A theory i have about what the kemper is doing to us musos.

gt_jumper · April 7, 2013 at 8:08 AM

You have the 2 big guns (axe fx & kemper) to choose from.

I chose kemper and i know its the right choice, here's why.

A majority of those who purchase modellers for recording are not all that happy with their tones they are getting via microphone on speaker, fair enough! Not everyone has awesome cabs/mics/pres/rooms to get pro results. BUT, i have found those who buy a Kemper will still be inclined to practice micing and mixing real amplifiers via profiling. Lets face it, its fun having that days mic up trapped in your toaster sized box forever. And, its a challenge that has the ability to directly compare results at the flick of a switch.

Those who by he axe fx will be more inclined to use it on any sort of recording instead of micing anything up, hence missing out on the black art of micing amplifiers up.

Thoughts?

Armin · April 7, 2013 at 9:57 AM

Yes, I agree.
When I owned the AxeFx I was never realy happy with the accuracy of the amp/speaker simulation.
So I still used my real amps for recordings - both with mic's and speaker sims (torpedo vb101).

Now after owning the Kemper I can capture any great amp/speaker/mic combination and store it.
So I see no need to mic this combination anymore for a recording.

On the other side I still like to experiment with other cabinets, speakers, mic's, mic placement - and re-profile my amps to get new sounds.

And the best is: I don't have to trust a manufacturer that the model is correct but can use my own setup and a/b the results until I am happy.

Quitty · April 7, 2013 at 1:50 PM

I always thought the weakest link in creating a direct guitar rig is the cab modeling. Impulse responses are a great step forward, but eventually just a glorified EQ.
There was a better solution out there (still is) called Nebula, which changes impulse responses automatically based the volume of the incoming signal - i think the Kemper's cab modeling works in a similar fashion but that's just a guess.

One of the greatest advantages of the Kemper, IMO, is that it doesn't dismiss tube amplifiers. It doesn't aim to replace them - it aims to coexist, to use them.
In that, it acknowledges that they won't disappear anytime soon and that they are doing something that is, at the moment, irreplaceable.
So yes, i agree - and i think that's true for more than just cabinets and micing.

Slightly off-topic;
With the XFX releasing MIMIC, i think we might get some healthy competition in the field now. It's Cliff admitting that the Kemper method has done something right -
if CK accepts that the XFX has some distinct advantages as well we might get some really amazing advancements -
for example, if we could select the type of power-section the amp we're profiling has from a basic list, it might be possible to separate amplifier and cabinets better.
Just a thought.