Kemper?

BGG

Fortheloveofguitar said:

ToneControl;77692" said:

btw Tone World recommend this, http://www.toneworld.co.uk/amplifiers-c11/heads-c12/dv-mark-multiamp-2-1-rack-mountable-preamp-effects-processor-p1315they are very picky, so I'd try to evaluate this too, they don't big up stuff that's not as good as they say, and have given me quite frank opinions about some stuff they do sell, I think they are sticking with the Coda-type reputation the guys cultivated at Sounds GreatRemember, they don't stock the Kemper I think, but if you call them I bet you'd get a decent opinion on the merits

I was speaking to Jamie Humphries on FB only last month about the Kemper and he actually favoured the DV multiamp. Says he actually owns one and prefers to the Kemper and Axe FX.

They sound great, they just don't get the same push and publicity as Axe FX and Kemper. To my ears it sounds more alive and like a real amp, you can dig in and back off and it's very responsive.

fastboy

I have a friend Rod who plays in a Saxon tribute band who uses one of these live. He's got the powered one and runs into a cab (think he said it was 600 watts IIRC) and just has a small rack mount with a tuner and the crybaby rack for Wahs. It's certainly a very portable rig for sure. 

I was at his house on Sunday as he wanted to model my Shiva and Dan Gower Rockmonster JMP so we set it all up and randomly despite him having a huge room full of gear we used a pair of Blackstar 1x12's and a Shure SM57 to mic the reference cab but also to test the kemper as theoretically we should get the same sound as it was the same cab on both. 

Anyway, after a couple of hours of just noodling and modelling the results of this were the base sound of the amp was definitely there for sure however, everything we modelled into the kemper just sounded darker (yes, things like FX's and cab sims were off) no matter what we did. 

Now, you could of course EQ to taste and I'd say it was certainly a 90% approximation of the reference amp but to my ears at least I just found the kemper a touch fizzy as we started to add some of the mids and treble back into the model. There was three of us there so one played, one operated the kemper and the other turned up and down the volume on the reference amp so we could tweak. 

It was good but if I'm entirely honest to me, I don't know if it was power sections of the real amps (Mullard XF4 in the Shiva and NOS Winged C in the JMP)  but the kemper just seemed to miss the dynamics of the real amp and the upper mids regardless of how we EQ'd it

I could see the kemper has a place if you want a light portable rig with FX, lots of models and various tweaking options but from my personal stand point at no point over nearly 4 hours did I even think I want to sell my amps and replace it with a kemper. I guess you can read into that as you wish....

rockmonster

Thanks for that Ryan

crunchman

I took my Lazy J out to practice last night after using the Kemper when playing out recently.  The real amp does sound nicer to me (and the Timeline is a better delay than the on in the Kemper) but by the time it's miced into the PA our sound guy says the Kemper sounds better out front.

I guess I'm in a nice position because I've got both options.

FelineGuitars

leerocker said:

 i have got a hardon for a friedman brown eye tho!

I missed this comment at the time but it stood out today - LOL

Col_Decker

There's a lad in a band local to me who uses one. No doubt about it sounds great and the modelling is spot on. But I can't help but feel that its soulless and that the sound you're getting isn't yours, it belongs to a software engineer who programmed it.

guitarfishbay

Col_Decker said:

There's a lad in a band local to me who uses one. No doubt about it sounds great and the modelling is spot on. But I can't help but feel that its soulless and that the sound you're getting isn't yours, it belongs to a software engineer who programmed it.

As opposed to the amp designer who designed your amp? It doesn't really make sense as an observation if you otherwise like the sound.

Col_Decker

Of course it doesn't have to make sense, its an opinion

guitarfishbay

True, fair enough

Fiftyshadesofjay

Col_Decker said:

There's a lad in a band local to me who uses one. No doubt about it sounds great and the modelling is spot on. But I can't help but feel that its soulless and that the sound you're getting isn't yours, it belongs to a software engineer who programmed it.

There is of course the fact that it wasn't programmed anyway, it was copied (profiled) from a real reference amp.

Col_Decker

Hey if you like them that's great, play it and love it. They're not for me though.

 

 

Nerine

Live, the jury's out for me still. Although I'm more for than against.

Recorded.. Incredible.

Provided you don't rely on the stock profiles. Go and get some free ones from TAF.

I've profiled amps and whatnot with it too. If you can't get good results, it's pilot error. The profiling worked perfectly for me and I was left with a 99.9% accurate profile of the amp I was working with.
That's what qualified the technology for me.
Once I knew that what I was hearing was what it said it was, I started to delve into it and try out things and use it on pretty much every production I've done in the last year or so since I've owned it.

I plug mine directly into the mic amps of our SSL 4000E at the studio, and bands and guitarists are usually rather gobsmacked at the sounds coming back through the mains. A lot of people listen to my productions and always think the guitars sound great. They're always Kemper these days.
If the guitarist has a nice rig, I'll pair it up with another amp and cab, mic it all up with some U87's, MD441's, SM57's and whatever, mult that down to a single mic output, which you can do easily on the SSL and run that into the Kemper for profiling.
Bang. Huge guitar sounds stored on a handy green toaster.

They're all profiles I've tweaked to my liking otherwise though.

It's a wonderful bit of gear. Especially for recording. Saves me no end of time and hassle and also allows me to really ramp up the production values of the tracks I work on.

Love it.

The naysayers, well.... Dunno. Not sure what they are or aren't hearing sometimes.

This is the only time I have ever fought the corner of a digital guitar emulator.
For the record, I think the Axe FX etc is pretty crap and sounds nasty.

paulmapp8306

Col_Decker said:

There's a lad in a band local to me who uses one. No doubt about it sounds great and the modelling is spot on. But I can't help but feel that its soulless and that the sound you're getting isn't yours, it belongs to a software engineer who programmed it.

Which is why I prefer the AFX because its more about crafting your sound rather than using someone elses.

Either way - after using an AFX (standard then 2) since 2008, having a Kemper for 13 months, owning a Fender Machete and hankering for a Suhr Badger and either a Lazy Y or Dr Z - I have the following to add.

1,  For recording, you cant beat the top end modelers, whichever you prefer to use.  FX are generally added "after" recording so the AFXs better FX dont come into play.  both units sound good and its more the immediacy  of the Kemper v the flexibility of the AFX.  Thats choice.

2.  For live use, at large venues where you would normally mic up an amp - still the modelers for me.  There much more consistent and actually sound better 96% of the time as bad micing up is a PITA - as is a bad mix/engineer.  AFX v Kemper?  again flip a coin.  The AFX for me due to better FX and more control over signal layout means (to me) a better end product - however the very amp like operation of the Kemper suits some better.

3.  Small venues where you dont mic up an amp, and running the modelers into amps/cabs.  Tough one this.  The modelers are great, very consistent and as good as many if not all of the more generic amps.  Anything sub £1k or so really (though money never tells the whole story).  Once you get top end/hand wired/boutique its a different story.  At that point you generally know what tone your after, and there will be a top end amp that does it.  At this point the amps are better than the modelers, though not by a whole lot and the punters generally dont care.    So, for original bands, or bands that need a general clean/crunch/lead tone the amps have it.  For cover bands - and particularly where a lot of different tones are ideal the modelers till have it.     AFX v Kemper?  for me the AFX here is a clear winner at present.  The Kemper has never been able to subtract the cab part very well - and even the amp only profiles leave me underwhelmed.  The AFX is simply leagues ahead in this format.  That all IMO of course - the kemper is more lively - and some love that.

4.  For the "guitarist".  Well - if your simply talking about how an amp sounds TO THE PLAYER, and how it feels TO THE PLAYER .... only one winner really and thats a quality real amp.  If you cant afford a quality amp you cant afford a top end modeler either so money is kind of a moot point - and theres no doubt, at present the limitations of a modeler into a FRFR system v a good amp - or a modeler into a SS amp/cab v a real amp - or even a modeler into a valve power amp/cab (all of which have their own strengths and weaknesses)  still show.  A quality valve amp is still the players choice - IF thats all that matters.  Its why I have the Machete - and why I will at some point have a top end (probably single channel) amp.  

All the other points though are why I still have an AFX, and why it will be my number one rig for 98% of my needs.

paulmapp8306

Oh - another thought.

There is another "use" as well - in a purely AFX v Kemper discussion - that of a studio.  This differs from "recording" as thats primarily home recording - or from the player perspective.  From a studio owner/engineer/producers POV, I think the Kemper wins quite comfortably.

Why?  Because they are used to working with amps.  There used to post EQ/compression/FX to glue a mix together - so dont need (or want) to tweek players tones on a digital unit.  The Kemper being basically a copy of a real amp - with simple amp like controls for any broad brush changes just suits much more than a mainly menu driven unit with a million and one parameters (should you choose to use them).

Add to that - they have access to many many real amps (which player may not) so wen recording these - if they get a real nice sound its easy as pie to profile it and save if for future use - either with the same band for a re-take/overdub, or a new project - or for other bands that may need that tone but cant get it with their gear.  The AFX just cant really do that as its more a personal tone it crafts. 

PVO_Dave

@paulmapp8306 "AFX v Kemper?  for me the AFX here is a clear winner at present.  The Kemper has never been able to subtract the cab part very well - and even the amp only profiles leave me underwhelmed.  The AFX is simply leagues ahead in this format.  That all IMO of course - the kemper is more lively - and some love that."

I wonder if the v3 release might change your mind a bit Paul? Lots of work has been done around the amp / cab separation with the upcoming release, I believe some of that is already available in the 2.8 beta, but not tried any of it myself, my needs are fairly simple with my Kemper

paulmapp8306

Quite possibly.  Its primarily that I mainly use a real amp/cab that made me keep the AFX and ditch the Kemper.  That and the routing possibilities within the AFX.  The quality and types of FX are better in the AFX however, as I mainly use reverb and delays those in the kemper are good enough for me.

The Kemper is something I will revisit at some point down the line Im sure.

The gaps are narrowing all the time between the two units.  FW18 with G3 modelling on the AFX has finally brought some of the rawness and liveliness to the AFX in amp/cab format that it was missing compared to the Kemper as well.

At present my next "purchase" is away from guitars.  Having bought my Suhr Modern, Fender Machete and a Martin 00028 in the last year (along with replacing the PUs in one of my PRSs for P90s) - I have my eyes firmly set on upgrading my Keyboard from my Roland Fantom S - almost certainly for a 76 or 88 note weighted board so I can learn "piano" techniques properly (as I came from an organ/synth background ).  At present Im gassing for a Norg Stage 2.  Just trying to decide if 76 notes is enough or if I need the full 88 - and saving a little cash of course.

PVO_Dave

I went down the FRFR route, I originally had a PODHD500 and a Tech 21 Power Engine, but wanted to move away from the tinkering of amp sims and just play the ones I like.

For me the Kemper will be the perfect setup once my Remote turns up (hopefully being shipped next week!)

fastboy

paulmapp8306 said:

Col_Decker said:

There's a lad in a band local to me who uses one. No doubt about it sounds great and the modelling is spot on. But I can't help but feel that its soulless and that the sound you're getting isn't yours, it belongs to a software engineer who programmed it.

Which is why I prefer the AFX because its more about crafting your sound rather than using someone elses.

Either way - after using an AFX (standard then 2) since 2008, having a Kemper for 13 months, owning a Fender Machete and hankering for a Suhr Badger and either a Lazy Y or Dr Z - I have the following to add.

1,  For recording, you cant beat the top end modelers, whichever you prefer to use.  FX are generally added "after" recording so the AFXs better FX dont come into play.  both units sound good and its more the immediacy  of the Kemper v the flexibility of the AFX.  Thats choice.

2.  For live use, at large venues where you would normally mic up an amp - still the modelers for me.  There much more consistent and actually sound better 96% of the time as bad micing up is a PITA - as is a bad mix/engineer.  AFX v Kemper?  again flip a coin.  The AFX for me due to better FX and more control over signal layout means (to me) a better end product - however the very amp like operation of the Kemper suits some better.

3.  Small venues where you dont mic up an amp, and running the modelers into amps/cabs.  Tough one this.  The modelers are great, very consistent and as good as many if not all of the more generic amps.  Anything sub £1k or so really (though money never tells the whole story).  Once you get top end/hand wired/boutique its a different story.  At that point you generally know what tone your after, and there will be a top end amp that does it.  At this point the amps are better than the modelers, though not by a whole lot and the punters generally dont care.    So, for original bands, or bands that need a general clean/crunch/lead tone the amps have it.  For cover bands - and particularly where a lot of different tones are ideal the modelers till have it.     AFX v Kemper?  for me the AFX here is a clear winner at present.  The Kemper has never been able to subtract the cab part very well - and even the amp only profiles leave me underwhelmed.  The AFX is simply leagues ahead in this format.  That all IMO of course - the kemper is more lively - and some love that.

4.  For the "guitarist".  Well - if your simply talking about how an amp sounds TO THE PLAYER, and how it feels TO THE PLAYER .... only one winner really and thats a quality real amp.  If you cant afford a quality amp you cant afford a top end modeler either so money is kind of a moot point - and theres no doubt, at present the limitations of a modeler into a FRFR system v a good amp - or a modeler into a SS amp/cab v a real amp - or even a modeler into a valve power amp/cab (all of which have their own strengths and weaknesses)  still show.  A quality valve amp is still the players choice - IF thats all that matters.  Its why I have the Machete - and why I will at some point have a top end (probably single channel) amp.  

All the other points though are why I still have an AFX, and why it will be my number one rig for 98% of my needs.

I think Paul makes some good points here. 

At this moment in time I fall into camp number 3 pretty squarely just doing pub covers. Recording? Rarely. Miced up venue? Rarely which is probably why I never got on with the AFX and wasn't exactly blown away with the kemper either. As I mentioned before, I can definitely see it has a place but it really comes down to application. For my application of sound a real amp is always going to win. 

If I was playing in a tribute band again and would therefore mainly be going FOH for sound then maybe although I still prefer the real thing I think. I guess I prefer the in the room sound that I'm mainly hearing being close to the the amp vs the miced up sound which is why I think I would really struggle to ever transition to modelling.