Passive CLR arrived and the difference in sound quality is significant. Wow!! I've only been able to play at low volume so far but I hope to crank it up this evening to really test it out but I think that for those of you that are used to playing through a combo amp or head/cabinet will find that the Kemper with a CLR will make it hard to tell the difference once you tweak the settings.

I'm still relatively new to the Kemper world (one week or so in) but I've been able to profile several amps very successfully. The only area I've got to spend some more time on is with my Kot (King of Tone) stomp box as part of a rig because that's the only area I've not been really able to dial in to replicate my live environment. (I've got the KoT between the Kemper and Amp Input as the manual states)... Of course if there are suggestions on how to profile an amp with stomp boxes please let me know. (I do need to re-check the Wiki which I've not done yet).. I feel like I'm going through a crash course with a lot more to still learn...

Mike

Quote from elvisscottyandbill

... and go active FRFR for the optimum in sound quality.

That's kind of where I'm leaning. Makes more sense.

My 2 cents on this.

I've been using a competing Product for a good three years mainly going FRFR. I've owned a non-Powered KPA for a year and a half, and only recently started replacing the other box for live use. The big shift for me was doing my own profiles. I started missing the rumble of a real cabinet onstage, so I purchased the Matrix GT1000FX power amp, which sounded amazing running it the way described in the OP - w/o cab simulation thru my own cabinet onstage and fully simulated out to the FOH (using profiles that I made With the same cab that I use onstage). This meant carrying another rack, so I jumped on the Upgrade option Kemper offers for early adopters and bought a Power Rack, hoping the internal power amp would do the same job as the Matrix.

In short, it does. The Power Rack sounds amazing, and is amazingly powerful (and I'm known to play loud). Combined With the warm and dynamic sound of the KPA, the power amp really delivers. I dug out my previous rig for a gig yesterday, just to calibrate my ears, but was instandly disappointed and spent the rest of the gig regretting I didn't bring my Power Rack as a backup.

FRFR's sound awfully boring to me. I don't enjoy playing through a piece of PA equipment. But more importantly, many bands MISS the sound of a guitar amp onstage. An FRFR is nowhere CLOSE to the same sound across the stage... it doesn't "thump" and it doesn't spread as well.

But I don't know if the Kemper power amp is the way to go. Haven't tried it.

Quote from suckamc

?... An FRFR is nowhere CLOSE to the same sound across the stage... it doesn't "thump" and it doesn't spread as well.

Well, we cannot argue about our own preferences and everybody's entitled to his own opinion of course, but this statement about the spread is plain wrong, from a physical POV.
And from my own experience I can honestly say that my DXR or CLR have a much better spread on stage than my Marshall cabs.

Quote from suckamc

FRFR's sound awfully boring to me. I don't enjoy playing through a piece of PA equipment. But more importantly, many bands MISS the sound of a guitar amp onstage. An FRFR is nowhere CLOSE to the same sound across the stage... it doesn't "thump" and it doesn't spread as well.

But I don't know if the Kemper power amp is the way to go. Haven't tried it.

I'm not sure if Your response helps the OP at all, but that's up to him to decide. I'm guessing you haven't played many gigs with a first class frfr solution such as the KPA or Axe-FX, and haven't tried the Kemper PA at all..? Anyway, I'm with Ingolf here; FRFR can be really great, and the sound dispersion from e.g. a coaxial frfr speaker is way more even than a classic Marshall 412 cab, which is legendary for its directionality. Both ways have their advances, none is better than the other, it depends on needs and preferences. I'm having great results with both, depending on the setting, and I know that many guitarists have the same experience.

Peace out.

I used a QSC K12 on tons of gigs. Maybe the K12 isn't what you're talking about, but it's close to $1,000, so... FWIW, the gigs were done on the Axe 1 and Kemper (never gigged the Axe 2 when I had it... which wasn't that long).

What I know is that there were many complaints from more than a few band mates in at least 3 different bands at the time (I work with a lot of bands...kind of a whore, I guess ) according to which they just didn't like the sound ONSTAGE compared to when I used a real amp, nor when other guitarists would play in those bands. It is not a case of being able to dial in tones for the mix... a wedge just doesn't sound like an amp onstage, and an amp-sound is what most of them wanted. As far as I know (and would have every reason to believe), there were no discussions about it between members of different bands, such that it was an issue of "group think." MAYBE their (and my, earlier) way of saying it was imprecise, and they could HEAR me, technically (something I'm sure was the case... I'm sure I was AUDIBLE to them), but they were not pleased with the sound of more PA gear vs the sound of an amp onstage. FWIW, I'm not the only one who has had this experience with gigging w/FRFR. Some bands don't want the RECORDED/MIXED sound onstage... the sound of the amp mediated by the mic and by monitors. That's what FRFR gives you. I record enough that it's no big bother to me, though having an amp is less boring, live, for me (unless it's an in-ears gig, which are the only places I use my Kemper, live).

But yes, different strokes. If you prefer or don't mind the sound of PA gear onstage, go for it. It certainly is a convenient solution (and you get to hear, more accurately, what the audience is hearing). It is a DIFFERENT sound than an amp onstage. I, for one, would love to know how closely the Kemper PA through a guitar cab sounds like an amp sitting next to you. That would make my employers happy, while letting my use my Kemper on those particular gigs. As it is, I currently only use it on two TV gigs, one normal band that uses in-ears, one church band that's all in-ears, and dang near every recording I do these days (like this one, last night, for a guitar maker's website https://soundcloud.com/123suckamc/lentz-strat-clip-1-wav). I've been a modeling junky since the 11r came out, and the Kemper is my favorite, by far. It's brilliant, and I'd love to use it on EVERYTHING, but some (MULTIPLE) bands want the sound of a real amp onstage. It's not me, nor my inexperience. They just want THAT sound. I have to give it to them or play my PA equipment in my room.

Well, I'm just waiting for a Power Head version to try... I will let you know my opinion about that

Quote from Boanerges

I dug out my previous rig for a gig yesterday, just to calibrate my ears, but was instandly disappointed and spent the rest of the gig regretting I didn't bring my Power Rack as a backup.

Boanerges, just curious here : the previous rig you are referring to, which made you regret you didn't bring the powerrack as a backup, is it the KPA/Matrix combo, or is it the "competing product"?

Regards

Quote from bigb6611

Boanerges, just curious here : the previous rig you are referring to, which made you regret you didn't bring the powerrack as a backup, is it the KPA/Matrix combo, or is it the "competing product"?

Regards

Sorry for being unclear What I wished to state, to make a short story long, was that I regretted that I didn't bring my KPA with the internal power amp (i.e. the Power Rack), which I've been using the last months and which sounds amazing. I have been using this "competing product" for several years live and in studios, although I have had a KPA for a couple of years too, noodling with it at home. Half a year ago, I thought that I'd either give the KPA a serious go or get rid of it, so I spent a few nights with it at home setting it up with a couple of suitable amps. And at loud stage volumes it all came together -- dynamics, warmth etc. So I went on and made a couple of profiles of my favourite amps/cabinets (a Friedman BE and my old Marshall DSL), which made everything even better. It made me smile every night

But then I started thinking about how pleased I used to be with this "competing product," and given that plus the fact that this "competing product" has a better footswitch solution, I decided to haul it with me for a gig, just to see if the honeymoon phase with the KPA was over. But it wasn't, apparently, and I spent the rest of the night trying to find the ooomph, warmth, 3-dimensionality that I get from my KPA, with no success. The "competing product," in comparison with the KPA, sounded stiffer, harder and harsher than the tones I'm getting from my KPA. This really surprised me; I would never have thought that I'd actually spend a night being displeased with this "competing product."

With the KPA, I go from the KPA to the FOH directly, and I have the sound that goes out in my front monitors. But I also run monitor out from the KPA with the cab simulation of directly into a 212 Scumback equipped cabinet, and I use the internal power amp in the KPA to power this cabinet. This is the same cabinet that I used for my own profiles, so I feed the profiled cabinet out through the FOH and use the original cabinet onstage.

I occasionally use a FRFR monitor onstage too, which sounds great (I have the Matrix one, can't remember the model name right now), but different, suitable for quieter gigs or for fly gigs when I need to bring everything with me in the plane's overhead lockers

Quote from suckamc

But yes, different strokes. If you prefer or don't mind the sound of PA gear onstage, go for it. It certainly is a convenient solution (and you get to hear, more accurately, what the audience is hearing). It is a DIFFERENT sound than an amp onstage. I, for one, would love to know how closely the Kemper PA through a guitar cab sounds like an amp sitting next to you.

I agree with this -- to me, some settings kinda demand the sound of a real cab onstage (although others would probably do without). IMHO, a real cabinet fed with the KPA PA gets pretty close, but there's (still IMHO) a difference directly comparing it. But for me, it's more than close enough, and I'm sure that if I set out to make it close (making a di profile of the amp etc.), I could get it closer. I use the same cab onstage as the one that I profiled, so when I listen to everything together (what I hear from the PA and stage monitors in addition to the actual cabinet), it sounds really close, and is way more controllable than if I brought my 100w Marshall.

Nice sounds and playing, by the way.

So the Kemper PA into a guitar cab sounds like A real guitar amp+cab, but not necessarily the one modeled? Cause I wouldn't expect it to sound like the modeled version... but I would need it to sound legitimately like AN amp. Like I said, I'm not THAT picky... I like doing in-ear gigs. But I gotta make the others happy, but nowadays I just use the Kemper so much that I'd love to have that continuity on each gig.

I need to talk to the American distributor about trying one. It's not like anyone in Dallas has them in stock. But that could definitely be my constant live rig if it's legit.

I believe that the whole point about this interesting discussion is that some give for granted that there's an entity called "the FRFR sound", which would more or less equal the "PA sound". But the truth is that there's nothing like this.

• Most PAs sound crappy.
  

  
  

• FRFR means nothing in itself. It doesn't correspond to an industrial standard or a given set of characteristics.
  

  
  

• There's the ideal cab from one side (flat response from 20 to 20.000 Hz, transient velocity close to infinity, total phase coherence, impedance coherence across the spectrum, optimal dispersion pattern, zero distortion, infinite available power etc...). Then there are the real cabs, which more or less draw away from the ideal.

The point is that the different ways in which a cab can draw away from the ideal reference can make it sound completely different from the others. As a matter of fact, the different "FRFR" solutions on the market sound as different as they can among each other.
As long as one has not being exposed to a very good "FRFR" system, they just can't judge how good such system can make their hi-class digital device sound.
I believe that the AA CLR is a good example of a good FRFR system. Far from ideal of course, but the closest many can afford, and by far enough to make the KPA sound very good.

Another share of unsatisfied users simply made some error, such as wrong gain staging, putting a cab in a corner, against a wall, on a wooden and resonant stage, on a wooden desk and the like.
Another share doesn't like the "FRFR" sound because they're not accustomed to listen to the real sound of a real mic'ed amp cranked all way up (some of them can sound really fizzy, noisy, "digital" LOL). I call this "the digital generation".

IOW, I believe that "in a controlled environment" no-one would feel unsatisfied with a good profile loaded onto a KPA driving a high-end "FRFR" solution.

Uhg.

Great post Gianfranco and a very good summary

Quote from suckamc

So the Kemper PA into a guitar cab sounds like A real guitar amp+cab, but not necessarily the one modeled? Cause I wouldn't expect it to sound like the modeled version... but I would need it to sound legitimately like AN amp.

More or less, yeah. But I guess that how close you can get to the actual rig modeled depends on your approach. I can only speak for myself; I profiled my Friedman BE/Scumback H/M75 rig. On tape, I got the profile to be pretty similar to the rig miked up, so for recordings and live through a PA system, I've more or less captured the amp at a sweet spot (to me). I then did a test recording where I ran the Friedman profile without cab sim via the Kemper's power amp through the very speakers I used for the profile, using the same microphone & mic placement. One would think (by a digital layman's logic) that this would yield somewhat similar results to going direct with the cab sims on, and it actually did. It was not identical, but it was pretty close and most importantly it sounded great. To answer your question above: it approximated the modeled rig. And most certainly it's good enough for stage monitoring and rehearsals. It gives me the oomph I need on stage for certain gigs, it bugs the hell out of my bandmates so that we can spend som old school quality time together arguing over stage volume, and at the same time I can run the entire profile direct through the PA.

And I can leave the cab altogether and use FRFR monitors, using the exact same profile, which I often do (and love) as well.

This, imho, is very flexible, and the KPA is light and easy to carry around, even with the internal PA (which adds very little weight). Given the sound quality of the KPA, this is ideal to me. For the time being, at least.

Quote from suckamc

I need to talk to the American distributor about trying one. It's not like anyone in Dallas has them in stock. But that could definitely be my constant live rig if it's legit.

I'd really recommend that you try this out. I'm totally surprised by the sound quality, feel and power of the B&O power amp that comes with the Kemper.