Kemper Profiler MK 2

[Dimiguitar]

I disagree. Most people who buy a Kemper (the thread topic) don't profile at all. If they don't profile at all, then accuracy wasn't part of their purchasing decision. So for the majority of people who buy Kemper, "the whole point" is not accuracy since they never profile with it at all.

I think it's quite possible not to profile but still expect to buy/get free profiles that are accurate, and make unit purchasing decisions on that basis. I believe part of Kemper becoming popular was A/B tests, usually through the function of the unit itself, tests where profiles sounded fairly convincing compared to source. This implies a level of accuracy.

And if I remember correctly, CK had also wrote on the forum that if a profile you download sounds a certain way, you can be confident it was intended to sound like that. I'm paraphrasing but can't find the exact comment again. That also implies accuracy, it seems to me.

But I can understand if the claim would be that, after a given level of accuracy and forward, what remains is less crucial for many people compared to the presence of other features.

If NAM required me to push a boulder up a hill 50 times each time I made or even just loaded a capture, I would probably say goodbye to the improved accuracy and pick other units/software. So there's surely other things that matter to me too, certainly.

 

[OneEng]

1. If I buy a capture/profiler device, especially for $1500+, it's because I want to profile amps and have it come out exactly like the original is.

Just so I understand you correctly, you believe that the majority of Kemper owners profile amps and care deeply that the profiles they make don't null as good as NAM. You also believe that no one that buys a Kemper (or other capture device) has any other criteria that might outweigh small differences in capture quality.

I'll agree that if YOU buy a capture/profiler, that is your criteria. I think that you are intentionally ignoring the fact that others don't agree and purchase a Kemper and are elated with the sound quality and features.

It's almost as if you are angry with anyone that can't grasp just how important a Null test is for a guitar rig.

I think it's quite possible not to profile but still expect to buy/get free profiles that are accurate, and make unit purchasing decisions on that basis. I believe part of Kemper becoming popular was A/B tests, usually through the function of the unit itself, tests where profiles sounded fairly convincing compared to source. This implies a level of accuracy.

And if I remember correctly, CK had also wrote on the forum that if a profile you download sounds a certain way, you can be confident it was intended to sound like that. I'm paraphrasing but can't find the exact comment again. That also implies accuracy, it seems to me.

But I can understand if the claim would be that, after a given level of accuracy and forward, what remains is less crucial for many people compared to the presence of other features.

If NAM required me to push a boulder up a hill 50 times each time I made or even just loaded a capture, I would probably say goodbye to the improved accuracy and pick other units/software. So there's surely other things that matter to me too, certainly.

You are absolutely correct that Kemper made a name for themselves with the premise that the device can capture and re-create famous tube amps so accurately that it is indistinguishable from the original amp, and that even the feel of the Kemper would duplicate the feel of the amp profiled so well that you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

I think that the claim is partially true. I think that Kemper gets pretty close, but that getting "near perfect" to the point where no one can accurately tell the difference takes a bit of doing on a Kemper. It also requires that you actually own the amp. I think I once topped out at 3 tube amps. I have a couple of friends that have as many as 10. MOST people have exactly 1. My point being that without Kemper, I would never have known that I prefer a Friedman over a JCM800 (and the same kind of thing for a few other amps) because I would likely never have purchased a Friedman to find out.

Where Kemper has gotten off in the woods is the persistent assertion that their profiles are as accurate as can be and that there is no sense in getting more accurate ...... which is a particularly hypocritical statement in the face of the MK2 launch. The irony is quite thick.

I think they should have shifted gears and pivoted to their strengths .... but then I don't run product management for Kemper. Instead they decided to double down on accuracy.

I have to admit, I purchased my Kemper based on 2 key pieces of research.

1. The people that owned Kemper had previously owned very nice tube amp rigs and sold them after purchasing Kemper.
2. Video after video showing artist after artist failing to tell the difference between Kemper and the real thing.

That ISN'T why I have kept the Kemper though. The damn thing is built like a brick, sounds great gig after gig, and just plain gets the job done in brilliant style making my job easy on stage (and at home).

I am rooting for them with the new profiling though. It will be interesting on this forum to see how the MK2 discussions go IF the new profiling algorithm meets or exceeds NAM. Of course, I could care less. Unless the Stadium XL punches it out of the .... well .... stadium with respect to live gig use and offers the same sonic stability and reliability as Kemper, I think Kemper will survive for quite some time to come.

It is sad though. They could be doing so much more.

 

[paisleywookiee]

Just so I understand you correctly, you believe that the majority of Kemper owners profile amps and care deeply that the profiles they make don't null as good as NAM. You also believe that no one that buys a Kemper (or other capture device) has any other criteria that might outweigh small differences in capture quality.

I'll agree that if YOU buy a capture/profiler, that is your criteria. I think that you are intentionally ignoring the fact that others don't agree and purchase a Kemper and are elated with the sound quality and features.

It's almost as if you are angry with anyone that can't grasp just how important a Null test is for a guitar rig.

You are absolutely correct that Kemper made a name for themselves with the premise that the device can capture and re-create famous tube amps so accurately that it is indistinguishable from the original amp, and that even the feel of the Kemper would duplicate the feel of the amp profiled so well that you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

I think that the claim is partially true. I think that Kemper gets pretty close, but that getting "near perfect" to the point where no one can accurately tell the difference takes a bit of doing on a Kemper. It also requires that you actually own the amp. I think I once topped out at 3 tube amps. I have a couple of friends that have as many as 10. MOST people have exactly 1. My point being that without Kemper, I would never have known that I prefer a Friedman over a JCM800 (and the same kind of thing for a few other amps) because I would likely never have purchased a Friedman to find out.

Where Kemper has gotten off in the woods is the persistent assertion that their profiles are as accurate as can be and that there is no sense in getting more accurate ...... which is a particularly hypocritical statement in the face of the MK2 launch. The irony is quite thick.

I think they should have shifted gears and pivoted to their strengths .... but then I don't run product management for Kemper. Instead they decided to double down on accuracy.

I have to admit, I purchased my Kemper based on 2 key pieces of research.

1. The people that owned Kemper had previously owned very nice tube amp rigs and sold them after purchasing Kemper.
2. Video after video showing artist after artist failing to tell the difference between Kemper and the real thing.

That ISN'T why I have kept the Kemper though. The damn thing is built like a brick, sounds great gig after gig, and just plain gets the job done in brilliant style making my job easy on stage (and at home).

I am rooting for them with the new profiling though. It will be interesting on this forum to see how the MK2 discussions go IF the new profiling algorithm meets or exceeds NAM. Of course, I could care less. Unless the Stadium XL punches it out of the .... well .... stadium with respect to live gig use and offers the same sonic stability and reliability as Kemper, I think Kemper will survive for quite some time to come.

It is sad though. They could be doing so much more.

No, actually you’re not understanding me correctly, and furthermore are constructing some weird strawman. Not sure why you’re struggling so much, but it is what it is. You’re attempting to apply your same tired points you’ve made over and over again to everyone else, to what I’ve stated. I also never even mentioned null tests. I am not angry about anything. I also never stated that anyone else should or should not be happy with a purchase they’ve made. I seriously suggest you work on your reading comprehension.

 

[ian_dissonance]

 

[paisleywookiee]

Can we get a study of Kemper owners, so we know precisely what percentage profiles their own amps? Where is it?

 

[riffy]

When I had the Kemper, I did profile my own amplifiers, and I also profiled some friends. But, that said, I also bought captures as well.

What that says I don’t know. But I do know, that other friends who had Kemper did not profile their amps at all. They counted on the profiles that they bought being accurate to the amp that was profiled. In some cases, they are fairly accurate, but in other cases, not so much. That doesn’t say they don’t sound good, because they did. They just weren’t accurate to the real amplifier to my ears.

 

[BenIfin]

https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/ProfileAmpmk2--kemper-profiler-head-mk-2

Just for you

Broken record here but:-

" ... Profiles now analyze more than 100,000 individual frequency points to deliver the highest level of sonic accuracy possible, while Kemper’s Liquid Profiling transforms your profiles with gain and tone controls to capture the dynamic feel of tweaking a physical amplifier. Moreover, the MK 2 update features dynamically adjustable speaker and cabinet resonance to further sharpen the fidelity of your impulse responses ... "

No wiggle room. No maybe's. No buts / if's. No grey area. Nothing to debate.

Its either going to -objectively test - "as the best" or "as not the best".

Massive claims require massive deliveries.

 

[paisleywookiee]

When I had the Kemper, I did profile my own amplifiers, and I also profiled some friends. But, that said, I also bought captures as well.

What that says I don’t know. But I do know, that other friends who had Kemper did not profile their amps at all. They counted on the profiles that they bought being accurate to the amp that was profiled. In some cases, they are fairly accurate, but in other cases, not so much. That doesn’t say they don’t sound good, because they did. They just weren’t accurate to the real amplifier to my ears.

I still think it means that we don’t really know what the percentages are. I tend to believe what I see in person, not what I read online.

 

[riffy]

Broken record here but:-

" ... Profiles now analyze more than 100,000 individual frequency points to deliver the highest level of sonic accuracy possible, while Kemper’s Liquid Profiling transforms your profiles with gain and tone controls to capture the dynamic feel of tweaking a physical amplifier. Moreover, the MK 2 update features dynamically adjustable speaker and cabinet resonance to further sharpen the fidelity of your impulse responses ... "

No wiggle room. No maybe's. No buts / if's. No grey area. Nothing to debate.

Its either going to -objectively test - "as the best" or "as not the best".

Massive claims require massive deliveries.

That does not say that the Kemper will out perform all other capture technology products. It doesn’t leave wiggle room.

To me, it says the highest level of sonic accuracy possible. That means for the Kemper ecosystem. Or they will be able to say that. So there is still wiggle room.

Although honestly, I hope it is the best capture technology that is out there. If that is so, I have another one in my future.

 

[Mongillo19]

Broken record here but:-

" ... Profiles now analyze more than 100,000 individual frequency points to deliver the highest level of sonic accuracy possible, while Kemper’s Liquid Profiling transforms your profiles with gain and tone controls to capture the dynamic feel of tweaking a physical amplifier. Moreover, the MK 2 update features dynamically adjustable speaker and cabinet resonance to further sharpen the fidelity of your impulse responses ... "

No wiggle room. No maybe's. No buts / if's. No grey area. Nothing to debate.

Its either going to -objectively test - "as the best" or "as not the best".

Massive claims require massive deliveries.

Idk, I agree but at the end of the day it's an advertisement. I'm sure they can wiggle out of it somehow. One could argue the use of "sonic" very much makes it subjective.

It "sounds" accurate can't be refuted.

 

[OneEng]

When I had the Kemper, I did profile my own amplifiers, and I also profiled some friends. But, that said, I also bought captures as well.

What that says I don’t know. But I do know, that other friends who had Kemper did not profile their amps at all. They counted on the profiles that they bought being accurate to the amp that was profiled. In some cases, they are fairly accurate, but in other cases, not so much. That doesn’t say they don’t sound good, because they did. They just weren’t accurate to the real amplifier to my ears.

This is where most of the people I know are as well. Probably half of them profiled their amp when they first got their Kemper, and the other half never profiled at all. Of the half that did, they either ALSO use paid/free rigs as well, or ONLY use paid/free rigs now.

Broken record here but:-

" ... Profiles now analyze more than 100,000 individual frequency points to deliver the highest level of sonic accuracy possible, while Kemper’s Liquid Profiling transforms your profiles with gain and tone controls to capture the dynamic feel of tweaking a physical amplifier. Moreover, the MK 2 update features dynamically adjustable speaker and cabinet resonance to further sharpen the fidelity of your impulse responses ... "

No wiggle room. No maybe's. No buts / if's. No grey area. Nothing to debate.

Its either going to -objectively test - "as the best" or "as not the best".

Massive claims require massive deliveries.

I THINK the wiggle room is in the word "sonic" which could easily be interpreted to mean "you can't hear the difference".

A stronger statement would have been "most accurate reproduction distinguishable by any means" .... but "sonic" may well be a better marketing term and also provides some wiggle room should NAM still outperform MK2 in a null test.

I still think it means that we don’t really know what the percentages are. I tend to believe what I see in person, not what I read online.

So if you lived in rural Texas you would believe that 90% of people drive a pickup truck?

That does not say that the Kemper will out perform all other capture technology products. It doesn’t leave wiggle room.

To me, it says the highest level of sonic accuracy possible. That means for the Kemper ecosystem. Or they will be able to say that. So there is still wiggle room.

They didn't specify "The most accurate Kemper ever". I think they are going after the title, but giving themselves an out with "sonic".

Idk, I agree but at the end of the day it's an advertisement. I'm sure they can wiggle out of it somehow. One could argue the use of "sonic" very much makes it subjective.

It "sounds" accurate can't be refuted.

Agree.

FWIW, here is what Chat GPT thinks about how many Kemper users profile their amps:

There is no official published statistic from Kemper on the exact percentage of users who profile their own amps, but based on industry discussions, user surveys from forums like TheGearPage, Reddit, and Kemper’s own community, here is a grounded estimate:

---

​

• 10–20% of Kemper users create their own profiles.
• 80–90% rely on commercial or free profiles shared by others (e.g., Tone Junkie, Michael Britt, ChopTones, Rig Exchange).

---

Why Most Users Don’t Profile Themselves:​

• Profiling requires:
  
  • A good recording environment
  • A mic setup
  • Reamping gear or access to the amp at gig volumes
• Many users are:
  
  • Bedroom players, cover band musicians, or studio engineers who prefer convenience
  • Touring musicians using known commercial packs for consistency

---

Insight:​

Kemper’s Rig Exchange (free profiles) and the commercial profiler ecosystem have made it so easy to get professional sounds that most users never need to profile an amp themselves.

 

[Jarick]

Is this issue here just debating personal preference?

@paisleywookiee and @Orvillain - you both said you want a profiler to be as accurate as possible

@OneEng - I think you're more concerned with having the total package including effects

So nobody's going to win this debate, although we can all certainly lose.

 

[paisleywookiee]

Is this issue here just debating personal preference?

@paisleywookiee and @Orvillain - you both said you want a profiler to be as accurate as possible

@OneEng - I think you're more concerned with having the total package including effects

So nobody's going to win this debate, although we can all certainly lose.

Yep. I’m stating what I don’t like about the original Kemper, and what I was hoping for for the new one that they failed to deliver on.

I really don’t give a shit what anyone else thinks about the device, whether they’re happy with it, if they’re happy with their purchase, etc., if people like it, super. I think the company is incredibly arrogant to release what they have in 2025.

 

[ian_dissonance]

Is this issue here just debating personal preference?

@paisleywookiee and @Orvillain - you both said you want a profiler to be as accurate as possible

@OneEng - I think you're more concerned with having the total package including effects

So nobody's going to win this debate, although we can all certainly lose.

It’s not even debating personal preference. It’s stating personal preference to move the line of the debate away from things that are for the most part measurable because preference doesn’t prefer measuring things. It’s actually kind of comical. We had the opposite in another thread where I guy said “this is my irrational preference and I understand it is both a minority and irrational” and people kept trying to debate him on why it is a preference and irrational for like two pages, lol. I swear some people are using ChatGPT to summarize a thread every time they come back and then responding to that (wrong, inaccurate) summary.

 

[Enchilada Jones]

Does anyone in this debate disagree that a person can like what they like for whatever reason you have for liking it?

If you don’t disagree with that premise isn’t it a bit silly to selectively take umbrage with marketing speak and wax poetic about potential marketing failures?

No company has deprived a consumer of their competitions product. No company can eliminate another companies product. Only the market can do that.

Only Barnes can kill Barnes.

 

[OneEng]

My point is that there are likely plenty of people who will be delighted with the Kemper MK2 .... especially those who already purchased an MK1.

I am not trying to make anyone else feel they need to buy it .... especially if it isn't their cup of tea.

Is this issue here just debating personal preference?

@paisleywookiee and @Orvillain - you both said you want a profiler to be as accurate as possible

@OneEng - I think you're more concerned with having the total package including effects

So nobody's going to win this debate, although we can all certainly lose.

Agree.

My point was that despite the misgivings stated in this thread about Kemper, there are likely plenty of people that will buy it.... or keep using their MK1 for the things it does do well.

Now, I do agree that by ignoring the Ui/Ux and other features, Kemper is going to have some strong competition from Line 6 Stadium (even if it didn't have capture) simply because features sell .... and so does color OLED scribble strips. I guess my contention is that Kemper is much more likely to lose sales because of these things than it will because of its profile accuracy.

NAM on the other hand is unlikely to take many sales opportunities away from Kemper. I don't believe that anyone that is interested in Kemper's strong points will be interested in NAM. This is, of course, a generality.

 

[Jarick]

Yeah that's what I don't get.

Is anyone here actually trying to argue the Kemper is more accurate than Tonex or NAM or whatever? I'm certainly not, there's more than enough clips of differences and I hear the "sameness" in high gain profiles and all that.

If not then again I don't get the debates. Because at that point it's personal preference. Ginger or Mary Ann. Coke or Pepsi. Whatever.

 

[DrewJD82]

I don't even know what the debate was over.

 

[ian_dissonance]

Yeah that's what I don't get.

Is anyone here actually trying to argue the Kemper is more accurate than Tonex or NAM or whatever? I'm certainly not, there's more than enough clips of differences and I hear the "sameness" in high gain profiles and all that.

If not then again I don't get the debates. Because at that point it's personal preference. Ginger or Mary Ann. Coke or Pepsi. Whatever.

Really the only thing up for “debate” that I could see was that profiling/capturing is intended to create as close as possible to 1:1 of an amp sound and someone kept saying “most people don’t even capture their own amps” as if that has anything to do with the previous thing.

 

[OneEng]

It’s not even debating personal preference. It’s stating personal preference to move the line of the debate away from things that are for the most part measurable because preference doesn’t prefer measuring things. It’s actually kind of comical. We had the opposite in another thread where I guy said “this is my irrational preference and I understand it is both a minority and irrational” and people kept trying to debate him on why it is a preference and irrational for like two pages, lol. I swear some people are using ChatGPT to summarize a thread every time they come back and then responding to that (wrong, inaccurate) summary.

I am certainly not debating my personal preference. I am pointing out that there are others that have different preferences other than accuracy. For those who feel accuracy is lacking in Kemper, and want for something more accurate, there are plenty of options for them.

Does anyone in this debate disagree that a person can like what they like for whatever reason you have for liking it?

If you don’t disagree with that premise isn’t it a bit silly to selectively take umbrage with marketing speak and wax poetic about potential marketing failures?

No company has deprived a consumer of their competitions product. No company can eliminate another companies product. Only the market can do that.

Only Barnes can kill Barnes.

LOL. No argument from me. Like what you like as it is you God given right .

FWIW, I think Kemper has made some MAJOR marketing failures.

Is anyone here actually trying to argue the Kemper is more accurate than Tonex or NAM or whatever? I'm certainly not, there's more than enough clips of differences and I hear the "sameness" in high gain profiles and all that.

Not at all. Kemper is demonstrably not as accurate as Tonex or NAM (or even QC). Kemper is accurate enough for me, and many others, but not for everyone.