Axe FX II and Kemper Profiler (Yes, another one...please read!)

[Loren9050]

You already have it, "Fremen Vibrato Lux clean (100).syx" Don't forget that it is tailored for my specific guitar... And if I tonematched the recto clean profile, I would have use the USA clan model instead. I may do it anyway next time the KPA is in my hands.
I will upload my full v18 banks not too far from now anyway

Just read the corresponding threads on the other forum... jeez ! I thought we fractalites were the bad guys ? :mrgreen
Which remind me a joke from my favorite French humorist, the late Pierre Desproges : "The enemy is dumb, they think that we are the enemy, but they are"

Wow! That's great to hear you will be posting new presets based on V18. I love your all your past presets and have had great success in the past tweaking them (just slightly) to suit my rig. Really looking forward to this! Thanks!

 

[Eanna]

Just thought I'd chime in here, while the OP was on his voyage of discovery I was struggling to get my new AxeFX XL to match my old Palmer PDI-03 / Boogie rig with FW17.03. Delighted to say that FW18 beta7 (major improvement on for me) got me there within 10 mins! Playability / feel is spot on now too. I can happily decommission my PDI / Boogie rack rig for direct to FOH gigs now only fair to highlight this for others reading here in future. I've updated my earlier posts as well.

 

[shasha]

Agreed, but I do get it. People get very emotionally invested in whatever products/platforms/whatever they have chosen, and whenever they feel anyone is criticizing it, they get very defensive. What's puzzling to me is that even when others don't actually criticize it (my "review" of both units was glowing), they still get upset and somehow convince themselves that you hated it and criticized every aspect of it. It's like they want someone to hate their chosen product just so they have a reason to argue and to justify what they chose. And at that point you have to ask, "Who are you trying to convince?"

I have never understood it, but man am I tired of it and that's why I was such a tool in my post about it. I could not possibly care less what anyone else does with their money. Apparently buying shit is a competitive team sport. Or maybe it's like politics where you can't have your own thoughts or values and you have to stick to your ideology lest you be attacked by both sides. It's stupid, stupid, stupid.

The funniest part is that at the end of the day you did what everyone else should do; check out both of them side by side and decide for yourself. That's why I don't like asking other people's opinions about stuff like gear...because it's just that, opinion. Opinion always has some degree of bias. I mean hell if I was going to give you a recommendation it would be biased as well. However I wouldn't cry about what you decided on.

 

[mbrown3]

Just thought I'd chime in here, while the OP was on his voyage of discovery I was struggling to get my new AxeFX XL to match my old Palmer PDI-03 / Boogie rig with FW17.03. Delighted to say that FW18 beta7 (major improvement on for me) got me there within 10 mins! Playability / feel is spot on now too. I can happily decommission my PDI / Boogie rack rig for direct to FOH gigs now only fair to highlight this for others reading here in future. I've updated my earlier posts as well.

Great! Glad you got it working.

 

[mbrown3]

That's why I don't like asking other people's opinions about stuff like gear...because it's just that, opinion. Opinion always has some degree of bias.

True enough, but I still value soliciting input, bias and all. For all of the folks crying, "Why bother, just try them", I learned a ton from the folks here and on the Kemper forum...stuff I didn't know about either device that helped me narrow my search down. I think as long as you go in expecting there to be bias...and thus taking things with a grain (or many) of salt...it can be very helpful.

 

[mbrown3]

OK, all, order for Axe-Fx II and MFC-101 placed. Will deal with the AX8 whenever it's released. Thank you so much for those that helped me narrow down my search, took it seriously and didn't just gripe or troll. I really appreciate the insight and assistance. For each of the idiotic immature folks (here and on the Kemper forums), there are (at least) twice that number of generous and kind folks that truly want to help. That's cool. And so far the Fractal staff have been awesome. That matters.

 

[Tonewicker]

OK, all, order for Axe-Fx II and MFC-101 placed. Will deal with the AX8 whenever it's released. Thank you so much for those that helped me narrow down my search, took it seriously and didn't just gripe or troll. I really appreciate the insight and assistance. For each of the idiotic immature folks, there are (at least) two generous and kind folks that truly want to help. That's cool. And so far the Fractal staff have been awesome. That matters.

i was %90 sure that sooner or later you are gonna get an axe fx have fun with your new unit it has a hard learning curve (well at least for me.. im still learning) but its %100 worth to its price

 

[Kent]

I still want to know what people mean, in this day, when they say that something "sounds digital". The Kemper and Fractal are entirely digital excepting the analog I/O. Hence, they sound digital because they are digital. I gain nothing when something is declared to sound digital. Does that mean it is grainy? Is the reporter stating that his/her impression of digital from the 1980s is being transferred to the product under review?

It is such a vague proclamation that the reader is simply forced to impose their own definition onto what they think the reporter meant to convey.

I prefer being clarity to shorthand in these matters.

 

[Rex]

I still want to know what people mean, in this day, when they say that something "sounds digital".

Superb question. Reminds me of something I read a few years back:

"No one ever left a modern movie theater complaining about the crappy digital sound."​

 

[shasha]

When saying something "sounds digital" it is not a compliment and it usually means that it is less than realistic because it is a facsimile or interpretation of the real thing. To me it's a very common and more importantly a very valid description.

Fire up an old Line6 POD and that is what people refer to when they say it sounds digital. I'm not bashing the POD; given the technology at the time of it's release and the fact that it was marketed for mass distribution it was hamstrung from inception. Hell even armed with the most powerful and one of the most expensive DSP's made the Ultra gave way to the AxeFXII which doubled the number of processors. What we have now is nothing short of amazing when you think about it. It only took one certifiably insane and obsessive man to just throw up his hands and say "f" it and cram two of these things in a box. It also took about 11 billion hours of R&D to get to where we are today. No huge company with bean counters and technology putting a ceiling on the performance of the product is going to do what FAS has done with the current technology at hand because it is cost prohibitive. Not to mention the amount of development involved to get to where the AxeFXII is.

Basically digital is a disparaging reference because it is deserved. Digital was touted as being superior because in theory it is fantastic....implementation has been about delivering at a price point. I mean if you buy a budget modeler it's not going to fool most people in a side by side comparison with the real thing. That's because it's not capable of achieving that and it was never intended to do so by the manufacturer. It was built to give you a reasonably priced approximation of the real thing. The AxeFXII is obviously more expensive than most of those other products because it costs a hell of a lot more to make one. Not to slight Cliff or anything, but if Line6's R&D department had the same parameters that he has which is basically build whatever the hell you want and damn the cost depending on their expertise they'd build a pretty damn amazing device.

And think about this....no one compares real amps to sims; it's the other way around. It's always about how close to the original they can get and most fall well short.

 

[Eanna]

I still want to know what people mean, in this day, when they say that something "sounds digital". The Kemper and Fractal are entirely digital excepting the analog I/O. Hence, they sound digital because they are digital. I gain nothing when something is declared to sound digital. Does that mean it is grainy? Is the reporter stating that his/her impression of digital from the 1980s is being transferred to the product under review?

It is such a vague proclamation that the reader is simply forced to impose their own definition onto what they think the reporter meant to convey.

I prefer being clarity to shorthand in these matters.

Sounding 'digital' to me = flat, lifeless, 2D, sterile, harsh, simplistic, static, hollow... (my Boss GT-6 amp models)
Sounding 'tube-like' to me = round, alive, 3D, soft, complex (overtones?), fluid, bounce, full... (my real tube amps)

Fortunately FW18 tones have enough 'complexity' to render my real amps redundant for live gigs for now at least - whereas FW17.03 did not get me there. I don't understand how this has been achieved (nor do I really need to), but FW18 certainly has been a biggie for me.

 

[ethomas1013]

OK, all, order for Axe-Fx II and MFC-101 placed. Will deal with the AX8 whenever it's released.

Oh, I didn't realize you were going to move forward. The last I heard you were considering waiting for the AX8. Glad to see you make a move rather than continue to analyze this further. Let me know when you got everything up and running so we can got together again. I'll let you play that Anderson if you let me play my Relic Tele, LOL!

 

[Rotti]

What did you run into what ?

I ran the KPA in the fx loop of the Axe, allowing me to have lots of routing options for pre/post amp fx, and also mix the KPA amp model with the Axe modeling. No real issues with gain staging in the slightest, and it was actually a lot easier than using a 4CM with a real head.

I think it would be harder to do it the other way around, as the Axe is so much more flexible with routings and fx. Not to say the KPA was bad at FX, but I don't think it would make any sense to use the KPA for its FX, while the Axe, even if you don't use it for amp modeling, still really can be a fantastic FX processor

Sorry, meant to reply sooner, then I lost your post...

I ran the same config...

The send from the Axe's loop was too hot. It hit the KPAs front end much harder than just running direct into the KPA. Pulling down the send level was easy enough, as was balancing the KPAs input level, but that just lead to a balancing act between the KPA out and the FAS loop return so that I could have the strongest signal possible without clipping the Axe's out2.

Once that was finally set, the levels were so weak I was having to crank my PA all the way up just to have a comparable volume to running either unit alone (with both sides of my PA at about 11-noon). I wasn't comfortable with that, so I stuck with the Axe.

For reference, I was/am using a Matrix gt1000fx into a pair of passive CLRS wedges.

 

[mbrown3]

I still want to know what people mean, in this day, when they say that something "sounds digital". The Kemper and Fractal are entirely digital excepting the analog I/O. Hence, they sound digital because they are digital. I gain nothing when something is declared to sound digital. Does that mean it is grainy? Is the reporter stating that his/her impression of digital from the 1980s is being transferred to the product under review?

It is such a vague proclamation that the reader is simply forced to impose their own definition onto what they think the reporter meant to convey.

I prefer being clarity to shorthand in these matters.

There is a commonly accepted understanding of this though. If you've ever played one of the old digital processors (digitech, ART, etc), they sounded like a computer was generating the tones (rather than a guitar amp). They had digital noise and artifacts that sounded...crappy. The technology has evolved such that these newest generation of devices sound natural and like guitar amps. Digital also typically means "processed" sounding, lifeless, flat, harsh, with a lack of complexity in the tones.

 

[mbrown3]

Oh, I didn't realize you were going to move forward. The last I heard you were considering waiting for the AX8. Glad to see you make a move rather than continue to analyze this further. Let me know when you got everything up and running so we can got together again. I'll let you play that Anderson if you let me play my Relic Tele, LOL!

Yeah, I was but since there's no time-table on the AX8, I figured I'd go ahead with the full on rig. Then once the AX8 comes out, if I decide to make the switch, resale value on the II and MFC is so high that it won't be a big deal to switch. I'll definitely let you know. It will be fun to get together again and jam.

 

[6L6C]

Late to the party!
Got a Axe Fx standard in 2009 and went to the II when it came out a few years ago, the short love it!
Tried a friends Kemper while helping him out with some midi stuff months ago, also sounded great!
For what I do and like, Axe Fx for me.

Skimmed through this thread and of coarse I expected a little Kemper bashing and felt some of it was unjustified.
But just out of curiosity went over to the Kemper forum (since mbrown3 posted over there also).
Of coarse expected a little Fractal bashing, holy crap! A 26 page pile on. (just skimmed that also).
Of coarse there were people who told why they preferred Kemper and in some cases the people had there hands on both units at one time.
But as for the rest, dam that thread went seriously wrong fast.

John

 

[henryrobinett]

Late to the party!
Got a Axe Fx standard in 2009 and went to the II when it came out a few years ago, the short love it!
Tried a friends Kemper while helping him out with some midi stuff months ago, also sounded great!
For what I do and like, Axe Fx for me.

Skimmed through this thread and of coarse I expected a little Kemper bashing and felt some of it was unjustified.
But just out of curiosity went over to the Kemper forum (since mbrown3 posted over there also).
Of coarse expected a little Fractal bashing, holy crap! A 26 page pile on. (just skimmed that also).
Of coarse there were people who told why they preferred Kemper and in some cases the people had there hands on both units at one time.
But as for the rest, dam that thread went seriously wrong fast.

John

People love to have other people to hate. It's kind of funny in a perverse way. Other peoples race, culture, religion, schools, musical genres, guitar player heros, political affiliations, countries, amp modelers . . .

I've never even tried the Kemper and I hate all Kemper people. I hate people who even THINK about a Kemper, even if they love Fractal.

 

[dpavel]

STOP READING THIS AND GO BACK TO PLAYING

 

[Kent]

People love to have other people to hate. It's kind of funny in a perverse way. Other peoples race, culture, religion, schools, musical genres, guitar player heros, political affiliations, countries, amp modelers . . .

I've never even tried the Kemper and I hate all Kemper people. I hate people who even THINK about a Kemper, even if they love Fractal.

I believe this is what is known as "The Great Narcissism of the Very Small Difference".

 

[mbrown3]

OK so I got it this week (Tuesday or Wednesday, can't remember) and I've been putting it through it's paces. Thanks to ethomas I had a pretty good idea of the sounds possible, but I figured I'd start with just factory presets until I learn the ins and outs of how to build presets and so forth. The first thing that struck me compared to the Kemper is that it seems easier to dial in great tones right out of the box on the axe. This is one of the things that some had commented about the KPA...they thought it was easier to quickly dial in great tones more so on the KPA than on the Axe. My experience was the opposite. While most of the KPA presets sounded lifeless and "flat" to me out of the box (with a couple of exceptions), many of the Axe presets sounded great. Maybe those folks meant "more accurate to the original amp" or something, but I'm just talking about usable tones, including effects and such. I probably could have added effects to the KPA and gotten to the same place, but the Axe has them right out of the box.

One thing I've noticed is that there is a wide difference between the gain and output settings from preset to preset. It seems to me like these should be normalized across the board and then users can adjust from there. Instead, some presets sit right in the range for my guitar(s), others have the input gain way too high; others have the output settings way too high. That makes it a bit hard to compare apples to apples. Still, many are just fantastic sounding right off the bat.

I will say, the number of options to make adjustments is crazy overwhelming. I've read through the manual a few times, watched tutorial videos, etc, and I still feel like I have barely scratched the surface...because I HAVE only scratched the surface. I feel like I barely understand anything...even basic things like how to set the MFC up to use it for a live performance. Having it change scenes by default is great, but then I can't figure out how to change the preset itself. The up and down buttons seem to jump up by intervals of 5, rather than by an individual patch. Is there a way to set it so that the up and down buttons go up/down by a single preset instead of by 5? That way I could use those buttons to change presets and the 1-4 buttons (I have 5 set as Tap) to change scenes. Anyway, this probably isn't the best place to ask about that, but one of the things I've run into as I've tried to get up to speed.

All in all, I'm really happy with the purchase and I'm having a ton of fun. I don't feel confident enough to use it live yet until I have a better grasp on what I'm doing. I have no reservations in terms of tone, audio quality, etc, though, and that says a ton.