As said before, some people seem to think that Kemper profiles actually *sound* better than their originals.
I know, we're in the realm of semantics here - but to avoid confusion, it's absolutely relevant to make a distinction between "does thing XYZ scientifically better" and "sounds better".
Sure, we could then as well instantly stop any discussion once it's about the (highly subjective) perception of sound/tone, but in this case (or in case of, say, L6 vs. FAS or anything else...), there's some kinda factual evidence for certain devices (in this case the Kemper) to sound absolutely fine on a very high level as there's quite some high profile players using it live since a long time already.
Now, just so that nobody gets me wrong: I absolutely applaud anyone diving deeper into "graph territory". Not only because I'm interested on a sort of scientific level but also because it's defenitely pushing things forward.
In case people wouldn't do so, we possibly still wouldn't have the 2203 in the HX ecosystem (which instantly became one of my more used amps).
And threads such as the plugin leveling one wouldn't exist, either (which I am pretty grateful about as it finally made me analyse my plugin-sim-chain a bit more carefully).
So, I'm all for scientific exploration of whatever it might be.
And still, completely dismissing the Kemper as an inferior sounding unit isn't the entire truth. Not only is there several other aspects to it, no, it's also that the Kemper's (factually) inferior profiling isn't necessarily making it a worse sounding unit. It's just no as accurate.