Kemper KPA vs. Axe-FX II (Yes, another one...please read!)

    LOL True...


    The profiler's tonestack, for example, works in a completely different way than most amps. mbenigni's example about the gain was just probably not the best one to make their point :)

    Dear Moderators ,
    I do not like you (in generally, sorry ;) ) but please do not allow these guys to transform this pleasant , useful and peaceful Forum to something like a TGP or even worse to something so sad and ultimately against free mind like that concentration fractalian forum .


    My answer on the OP question /dilemma :
    Fractal is a digital device which sounds and feels when you play it like a DIGITAL device .
    KPA is digital device which sounds like and feels under fingers like you play your guitar through REAL VALVE AMP .


    When you close your eyes , and use only your fingers and ears , what is the result ?
    AXE- one can feel and hear DIGITAL device
    KPA - one can feel and hear VALVE AMP .


    Case solved , and it is up to you to choose.
    ps
    all of the rest ,those overcomplicated factors, pros , cons, and similar stupidities between two units are for the guys who are not real guitarists, but only tweakers who DO NOT KNOW how and why to play guitar.
    Such a guys deserve Axe.

    1988 Branko Radulovic Hand Made Strat in Macedonia (SFRJ)

    2006 Steve Vai vwh moded with SS frets and Sustainac 2006 (Japan)

    2008 Fender YJM , moded (USA)

    2010 Tom Andersons Drop Top 2010 (made in California)

    2017 Charvel GG sig Caramelised Ash (USA)

    2022 Gibson ES 335 2011 Custom Shop Cherry of course ( Memphis)

    Edited 3 times, last by Rescator ().

    In my experience, after having profiled:


    -Bogner Uberschall
    -Ecstasy
    -Shiva
    -Helios
    -Marschall JCM800
    -Marschall Jubilee
    -Marsvhall no master volume early 80s


    and having created 10 profiles per channels with different settings for all amps (all settings neatly put into
    a spreadsheet ) I found that the KPA does do a very accurate job of recreating the actual amp sound and when dialing away from the profiled settings it still kept the character and response ...I recreated it then on the actual amp. So, perhaps it's just my experience or subjective perceptions but it seems the KPA does a great job at staying authentic:)

    Some of the KPA params have no bearing on reality, like the Pick parameter. And some while having real life equivalents are much easier to on the KPA, such as adjusting bias. Some have real life analogs, but the Kpa controls go into ranges that arent physically possible without damaging the amp.


    I dont have one but wouldnt call the Axe digital sounding, but for sure I know the KPA doesnt require much tweaking to sound like a real rig, and its user interface is very intuitive and quick to deal with. The Axe seems like a lot more work.

    What I like about the KPA is that I can get lost in one profile, and just play for hours... just like with a real amp. It feels good and makes me confident that I use profiles that sound 99% close to the real thing. And of course that 1 percent just means different, not necessarily worse.


    With the Axe-FxII back in the days when I had one, I have never felt this way. I was always tweaking something, changing presets, etc. With the KPA I play more guitar.

    I agree meambobbo... Some parameters are not necessarily reflected in the projected sound.


    as for a digital sound...I agree...having played the Axe-Fx and compared the amp models with the actual amps, there's always something odd about the sound and in a blind A/B test I was always able to tell....anyways, all good gear, just a preference.

    Quote from TheLightspeeder

    and having created 10 profiles per channels with different settings for all amps (all settings neatly put into
    a spreadsheet ) I found that the KPA does do a very accurate job of recreating the actual amp sound and when dialing away from the profiled settings it still kept the character and response ...I recreated it then on the actual amp. So, perhaps it's just my experience or subjective perceptions but it seems the KPA does a great job at staying authentic:)


    It stays authentic, but the knobs don't behave the same way. If that was true, there would be no need in creating profiles of the same amp with different settings.
    It's not importantm that it doesn't sound the same, because it sounds really good, but some things mentioned in this thread aren't true.

    Actually, that was my point in my post. I usually do 10 profiles per channel per amp. I was able to dial in the sounds from the different profile via the profiles just like on an amp...so profile A can be changed to Profile B and so on. I checked it with the amp as well...pretty authentic. But that's my observation:)

    There *are* differences in the reactivity of the knobs, what I was saying before applied only to dynamic response. I do think by and large the Kemper sounds the same as the amp when it comes to the dynamic response of the gain knob - curve and everything. Because that's what it is collecting during the profiling procedure.


    The other differences are mitigated by the musicality and the limitations of the other parameters. In my opinion, the Kemper is quite difficult to make sound bad. Because it is so limited in terms of deep editing.


    The Axe - coming from an ex-owner - is very easy to make sound bad. It only takes one dodgy IR, or a tweak of a parameter that you don't understand... and you end up resetting amp block.


    Listen... the simplicity and ease of use of the Kemper cannot be understated. I work day to day with loads of bits of hardware and software related to music, as it is part of my job. Almost uniformly, developers provide features at the expense of workflow. A large part of the reason the Axe didn't stick around once I got the Kemper is because I immediately realised that the preceeding 6 months or so before getting the Kemper, I was just toying around with the Axe. Even 6 months in, I did not have any fixed or established presets.


    Probably my own dayum fault of course... but all in all, the Kemper is easier to use in my opinion. And when you've done an 8 hour shift using a combination of Pro Tools, Cubase, and Reaper... you just want something that doesn't get in your way.


    Some people are scientific about guitar, and they probably respond well to loads of parameters and options. Other people (I am one of these) are a bit more mystic about guitar, and don't like to get into the nuts and bolts of every little bit of gear. They just want to play.


    In short:


    I got my Axe FX. Spent 6 months enjoying tweaking it and installing firmware updates and trying out new routing methods, and testing out different amps with different cabs. I wrote very little music in that time period.


    I got my Kemper. Deleted all of the factory profiles. Profiled my Diezel D-Moll and my Laney VH100R. Wrote half an album since then.


    *shrug*

    I don't have any experience with Fractal.
    But what I am seeing is this,


    I believe that people are from one of a couple personalities when it comes to their decisions.


    Being-
    If I get a Kemper, I will be bothered knowing that there will be so much more tweaking, tuning, checking out of endless possibilities on the other machine that I could be missing out on something.
    Having a Kemper would seem just like the joke of reaching the end of the internet. There is nothing more to see.


    Another would be they bought it first and MANY people become brand brainwashed for one reason or another. Like the Ford Chevy arguments here in the states. Nobody likes to think or in some cases admit they bought an inferior product (whether they did or not) so they have to say theirs is the best. This is a personality flaw in itself.
    This is usually when I cant help but remark "Did you build or design this vehicle?" No? Then relax. Stop arguing on who's is better. Its not your puppy. This is a major flaw in human behavior if you ask me but very real. An insecurity in their purchase.


    Yet another is someone who likes KISS. No not the joke of a band but- Keep It Simple Stupid. I just wanna play.


    The final is the one who just loves to tinker, tweak and experiment. This is not me at all except for good effects. I want the amp tone handed to me but let me set the effects and experiment with them.
    The Kemper has given me the tones without any further tweaking. I personally would like more in the effects department because I like all kinds of music. Yes even ambient.



    Oh, and then we have some that are just absolutely indecisive in any decision they need to make.

    I don't have experience with Fractal, but love and own a Kemper.


    I can tell you from my research (something I do quite well) that what swayed me toward the Kemper vs the Axe II was that nearly all who auditioned both or owned both agreed on 2 major points.


    The first was that the Kemper had better basic tone quality. It just sounded good without putting much of anything on it .... and it sounded like a tube amp .... which most of the guitar playing world uses as the benchmark of what "sounds good".


    The second was that everyone agreed that it is easier to make a Kemper sound good. With very little work, you can make the Kemper sound very good.


    These were the criteria that I used to decide on the Kemper vs. the Axe II from Fractal.

    I haven't played an AFX2, but I've heard one live. I liked what I heard and I researched it and that's how I learned about the Kemper.
    I'm not a 'scroll through digital menus' type of guy, and when I heard about Fractal's frequent firmware updates that changed the sounds, that's when I decided the AFX wasn't for me. I have no desire to re-tweak my patches.
    Plus, the KPA's mid gain stuff sounded warmer to me in all the clips I heard.


    There you go. :thumbup:

    Quote from MtotheEikel

    Okay. If that's true, why are you still profiling different settings?


    Because, when someone new to the Profiler reads the same thing over and over again that you have to Profile each setting that's what you end up doing.
    There's a saying that goes something like this, "if you repeat a lie 3 times it becomes the truth". :)


    Just like Lightspeeder says, now he doesn't Profile each setting any more...

    Both units are pretty much equal.


    Until you start playing them one next to another, then it all of sudden hits you in the head. Hint - note which forum I am posting on.


    BTW, reading and listening to youtube clips is pretty much worthless, you just need to try them both.

    Here's my take and it may not be popular here. The kemper easily sounds more authentically like the amps it's profiling. I believe that the nature of the axefx' circuit emulation yields results that are theoretically correct but often times vastly different in response than the real amps it's profiling. OTOH, it sounds great. It just doesn't necessarily mimic the sound of the original amps exactly.


    The biggest difference is in the effects and the routing. The effects in the kemper are VERY disappointing. So much so, that I'd consider trading my kemper for an axefx II even though the kemper sounds more accurate to me in terms of tube amp profiling. The time based effects in particular are very weak and when listening in a critical, studio environment it's pretty obvious they are sub-par. I did some A/B testing with the kemper reverb vs. a cheap digitech digiverb in the effect loop and no matter how I tweaked the kemper's reverb, I liked the digitech better. The tails just sounded smoother and the tails are a weak spot on this particular digitech. There are much better reverb pedals on the market. The delays are also poor and it's disappointing that you can't dial in the delay time directly without using ratios (i.e. why isn't one of the ratios 1:1 ???)


    And the fuzz pedal doesn't react anything like the standard fuzzface that everyone likes. The TS-9 is decent but pales in comparison to a real pedal. There is no univibe pedal, the chorus is very weak. I could go on and on.


    So don't get me wrong...I love the way the kemper reacts to amp / guitar dynamics and it feels more like the amps I know and love than the axefx does but with the kemper, I cannot give up my pedals. I still need to use my clyde wah, my TS9, my fuzzface, my reverb, my zendrive, etc.


    With the axefx, you could probably get away with using all their internal effects.


    OTOH, I personally don't mind using the pedals so it's not as big a deal to me as it might be to some people. I think if I had the quality of the axefx effects I might have a different view of that though.


    One other thing, I do like the USB connectivity of the kemper.