Axe-Fx 3 & Kemper users advice

I have both and it took me a long, long time to find some good profiles for the Kemper.I never found a good clean one, but with Axe III I found it in one houre! Thats a matter of taste, but as said before you do not know what guitar was profiled with what setting at the amp, with what settings at the console and so on. (Thats all is a matter for people not profiling their own tube amp rigs!.) Than you start to adjust fit or your needs and at the end you start wondering what was better ending up with 3-4-5-6-7-8 versions. The preset management at the Kemper is hard, you end up fast with hundreds of profiles ( I still try to clean up nearly 900 of them, most useless!) and its not easy to manage. Some people erase all the profiles and start from scatch to get more clearence in the Listings. Maybe an editor comming sommer this year (After many years of waiting for it.) will help, but at the end the Axe III is more clear and usefull because the handling structure is simply straight foreward. I can simply rearange blocks, routings are easy, recording, reamping is easy and you can go beyond cloning amps (like the Kemper) and create maybe odd things. You will find at youtube all the super players with super skills but making your own tone could be a key of happyness for you. Thats possible with the Axe III. Mr Kemper tried to reinvent some handlings, effects but its confusing me. So at Axe Edit or the real machine you get some common behavior patterns to use the effects. One last thing: You have to criss cross your arms to adjust things at the Kemper, strange! At the end use a piece of paper, your guitar and hum your melody, whrite it down and show it to your mates. Less producing more creating ? I wrote this to myself ;-)
 
I agree with Leon here about the "Kemper for Amps, Axe for effects" nonsense that's been making the rounds on forums. As far as the Amp Modeling is concerned, the Axe-Fx III's ARES modeling is state of the art and the benchmark of the entire industry. The preamp and power amp sections are modeled in painstaking detail and are the most musical and accurate Fractal Audio has ever created. Just listen to the recordings on this forum, or by any of the most well known artists in the world who trust and rely on Fractal Audio products for both studio and live use. There's a reason why so many of the biggest names in the industry have switched their rigs over to the Axe-Fx III, it's the world’s most powerful all-in-one processor for guitar, bass, and other instruments. The Axe-Fx III is built to last, and evolve.
 
Can anyone who has both maybe offer an honest assessment on what's easier to play, with less fiddling, again for recording, not live use

For live use the Kemper and Axe 3 are at the top of the food chain. I have used the Kemper since it came out in 2012. Along that timeline I would try other gear that came out to justify it to myself. You name it and likely I've tried it. I use the Axe 3 now. Since you don't know me that probably means nothing to you, but live there is everything you would expect from your amp plus the ability to have multiple guitars and chains. With so many amp options I probably only use 3 or 4 as over that same journey I've determined what I like and narrowed in on it. Your answer depends on what is critical to you. Is price a variable? Does it matter to have infinite-ish options?

If you are only talking about recording I would say that it opens up many other options for you as the differences become less noticeable. Listen to most YouTube videos which are via recording interface. Much sounds similar. Take that same setup and go live....the men are separated from the boys.

Tech 21 Character sans-amps, Joyo amp sim pedals (American, etc.) can provide a very good sound when just recording. They are plausible even live. So, you can take the test drive and see what the important elements are. I can tell you from my experiences that you can have very good results with what you described with a bunch of options, some of them even very low priced.

If you were playing live I would tell you Kemper or Axe 3.
 
thanks again guys, just to say. I like my amps and am looking for mainly silent recording solutions. Not to sound insulting but I tend to hear a scooped smiley face curve with most modelers, AF included. when people mention the mid range present in the Kemper, to me,...that's what makes it sound "real".. most amps have a thick mid to them. In fact when looking at an EQ curve of my Marshall, there is no information above around 6k-7k...it's just not there. Modelers don't take this into account and usually which is why they tend to sound spikey

still on the fence and listening for good sound examples.
these KPA clips sound "real"



thx again!
 
thanks again guys, just to say. I like my amps and am looking for mainly silent recording solutions. Not to sound insulting but I tend to hear a scooped smiley face curve with most modelers, AF included. when people mention the mid range present in the Kemper, to me,...that's what makes it sound "real".. most amps have a thick mid to them. In fact when looking at an EQ curve of my Marshall, there is no information above around 6k-7k...it's just not there. Modelers don't take this into account and usually which is why they tend to sound spikey

still on the fence and listening for good sound examples.
these KPA clips sound "real"



thx again!


In my tests, the biggest contributing factor to the KPA's tone comes from the cab section rather than the amp section. In fact, I've been able to fully recreate Kemper profiles in the Axe-Fx II simply by capturing the cab section of Kemper profiles using the Axe-Fx's IR capture utility and combining them with amp models that are similar to the amps used in the Kemper profiles. Thus, in my opinion, a lot of it comes down to the IR.

That said, one advantage the Axe-Fx has over the Kemper is that it has EQ matching functionality, which is extraordinarily powerful in terms of cloning or copying a given tone. Yes, the Kemper's profiling technology can yield extremely accurate results, however it's not nearly as flexible or versatile as EQ matching. With EQ matching, I can use practically any sample of a guitar tone I like as the basis for copying it. Whereas profiling is much more involved.
 
I tend to hear a scooped smiley face curve with most modelers
i would not say that a "smiley face EQ" is a typical sound of an Axe-Fx. if you're listening to recordings where someone did that to the tone, then that's because they did that.

but that's the beauty of the Axe-Fx approach. the amps are modeled at the component level, it's not a snapshot of an amp at some specific setting. you can change the Amp EQ the way you want. and if one Amp model isn't doing it for you, try another.

i wanted to add this, but don't really want to because people will say i'm biased. it's true, i use Axe-Fx gear. but at any live show, so far, i've always been able to hear/guess when the guitarist is using a Kemper. there's a particular sound i feel it has. i listen and say hmm that sounds like a Kemper, and i look and it is. that's not a bad thing, or a thing at all. just saying that i've been 100% so far at live gigs on that. *shrug*
 
@Peter McCarthy

There's actually a lot of information above 6khz on a close mic'd amp/cab. Although it tends to be mostly upper highs and fizz. The KPA mid range is not the scooped vs no scooped thing - it's a slight cocked wah thing that you hear more and more, the more you play and record these things. It's not a bad sound but it certainly imparts its own little thing on the profiles.

The beauty of the Axe Fx is you CAN dial it in like that if you like. You can tweak the amps till it sounds perfect to you. You're not stuck with a profile of an amp with a certain setting. The knobs on the Axe actually react like the real amp where it's not some static 3 band EQ over a profile. Each amp will have its little quirks.

Both products are excellent at the end of the day. For MY tastes and needs - Axe is a better fit. I'll go ahead and say, in my opinion, it is a better and more complete guitar solution overall.
 
In fact when looking at an EQ curve of my Marshall, there is no information above around 6k-7k...it's just not there. Modelers don't take this into account and usually which is why they tend to sound spikey....

Sorry but there is quite few wrong or misleading information here. Your marshall might be broken or modded, your speaker-cab might be smth special(!),
your mic-interface might be broken...or you are staying hours long infront of a cranked amp and than later on comparing it to a close mic recording...

Hope it doesn’t come over harsh and judgmental but ask an experienced mixing engineer how they mix guitar tracks, especially ones recorded through marshalls, where they set the low and hicut, and why they do it.....cause there is f@ing amount of hi and low end information :) Way over 7k.

Another topic maybe but, i found out for my self, life is easier with a trainwreck or friedman simulation instead of using a plexi.

Stirring the soup, most of the amps sound actualy the same in real world
or in axe fx. It’s the IR-speaker actualy which has more impact. (i know this is actually written/told already million times)
So i ask my self why did i fight with plexis, ac30 etc for soooo long, instead of moving to a morgan, trainwreck, friedman or similar.

Back to topic, IMHO game is over for Kemper unless they release an updated new unit.(stirring the soup even more :)

Don’t know if it really means anything but at Namm 2017, Kemper had a way bigger booth, was designed well, and the booth was bussy. This year, it was smaller and it didn’t seem like people are showing that much interest as 2017.
 
Last edited:
Hi Peter,
I've had 3 Axe FX 2s and now have the axe FX3.
When I was buying a backup AxeFX 2, I looked at getting a Kemper because of availability. In the end, I decided the Kemper was not for me as it really only does one thing well (don't bash me - just my opinion) - and that is profile amplifiers.

So - Your case is special because you just love your amps but want a more social way to get 'them' in a box.

In your position, I would look very closely at my (or someones) ability to accurately profile my amps (not as simple as it sounds) with the kemper. They will need very high quality mics, etc and the capability to take multiple amp profiles for each of your amps with multiple settings. Then - and only then, I could play those profiles and see if I like them. Then I'd look closely at each of the effects in the unit, and see if they hit the bar for me. Keep in mind that the kemper controls such as bass and treble do not emulate the modeled amps.. they are the kempers bass and treble controls. Also - I'd need to make a decision about using FRFR (So the amp profiles & effects sound real), or limit myself to a guitar cab and power amp. Not my preferred option because then it will always sound like something through those speakers. You mention you love your marshall and Fenders, so FRFR is probably the way to go.

In my position, I wanted the best modeler for multiple amps and am glad I chose the axe fx 3 as the amp & cab models are amazing & the effects are .. well they are incredible.

Seems to me, that right now, the real challenge with any modeler is getting a couple of FRFR cabs that are genuinely as good as studio monitors because that's exactly what's needed to ensure the tomes coming from your Axe FX or Kemper is genuine, and therefore translates perfectly to any good PA.

Another route is In Ear monitors - You could connect them straight into he Headphone outputs and see how it is before proceeding further.

Please let us know which route you take, and the pros n cons you encouter along the way.

Good luck with such an important choice.

Thanks
Pauly

greetings!

I'm very curious about the AF3, my main use for wanting this I feel may go against what I'm reading I'm afraid.
I can use some straight advice.

I've always played tube amps and own a vintage Marshall 50 watt head 73', and a 66'Fender PR, I love these amps. My main gig amp is a Suhr Badger 30 due to the ability to play at lower volume levels.

So, mainly my tubes amps aren't house friendly and I'm looking for a straight to audio i/o (apollo) recording solution, maybe with the potential to do a DI as well for reamping. I just can't use the Marshall it's too loud for home use.

I have heard some stunning sounds from the Axe FX, but, they do seem to be coated with tons of effects. I've also heard a lot of really bad sounds from the AF, sounding very digital and brash at times, usually when not swimming in effects. which has me wondering if the whole bang of the AF is mainly efx?
I understand that the AF excels at effects, for my use, I would really be using effects post recording, so they don't appeal a whole lot, plus I'm not an atmospheric kind of player I guess. I'm after great straight amp tones, with a bit of delay or verb.

So, I've heard awesome sounds from the Kemper as well, and I know the effects are nowhere near the AF, but as that's not my main concern. I'm wondering if, since the AF users usually warn that I'd have to deep dive into parameters to get sounds realistic, if maybe the Kemper wouldn't be a better choice? It seems much simpler to operate and get a great sound quicker.

Can anyone who has both maybe offer an honest assessment on what's easier to play, with less fiddling, again for recording, not live use. I figure 'd have to buy a few good profiles but that's not a big deal.

Well, thanks for reading and any input.
PM
 
Dunno about the Kemper - look what it does to your hair!!
Pauly


thanks again guys, just to say. I like my amps and am looking for mainly silent recording solutions. Not to sound insulting but I tend to hear a scooped smiley face curve with most modelers, AF included. when people mention the mid range present in the Kemper, to me,...that's what makes it sound "real".. most amps have a thick mid to them. In fact when looking at an EQ curve of my Marshall, there is no information above around 6k-7k...it's just not there. Modelers don't take this into account and usually which is why they tend to sound spikey

still on the fence and listening for good sound examples.
these KPA clips sound "real"



thx again!
 
Dunno about the Kemper - look what it does to your hair!!
Pauly

Ouch...

Wouldn’t want that happen to me, I’d probably lose my job with hair like that, and how would I be able to afford all these toys?

Good thing I didn’t choose a Kemper!
 
At least he has hair! Mine is no longer.

Ouch...

Wouldn’t want that happen to me, I’d probably lose my job with hair like that, and how would I be able to afford all these toys?

Good thing I didn’t choose a Kemper!
 
Firstly - I think credit to this forum, what an interesting and well mannered discussion.

Something struck me last night - I'm playing a small set in a month or so and wanted a Blackmore sound, got a passable one really quickly. 100W Plexi, change the tubes to KT88 and it's pretty close - close enough for me.

To me these days, getting close enough sounds with the Axe is just so insanely easy - I can't quite believe it, maybe I've just got better - but I think there are two things which have happened the past 6 months (actually three I've just thought of another).

1. Coopers Masterclass, actually seeing a professional approach a patch has made the world of difference to me - not a lot of tweaks, but thinking about it a different way
2. The III and 3.01 - I think it's so nailed and easy now
3. The latest generation of IRs

And the last point is a key one, I've got the latest few releases from OwnHammer, ML and most recently York Audio - the quality and impact of these is hard to overstate for me, that has really been the missing link nailed.

And for me this workflow seems much more intuitive than the profiling amp idea, kind of more linear - I pull up a IR first (basically guess one), go to the amp and dial that in as I like, then audition IRs more carefully, align them and final tweak of the amp and I'm done.

Basic process will take 10 minutes for the sound I wanted, OK after then I'll tweak and change - but I don't need to.

This to me is logical - I pick my speaker cab, set up my amp and then tweak - just like the real world, and I feel involved in the process - rather than working my way through presets/profiles looking for a match.

But back to the point of me typing this - kudos to the latest wave of IR producers, they have changed the game for me
 
Thanks all for chiming in with opinions, much appreciated.

I forget how literal a conversation on the web can be.

I'll restate what I meant to say earlier regarding the so called "air band" that I hear on all modelers. There is very little useful information above 6K in distorted rock guitar tones, the usually get cut.

7k and above is fine for air on a chimey clean sound but to "me" I find those frequencies fatiguing on distorted guitar, and "IF" present I attempt to cut them, and usually the amp isn't for me Nothing wrong with my Marshall, Marshall rock tone is not about chime and air 7-10K, it's about the gut punch, again...(for me) :)

I'm not a metal player, maybe if I was I would need those freqs to cut?

I'm no bad cat, and make stupid faces when I play,...so,..forgive me for that. But using this as an example. I actually dimed the Presence and Treble for added gain on the "Dickey" part but there still no grating high end, just cut to the tone...at least to me ?

And I not saying this is the bees-knees either, but, if I could bottle this into a workable volume it would work for me.

thanks again guys!

 
Thanks RLE, I appreciate that!!

PM

I agree that it’s great playing, and great tone for that kind of music.

However, that doesn’t sound like a Marshall to me per se, it’s a Marshall recorded in a certain way with all fizz removed. Like there’s a blanket over the sound. Which may work for this case, but isn’t a feature of the amps, which do have fizz.

I don’t see why this would be a problem to remove in a modeler. You can shoot your own IR the same way you made this recording and will have exactly that.
 
Back
Top Bottom