Kemper Profiler MK 2

MirrorProfiles said:
They’ll do well to sell a fraction of these compared to the MK1. Things have just moved so far beyond where they were, faster boot times and better IR’s ain’t really going to cut it.


Even the best profiles out there do a relatively poor job of capturing compared to more modern approaches. The approach they use simply has its limitations and cannot properly catch some amps and sounds.
Click to expand...
BUT ITS MARK KNOPFLER!!!!!!!

(Who I’m sure sounded great on that tour…but sounding great is hardly difficult these days for a player with his skill. Or even a player with my skill)
 
I see striving for accuracy as a great benchmark when designing anything that copies, models, captures the original so it can reproduce it.
Makes total sense.

I ‘hear’ a small subset of players hammering on the ‘accuracy’ of Kemper being less than competitors. Those same players, as well as all players, are almost all guaranteed to be less accurate than the original players they emulate on stage and in their private rooms. And it’s not the hardware choice that causes it.
What I don’t see is countless threads on how they are dejected with their constantly coming up short in their abilities.

The good news is the audience is listening and they really, really, don’t care what the charts and graphs say. They care if it sounds ‘like’ the original enough to entertain them. I don’t think Kemper has failed to sound like the originals and players who use Kempers are obviously not relatively more prone to failing to entertain the audience.

So keep hammering on accuracy *when developing your algorithms etc* but use some perspective when choosing criteria to judge what works by understanding the ‘work’ you intend to do with your chosen tools.

TLDR: TikTok don’t give a fuck about accuracy. TikTok luvs entertainment.
😎
 
Last edited:
Enchilada Jones said:
I see striving for accuracy as a great benchmark when designing anything that copies, models, captures the original so it can reproduce it.
Makes total sense.

I ‘hear’ a small subset of players hammering on the ‘accuracy’ of Kemper being less than competitors. Those same players are almost all guaranteed to be less accurate than the original players they emulate on stage and in their private rooms. I don’t see countless threads on how they are dejected with their constantly coming up short in their abilities.

The good news is the audience is listening and they really really don’t care what the charts and graphs say. They care if it sounds ‘like’ the original enough to entertain them. I don’t think Kemper has failed to sound like the originals and players who use Kempers are obviously not relatively more prone tofailing to entertain the audience.

So keep hammering on accuracy *when developing your algorithms etc* but use some perspective when choosing criteria to judge what works by understanding the ‘work’ you intend to do with your chosen tools.

TLDR: TikTok don’t give a fuck about accuracy. TikTok luvs entertainment.
😎
Click to expand...
By this metric, BiasFX and Headrush or a PodXT are good enough and we should all just crack on with other stuff. They all sound good enough, and nobody in the audience would notice or care anyway.
 
MirrorProfiles said:
By this metric, BiasFX and Headrush or a PodXT are good enough and we should all just crack on with other stuff. They all sound good enough, and nobody in the audience would notice or care anyway.
Click to expand...
Not exactly what I hoped people would take from my comments. Yes you should crack on *with what ever choice you feel good with*. Use what inspires you most.

You shouldn’t use your preference, and reason for it, as an absolute rule for others. Unless your only goal is to create completely accurate results it seems entertaining your audience and yourself is a higher priority than hitting the last 2% of the accuracy tally.
 
Last edited:
Enchilada Jones said:
Not exactly what I hoped people would take from my comments. Yes you should crack on *with what ever choice you feel good with*.
You shouldn’t use your preference, and reason for it, as an absolute rule for others. Unless your only goal is to create completely accurate results it seems entertaining your audience and yourself is a higher priority than hitting the last 2% of the accuracy tally.
Click to expand...
So the Kemper Mark II is selling itself on better accuracy or it isn’t? I’m not suggesting it needs to be industry leading accurate, but their attempts to catch up have been underwhelming.

FWIW I don’t use any one technology for amp modelling, I’m pretty agnostic to any brand or approach so long as it gives good results. And I don’t care what others use - I just think Kemper is a pretty unappealing and underwhelming choice in 2025. Entertaining the audience has precisely nothing to do with ANY choice of gear, it barely belongs in the discussion. Kemper’s entire premise relies on accurately profiling an amp, and it falls short by modern standards. We can move the goalposts to make the Kemper sound like a good product, but it fundamentally falls short on its main purpose.
 
Eagle said:
Yes but you miss the point “Again” the profile was made by him and a world class engineer hands on. Unless you don’t think profiles vary in quality.
Click to expand...
I think it's an "appeal to authority" fallacy. Just because there's a world class engineer and a world class player does not mean they are able to overcome inherent technical limitations of the Kemper platform.

Can they get better results than Joe Average? Absolutely.
Can they get results that work well for the uses of Mr. Knopfler? Absolutely.
Will those results sound absolutely great to the audience at a typical Knopfler stadium gig? Hell yeah!
Can they get results that are more accurate than what the Kemper is capable of? I don't think so.
 
laxu said:
I think it's an "appeal to authority" fallacy. Just because there's a world class engineer and a world class player does not mean they are able to overcome inherent technical limitations of the Kemper platform.

Can they get better results than Joe Average? Absolutely.
Can they get results that work well for the uses of Mr. Knopfler? Absolutely.
Will those results sound absolutely great to the audience at a typical Knopfler stadium gig? Hell yeah!
Can they get results that are more accurate than what the Kemper is capable of? I don't think so.
Click to expand...
The appeal to authority is the part that makes his position hilarious. But it doesn't even need to be an appeal to authority to be logically flawed.

That Mark Knopfler and His Amazing Engineer get different results is a bug, not a feature.
 
MirrorProfiles said:
So the Kemper Mark II is selling itself on better accuracy or it isn’t? I’m not suggesting it needs to be industry leading accurate, but their attempts to catch up have been underwhelming.

FWIW I don’t use any one technology for amp modelling, I’m pretty agnostic to any brand or approach so long as it gives good results. And I don’t care what others use - I just think Kemper is a pretty unappealing and underwhelming choice in 2025. Entertaining the audience has precisely nothing to do with ANY choice of gear, it barely belongs in the discussion.
Click to expand...
Yes Kemper is a device designer that claims its product is able to copy an amplifiers ability to create sounds that players like. They have supposedly improved their offering and accuracy is one of the criteria they improved. As I said, it is logical for a designer of these things to measure accuracy.

I’m claiming the ‘entertaining ourselves and others’ is a goal we players have when using an ‘amplifier’ device.

Once the accuracy of these devices hits a tipping point, and most of them clear that hurdle easily, then the importance of further accuracy is not as critical as how well the device entertains us and our audience.

When you tell people come see your performance, or recommend they go see another artist do you tell them they will enjoy the performers ‘extremely accurate guitar amplification sound’? Or is some other aspect of the performance higher on your list of reasons to go see the show?!?
 
laxu said:
I think it's an "appeal to authority" fallacy. Just because there's a world class engineer and a world class player does not mean they are able to overcome inherent technical limitations of the Kemper platform.

Can they get better results than Joe Average? Absolutely.
Can they get results that work well for the uses of Mr. Knopfler? Absolutely.
Will those results sound absolutely great to the audience at a typical Knopfler stadium gig? Hell yeah!
Can they get results that are more accurate than what the Kemper is capable of? I don't think so.
Click to expand...
No but they end up with great sounding results.
 
Honestly, I think the accuracy war only appeals to a small group of players (top professional players mostly).

Both Kemper captures and other brands simulations already sound great. Not being 100% to the original amp is not a deal breaker for most people who just want to sound great and have convenient features.

If you're not happy with the sound of a Kemper, Helix, Fractal or Quad Cortex, you might want to check your playback system, your guitar or your technique. Reaching 100% carbon copy of that amp you love is certainly not the thing that's keeping you from being happy with your sound.
 
Call me crazy but Kemper sounds way better than Tonex ( I do have tons of Amalgam captute etc..). The feel under finger when I played with Kemper is incredible, much sponginess and feedback better than Tonex. I use Fender FR10 as reference
 
Enchilada Jones said:
When you tell people come see your performance, or recommend they go see another artist do you tell them they will enjoy the performers ‘extremely accurate guitar amplification sound’? Or is some other aspect of the performance higher on your list of reasons to go see the show?!?
Click to expand...
No, because all my gear use is in the studio. And replicating the sound of an amp with utmost accuracy, quality and convenience is the priority. At one point in time Kemper was the leader at this. Perhaps hopefully, I thought they may try and compete in this again, but it doesn’t seem that way.

For live use, the criteria is different. Some things that might not be critical in a studio could be in a live environment, and vice versa. I’ve seen great performances on all kinds of gear, I really do not care what people use. But on a recording, especially when I’m being hired to do it, then I do care.
 
This Mark 2 has missed the mark in so many ways. Same number of effects slots? Same screen? Same profiling engine?

I actually am not disappointed as I called it years ago that there would never be a true “Mk 2”, just mostly invisible hardware updates. But at the same time I’m disappointed that an innovator like Kemper stopped innovating in 2011.
 
BenIfin said:
Maybe save "box" cost changes to divert all $$ to under the hood changes and retain profit margins <- if you think about it, a very smart business move ... a genuine win/win
Click to expand...

Let alone that people familiar with the device will still be as familiar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

hunter
Null Tests
2
Replies
33
Views
1K
Sascha Franck
Sascha Franck
gergohajer
Real Amp VS Quad Cortex VS Kemper VS ToneX
2
Replies
21
Views
3K
ejecta
ejecta
T
The Profiler Conumdrum
Replies
17
Views
458
laxu
laxu
N
Captured an Engl Savage 120 with the Quad Cortex today
Replies
0
Views
393
nightlight
N
JCW308
Kemper Player - Kemper gives away Morphing for FREE
8 9 10
Replies
188
Views
6K
OneEng
O
Back
Top