Kemper " Methodology vs Axe " Methodology " ..... I just realized something really obvious ..

[benifin]

Hey all

This isn't a KPA 'vs' Axe thread.

I use a KPA and have also been fortunate enough to use an Axe FX XL+ live recently ..... both great units .... end of story .... period.

What I only recently realized though was the fundamental difference between them:-

- the KPA is basically an " open " / " more accessible " system whereby any person can profile any amp and put it in the KPA

whereas

- the Axe is basically a " closed " / " more controlled " environment whereby amps only exist within it when Fractal put them in

Clearly each " way of doing things " has its own +'s and -'s and neither is better or worse than the other ...... I did think though that in all the "discussion" about the merits or otherwise of each unit, the "methodology" difference between the two never seems to be discussed.

And given that each way of doing it is very different .... and that different people will clearly prefer one or the other ..... it struck me as somewhat strange that this doesn't seem to come up when people say they prefer one over the other.

Anyway ..... this is a discussion forum ..... and I had a thought .... and I decided to type it in.

Ben

 

[Ugly Bunny]

I think if they weren't so cost-prohibitive (or 'expensive,' for those of you in Rio Linda), there wouldn't be a discussion at all. Everyone would just have both. But since most people who can afford even one of them grow fond of their choice and defend it. I love my Kemper to death. Still plan on getting an Axe, and I'll love that to death too! Time will tell which gets used more by the time I actually die, but yea, both are great!

 

[C-4]

HEHE! I got the Rio Linda comment!

 

[Jay Mitchell]

- the KPA is basically an " open " / " more accessible " system whereby any person can profile any amp and put it in the KPA

whereas

- the Axe is basically a " closed " / " more controlled " environment whereby amps only exist within it when Fractal put them in

This is incorrect. (Disclaimer - I use neither one at this time.) By your logic, both platforms are closed systems, The difference between them is that kpa has a semi-automated self-configuration utility built in, but the eq/distortion/eq topologies that are configured during the profiling process are themselves fixed ("closed"). The Axe-Fx has what would appear to be a more elaborate and complex underlying topology - which has been altered over time - and allows more user involvement in the configuration of that topology.

If you buy a kpa and only use profiles acquired by others, then the kpa is "closed," in that there is relatively little you can do to alter the underlying character of the profiles. If you use the IR-acquisition and tone-match features in the Axe-Fx (I never have), then it becomes more "open/accessible" in your terms.

 

[Scott Peterson]

OP doesn't mention User IR's -for cabs (which assumes the speaker, cab, any power amp color unaccounted for or altered, the mic, positioning, mic-pre, EQ and other factors) which are used by both platforms.

One key about posting on forums; if you start off with a disclaimer about what your post/thread is "not" about then it most likely is exactly what it is about.

 

[benifin]

This is incorrect. (Disclaimer - I use neither one at this time.) By your logic, both platforms are closed systems, The difference between them is that kpa has a semi-automated self-configuration utility built in, but the eq/distortion/eq topologies that are configured during the profiling process are themselves fixed ("closed"). The Axe-Fx has what would appear to be a more elaborate and complex underlying topology - which has been altered over time - and allows more user involvement in the configuration of that topology.

If you buy a kpa and only use profiles acquired by others, then the kpa is "closed," in that there is relatively little you can do to alter the underlying character of the profiles. If you use the IR-acquisition and tone-match features in the Axe-Fx (I never have), then it becomes more "open/accessible" in your terms.

Actually ....... you have missed and misconstrued my point Jay.

Whilst it may or may not be true that a KPA profile can or cant have its underlying character changed more or less than an Axe IR+tone-match-sound ..... that's not what I was saying or getting at.

Simple example - lets say Vox release the long-awaited AC 31 [ ] on September 1.

=> with the KPA, if a person anywhere gets their hands on an AC 31 on September 1, they can profile it and get it in to their KPA immediately and share or sell their profile to anyone from September 1 - whether or not that profile it good / bad / tweakable etc .... is a whole different ball-game and is irrelevant to my point.

=> with the Axe, the AC 31 only gets into the Axe if/when Fractal decide to take the time to mimic/model it - no-one else outside of Fractal can do it ..... and Axe tone matching is not the same as KPA profiling.

Again, I'm absolutely not saying one is better than the other - just trying to point out that from a user-perspective, this is fundamental difference between these 2 awesome music machines that seems to be mostly overlooked when KPA/Axe discussions arise.

Ben

 

[benifin]

One key about posting on forums; if you start off with a disclaimer about what your post/thread is "not" about then it most likely is exactly what it is about.

Hey Scott - not at all in this case - no reverse psychology / reverse intent.

I am very upfront about using a KPA and am equally / more upfront about when I have used an Axe [ set up for me ] and been equally blown away by it.

Just trying to raise and discuss what I think is a valid, genuine real differece that seems to be rarely raised in Axe/KPA discussions.

Ben

 

[burningyen]

If you buy a kpa and only use profiles acquired by others, then the kpa is "closed," in that there is relatively little you can do to alter the underlying character of the profiles.

I disagree. You can swap cabs, and there are a bunch of deep dive parameters (Pick, Compressor, Tube Shape, Tube Bias, Definition, Clarity, Direct Mix), not to mention Distortion and EQ, that let you fiddle with a profile so as to make it unrecognizable.

 

[Scott Peterson]

Hey Scott - not at all in this case - no reverse psychology / reverse intent.

I am very upfront about using a KPA and am equally / more upfront about when I have used an Axe [ set up for me ] and been equally blown away by it.

Just trying to raise and discuss what I think is a valid, genuine real differece that seems to be rarely raised in Axe/KPA discussions.

Ben

Tongue in cheek humor, hence the smilies. It's not all serious business here on the web. Has nothing to do with the gear you use or do not use. Relax, smile and have some fun.

That said, allowing third party input into your digital box sort of blows up the premise of a 'closed' vs. 'open' to a point.

IMHO, the paradigm for the KPA and Axe-FX are open source. User IR's. Profiles. Match EQ. All just tools. The debate of an 'open' or 'closed' ecosystem isn't a debate more than it is an intellectual exercise. How the tools are constructed by design: one approaches amplified guitar tones by a macro approach and one by a micro approach. That is a more accurate overall perspective - again, IMHO. Allowing third party IR's - which both the KPA and Fractal units do - blows up open vs. closed. Both platforms are open.

 

[eriwebnerr]

Well I voted for the Helix - wait is this the right thread?

 

[randombastage]

People do talk about the fundamental difference you pointed to. Many times they mention you have to hunt through thousands of those 'openly developed' profiles. And others point out you have to find a 'good' one before you should judge the Kemper.
So the real world effect of that difference is in the discussions. It may not be pointed out as a bullet point A/B difference but the difference is cited in the debate...

 

[jpage]

you have to hunt through thousands of those 'openly developed' profiles. And others point out you have to find a 'good' one before you should judge the Kemper.

This is why I decided on the Fractal actually. I'm not much of a 'tweaker' and I was worried about having to weed through a bunch of 'mediocre' profiles. I put that in quotes because I'm not even sure I know what that even means lol

 

[jimification]

One of the things that is commonly asked with the KPA is: "Why don't they make one without the profiling feature?". It seems to me that it's an essential part - every KPA sold is another potential set of free amp models for all the users, increasing its value as a tool. Community spirit and open source-ness aside, this is a clever way to do business. Actually Valve do something similar with their video games, where they are now more or less just making tools or a framework and the users are generating the content for them.

 

[rsm]

sorry, I'm late to this thread, no time to read it, quick somebody tell me...what are we against? what clouds are we yelling at?

IBTL

whew!



I think it comes down to your mindset, how you work to create the sounds in your head and how it sounds. I'm very happy with my pedestrian gear, I get what I want from it and it works well for what I want and need. Any modern modeler can get good/great tones IMO

 

[big_aug]

It is discussed. It is one of the major points that people discuss when comparing the Axe to the Kemper. They just don't refer to it as "methodology." I bet every Kemper owner would say they love that they can profile any amp they get their hands on. That would be them praising the "methodology."

 

[MacOSatch]

Important part of huge Kemper sound is 3-dimensional IRs technology they use.

 

[Dead-Pan]

Kemper has a wonderful power amp bloom that responds to the pick and goes straight to the heart of the player.

 

[SteveO]

People do talk about the fundamental difference you pointed to. Many times they mention you have to hunt through thousands of those 'openly developed' profiles. And others point out you have to find a 'good' one before you should judge the Kemper.
So the real world effect of that difference is in the discussions. It may not be pointed out as a bullet point A/B difference but the difference is cited in the debate...

This is why I decided on the Fractal actually. I'm not much of a 'tweaker' and I was worried about having to weed through a bunch of 'mediocre' profiles. I put that in quotes because I'm not even sure I know what that even means lol

It's not that much of a chore, really. You can refine your search based on the type of amp profiled, or the person that made the profile, the date that the profile was uploaded into the Rig Exchange, or the rating given to that profile by other people.

 

[jpage]

Kemper has a wonderful power amp bloom that responds to the pick and goes straight to the heart of the player.

Sounds dangerous!

 

[jpage]

It's not that much of a chore, really. You can refine your search based on the type of amp profiled, or the person that made the profile, the date that the profile was uploaded into the Rig Exchange, or the rating given to that profile by other people.

Yeah, I'm sure I could've made it work...just another variable to consider. I use one IR for all of my AXE presets and don't ever delve into any "advanced parameters"--I'm sure the Kemper is the same way; as deep or as simple as you want it to be.