Kemper: so far, the axe-fx 2 stays

C

Chris Hurley

Power User
I've heard so much about the Kemper Profiling Amp that I decided to give it a try. I've had an axe-fx II for about six months, having had an ultra for a couple of years before that. I mostly run into a power amp and guitar cabinets.

This is not a full review- this is just a snapshot or profile of my experience.

One of the interesting (and hard to believe) features of the KPA is its ability to disable a cabinet sim from a profile so that you could change cabinets, or use no cabinet at all and run into a physical guitar cabinet. Immediately upon working with the KPA, I found that this feature was not going to go far enough to be usable on physical guitar cabinets. Disabling the cabinet does something, but it doesn't remove it entirely- there is obviously still a sonic remnant of the cabinet because all of the presets I tried still sounded like they had some sort of cabinet on them when run through my real cabinet. FRFR users never need to disable a cabinet entirely, so this wouldn't apply to those folks.

Because of the cabinet issues, none of the stock presets I tried really did it for me. Don't presets on any device always stink? I wasn't able to use the EQ to overcome the embedded cabinet for use with a physical guitar cabinet. Not everyone runs that way but some of us old dinosaurs still use an old style cabinet, even if feeding direct for FOH and monitoring.

Time was running out for me on the first day and setting up a real amp for profiling wasn't an option yet, but profiling my favorite axe-2 settings wouldn't take long. I hooked up the axe-fx 2 in the KPA loop and when I was at a point to audition the sound of the axe-2 through the kpa, it was strikingly different than what I was used to- thinner and brighter. I'm not sure why. Nothing seemed to be clipping- I tried adjusting levels to no avail. I switched from the rear to the front input and it didn't seem to make much difference. It wasn't the sound of something broken- just different. I never did figure out the difference but did verify it several times by hooking my axe-fx up on its own. I ended up adjusting the preset until it sounded good through the KPA.

The magic moment- I ran a profile on my compensated preset and then refined it. The KPA does a good job of reproducing the basic tone. The gain level is very similar, as is the EQ- with the exception of low end. The KPA version always lacked a certain low end depth that the axe-fx preset had and no amount of refining would fix it. Adding bass EQ after the fact was a partial remedy and adjusting the EQ setup in the KPA might help further (I believe that is possible).

For most non-guitarists, I think they would rate the profile as being identical and that's a big success. For me as a player, I could hear differences. Sometimes they didn't seem to be significant while other times it seemed that the structure of the gain was different. Nuances and textures (what I like to call "grit texture") seemed to be "averaged" away sometimes.

The profiling feature does work, and probably better than you might expect if you hadn't already heard that it works well.

Kemper says that the profiler is designed for real amps and that results from profiling modellers will vary. While it is possible to profile axe2 presets, they don't really represent the original that well in a lot of cases. For this reason, I think it is flimsy to say "any sound an axe-fx2 owner can have, a KPA owner can have too". A KPA owner can have any axe-fx2 sound in the same way that any visitor to an art museum can have any painting by taking a picture with their cameraphone. It looks just like what is on the wall but some detail is lost. On the other hand, it represents a handy way to take a facsimile of a sound you made on the computer or other amp solution and carry it with you, even if it isn't flawless.

I found the tweakability of the resulting profile to be useful, though not quite what I'd call comprehensive. As others have mentioned, sometimes you just can't "get there from here" with a particular profile and just have to pick another. I was impressed that almost every profile I tried cleaned up really well with the gain control. Dirtying up varied. Some profiles could tolerate quite a bit of dirtying up while others became cluttered and farty. This isn't unlike a real amp perhaps, but I'm spoiled by being able to dial that out at will with the low-cut parameter on the axe. The EQ seemed unobtrusive. It worked like a channel strip EQ where you could change the tonality but not the character.

Cleaning up with the guitar knob doesn't seem to be on the same level as the axe 2. I think the axe2 may be better than a real amp in this way.

I only briefly tried the advanced parameters and can't really comment on them yet.

I'm looking forward to profiling a real amp. I have a DI box I can use so that I won't have to incorporate a cabinet. I'll be interested to see if the KPA can successfully ADD a cabinet when none was profiled, even though it can't entirely REMOVE a cabinet when one was included in the profile. I only have one tube amp at this point in time. I have access to a couple of others but I'm not sure I will go that far. I expect that most of the KPA profiles that people share (or sell.. ahem...) will include a cabinet. For a poweramp-cabinet user like me, these are not terribly useful. I will hook up my monitors shortly to see how this sounds in that environment.

The box itself is quite nice. The LEDs around the knobs are awesome. The always active tuner is nice. The LCD is beautiful and detailed. The knobs behave very well in use. I didn't spend much time with the effects yet but I found nothing offensive about what I heard.

Routing and effects capability is similar to what you get with an eleven rack or POD- one series rig with a few stomps, one amp and cabinet, and a couple of post amp effects. Obviously, this sort of rig works fine and is more than what we as guitarists used for decades with real amplifiers, but there is no parallel routing. There is also no dual amp setup- no synth, no mbc, no looper. I don't use those things everyday but giving them up requires consideration.

Startup time is also similar to the 11R- it takes about a minute for it to be ready to play.

At the end of the evening, I found myself somewhat disappointed as a poweramp cabinet user and as someone who was looking forward to being able to build tones in Revalver (for example) and then copying them to the KPA. It copies the basic idea of the sound but the nuances are hit or miss. Real amps will be different.

I just thought I'd share my experience as an axe-fx 2 user since I know some of you are interested in this KPA thing as I was. Take it for what you will.

-Chris

UPDATE: here's an update: http://forum.fractalaudio.com/lounge/47861-kemper-so-far-axe-fx-2-stays-3.html#post623880
 
Last edited:
Chris Hurley said:
The KPA version always lacked a certain low end depth that the axe-fx preset had and no amount of refining would fix it.

Nuances and textures (what I like to call "grit texture") seemed to be "averaged" away sometimes.

A KPA owner can have any axe-fx2 sound in the same way that any visitor to an art museum can have any painting by taking a picture with their cameraphone.

Cleaning up with the guitar knob doesn't seem to be on the same level as the axe 2. I think the axe2 may be better than a real amp in this way.

If I had to decide between the two right now and could return either of them with equal ease, the KPA would be sent back in a heartbeat.
-Chris
Click to expand...
Sounds like we've begun the on-running theme of the Kemper when compared to axe-fx2 (for those who can hear the differences)
 
I also noticed that the KPA's i/o's are mono, whereas all AX FXs have stereo x 2... One thing that has puzzled me in the numerous videos where they A/B the Kemper and the "reference" amp, is how they are running the sound from the Kemper? Take a combo amp, for example. When they are A/B'ing the sounds, where is the sound for the KPA coming from? Obviously the KPA still needs an amplifier and a speaker.
 
The cameraphone comment of mine is probably unfair. It could be a full frame DSLR taking the picture. I'm not intending to downrate the product, only sharing my experience with it.
 
Interesting review Chris, In your opinion do you think that the KPA is more suited as a tool for the studio than for live use? Based on the way it looks and what it does, when compared to the over all design of the Axe that's how I have perceived the KPA.
 
Great review, though not surprising. Hoping to hear more of your kemper journey, including all the good, bad and ugly.
 
Chris Hurley said:
If I had to decide between the two right now and could return either of them with equal ease, the KPA would be sent back in a heartbeat.
Click to expand...

I got the chance to try one for a few hours and I had the same thought. The sound seemed less exciting. You said it did not have depth or the right kind of grit and I would agree -- something was flat sounding with an almost pod like quality to the top of drive sounds and a charicature quality to the cleans. Very hard to put my finger on what I didn't like it, because I have to admit --- it was a lot of fun and the knobs and LEDs are very cool to stare at.

I also agree that you call it hit or miss. Adjusting the gain knob was like turning on a metalzone.

Now, I was able to get my sound, and I can see how this is really all most people want.

But like you opened with if I had to decide on the spot it would be Axefx in a heartbeat.
 
After you've 'lived with' the KPA for a few weeks, it will be interesting to hear your thoughts at that point too.

Thanks for taking the time to share your experience thus far.
 
I'm just in the infancy with this thing and I'm going to give it a week or so of honest use before I make a decision on keeping it. I had a rough honeymoon with both axe-fx units too. It took me a while to find my bearings and I understand that I am somewhat used to how it works, giving it a bit of an advantage for me in that way.

I will also like to try to use the KPA direct. I've never gotten comfortable with playing through a direct rig. I can play through my cabinet, record the dry signal and apply an impulse after the fact that works for the recording but playing through the impulse isn't something I've been able to be comfortable with. Yes, of course I can play it but it doesn't do much to aid my happiness in some small way. I don't have a great selection of FRFR reproduction gear to begin with but that is another subject.

Hope this is useful to some people.
 
Thanks for your review so far, but since they have clearly stated that profiling the Axe Fx or any other modeler is not its strong point, that part of your review is not of much use to me.

The Axe-Fx is best suited for most people thru some kind of monitor/frfr setup, so the Kemper probably is as well. Although I have read from some saying they are really happy with the Kemper thru their poweramp/cab setup(obviously some Axe users love going the amp/cab route as well).

Thanks again, and I look forward to your review when you have really put it thru its advertised supposed strengths, and gotten over the initial learning curve that is to be expected.
 
Last edited:
Yes please! Keep the thoughts coming. I plan on getting one, if only to add to the stable. I also have an 11R, HD500, GSP1101 and have had a ton of other line6 stuff. It's a pretty exciting prospect if only from the sheer number of rigs that folks could share. At least until someone figured out how to lock it down and charge for it.

Being Switzerland in this modelling/profiling war, digging through all the crap slung about by folks that have one box, and feel the need to insult the other-can be exhausting. An open minded comparison of these two units is certainly a welcome change.

Keep in mind that this is basically the kemper standard. He may come out with some sort of ultra and then a II of his own. Might come out with one that doesn't use the profiler, just plays them. Maybe a rack unit. No idea. It's pretty new. It's obvious he doesnt move as fast as cliff, but few humans do. Still in beta OS.

There are some posts on that OTHER board about really removing the cabinet. You might give it a look. I'd be suprised if he doesnt address that cabinet perma-bleed issue. A LOT of people like power amp/cab setups. I do both just for flexibility, and really dont want to give that up. The AXE2 is firmly entrenched in my world, for at least one band. The KPA might become the head of choice for the other band, sort of a B rig. Though I am open to using both at once for the best of both worlds.
 
On the OTHER board someone also measured latency to be 5 ms. Isn't that Pod territory? ;)
They're adding that only some people are sensitive to that. Rightfully so, I guess.

From hearing clips and video's only, I tend to agree with people that find it more 2D sounding and that it indeed is something you will notice more after the honeymoon period. OTOH, with 1000 profiles, you can have many honeymoons in a way... ;)

What I do like sometimes, is how the KPA can sound real "dry", while the Axe seems mostly wet-wet-wet (which I love as well).
If that isn't possible in the Axe, I wish there was a dryness/wetness control :p
If Cliff would be using his "basic" power amp modeling to express the profiles (you would guess so), then I would guess they will also always sound wet-wet-wet... (?)
 
Kemper (the company) does show obvious signs of moving the product forward. There have been two firmware updates in the last few days fixing various issues. This is much better than other products that never get updates or that have to be sent to the factory to be updated or even just "sorry- buy a newer one"
 
My 2 cents here. I've ordered the Axe Fx 2 this week and waiting for it to arrive home. But as of today i have yet to hear THAT many clips that sound as good as the Kemper's. Part of the success of this new device is that everybody can actually have good tone. On the other hand EVERYBODY is posting AXEFX2 clips good AND bad....which is misleading....

I always hear people saying "OMG it just sounds freaking awesome" when IT'S NOT....and it sounds like plastic...i heard very few good clips. Fractal should think about that. Other than improve tweakability they should improve the time-to-good-tone...if you know what i mean!!
 
B. Ste said:
I always hear people saying "OMG it just sounds freaking awesome" when IT'S NOT....and it sounds like plastic...
Click to expand...
I agree, though not as much with the "plastic" (and sometimes I like "plastic" too). I still find it hard to point people to many convincing clips.

But it will make up for it once you hear one in the room though! (well, worst case: depending on you amplification and tweaking talents ;))

E.g. The whole of fw4 stock presets sounded awesome here through Atomics. Playing through my desk monitors or into real cabs seems often pretty crappy without tweaking though. But boy if you (can) tweak! (or get lucky presets)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom