# Axe FX II vs. Kemper Profiling Amp



## jephjacques

Apologies if this has already been discussed, but I'm thinking about upgrading from an Axe FX Ultra to one of these two and can't decide which would be better for what I do (it would only be used for recording). I do instrumental metal/post-metal (ugh I hate that term) and I run a pretty wide gamut in terms of tone, everything from huge distortion to pristine cleans and semi-dirty tones.

I really like the flexibility of the Axe FX and I've heard the II is pretty much better in every way, but I've also heard great things about the Kemper. If any folks who have experience with both could give me a rundown, I'd really appreciate it!


----------



## Spaceman_Spiff

Well Axe-FX II can do the same tone matching, amp profiling thing that the kemper does now, and it has about a million other effects and stuff. Sooooo....


----------



## sear

Both are awesome. Both do kinda different things. Do you want any amp at your fingertips, or a way to directly record the character and tone of your own amps and use it in a small package?


----------



## jephjacques

Mostly the former. Sounds like the Axe FX is more what I need.


----------



## infernalservice

jephjacques said:


> I really like the flexibility of the Axe FX and I've heard the II is pretty much better in every way, but I've also heard great things about the Kemper. If any folks who have experience with both could give me a rundown, I'd really appreciate it!



I have ABC'd an axe standard, axe 2, and the kemper. Jumping from the standard to the axe 2 was like going from an NES to SNES to make a nerd analogy. However, I found more usable tones right off the bat in the kemper than either fractal unit. Also while tone match is a great feature, it is not equal to profiling in my eyes. With tone match you still have to manual select a closely resembled amp block and a few other variables come into play. The kemper is a way more streamlined affair. I actually profiled my favorite axe presets off my standard before selling it, so its win win in my eyes.


For me, I ended up going with the Kemper because I prefer the traditional layout. FX are more abundant and more tweakable on the axe 2, but I am not one for a million effects anyway, especially those crystal garden and vocoder type ones. All I like is a good delay on a lead patch, a ts type boost, and maybe a chorus and some reverb on the cleans. Speaking of cleans, they sound more tube like to me on the kemper. It is a very intelligent design, and with the eventual release of the rack mount version and footswitch, some of the axe 2's advantages are going to be matched in terms of portability anyway. High gain presets were pretty much on par with each other across the board, but I just found the kemper to suit my tastes better. Recently I moved away from an FRFR setup to a cab power amp combo (I had done the opposite with the axe std because I thought it sucked through a cab), but with the kemper I like the feel of a cab more because it to me sounds more like a tube amp off the rip.


----------



## VESmedic

The axe fx does not profile like the kpa does, please stop spreading that BS. The tones in my Kemper are much more realistic in feel and tone than my axe fx. I'd choose the Kemper everytime, and there isn't a damn IR on the planet that can match kempers cabs. There's a reason the biggest engineers in the world are using the KPA, and not the axe fx.


----------



## noise in my mind

VESmedic said:


> The axe fx does not profile like the kpa does, please stop spreading that BS. The tones in my Kemper are much more realistic in feel and tone than my axe fx. I'd choose the Kemper everytime, and there isn't a damn IR on the planet that can match kempers cabs. There's a reason the biggest engineers in the world are using the KPA, and not the axe fx.



I saw that Andy Sneap is using a kemper and loves it. I think the axe fx can sound great with after market IR's. Are the kemper cabs insanely better than aftermarket companies like ownhammer and redwirez?


----------



## lewstherin006

If you have enough money i say fuck it and just use both. It really comes down to the person playing and what their needs are.


----------



## Andromalia

Main "problem" of the axe II is the default settings aren't very good. You must do some research to get it to sound like you want. It's getting easier now as the documentation is there and the unit has been out for more than a year.

Reading the axewiki will solve you a TON of headaches, the setting up isn't hard nor long, you just have to follow some basic guidelines, but if you go in there blindly you'll spend years tweaking for nothing.

When I bought the axe II the Kemper wasn't released, and I had an axe I so it was a natural upgrade. If I had to do the same choice today I'd be hard pressed to make a decision, honestly, especially since the Kemper is now available as a rack.

The one thing that I'd vouch for however is Fractal and G66 customer support. Software updates are frequent and often offer significant progress. Fractal announced they'd be working a lot on cabs in the near future, I have some hopes for the result being good seeing what was done in the past.


----------



## noUser01

The opinions here are... interesting. 

Both the Kemper and the AxeFX II sound phenomenal, and as far as sound quality goes they are pretty much on par. I've heard the best demos and the worst demos of both units, and I don't see either one coming out on top in terms of pure sound quality.

What I do see is people claiming one is better than the other for the wrong reasons. Most people claim one is better because one is better suited for them, and they were incapable of getting better sounds out of one unit, or just didn't want to spend the time. The units are extremely different in the way that they work, meaning it's not common for someone to vibe with the way both units work equally. It's similar to comparing two vehicles that are the same kind of vehicle in the same prize bracket... it's not about which one is better, it's about which one really works for _you_ as a player and tone junkie (or driver ).

If you really want to spend the time and effort into getting lots of different tones and having each one be absolutely perfect to your needs, get the AxeFX II. If you really want to have as much tweakability as possible and have full access to every part of your sound then this is the way to go. Keep in mind though it's not an easy unit to work with until you go through a lot of learning, a lot of trial and error and perhaps some frustration too. 

If you want something with a much shorter learning curve and aren't trying to get everything in the world out of one box (delays, reverbs, modulation, crazy synth sounds, vocoder-esque sounds, clever routing options, dozens of effects at once etc.) and just want some solid amp tones right out of the box, the Kemper is going to be better for you. The Kemper will require less of your time to get good tones out of and is overall much easier to operate, yet you might not have all the tweaking capabilities you may want. And when it comes to effects it's much more limited, especially when it comes to routing options. 

I own the AxeFX II because I know I want full control and am willing to put in the time. I'd have both if I had the money, because I understand each unit works in a very different way, but achieves pretty much the same end result.

So which are you? Do you just want something easy to use like an amp but way more versatile than a single head? Or do you want full access to every part of your tone at the cost of a lot of your time and a steep learning curve?


----------



## jimwratt

infernalservice said:


> I actually profiled my favorite axe presets off my standard before selling it, so its win win in my eyes.



My understanding is that you can share the profiles with other users, which means that the Kemper is essentially limitless in the amps it can profile. If you could get Eddie Kramer to make a profile of one of Jimi's amps, you'd officially have one of the best recorded tones out there. That feature alone is a major step forward in guitar technology. They've decoupled the tones from the hardware. I used to think IR was going to be the future of digital guitar processing but now I think it will be in conjunction with this profiling concept. There was a lot of DIY contribution missing until now.


----------



## Lorcan Ward

I own both and the best advice I can give you is to try them both. Nobody hear can tell you which you will like better since they are very different units despite the constant Vs discussions. 

Up until Firmware 9 on the Axe-fx II I felt there was some things missing, especially for hi-gain. In comparison the Kemper had more punchy/wide tones and chunk to palm mutes which a lot of people found when comparing them. Two months later Cliff had added all these things to the Axe-II with the latest FW so I'm selling my Kemper since I've no need for it anymore.

If I had my own amps, cabs and mics I would choose the Kemper. Every hi-gain profile I tried always had something I would change about it and I really don't like how the input gain works. There isn't enough editing options on the Kemper to make these changes so that why I lean towards the Axe. For clean tones I would choose the Kemper but for really re-fined Hi-gain tones the Axe-II suits my needs better.


----------



## Watty

jimwratt said:


> They've decoupled the tones from the hardware.



I'm about a day away from pulling the trigger on a II, but I think this sentiment is pretty interesting. Definitely something to think on. Problem is, it's really between these two companies now as they've pulled so far ahead of their competition. They can "kind of" sit back and ride the wave they've created before they have to REALLY dig into making this the "next big thing."

Two pennies gone.


----------



## noUser01

Watty said:


> I'm about a day away from pulling the trigger on a II, but I think this sentiment is pretty interesting. Definitely something to think on. Problem is, it's really between these two companies now as they've pulled so far ahead of their competition. They can "kind of" sit back and ride the wave they've created before they have to REALLY dig into making this the "next big thing."
> 
> Two pennies gone.



I don't see how that's something the Kemper does and not the AxeFX II considering... well you know:

Axe Change -The Official Site for Fractal Audio Presets, Cabs and More

You can share patches on the AxeFX as well. I'm not sure the point you're trying to make, jimwratt, sorry if I'm missing it.  I mean I'm sure someone would make the argument that AxeFX patches won't sound the same for someone else, but an amp profile won't sound any closer, for the same reasons.


----------



## jimwratt

Watty said:


> I'm about a day away from pulling the trigger on a II, but I think this sentiment is pretty interesting. Definitely something to think on. Problem is, it's really between these two companies now as they've pulled so far ahead of their competition. They can "kind of" sit back and ride the wave they've created before they have to REALLY dig into making this the "next big thing."
> 
> Two pennies gone.



Until Behringer, Boss, and Digitech come out with an infinitely crappier sounding version that's more portable, affordable, and cheaper. Then line 6 will predictably stabilize the field. It would be awesome if someone figured out how to extract the software from one of them and started selling generic components like they do with operating systems and PCs. Can you imagine upgrading a Spider Valve to kemper specs and os? Winning.


----------



## Watty

The Axe FX is designed on the idea that you can use the tones within it to shape your sound, while the Kemper essentially says, use our hardware to capture the sounds you already have. If that makes it any clearer....


----------



## noUser01

Watty said:


> The Axe FX is designed on the idea that you can use the tones within it to shape your sound, while the Kemper essentially says, use our hardware to capture the sounds you already have. If that makes it any clearer....



True, but with the tone matching capabilities the AxeFX II can do the same. Maybe not the same way, and maybe not even to the same quality, who's to say... but it can do the same thing.


----------



## kessel

Is there also a rig-exchange community for the Axe? I think this is an important thing to think about.

I did buy a Kemper because there is no limit getting new sounds for it. Before that I did have a POD HD500, for which it took several months for Line6 to get new amp models until they uploaded a new firmware upgrade, and that didn't even mean that I would get the ones I've desired.

With the Kemper I do actually have too many amps, most of which I will never need, but I will also never miss the ones I want and need, because there's always someone who will profile it and share.


----------



## pushpull7

Did someone mention the axefx price? I haven't got a clear price difference between them (the kemper is about 2k street) Also, is there some kinda waiting period for the axefx?


----------



## noUser01

chrisharbin said:


> Did someone mention the axefx price? I haven't got a clear price difference between them (the kemper is about 2k street) Also, is there some kinda waiting period for the axefx?



Didn't look far did you? 

The Axe-Fx II - Preamp / FX Processor Mark II - Order Online

There is no waiting period either.


----------



## pushpull7

Sorry, I missed it. Anyways, thanks!


----------



## codycarter

Axefx2: preset amp model and effects. An all in one guitar rig.

Kemper Profiler: preamp designed to capture all the aspects of a guitar rig, to be reused withoit the rig.


Say you have a super awesome rig, but don't want to take it in tour. You can capture every aspect of your rig and take it with you, with out any bit of your rig.

The axe however has amp models already in it, and a ton of effects


----------



## noUser01

codycarter said:


> Axefx2: preset amp model and effects. An all in one guitar rig.
> 
> Kemper Profiler: preamp designed to capture all the aspects of a guitar rig, to be reused withoit the rig.
> 
> 
> Say you have a super awesome rig, but don't want to take it in tour. You can capture every aspect of your rig and take it with you, with out any bit of your rig.
> 
> The axe however has amp models already in it, and a ton of effects



Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the Kemper comes with amp profiles from the get-go as well, so the AxeFX II doesn't really win in that regard. 

Also, you can't take your entire rig on the road with you, just the amps. If you have some vintage 60's fuzz that Hendrix used, you can't profile that into the amp necessarily. With the AxeFX II you can try and tone match that fuzz pedal though. But I say this with my limited understanding of how the Kemper profiling works.


----------



## DarthV

ConnorGilks said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the Kemper comes with amp profiles from the get-go as well, so the AxeFX II doesn't really win in that regard.
> 
> Also, you can't take your entire rig on the road with you, just the amps. If you have some vintage 60's fuzz that Hendrix used, you can't profile that into the amp necessarily. With the AxeFX II you can try and tone match that fuzz pedal though. But I say this with my limited understanding of how the Kemper profiling works.



With the Kemper, you can profile an amp with a your vintage fuzz in front of it. The KPA basically takes a snapshot of whatever you're mic'n. So you could have a profile with it and one without.

Check out Chapper's hour long KPA profiling vid:



As for which is best for you? Can't say, if you're happy with all the effects and routing options in your AxeFX, then maybe the II would be best. I really like the simplicity of my Kemper and I'm not a huge effects whore, so it's the best fit for me. Honestly don't think you could go wrong with either


----------



## noUser01

DarthV said:


> With the Kemper, you can profile an amp with a your vintage fuzz in front of it. The KPA basically takes a snapshot of whatever you're mic'n. So you could have a profile with it and one without.



My example was a poor one. My point was that you can't do it for all of your pedals (compressor, chorus, delay, etc.) but as I said before, it depends how picky you are about effects.


----------



## codycarter

ConnorGilks said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the Kemper comes with amp profiles from the get-go as well, so the AxeFX II doesn't really win in that regard.
> 
> Also, you can't take your entire rig on the road with you, just the amps. If you have some vintage 60's fuzz that Hendrix used, you can't profile that into the amp necessarily. With the AxeFX II you can try and tone match that fuzz pedal though. But I say this with my limited understanding of how the Kemper profiling works.



Oh you are right! The axefx2 and pretty much all modelers are just emulaters trying to recreate effects, amps, and cabs. I see modelers as digital remakes of other things

The kemper is a more physical take on it. Instead of being limited to what it came with or other emulations, you can take any rig and capture every element of it and make a digital file.


Me personally, I like the Pod HD, the Axe fx II is cool but mote than I'd really use. The Kemper is great too, but I don't really own a rig outside of my pod so I don't have much use for it


----------



## no_dice

codycarter said:


> The Kemper is great too, but I don't really own a rig outside of my pod so I don't have much use for it



You don't need one.  There are plenty of users with rigs making quality profiles. I don't really have good enough microphones to make profiles of my amps as good as they could be.


----------



## codycarter

no_dice said:


> You don't need one.  There are plenty of users with rigs making quality profiles. I don't really have good enough microphones to make profiles of my amps as good as they could be.



I also can't afford the kemper or axe fx


----------



## noUser01

codycarter said:


> The kemper is a more physical take on it. Instead of being limited to what it came with or other emulations, you can take any rig and capture every element of it and make a digital file.



Again, you can do the same thing with an AxeFX II. In fact I'd say it's even more true with the AxeFX II, as you'll get more detailed copies of your effects as well. Kemper focuses on amps, with the ability to do drives as well (I think...?), but the AxeFX II would be much better at doing what you are describing.


----------



## flint757

ConnorGilks said:


> True, but with the tone matching capabilities the AxeFX II can do the same. Maybe not the same way, and maybe not even to the same quality, who's to say... but it can do the same thing.



If it isn't the same way and not the same quality then it is not the same thing. 



ConnorGilks said:


> Again, you can do the same thing with an AxeFX II. In fact I'd say it's even more true with the AxeFX II, as you'll get more detailed copies of your effects as well. Kemper focuses on amps, with the ability to do drives as well (I think...?), but the AxeFX II would be much better at doing what you are describing.



Kemper sounds better out of the profiling processes. Tone matching is just a Graphic EQ basically which is not even kind of what the Kemper does. With the rig exchange you have an infinite amount of possibilities. You can even purchase some profile packs from well known studios (with better mic's and room environments) to get even better profiles if someone wishes. Axe-fx does win in several other areas however, but Kemper kills in the raw tone department. The effects the Kemper does have are phenomenal and more are added fairly regularly though. It is also true that no one is likely to be disappointed with either of them.


Considering price and availability, especially Europe, it is cheaper to get the Kemper. If one felt like they were missing some pitch or delay effects they could buy something like the timefactor or pitchfactor and route it in the back, coming out to about the same cost as a new Axe-fx II with just as many effects. In the long run Kemper will acquire many more effects and will likely only be missing things like the synth or vocoders (never used those on my Axe-fx even so I don't particularly care).


----------



## noUser01

flint757 said:


> If it isn't the same way and not the same quality then it is not the same thing.
> 
> 
> 
> Kemper sounds better out of the profiling processes. Tone matching is just a Graphic EQ basically which is not even kind of what the Kemper does. With the rig exchange you have an infinite amount of possibilities. You can even purchase some profile packs from well known studios (with better mic's and room environments) to get even better profiles if someone wishes. Axe-fx does win in several other areas however, but Kemper kills in the raw tone department. The effects the Kemper does have are phenomenal and more are added fairly regularly though. It is also true that no one is likely to be disappointed with either of them.
> 
> 
> Considering price and availability, especially Europe, it is cheaper to get the Kemper. If one felt like they were missing some pitch or delay effects they could buy something like the timefactor or pitchfactor and route it in the back, coming out to about the same cost as a new Axe-fx II with just as many effects. In the long run Kemper will acquire many more effects and will likely only be missing things like the synth or vocoders (never used those on my Axe-fx even so I don't particularly care).



I agree in some respects. Where are you getting this information though that the tone match is basically a graphic EQ? Not challenging you on it as I don't know. Would just like to know if it's actually written somewhere.

Obviously it's not going to be the same as the Kemper, as the AxeFX II never was about copying tones, and still isn't. The users simply asked for something similar, and it was given to us. So yes, you're right, the profiling capability isn't nearly the same because that's not what it is designed to do. But keep in mind this brings up two important points. The first is how many people would actually be able to tell the difference in sound and/or feel. 

The second is that while the Kemper is probably a much better unit for copying other tones, I don't find it superior in overall sound quality. I find it more or less spot on with the AxeFX II, personally. Maybe it's my ears, maybe it's all in my head, maybe it's the truth. Something to think about though.

I should also mention that I highly doubt the Kemper will get the same effects capabilities, as the routing options within the AxeFX are a huge part of what makes it so capable. There's so many unique - and more importantly applicable - sounds that you can get with the routing options, not to mention the detail you can get into for your effects. Maybe not that important if you just want a chorus, but if you want to match that vintage 70's chorus pedal you have then the Kemper isn't what you want.

Again though, I don't find either unit better than the other. It's about what YOU want out of a unit.


----------



## flint757

Indeed the routing options in the Axe-fx are near limitless. 

What the Axe does is take a profile close to what you want (if it exists currently at all) and applies an EQ on top of it to get it to sound like it should. I like the fact that the Kemper remains true to the original sound, I've found that the Axe-fx has a sound all of its own layered in it. They are both amazing products that anyone would be happy with and I did say that too.

As for the effects while the routing will never be matched, since it is locked to an extent, I do think it is only a matter of time before it has all of the effects that people actually use and aren't just for show. If you plug another unit into the loop routing capabilities open up a bit more. That being said, it is setup in a fashion that 90%(bullshit statistic ) would most likely route their own pedals.


----------



## DrJazz

I was going to write a lenghty reply on the differences between tone matching and profiling, but flint757 above quite covered it.

They're two different beasts altogether. They'll both give you some great tones and endless tweakability. I like the philosophy of the KPA, and in the end went with it. I love dialing amps, and I've found it much easier to get juicy tones out of a real amp than out of an axe fx. The profiles available online are also quite good, and some of them (especially the profesionnal ones) are breathtaking. For the price difference, I'd rather get a Kemper and rent the amps I want to profile. This way, I get the exact tone I want. Effects-wise, I have all I need in my KPA, and the effects are pretty high quality and responsive. Unless you want your guitar to sound like a bagpipe, there is a good chance that the effects selection in the KPA will suit your needs as well.

That's not to say the AxeFx II can't do great tones. You can get some very nice sounds out of it, and it's very powerful, portable and versatile in your setup. I've seen some artists use them live with great success tonaly (Periphery, Devin Townsend). Then again, I'm slowly seeing Kempers live as well.

Both devices will give you great tones, and you can't really go wrong with either of them. I've found that an amazing profile with the KPA will give me that whole "ooomph" I get when I've dialed an amp just right, and it's something I have yet to experience with an axefx. 

But, even if it's easy for me to get an amazing, lifelike tone out of the KPA, that doesn't mean that the "quest for tone" is over. I know I've yet to explore the full extent of the profiles already in my KPA, but I'm still scouring my area for some specific amps that I'd love to get my paws on. This is actually one of the reasons why the KPA is better suited for my needs : I'm always chasing tones, and the KPA enables me to capture the dynamics of all the amps I could dream of, all while keeping my wallet in a somewhat safe posture. I know at some point I would have gotten rid of my AxeFx II (had I gotten one instead) because, eventually, I'd be craving for tones I could not dial with my Axe Fx II.


----------



## AngstRiddenDreams

I've got it, buy an Axe FX II, make the most perfect refined tones I can imagine that suit my needs. Create sounds that you can only make on the Axe, then buy a Kemper and profile them. Sell Axe. Then continue to profile awesome amps with the Kemper.


----------



## infernalservice

codycarter said:


> Axefx2: preset amp model and effects. An all in one guitar rig.
> 
> Kemper Profiler: preamp designed to capture all the aspects of a guitar rig, to be reused withoit the rig.
> 
> 
> Say you have a super awesome rig, but don't want to take it in tour. You can capture every aspect of your rig and take it with you, with out any bit of your rig.
> 
> The axe however has amp models already in it, and a ton of effects



This is misinformation that i tend to see a lot in regards to KPA. I wish Kemper was actually a little bolder in their advertising about what is already on the unit from the first boot. The kemper comes with a ton of preset rigs (ie amps) and effects. You do not need a killer amp collection to make use of the unit. Between what is loaded and what is available for rigs online, there are an infinite number of tones available.


----------



## infernalservice

ConnorGilks said:


> Again, you can do the same thing with an AxeFX II. In fact I'd say it's even more true with the AxeFX II, as you'll get more detailed copies of your effects as well. Kemper focuses on amps, with the ability to do drives as well (I think...?), but the AxeFX II would be much better at doing what you are describing.



How is the axe more accurate when you have to choose an amp model that "closely" resembles the tone you are trying to capture? That is a decent enough margin for user error to throw me off.

Also on the effects being retained, straight from the tone match manual:
In general, your starting point preset should have no effects in front of 
the Tone Match block at this point. You might add some for &#8220;flavor&#8221; 
while dialing in, but set them to BYPASS before doing a Tone Match. 
The exception might be a drive or EQ that is really integral to getting 
the starting preset to sound or feel &#8220;right.&#8221; Effects after the Tone Match 
block are okay, but it&#8217;s perhaps best to hold off until after capturing.

....
While that is saying to don't color your starting point, you are encouraged to tone match tones without effects as you will loose time based effects and other ones may skew the tone match. A dry guitar track would give you the most accurate match, but with either a KPA or the Axe2, you are still going to need to guestimate things like a chorus or delay most likely. I did some kpa profiles of axe standard patches with delay and they didnt sound too good. I also tried doing a tone match on an axe 2 to a dimebag clean tone with chorus, it didn't sound too hot either. Once I pulled the effects out and put them in post capture, it was way better.


----------



## noUser01

AngstRiddenDreams said:


> I've got it, buy an Axe FX II, make the most perfect refined tones I can imagine that suit my needs. Create sounds that you can only make on the Axe, then buy a Kemper and profile them. Sell Axe. Then continue to profile awesome amps with the Kemper.



I don't think you understand how this works...


----------



## noUser01

infernalservice said:


> How is the axe more accurate when you have to choose an amp model that "closely" resembles the tone you are trying to capture?
> 
> Also on the effects being retained, straight from the tone match manual:
> In general, your starting point preset should have no effects in front of
> the Tone Match block at this point. You might add some for flavor
> while dialing in, but set them to BYPASS before doing a Tone Match.
> The exception might be a drive or EQ that is really integral to getting
> the starting preset to sound or feel right. Effects after the Tone Match
> block are okay, but its perhaps best to hold off until after capturing.
> 
> ....
> You are encouraged to tone match tones without effects as you will loose time based effects and other ones may skew the tone match.



You've completely misread my posts... I was not saying the AxeFX II was more accurate in tone matching, I said it would be more accurate to say that the AxeFX II is a method of "taking your whole rig with you" as you can tone match effects pedals and many users have also made settings to copy famous effects pedals.

Also, I was not saying that you would achieve this by tone matching with tons of effects on. I was saying that you can tone match gain pedals quite easily (which I have done myself) by putting the tone match block after a drive block instead of after an amp block. The other option is that there are a lot of famous effects pedals that have been either tone matches or manually dialed in emulations and posted up on the Fractal Forums, allowing you to share pedal copies as well, not just amps or whole presets.


----------



## infernalservice

ConnorGilks said:


> I don't think you understand how this works...



You actually can profile axe tones on the kpa. I have done it, and Merrow made a video showing him do it from an axe std.


----------



## noUser01

infernalservice said:


> You actually can profile axe tones on the kpa. I have done it, and Merrow made a video showing him do it from an axe std.



Obviously. My point is that we're talking about things like routing options being the things that are what make the AxeFX II unique, and those are the things you can't copy over to the unit. There's plenty you can copy from the AxeFX to the Kemper, but there's also stuff you can't copy over.


----------



## Rossness

If I don't really care much about recording, which unit is best for live use, through a cab, not mixed up? Basically I'd like to find an amp that works like a Line 6 Vetta, but is a billion times better. Any advice?


----------



## berzerkergang

lewstherin006 said:


> If you have enough money i say fuck it and just use both. It really comes down to the person playing and what their needs are.



How many people on here have $7000 to blow on this? PS if you raise your hand, I hate you lol


----------



## Splinterhead

From what I understand the Kemper will make an excellent copy/profile of a specific rig with specific settings. I think the difference is that the AXE's amp simulations are backed up with the integrity of the amps specific tone shaping controls. So if you have a Kemper profile of a Marshal Plexi at a particular setting and you start to manipulate that setting with the Kemper's tone shaping controls the profile would lose its integrity.

Help me out here guys. Does this sound accurate?


----------



## Andromalia

Let's stay simple.

The kemper allows you to get a specific rig sound and tailor it a bit but not that much if you want to stay realistic. It would be my choice for someone owning a "real" rig who wants to travel light and is satisfied of his sound, or for someone who is fine using oter people presets with just a bit of adaptation. It's also best if you're tight on the money as it is the less expensive unit of both.

The axeFX2 is better suited to start tones from scratch when you have one in your mind and has a superior effects section, good enough to be used without the modeling by the Petruccis, Vais etc. It also has the advantage of having its own interface for direct recording. (With the Kemper, you must buy a separate interface if you want to do home recordings)

I own an axeII, merely because I had an axe1 and was satisfied with the constat updates and followups of Fractal audio, and the Kemper wasn't out then.

Today, if I had to make a choice as a non-professional, I'd take a Kemper: it's less expensive and would suit my needs well enough. But I won't be buying one to replace an axeII either, for exemple. Especially as I play quite a bit of cheesy 80es stuff with a load of stupid effects (chorus, flanger etc)


----------



## kessel

Andromalia said:


> Let's stay simple.
> 
> The kemper allows you to get a specific rig sound and tailor it a bit but not that much if you want to stay realistic.


 
Well, I'll try to say the same as you but not staying that simple.

The Kemper lets you actually do more than just a fine adjust of the profile you choose. You can change many sub-options both on amp and cabinet setup and the change are really noticeable. And there's not only Drive and EQ controls, there are also some other things like SAG, Tube Control, Low and High Shift, Clarity, Picking Volume and such... and you can choose the combination of ampheads with cabinets.

This means, every single profile can offer a relativ wide range to be edited, anyways there are some limitations that other products do not have, like the mic used on the profiling, which always suppose a filter you can't later get rid of. And the effects on it are good but not as many as in the Axe FX.


----------



## redstone

axe-fx -> cab + frfr

kemper -> cab or frfr


----------



## c4tze

im sick of bullshit like that the axe fx could do profiling or anything close to that. axe is porn, its not easy to handle but if you once found out it is a mighty weapon. but the kemper is so damn versatile and it can do a lot more than i thought it could to before i had one. i still have an axe but just because i dont have a 2nd kemper. people should stop comparisons, those two are based on completely different technologies and both are excellent. but when it comes down to possibilities and whats possible at all, the kemper is plain mean and straight forward win. axe may be a mighty weapon, but to me, and a lot other artists (and a lot famous, skilled and professional artists), the kemper is the ultimate weapon.

#edit

and my kemper power rack does cabinet AND full range ...


----------



## Eclipse

Axe Fx forever. <3


----------



## jephjacques

Update: Bought a Kemper, couldn't get a sound I liked from it, traded it in for an Axe II, felt immediately at home.

The Kemper sounded great but A) I was already used to using the Fractal interface and B) the Axe II had way more of the kind of amp models I like preinstalled.

I don't think they're apples and oranges, it's more like granny smith vs. red delicious.


----------



## jimwratt

ConnorGilks said:


> I don't see how that's something the Kemper does and not the AxeFX II considering... well you know:
> 
> Axe Change -The Official Site for Fractal Audio Presets, Cabs and More
> 
> You can share patches on the AxeFX as well. I'm not sure the point you're trying to make, jimwratt, sorry if I'm missing it.  I mean I'm sure someone would make the argument that AxeFX patches won't sound the same for someone else, but an amp profile won't sound any closer, for the same reasons.



I meant in terms of users being able to actually provide their own models or modifications of models. Of course there will be variations, but there will also be exceptions. 

If you look at the amplifier and stomp box fields, there are whole companies like analogman and Mesa that got their start by modifying existing products. If the new generation of modeling, profiling and IR companies begin to move in a direction that is open enough in terms of software, I can see the field being enriched by people who can figure out how to alter the amp models in the hardware products themselves to make them more realistic instead of being entirely reliant on the companies to do it for us in successive hardware upgrades. 

Stomp box aficionados are all down to the point of fetishizing NOS BC108 transistors in their fuzz boxes because of how much modification and DIY builders have impacted the landscape of effects pedal making. Sure, the big companies are a bit stuck in their ways, but the cutting edge is being led by players and builders in a way that's more concerned with tone than profitability. I think that ethos could benefit the technology of digital amp modeling in the future. What codes are associated with the better digital tones out there? Would they be analogous to Germanium transistors or silicon? I for one would be interested in someone modifying a POD HD500 to make it better, or even to experiment. The PC industry has that ethic too and it produces better programmers, products, and companies. The next Randall Smith will be a hacker.


----------



## Jonathan20022

This was definitely a good read considering I just found out the Kempers are selling for just under 2k on zzSounds right now. 

Speaking as a potential customer, I LOVE fiddling with things and making things just right so that alone makes the Axe seem like a more attractive product over the Kemper. To be honest, I don't have much to "model" from anyways haha I like my tone as it is now but it is still an all Digital Effects Processor with the Cab Simulation bypassed and running it through a Solid State Practice/Small Gigging Amp. So ultimately I wouldn't really be using the Kemper to it's full potential by profiling my current rig looking for something better and new?

That was probably my biggest concern with the Kemper, stock usable tones, fair amount of effects, and a great platform to expand on your current sounds without having to fiddle TOO much with the Kemper itself. I'd say the Kemper seems like the more usable device or a touring musicians with plenty of amps that he loves AND uses often enough that he wishes he could have them all on the road. That an say a Studio Engineer looking to downsize the number of amps he owns.

It makes sense that I get the Axe, especially since with updates and such they're bringing in fresh tones and dynamics to their already existing tones constantly. The fact that they're only working on a (Rumor of course) Pedal form of the Axe 2 and not a 3 is also nice to know that I probably won't need to upgrade for at least 2-3 years. But that's speaking from inexperience as a potential customer, I was considering purchasing either the Axe FX 2 or the Pod HD Pro and after playing both side by side it was a no brainer that the Axe is just more suited against the future and whatever I may need then.

And on the profiling topic, considering that I don't have much experience with it myself.

Isn't the fact that you have to pick an amp and cab blocks that are similar to the tone you want to match negligible? Do we specifically KNOW that the Kemper does something that the Axe doesn't during their Tone Matching? I mean barre the fact that we need to pick those two, the Kemper doesn't have that "Step" but I fail to see how it's worse or one is better in that regard. As far as I know having to do a small portion of the work doesn't negate the Axe's Tone Matching and it's authenticity. Unless of course we can confirm that it is just applying a Graphic EQ over whatever you're using.


----------



## noUser01

jimwratt said:


> I meant in terms of users being able to actually provide their own models or modifications of models. Of course there will be variations, but there will also be exceptions.
> 
> If you look at the amplifier and stomp box fields, there are whole companies like analogman and Mesa that got their start by modifying existing products. If the new generation of modeling, profiling and IR companies begin to move in a direction that is open enough in terms of software, I can see the field being enriched by people who can figure out how to alter the amp models in the hardware products themselves to make them more realistic instead of being entirely reliant on the companies to do it for us in successive hardware upgrades.
> 
> Stomp box aficionados are all down to the point of fetishizing NOS BC108 transistors in their fuzz boxes because of how much modification and DIY builders have impacted the landscape of effects pedal making. Sure, the big companies are a bit stuck in their ways, but the cutting edge is being led by players and builders in a way that's more concerned with tone than profitability. I think that ethos could benefit the technology of digital amp modeling in the future. What codes are associated with the better digital tones out there? Would they be analogous to Germanium transistors or silicon? I for one would be interested in someone modifying a POD HD500 to make it better, or even to experiment. The PC industry has that ethic too and it produces better programmers, products, and companies. The next Randall Smith will be a hacker.



I don't really see how that in itself is even relevant in the field of digital processing. I think that while we are focusing on copying what's around right now, the end goal for all these companies seems to be the tweaking factor - the idea that you can get YOUR tone, not just the tone of every amp that's out there, but the full spectrum between all these models too, the sounds that haven't been explored. In the AxeFX II you can tweak parameters of an amp like nuts. Way back just after I got the unit I made (I use that term loosely) an amp model that combined everything I love about my favorite punk tone (midrangey, punchy but loose and dirty) with the clarity of a 5150 III. Just went into the advanced parameters of the unit and there's a ton of stuff there.

Now I know you'll say "that isn't improving upon the modeling, just changing the model" and you're totally right, but I feel like this stuff is not only so hush-hush, but so advanced as this point in time that I'd frankly be surprised if there would be many people that would be able to help. And to be honest, as soon as they're found they'll just be hired by Kemper or Fractal I bet. 

But yeah I see your point and I don't see it happening realistically, but I would like to.


----------



## Glenld50

I've been doing some research on both kemper and axefx II and correct me if I'm wrong here. Kemper will be best for people that like the simplicity of plugging in with minimal tone or effects tweaking, a tool for any engineer that has the ability to profile several amps with several mics. AxeFX users are more geared towards tweaking options like effects and creating patches and that is why guys like Vai and Petrucci are just using them for effects. Some key notes if your planning on playing live, kemper has a minute start time so if you lose power on stage your stuck waiting. Also read that there is a bit of a delay when switching presets which can be a problem. So, I guess it all boils down to what your going to need in a profiler amp right? Also would like to know if kemper has the option to use an expression pedal?http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/images/smilies/hookem.gif


----------



## Svava




----------

