Another Kemper vs. Axe Fx II thread...

[squank]

The AxeFX lacks something, something you may not know until the next the update. Or that you may know but be called a hater for knowing it.....

First off, you don't always know what you are missing till you have something to contrast it with in context. A new firmware with major modeling changes can often be better whether or not a specific 'lack' was ever noted before in any way.----Scott Peterson

It is unknown which update will be without any lack.

Excellent!

 

[Ventura]

Daaaaaaaaaaayuuuuum, these threads catch on like wildfire eh?

 

[zentman]

The AxeFX lacks something, something you may not know until the next the update. Or that you may know but be called a hater for knowing it.....

First off, you don't always know what you are missing till you have something to contrast it with in context. A new firmware with major modeling changes can often be better whether or not a specific 'lack' was ever noted before in any way.----Scott Peterson

It is unknown which update will be without any lack.

Back in 1973-74 my old 67 Twin was great. It lacked nothing. Then this rather large guy in Santa Cruz on East Cliff drive recommended a tube change. Dang if it didn't have a bit of something more.

After that he added a master volume. Wow, there's a feature I could really use. Much better.

Next he told me about some speakers that he liked so I tried them. Dang if my perfect little Twin didn't sound slightly better.

Next he went in and changed some circuits and man that amp had some major mojo.

It just kept getting better every time I stopped by his shop.

Too bad Howard moved to LA and left us in Santa Cruz with nobody to keep us up to date.

 

[stratotone]

The Axe Fx has incredible sounding on-board effects from the clips I've heard, but I already have effects covered via ADA STD-1 Chorus, TC2290 delay, Lexicon reverb and some floor boxes. What I'm after are the most realistic amp tones I can get. I've heard that once you take away the effects from Axe Fx models, it doesn't sound all that great. I find that ironic, as the same has been said about the Virus line of synthesizers, all of which are made by Christoph Kemper. So is it a matter of source tone then? The Kemper 'profiles' from a true analog source... i.e. a real amplifier. Still, given its extreme architecture, I can't help but wonder what tones are possible with the Axe Fx II?

Do this, research who uses which in the majors. Listen to albums by the guys who use these things. See who is touring with what and then find out why. Internet babble from fanboi's of either side is worthless.

As to the Kemper taking it's sound from a true analog source, that is irrelevant as it is 100% digital simulation of said source. It does sound as analog as the original amp to 99.999% of the folks who hear it though. Mr Kemper has a way with writing very good sounding code.

As to the Axe sounding like crap raw, that is incorrect. I can post clips to the contrary all day long but there's no point. I can post clips of my GP100 from 1996 that sound awesome as well.

The Kemper can and does sound just like whatever amp it's supposed to be and so does the Axe. The Kemper will give you unlimited amps, the Axe is something like 124. That being said, all those "advanced parameters" the slow among us complain about do actually do stuff. Changing tonestacks, having two amps at once etc. You can make amps that don't exist or combinations of amps that make unique tones.

Do you have to use those really off the wall things they put in there like tube bias and other factors , which contrary to an ignorant poster's comments, are actually more than disguised EQ's? Nope, most folks probably don't. There's a kid who builds amps that knows what all that shit is and he did a clip of a perfect SRV Fender amp by matching the tweaks that Stevie had done to a particular amp. For guys like that it's cool. For dummies like me, it's bring up amp, turn treble, bass, mid, then add a cab and I'm done. Somebody said all that crap clutters up the unit but you never see it unless you go looking for it.

I NEED the effects and options the Axe has but if I didn't, I could as easily gig the Kemper. I do some very complicated huge sounding pad like stuff live with multiple delays and pitch shifted harmonies. I won't even get in to the changes I make on the fly with my two expression pedals.

If you just need some amps, get a Kemper. It will sound just like the amps you play to most folks.

If you need some amps, huge effect set ups, and the ability to do whatever the F you want, the Axe.

Like I typed in my first line, there are world class touring pros using either one or the other, and yes many use the amp sims on the Axe, some don't. The point being, you really can't make a mistake going either way. Depends on your needs. With all the effects you have, the Kemper just may be a good fit for you.

Excellent passion-driven post! If I ever decide to unload my effects rig, I'm going to replace it with an Axe II. I'm actually considering it now. Kemper's amp profiles combined with Axe Fx II effects would reduce my rig size to a totally manageable size. Separate ATA cases for each unit, one ATA case for a stereo/mono power amp, and a pair of FRFR speakers = done!

Here's an Axe Fx Ultra based rig doing Boston... Sounds fabulous!

Here's a kemper rig doing boston.

https://soundcloud.com/okstrat/peace-of-mind-edit

And one doing crazy train.

https://soundcloud.com/okstrat/kemper-crazy-train

Pete

 

[zentman]

 

[ejecta]

The AxeFX lacks something, something you may not know until the next the update. Or that you may know but be called a hater for knowing it.....

First off, you don't always know what you are missing till you have something to contrast it with in context. A new firmware with major modeling changes can often be better whether or not a specific 'lack' was ever noted before in any way.----Scott Peterson

It is unknown which update will be without any lack.

That's a straw herring.

 

[ejecta]

Nice tone but I prefer the sounds of his amps here. There is just nice warmth he gets that I hear lacking in the clip you posted.

I look at it like this, I don't think music from a CD, AIFF on a an iPod etc sounds terrible. Far from it. But those recordings don't have the same warmth in sound of a wax album. There is clear advantages of digital over wax but they sure as hell don't sound the same. Which is better will always be subjective..... sounding the same... not so much.

 

[zentman]

Hmmm, kid in his room vs SRV live kicking ass. That Boston clip Stratotone did was nice but I prefer the actual album with Tom Schultz.

 

[ejecta]

Hmmm, kid in his room vs SRV live kicking ass. That Boston clip Stratotone did was nice but I prefer the actual album with Tom Schultz.

Exactly. I think units like the AxeFX and Kemper fit certain situations and others they don't. But they don't sound the same..... sorry.

 

[zentman]

Hmmm, kid in his room vs SRV live kicking ass. That Boston clip Stratotone did was nice but I prefer the actual album with Tom Schultz.

Exactly. I think units like the AxeFX and Kemper fit certain situations and others they don't. But they don't sound the same..... sorry.

Dude, you could give ANYBODY SRV's actual amp and guess what, it won't sound the same. (hint, it was Stevie that made it sound like that)

 

[ejecta]

Hmmm, kid in his room vs SRV live kicking ass. That Boston clip Stratotone did was nice but I prefer the actual album with Tom Schultz.

Exactly. I think units like the AxeFX and Kemper fit certain situations and others they don't. But they don't sound the same..... sorry.

Dude, you could give ANYBODY SRV's actual amp and guess what, it won't sound the same.

SRV could play the AxeFX and not get that same tone. Sure he'll still sound good and sound like himself but the tone will not be the same. Sorry.

 

[zentman]

Hmmm, kid in his room vs SRV live kicking ass. That Boston clip Stratotone did was nice but I prefer the actual album with Tom Schultz.

Exactly. I think units like the AxeFX and Kemper fit certain situations and others they don't. But they don't sound the same..... sorry.

Dude, you could give ANYBODY SRV's actual amp and guess what, it won't sound the same.

SRV could play the AxeFX and not get that same tone. Sure he'll still sound good and sound like himself but the tone will not be the same. Sorry.

Sorry but maybe he could and maybe you are speculating on a matter which can not be proven, sorry. Also, you nor anybody you know could tell the difference between 24 bit digital audio and a vinyl album, sorry. That has been proven and is not speculation.

 

[Rogue]

Back in 1973-74 my old 67 Twin was great. It lacked nothing. Then this rather large guy in Santa Cruz on East Cliff drive recommended a tube change. Dang if it didn't have a bit of something more.

After that he added a master volume. Wow, there's a feature I could really use. Much better.

Next he told me about some speakers that he liked so I tried them. Dang if my perfect little Twin didn't sound slightly better.

Next he went in and changed some circuits and man that amp had some major mojo.

It just kept getting better every time I stopped by his shop.

Too bad Howard moved to LA and left us in Santa Cruz with nobody to keep us up to date.

Seems like it would have to be lacking something in order to get better.

 

[ejecta]

Back in 1973-74 my old 67 Twin was great. It lacked nothing. Then this rather large guy in Santa Cruz on East Cliff drive recommended a tube change. Dang if it didn't have a bit of something more.

After that he added a master volume. Wow, there's a feature I could really use. Much better.

Next he told me about some speakers that he liked so I tried them. Dang if my perfect little Twin didn't sound slightly better.

Next he went in and changed some circuits and man that amp had some major mojo.

It just kept getting better every time I stopped by his shop.

Too bad Howard moved to LA and left us in Santa Cruz with nobody to keep us up to date.

Seems like it would have to be lacking something in order to get better.

 

[zentman]

Seems like it would have to be lacking something in order to get better.

Was a 1957 Tweed lacking anything or did it do what it did as it was intended very well? Maybe amplifier development should have just stopped there. Some say it was the holy grail. Did Howard Dumble improve Fender's designs? What about Randal Smith?

Did you ever buy new tubes or speakers for an amp you loved and thought it got better even though you already loved it as it was? Most have.

 

[Ventura]

Dude, you could give ANYBODY SRV's actual amp and guess what, it won't sound the same. (hint, it was Stevie that made it sound like that)

Lil' hint on this is that he used NOS 5751 in his preamp slots to tame the gain, and keep the headroom maxed. Fact.

 

[Ventura]

To this thread: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pissing_contest

 

[zentman]

Dude, you could give ANYBODY SRV's actual amp and guess what, it won't sound the same. (hint, it was Stevie that made it sound like that)

Lil' hint on this is that he used NOS 5751 in his preamp slots to tame the gain, and keep the headroom maxed. Fact.

Didn't he also use mismatched speakers, impedance wise, to do something to the amp? I thought I read that but may be wrong.

 

[Ventura]

Didn't he also use mismatched speakers, impedance wise, to do something to the amp? I thought I read that but may be wrong.

This I can't recall - although I wouldn't be surprised...

All I know is 5751s were the tube of choice. And I've actually employed a couple of these in my high gain heads to offer interesting effects on an otherwise Chinese/C9 laden preamp stage.

 

[ejecta]

To this thread: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pissing_contest

Wait until V12 of the pissing contest.