Hi,
I had every possible modeler (among those AxeFx, Kemper and Helix) and finally arrived at QC because that is the best suited modeler for my purpose. I learned the following which I think is essential to make a good decision (but of course this is just my experience
Kemper or a QC are the best decision if you have a decent tube amp and want to reproduce that sound, but it is important that you have to capture your own amp, do not expect to find a capture that suits your needs that comes from someone else.
To get a real good capture into the Kemper you need good studio equipment, a lot of experience and time, that is why I prefer QC, where you just need ten minutes and a good reactive loadbox, in my case a Two notes Torpedo, to get a really good capture of just the amp without a cab.
If you are good at capturing the cab and have the equipment for that, just do this or buy a cab like your own from a commercial company specializing in Cab Irs like (in my case) Chop Tone.
Important: you will have to capture every sound you want to use, because it is best to not touch any control. Therefore at least you need two sounds, with and without the treble booster.
If you are playing with In ear systems, then this should work. If you want or have to hear your own sound on stage, you need a tube power amp like Mooer or Fryette and a cab. FRFr just doesn ´ t work for a powerful sound.
Ive got both the Kemper and the QC. You can use a load box to directly profile straight into the Kemper too, so there’s no difference there. On the Kemper you can , if you want use either IRs or a ‘baked in’ cabinet with that profile. IRs are much more convenient, but the cab part of a Kemper profile is much better as it adds dynamics to the cab, which an IR (at present) can’t do, as its a static model and does not include speaker reaction to the dynamics of your playing or amp settings. The capability to separate/interchange cab portions of a QC capture is a big miss
and surprises me. The Kemper can use both IRs and the ‘baked in’ cabs I just mentioned. As for UI. on the QC it’s actually quite clunky, especially doing some obvious stuff like changing setlist live. It also involves a lot of bending over. Kemper toaster or rack are at eye level and have amp style knobs. The Stage has a mobile editor, which the QC lacks. Performance mode on the Kemper beats all the other modellers by a long way. It effectively gives you up to 5 amps, each with 8 switchable effects and different scenes freely available with no gaps. The QC can only use 1 preset at a time in this way, with up to 8 scenes. You would run out of DSP way faster than the Kemper to do the same thing despite the much improved processing power. The main advantages of the QC are more than 1 amp at the same time and split paths/ routing. There is also the compatability with their plug ins, which is one of the main selling points, but you have to buy the plug in version and port them over to the QC at over a hundred quid each. You could always profile them…
Don’t you have access to less scenes (not sure what the correct term is for Kemper) at once for Kemper? That’s the main deal breaker for me with Kemper, also the lack of an additional signal path + you can’t have more than one amp in the preset
That’s where performance mode kicks in. It’s actually similar to having 5 scenes, each with a different amp, and completely different effects with completely gapless switching. There are also “scenes” within those performances, which is probably what you are thinking of. Scenes are a thing which was first brought into being by helix to make up for the gaps between. presets which made it difficult to have more complex setups. Kemper had Performance mode, which as I said, is way more powerful because the entire processing power of the unit can be used within each performance. The best way to work it out is to check the manual online and see what I mean. In a nutshell, scenes are a pretty inefficient way of working and only there to make up for the slow preset switching on the QC. On the Kemper you can have 5 amps to switch between, all with their own set of up to 8 effects. They also have the scenes you are referring to within those performances but they are way less important than in the QC as the way the Kemper works you don’t need them, they are just the icing on the cake. There is no way you could have 5 different amps and 40 different effects running on one preset in the QC, which is what you would need to match the Kempers performance mode The effects on the Kemper are in a different class to the QC which gets by but isn’t particularly inspiring. On the other hand, if you want 2 amps at once or complex routing then the QC wins hands down as the Kemper simply can’t do it.
I have had both Kemper Stage (too clunky for me) and FM9 (mature solid product, best tones and feel, a no-brainer if it weren’t for the small GUI / loss of tactility which didn’t work well for me in live situations).
I would like a QC, I think its clever design concept and form factor is perfect for my needs .. but looking at comments, it seems to me that some of the concept and promises made remain unfulfilled (Covid and supply chain must have been a huge influence).
I love what DSP are trying to do, I have five plugins and was an early QC adopter but returned it as the clean and EOBU tones didn’t feel much better than what I had at the time (Atomic AF12), and bought a Strymon Iridium which was a huge improvement. I dearly hope DSPN can catch up. I want to believe and may yet bite if only to trial test.
I would say best tones and feel is definitely subjective but its good that you have found platforms that work for you and its great we have so many choices today!
Hmmm. Have you used an FM9T?? There’s no gaps period.
I haven’t seen or heard anything by from Kemper that makes me think “that beats all modelers by a long ways” especially in regard to fractal.
Kemper also squeezes their base for money any chance they get.
I played the Toaster about 8 years ago. Played my buddy’s fractal and lb for lb I went with fractal.
Kemper sounds really good. I don’t think Theo offering beats out fractal tho. I’ve never been a big fan of L6 but I’m considering selling my QC for a stadium.
The gapless thing is a big deal (to me anyway) fractal does it between massive presets without trying.
The gap between channels on my triple rectifier takes more time than the FM9 does.