Since only the profiler/capture device is attempting to recreate a specific amp, a Modeler, by definition, can not be compared directly to the sound of the amp it is attempting to recreate and therefore muddies the water for what "sounds better" having eliminated the ability to simply say "sounds exactly like" and utilize the base sound as the original tube amp itself.
Opinions of what "sounds better" are prolific in the extreme. Attempting to determine which person's "sounds better" will match your own is therefore impossible.
Statistically (based on my own reading of thousands of posts all over the internet and among my own group of friends that gig with various rigs), guitarist that value the sound of a good tube amp with minimal lathering of effects on it gravitate to profilers/capture devices. The Kemper is currently the best profiler/capture device on the market with respect to gigging features and workflow using the same statistical process.
Then you think that quite a few people with pretty impressive guitar playing credentials are not objective. Find me a review where Fractal, Kemper, the original tube amp, and helix are compared where the Helix was the preferred sound. I would be interested in hearing this.
While both can be made to sound good (at least to my ear), it is easier for a person used to dealing with a tube amp and pedals to get the Kemper into the desired "tone" than the Helix (or Fractal for that matter). I know many people that would argue that the Helix in particular is simply not capable of reaching the same raw tube amp tone as either Fractal or Kemper. It is only when you bring the Helix considerable processing and efx capabilities to bear that a "good" sound is achieved (even by your own example). Many would argue that this "good" sound, while still a "good" sound is not the sound and behavior of a real tube amp.... but is still good.
Never said or even eluded to such an utterly absurd statement.
I contend that MOST guitarist that gig, are NOT tweakers. They (as a statistical group) are interested in characteristics of traditional tube amps with respect to the ability to cut through the mix and sit in the mix nicely playing live. They are interested in pedalboard visibility, workflow, and usability including ergonomics, spill-over, and patch switching times as well as workflow enhancing features for a live performance.
Tweakers, on the other hand generally could care less what kind of foot controller the guitar processor has since they will (NEARLY ALWAYS) be using a PC to manipulate the plethora of settings and routings that the device offers. They are (statistically speaking) most interested in what kinds of sounds they can get and delight in creativity of new and original ways of processing a guitar that result in original sounds while being only mildly interested in re-creating the sound of a traditional raw tube amp tone.
It is not unreasonable to expect that a profiler with a good live pedalboard workflow would be preferred by a live musician while a great PC editor and superior flexibility of a modeler would be preferred by a tweaker.
Before everyone here gets their panties all in a bunch, I have seen the Helix used well in a live gig on more than one occasion. That still doesn't make it a superior tool to the Kemper for live use. It only means that you CAN achieve a good live result with it.
FYI, pay careful attention to what the OP said. See where he is coming from and think about what features would be most useful to him and be easiest to use. He isn't asking what your favorite modeler/profiler is. He is asking which one would best fit his needs.
