Is the Kemper really *that* much better than the Axe-Fx?

[bammbamm]

Originally Posted by EasyDoesIt

I didn't call him a liar; I called him a brilliant marketer by how easily he convinced the AXE II owners that tone Match is the same as Profiling when everyone knows very well that Tone Match is no different than any EQ Plugin that has been around for a decade or so.

I respect truth and integrity and Cliff has every excuse not admitting that Tone match is identical to EQ match plugin due to some of his customers who whine and cry that they want the same thing the Kemper customers have. I'm sorry you see that as disrespectful, but your hostility is understood. You can't make a point so your resort to personal attacks, that's your understanding of respect and how you attempt to win an argument: by insulting others! Good luck to you!

Um.. so Cliff deliberately misled the Axe FX owners and made something up to fool them because they whine and cry about wanting such function. Isn't that saying that he is a liar? Seems like you have a vendetta against the AxeFx and its users. What have they done to you? Seriously... dude. Who whined and cried? I didn't see one who did in the the Fractal forum... did you?

[cliffc8488]

Dear Mr. EasyDoesIt,

I'm sorry I ran over your dog. It was an accident I swear.

Sincerely,
Brilliant Marketing Person

[Muzz]

Originally Posted by cliffc8488

It's almost trivial to match an amp (or another modeler). Matching a recording is far more difficult.

Here is a match of a 65 DRRI: www.fractalaudio.com/tmp/dlx_match.mp3

They sound/feel different to me but I could be due to the playing. Could you post several A/B comparisons feeding the amp and the Axe with the same dry clip? If it is not too much asking please use a clip more complex and long.

[tgp100]

Originally Posted by 1fastdog

Don't know if this applies, but consider FUD and how it's used,,,

"FUD stands for Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt.It is a marketing technique used when a competitor launches a product that is both better than yours and costs less, i.e. your product is no longer competitive. Unable to respond with hard facts, scare-mongering is used via 'gossip channels' to cast a shadow of doubt over the competitors offerings and make people think twice before using it.In general it is used by companies with a large market share, and the overall message is 'Hey, it could be risky going down that road, stick with us and you are with the crowd. Our next soon-to-be-released version will be better than that anyway'."

YMMV.

As I wrote earlier, it's common in the businessworld for some companies to use FUD tactics and it's very ugly.
FUD info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_u...inty_and_doubt
What's been displayed early on in this thread is extremely unprofessional behaviour and very bad manners, by any company standards.
It's wrong, counter productive and against common sense.
A nice and educational business ethics class should be mandatory for everyone taking the business road.

[zentman]

Originally Posted by EasyDoesIt

I didn't call him a liar; I called him a brilliant marketer by how easily he convinced the AXE II owners that tone Match is the same as Profiling when everyone knows very well that Tone Match is no different than any EQ Plugin that has been around for a decade or so.

"If there's a point to be made here it was clearly made by the misinformation propagated not only by some AXE II customers owners, but also by the Makers of AXE II themselves. I don't know if there are some kids out there that will be sold an acoustic to play metal or a distortion box to play folk music because a few did it, but I''m having a hard time accepting that some, other than the owner or salesman, are also spreading misinformation to help selling a product even when they don't receive commission! People should have some integrity instead of recommending the wrong solution knowingly."

[riffy]

Can't we all just agree that both units do sound great and leave it at that?
Pick your poison and leave it there!

Gary

[EasyDoesIt]

I don't have a Vendetta against anyone. I happened to be in the market for something that models My collections of tube amps and I was doing research that lead to this forum. I did see a post where Cliff stated that you can "tone match amps and not only recorded clips". I asked him to direct me to some videos that demonstrate how accurate and complex or simple the process would be, but he didn't reply. Some of the hard core fan boys pointed me to few videos that were far from impressive when compared with the wealth of videos available about Kemper. I got insulted, called a troll and non of the points I made was addressed. Many responses where only silly smiles were used because the fan boys who couldn't compose sentences that address my points figured insulting me would make their point! Brilliant isn't it!

My understanding based on extensive research was the the AXE and AXe II were never intended to clone or copies but rather something better than the AMPS they model so it wouldn't be a good solution for someone like me looking to model his own tube amps specially that there's an amazing product made by Kemper that addresses this scenario specifically where someone wants to carry in one box the sound of his OWN tube amp (Miced amps). That's the summary of what I've been saying. Is that really offensive and does it call for someone to call me a troll and insult me over! Sure the AXE II sounds good, but as a solution for someone who wants to model his own AMPS, it's way behind the Kemper that, I personally would have a very hard time recommending the AXE as a solution to model you own tube amps. The data, the videos and the consensus is very clear on that the Kemper is the only viable game in that regard. Did anyone read any of the reviews on Sweatwater where many AXE owners who gave review were blown away by the Kemper accuracy and feel that they clearly see it as a better modeling tool in general and not only to model you own tube amps! So you love your AXE II, fine Live with it but don't deny the clear evidence that Kemper is way better for modeling your own amps and clearly uses more advanced modeling than any other modeler including the AXE II!

Let's see how many responses I get to this with posts that only include a smile or two!

Originally Posted by bammbamm

Um.. so Cliff deliberately misled the Axe FX owners and made something up to fool them because they whine and cry about wanting such function. Isn't that saying that he is a liar? Seems like you have a vendetta against the AxeFx and its users. What have they done to you? Seriously... dude. Who whined and cried? I didn't see one who did in the the Fractal forum... did you?

[EasyDoesIt]

Turns out they have a name for that. FUD.

Originally Posted by zentman

"If there's a point to be made here it was clearly made by the misinformation propagated not only by some AXE II customers owners, but also by the Makers of AXE II themselves. I don't know if there are some kids out there that will be sold an acoustic to play metal or a distortion box to play folk music because a few did it, but I''m having a hard time accepting that some, other than the owner or salesman, are also spreading misinformation to help selling a product even when they don't receive commission! People should have some integrity instead of recommending the wrong solution knowingly."

[Yek]

Let's see how many responses I get to this with posts that only include a smile or two!

Here are three:

[EasyDoesIt]

Now that's really funny!

Originally Posted by Yek

Here are three:

[Yek]

Originally Posted by Audioholic

Sorry Cliff but Trivial to match an amp? Give me a break. Amps have been the foundation of recordings for forever, and isn't that what you have been trying to do since you started?. Really stretching with the trivial to match an amp, reallly stretching...

No worries, you are interpreting his post wrong.
It's about the Axe-Fx procedure.

[DADA]

Have to agree with Easy Does It (and I am an axe-owner :-) The FAS smiley here keeps shouting its better... its better...its better

I am still waiting for the FAS version of this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7V1M...layer_embedded

Oohhh....the silence.....

[North]

I have the Axe-Fx II and I am waiting for the Kemper, IMHO:

1. The Axe is a great product for many guitar players.
2. The Kemper is a great product for many guitar players.
3. Some like both, some like neither.
4. Fractal has chosen to use its authority to pick on Brand K on something that may or may not have much significance in a way that makes it appear very significant. Some may think this is ethically and/or otherwise questionable.
5. Kemper has chosen not to engage in this (as far as I know).

I like both products (the Kemper from what I have read and heard), but I personally really don´t subscribe to Fractals behavior in this case.In my mind it devalues the company and it is an actual acknowledgement and endorsement of Kemper.

IMHO.

[javajunkie]

Originally Posted by EasyDoesIt

I don't have a Vendetta against anyone. I happened to be in the market for something that models My collections of tube amps and I was doing research that lead to this forum. I did see a post where Cliff stated that you can "tone match amps and not only recorded clips". I asked him to direct me to some videos that demonstrate how accurate and complex or simple the process would be, but he didn't reply. Some of the hard core fan boys pointed me to few videos that were far from impressive when compared with the wealth of videos available about Kemper. I got insulted, called a troll and non of the points I made was addressed. Many responses where only silly smiles were used because the fan boys who couldn't compose sentences that address my points figured insulting me would make their point! Brilliant isn't it!

My understanding based on extensive research was the the AXE and AXe II were never intended to clone or copies but rather something better than the AMPS they model so it wouldn't be a good solution for someone like me looking to model his own tube amps specially that there's an amazing product made by Kemper that addresses this scenario specifically where someone wants to carry in one box the sound of his OWN tube amp (Miced amps). That's the summary of what I've been saying. Is that really offensive and does it call for someone to call me a troll and insult me over! Sure the AXE II sounds good, but as a solution for someone who wants to model his own AMPS, it's way behind the Kemper that, I personally would have a very hard time recommending the AXE as a solution to model you own tube amps. The data, the videos and the consensus is very clear on that the Kemper is the only viable game in that regard. Did anyone read any of the reviews on Sweatwater where many AXE owners who gave review were blown away by the Kemper accuracy and feel that they clearly see it as a better modeling tool in general and not only to model you own tube amps! So you love your AXE II, fine Live with it but don't deny the clear evidence that Kemper is way better for modeling your own amps and clearly uses more advanced modeling than any other modeler including the AXE II!

Let's see how many responses I get to this with posts that only include a smile or two!

Yes and no.

Yes, you are correct and stating the it was not intended (prior to tone matching) to clone or copy a PARTICULAR amp. But the II is intended to model the amps it has accurately. the better part you keep adding is mainly the ability to deviate from the original designs and mod your own amp or make hybrids. For your purpose taking a snapshot of your amps the kemper sounds like a better solution. For mine, coaxing the sound and behavior I want to here from the machine the Axe-fx II worked better. I sold the kemper. I actually would have kept it if it did not take sooo long to start up (as long as it takes ME to load a firmware version on the axe-fx II) and not liking the form factor. It did sound very good to me. So does the axe-fx.

However, it is clear that you do no not have in depth hands on experience with either the II or Kemper (which I consider important in extensive rather than preliminary research).

I will quote hippietim because my experience mirrors his:
"The Kemper has potential. I will disagree with folks that say it sounds exactly like the amp you're profiling. It does a very good job of capturing the essence of an amp rig at a particular setting. But no matter what I did, I never got a profile to have the low mid response like the real thing. I don't just mean EQ here - you can dial that in after the fact if you have the patience. The feel of it was never quite right in terms of the low mid responsiveness. If you want good profiles, you better have the amps and mics to do it yourself or be incredibly patient to weed through the hundreds of less than stellar profiles.

The amp controls on the Kemper do not work like the amp controls on a regular amp. The gain knob is nothing like a real amp - it has a very narrow usable range. The bass/mid/treble/presence is like some amp out there no doubt but not like the amp in the profile you are using.

The effects with the Kemper are ok but not where they need to be at that price point. The routing and other capabilities of the Kemper are not where they need to be either.

I much prefer the feel of the Axe over the Kemper. I much prefer the sound of the Axe over the Kemper."


To clear the air on what Cliff did say about the different approaches, here it is:
"It (the II) now has Tone Matching which is arguably the most important part of profiling.

Profiling consists of four parts:
1. Finding the input EQ.
2. Finding the "shape" and bias point of the nonlinear transfer function.
3. Finding the output EQ.
4. Finding the compression, or sag, characteristics.

The Axe-Fx II with V6 uses a hybrid modeling/profiling approach. The Axe-Fx modeling is much more complex in that it does not use a single waveshaper with adjustable shape and bias point. It uses multiple dynamic nonlinearities including preamp and power amp modeling. Profilers distill everything down to a single static waveshaper and then adjust the shape (probably a x+k/x-k waveshaper) and bias point of that waveshaper to try and match the measured transfer function. They then find the input and output EQ and the compression.

With V6 the Axe-Fx II uses a combination of modeling and profiling. The amps are modeled using our exclusive multiple dynamic nonlinearities that very accurately replicate actual tube triodes and our new power amp modeling which fully recreates the behavior of a tube power amp and output transformer. The models are then refined by applying test tones to the actual amp to find deviations between the real amp and the model. For example, traditional circuit based modeling cannot account for things like parasitics since these are not represented by the schematic. So we now augment our traditional circuit modeling with measurements from the actual amp and store that data in the model.

With Tone Matching you can morph a model to match other amps. This works best if the model and amp are similar.

There are numerous advantages to this approach. These advantages include full control matching. The drive, tone, etc. controls behave just like the real amp. You're not just getting a snapshot of the amp at some setting. Another advantage is full separability of the amp from the cabinet. Due to inseparability of linear responses, profiling lumps the amplifier output with the cab response. The multiple nonlinearities also capture the complexities of amps that rely on both preamp and power amp distortion. Single waveshaper approaches cannot capture the complex interactions of multiple distorting stages and the concomitant duty-cycle modulation, EQ modulation (which produces note bloom and swirl) and the vagaries of feel.

The one disadvantage is that you only get the amps that we have modeled. If you have an amp that is very unique that we haven't modeled then Tone Matching may not fully capture the essence of that amp. Profiling allows you to capture that amp at your favorite settings with your favorite cab. Another disadvantage is that modeling is very labor intensive. We have to enter all the circuit data, measure the control tapers, verify the model accuracy and then apply all the fancy test tones and capture the refinement data."

[rob2001]

Is this thread for real??