Where should I go next?

[Mongillo19]

I recall you loving the Kemper when you got it. I would stick with that as well. You can get them for super cheap too.

I know it's older tech but it still sounds good (as you know) and it has all the features you want

 

[la szum]

 

[mbenigni]

Yeah, I didn't like the footswitches at all. But I wouldn't be using them if I did this.

I really wish all of these companies would make one version of their devices with no footswitches for those of us who just want to add it to a pedalboard and control everything with MIDI

I agree with you, but in the QC's case it wouldn't change much (apart from maybe the price) - because I'd still want all of the encoders, with roughly the same spacing.

 

[mbenigni]

I spent the day playing with this setup:

Guitar -> HX Stomp XL IN -> HX send -> DSL40 Input -> DSL fx loop send -> HX Return -> IR block -> out to PA

It sounded killer. And it made me realize a few things:

1. I want my amps separate/independent from my effects. I don’t want both tied up in the same device.
2. I want the sound of the DSL in a smaller, more portable package. Since I’m not using the speaker, cab, or power section, there’s no reason to lug those things around.

This is making me think maybe a Kemper toaster, or a QC might be the way to go. I’d use either strictly for amps and Profile/Capture the 5-6 sounds I want out of my DSL. Then control it with the HX and use that for effects and setlist/programming creation.

On the QC can you toggle individual blocks with MIDI?


Essentially what I’m realizing I want to do is have the HX be the master controller, and have the amps be in its loop, then use MIDI from the HX to select amp tones per preset/snapshot/stomp.

If UA made a Marshall pedal I’d probably buy 4 of them and use them in a Morningstar ML5

I feel like the QC is overkill for this setup, but there are several ways you could set up MIDI to accommodate. A single preset with a variety of amp models and capture blocks, in Scene mode, with each Scene having one block activated. HX MIDI output can be sent corresponding with each Scene, or with each QC footswitch.

 

[mbenigni]

I guess the problem would be I'd have to toggle all the others off when I toggle one on.

Hence the use of Scene mode. Just set all the bypass switches to be Scene dependent, and set up each scene to have the block(s) you want turned on, on.

 

[mbenigni]

Yeah, the hybrid mode they announced is pretty lame. But with what I have in mind I would never actually use any of the QC controls and it would be doing nothing but toggling between amp Captures in 1 preset.

I suppose if I went that route, I could set up each Scene to have a different Capture ON and then use MIDI to trigger the footswitch to select a Scene for the one I want on

I should have kept reading LOL.

But wait - haven't you said that you didn't care for the QC's amp modeling? Too much low end/ woof/ compression?

 

[mbenigni]

I thought hybrid mode was implemented?

IMPLEMENTED

 

[mbenigni]

I'm thinking the one thing that might make it work for me in this case is that I wouldn't be using it for anything but amp sounds.

I'd have 1 preset with 7-8 Captures of my amp loaded and Scenes set up to select which one is active. Then I'd use the HX Stomp to send MIDI to select the one I want.

I wouldn't be using any of it's footswitches, its screen, it's effects, it's amp models, or it's IO. So I'd be avoiding all of the things that annoyed me about it before.

Almost everything LOL. If I were handed the exact same gear, I'd put the HX in the QC's effects loop and do everything the other way around.

 

[mbenigni]

The only thing I like better about the QC idea is that it would fit on a pedalboard with the HX Stomp.

(8 pages later...) where did you land on FM3? You dig FAS but not their Marshalls so much?

 

[JiveTurkey]

This gif is one of my faves

 

[metropolis_4]

You've answered your question again.

I’m about 90% sure that’s where I’m going

I should have kept reading LOL.

But wait - haven't you said that you didn't care for the QC's amp modeling? Too much low end/ woof/ compression?

Yeah, I don’t think I’d use the QC amp modeling, I’d just have a preset with a bunch of Captures of my amp and select them with Scenes

 

[metropolis_4]

(8 pages later...) where did you land on FM3? You dig FAS but not their Marshalls so much?

I actually really love their Marshalls!

I haven’t given up on the idea of an FM3. I think in a lot of ways it could be a good option. But the problem is if I’m mainly using it for amp tones it only has one amp block and the gap when changing channels on the amp block is bigger than it is on the AxeIII. And there’s no gap with the Kemper for as many amps as I want

 

[JiveTurkey]

I actually really love their Marshalls!

I haven’t given up on the idea of an FM3. I think in a lot of ways it could be a good option. But the problem is if I’m mainly using it for amp tones it only has one amp block and the gap when changing channels on the amp block is bigger than it is on the AxeIII. And there’s no gap with the Kemper for as many amps as I want

8 pages later; still answering your own question

 

[mbenigni]

Yeah, I don’t think I’d use the QC amp modeling, I’d just have a preset with a bunch of Captures of my amp and select them with Scenes

OK, this answers a question that had been brewing (per things you've said in the past), as to whether your issues with the QC tone were "global", or isolated to specific models (or models in general, vs. capture blocks.)

I actually really love their Marshalls!

I haven’t given up on the idea of an FM3. I think in a lot of ways it could be a good option. But the problem is if I’m mainly using it for amp tones it only has one amp block and the gap when changing channels on the amp block is bigger than it is on the AxeIII. And there’s no gap with the Kemper for as many amps as I want

Ah. Yes, this is a point in favor of QC: you can just load a pile of captures into a single preset and switch them in and out instantly. There are ways of getting similar functionality on other platforms (rig changes on Kemper, amp channels on FAS), but nothing quite as straightforward.

Still, you know and love the Kemper workflow. Its form factor is the only real drawback. (I'm getting flashbacks to JiveTurkey's sideways-mounted pedalboard toaster LOL.)

 

[mbenigni]

Of course not lol but with a majority of gear being so close to each other in terms of tone and capability, sometimes it's the smaller things that matter and push someone to buy one device over another

Are those differences really so small, though? FAS does the deep edit thing; Kemper does profiling with morphing and stage-ready I/O; QC does modeling and multiple captures per preset, in a unique form factor. I feel like these distinctions would drive different players to different purchases sooner than concerns over dodgy and/or goofy marketing decisions.

 

[laxu]

They call them rack units… No point in putting something MIDI controlled with no footswitches on a pedalboard.

Not the same thing at all.

I have a FM3 and an Axe-Fx 3. The FM3 (or QC or HX Stomp) is small enough that I can take it and some compact MIDI controller with me in a carryon luggage and have a whole guitar rig right there. My Axe-Fx 3 stays at home unless I have a car at my disposal (don't own one, just have no need for it in the city I live in).

But at the same time the FM3 is kinda crap at being a floor unit. Its display is hard to read because of its tiny text and the 3 switches, as programmable as they are, is not enough. 4-5 switches? I could work with that. 3 just doesn't do it for me. Sure I can augment it with some simple switches, a MIDI controller etc but instead I'd rather have no switches to make it even more compact so I can put the unit somewhere waist high for easy control access and then control it from the floor with something else.

HX Stomp is similar in this sense. I'd rather it had more onboard knobs and a bigger display than footswitches. It's so much easier to augment these things a footswitch solution than try to add more knobs on them. MIDI knob controller support is abysmal on every single modeler on the market.

That's why I liked the QC because in terms of hardware it was everything I wanted out of a guitar modeler:

• Compact.
• Powerful enough for even complex signal chains.
• Tons of onboard controls thanks to the switch/knobs.
• Touchscreen UI for easy navigation.
• Enough inputs and outputs for most uses.
• Built in mic preamps should you need them for any reason.

Shame its software is the part that doesn't do it for me.

 

[metropolis_4]

OK, this answers a question that had been brewing (per things you've said in the past), as to whether your issues with the QC tone were "global", or isolated to specific models (or models in general, vs. capture blocks.)


Ah. Yes, this is a point in favor of QC: you can just load a pile of captures into a single preset and switch them in and out instantly. There are ways of getting similar functionality on other platforms (rig changes on Kemper, amp channels on FAS), but nothing quite as straightforward.

Still, you know and love the Kemper workflow. Its form factor is the only real drawback. (I'm getting flashbacks to JiveTurkey's sideways-mounted pedalboard toaster LOL.)

Agree, the form factor is really the only drawback for what I’m looking for in the Kemper. Though I’m tempted to go toaster + Kab instead of trying to put it all on a board. Or maybe even rack and then later add a Helix rack to go with it.

Yeah, my issues with the QC tone was just the amp models in general. I didn’t hear the same tonal problems in the Captures. My only slight problem with Captures was I didn’t feel like Captures of drive pedals worked or sounded as good as I’d hoped they would. Especially in front of Captures of amps. But I certainly didn’t exhaust all the possibilities there

 

[Jarick]

I think the Toaster + Kemper Kab would be a solid choice given your preferences...you can run "amp in the room" or direct or both I think. The only downside is you'd be sinking in about $3500 (with the remote) for tech that's over a decade old. But that seems to be your preference.

What's the appeal of the Helix for you, knowing you don't love the amp modeling?

 

[laxu]

Are those differences really so small, though? FAS does the deep edit thing; Kemper does profiling with morphing and stage-ready I/O; QC does modeling and multiple captures per preset, in a unique form factor. I feel like these distinctions would drive different players to different purchases sooner than concerns over dodgy and/or goofy marketing decisions.

My take as always is that the major differences are:

1. Form factor
2. Workflow

If you can't get good tones out of any of these that's on you. That doesn't mean you can't have a preference for a particular unit. Past that you can get into the small things that will push you towards one or the other.

To me Fractal and Line6 units are the most "feature complete" on the market. There's not much they can't do. But unfortunately you also have to make compromises in both companies units. Small but less powerful, big but powerful, floor vs rack vs pedalboard.

QC has great hardware but needs so much work on its software that by the time they've got it all sorted out the next gen Line6 or Fractal are out or close to being released.

Amplitube could probably take the whole captures/profiling market if they released a compact pedal (let's say Strymon Iridium or Volante size) that can run their ToneX stuff with cab sims. Pair that with your favorite pedals or multifx.

 

[Mongillo19]

The only downside is you'd be sinking in about $3500 (with the remote) for tech that's over a decade old. But that seems to be your preference.

If you are buying Kemper gear new you are doing it wrong lol