THE BEST SOUNDING AMP I'VE EVER PLAYED // Will it hold up against digital modellers?

[@PaulDavids]

Hey champs, thanks for watching. For those interested, I made a full amp demo/how I dial in my tone and pedals on my (new) 2nd channel. Check it out (or not). kzbin.info/www/bejne/lZOZoI2eapl0rLM *ALSO VERY IMPORTANT and pls read before commenting:* The Kemper is recorded via the DIRECT OUT. That is exactly how I always used the Kemper and that's why I used that same setup for this 'comparison'. This video is not a: 'KEMPER VS REAL AMP' video where we see how close the Kemper can get to the real deal. It's basically the other way around: 'How Paul Davids always used his Kemper vs HIS NEW MATCHLESS' video. It was never my intention to create identical sounds, I was just interested to see how my old setup/rig compared to playing the real deal. When I would run the Kemper trough a power amp and via the Matchless cab I'm sure it would've been closer. But I wouldn't have done that anyway, too much hassle.. Also, people saying I should have profiled my own Matchless: although that is a fun experiment, it's very seldom a situation that really happens. Most folks just download great profiles (like I did) to use on the Kemper, and stick with those. As I said in the video, getting a great profile is actually pretty difficult.

[@johant.m7303]

Verry good video!

[@jeremiedion7850]

Don't you still have your ox box for volume problems!?

[@meandmyunclesbrother]

Great video Paul!

[@ryner5171]

wat u ave 2nd chanel .. ...

[@AlanIanke]

With good headphones it's possible to tell the difference. The Matchless has a cleaner attack. The Kemper sounds with a little bit of "digital dust" when the pick strikes the strings.

[@NickTann]

The Kemper sounds more compressed. the matchless is more rich and open. In my opinion.

[@mitchfindergeneral]

This was my conclusion as well.

[@sch2412]

wanted to write the exact same thing :D

[@macumbeiro_xx]

Exactly, but I think the Kemper can be tweaked a bit more to sound closer. I wouldn't change my Kemper for a million dollars... well maybe for a million ;)

[@nickagervasi]

I think that I have to agree. Listening to those back to back, I can hear it. But the overall tone is SUPER CLOSE.

[@erwin2869]

Yes

[@cmunson59]

It's weird but it's how it shows up in my head. The kemper is like listening to someone play behind a closed door while with the matchless it's like opening the door. If that makes sense. Love the matchess over the Kemper.

[@freehey629]

That's because the Matchless is obviously recorded with two mics panned left and right, which creates a stereo widening effect. The Kemper is almost dead center. While I think the Matchless sounds better, the stereo widening of the Matchless clips makes this a bit unfair. Either both should be panned left/right or both mono.

[@heinrichthiessen]

@@freehey629 THats what I thought. The mic position is kind of what sells it here.

[@JeffLearman]

My sentiments exactly: the slight stereo separation of the mics made the Matchless sound way better to me. So I just re-listened in mono (on Windows: control panel -> ease of access -> audio) and there's still a difference, but not nearly as big. And then I agreed with Paul's assessment. BTW I'm over 60 and don't hear anything over 8K, listening using inexpensive Sennheiser wireless headphones, so not perfect listening by far. I still hear a difference and the Matchless wins, but not by enough that I'd bother! IMHO the real biggest difference is having a speaker and the acoustic feedback through the guitar; can't get that using headphones. (There is a widget you can clip on a headstock to help with that, though!)

[@antoinebachelier9351]

Yeah. Less "bite" from the Kemper.

[@teleplus97]

@@freehey629 I listened to this in mono, and I could still tell the difference. Night and day. I think the difference is big enough to give much higher than 50% chance of guessing the amp from the Kemper even if the time gap between the A and B is spread to rather significant, say a minute or two. Just saying, can't prove it really, but that's how I feel about it.

[@RhettShull]

You sir, have excellent taste in amplifiers.

[@joshualyness4790]

It’s only THE Rhett Shull commenting on Paul David’s video 😉

[@brandall101]

It's kinda funny to see the amp that sorta started it all (the lower wattage boutique boom) is still seen in such high esteem. Back in the early to late 90s this amp reigned supreme. True story - I used much of the proceeds from my summer job between freshman and sophomore year college ('95) to custom order a green 2x10 Matchless Chieftain. I loved that amp dearly for 7 years... only sold because at 75 lbs it was such a pain to move around. I now own a '68 Princeton Reverb (a real one, not the reissue) and I dare say that Chieftain had a more complex, 3d clean tone.

[@skunkproductionsMLA]

I'm a cheapskate so what should I buy, a Bugera BC30 and mod it get or a modeller with a Matchless profile?

[@w1third]

skunkproductionsMLA HX Stomp

[@matthewturner5773]

Agreed

[@RJRonquillo]

90s DC-30s are some of my favorite amps.

[@sonar1357]

@Sss not trying to shill but they're probably made better today as well. Wiring has vastly improved at Matchless over the years. Better isolation and grounding means less noise.

[@Flavum]

@Sss Yup. The "Sampson Era" claims are BS. The newer amps may even be better, thanks to circuit and placement updates.

[@evanmaier2551]

The matchless definitely is beefier. I like that sound a lot

[@inthemix]

Matchless was worth every penny. The Kemper is amazing no doubt about it but with your playing, the Matchless just has a certain tone to it that can’t be beaten! It seems to react with your dynamics in a very special way - long story short, you sound amazing!

[@TheDevil69270]

The Matchless sounds much warmer to me, but we have to admit that the Kemper does an insane job at recreating these sounds in one package

[@fejeren81]

My thoughts exactly!

[@AlexCronex]

Yep, the Matchless is the real deal. I‘ve played for about 10 years an Axe-Fx and switched now back to a Mesa Boogie Mark V. For now no modeller is 100% accurate in comparison to a real tube amp🤘🏻

[@boarderking133]

No one can tell the difference over KZbin on their phone speaker. Also the difference you're hearing is that he used different cabs for each. Not an amp to p comparison.

[@rolux4853]

Dylan Howard I can smell someone desperately in need to defend his big digital toy, which costed insane amounts of money.. Not everyone is listening to KZbin videos through his phone, but a decent HiFi setup btw. Of course you are right, KZbin compresses the heck out of the audio! But even with YTs (lack of) sound quality you are clearly able to hear the supremacy of the real matchless tube amp in this video. I don’t have any problem with digital gear, in fact I play a lot through digital plugins, but if I want to have the real sound nothing beats my Fender tube amp. It just feels and sounds that little bit more real! But of course it’s kind of a one trick pony, while the kemper (or any other digital amp/daw plugin) can get you every tone you can imagine.

[@mr.guitarrockman1476]

Well, you hear the difference, even with the phone... BUT.... it's hard to tell if one is 'better'.…. also Paul, you did not profile this exact amp, did you? 🤔 No matter what, everything sounds really, really good in this vid. 🤘🏻🎸💪🏻

[@suaragitar]

The Kemper sounds like an amp that has blanket over it for lack of a better word. The Matchless is just brilliant!

[@toledo2983]

the Kemper sounds lifeless in comparism, like cheap fake digital sound.

[@k9er233]

@@toledo2983 There is just no exact replacement for the tone from those magical little fire bottles.

[@gryphon37]

One breathes, the other does not, and won't.

[@music2noise]

had Kemper for two weeks and sold it.

[@user-ev2qo1hj1g]

Yep

[@quicklynamed]

After trying all kinds of digital modelers and "do it all" types of things, I've concluded that nothing really compares to the sound, and in particular, the feel of a tube amp. Guitarists have been chasing the non-tube unicorn for years to no avail. Warts and all, tube amps are king.

[@craigwillms61]

My buddy uses only a kemper on stage using the house system to amplify. I haven't the heart to tell his sound is thin and washed out. He's very good but you miss the nuance of his playing. Kemper might be fine studio gear - not for the stage. IMHO

[@weschilton]

@@craigwillms61 Its the same in the studio

[@skaldlouiscyphre2453]

After years of being told I needed to get a tube amp I was able to use a YCV Blue for an extended period, both on it's own and with a clone of an SLO preamp running into it. The SLO sounded very similar to the digital model I was used to (maybe less dynamic, but probably only if you could tell how hard the pick attack was), the YCV sounded a little brighter. Neither were what I was after although they both sounded adequate. A Crate GX for $30 ended up being what I was after. It got me about 90% of the way to what I was after. In combination with a Master Effects Martyr (VS8100 preamp clone), it's exactly what I was after, just run 'em in stereo. I think I like the Crate even more than the clone of a VH-140C preamp I got later on, but the VH is preferable to the tube SLO preamp. Simple and analog is good but for some tones transistors will do the job better. Best of all, you won't sound like everyone and their mom with a 5150 or a Mesa.

[@labdrive]

You know that if you play in front of any sizable audience, your magnificent tube sound will be collected by a 80$ Shure sm57 in front of one of your speaker (or thru some direct box of some kind), into a mixer, and will go out thru a mix of 18-inches speakers and horns, right?

[@labdrive]

@@retroman541 ??? Your sound will be amplified by real amps, including in your monitors. For the look, hard rockers have solved the problem a long time ago: an enormous wall of Marshall stacks behind you... unplugged.

[@callumnew7202]

The matchless sounds fuller, warmer and less “brittle” than the Kemper. The Kemper sounds really good considering it’s a fraction of the price of the matchless.

[@thoth8663]

Perfectly put.....nice ear you have there.

[@davidburke2132]

Totally agree. I was able to pick out the Kemper and the Matchless in Paul’s little test snippet and I do think the Matchless has the nicer tone in this video (with all the care Paul describes that he took in microphone use and placement) but would I have been able to pick out the Kemper as “digital” or “not the real thing” in isolation, without previously hearing the two amps earlier in the video? No, I wouldn’t. Without being A-B’d with the Matchless the Kemper sounds pretty wonderful in its own right.

[@callumnew7202]

David Burke I know what you mean. By itself, the Kemper doesn’t sound brittle at all; when it’s compared to the matchless though, you notice it.

[@bardsamok9221]

​@@callumnew7202I sold mine _because_ of that brittle digital kemper tone. K could do a couple of things well, but most it's night and day. Sold it and invested in other equipment.

[@mitchfindergeneral]

The Kemper sounds more compressed and the Matchless sounds HUGE in comparison.

[@justinnorthcutt6794]

The Kemper sounds great... but you're right, the Matchless sounds HUGE. Just HUGE.

[@scoutsden7193]

Agree, much fuller mid-range.

[@estebanpena499]

agreed but remember the recording methods. The Matchless is being recorded through a SM57, the Kemper is in line.

[@Melgaer]

The difference is huge. Yes, Kemper does really simulates the sound of Matchless, and sounds good, though only until you play the Matchless.

[@400_billion_suns]

If he'd profiled *his* amp and mic setup with the Kemper, you'd have a hard time hearing any difference. He's comparing his amp, in his room, with his mics, against a profile somebody else made of their amp. Edit: see his follow up vid for an actual comparison kzbin.info/www/bejne/aWOQqYaKh8ylftk

[@deshawn4077]

@@400_billion_suns There will be a difference

[@the80386]

@@deshawn4077 there will be no noticeable difference if profiled properly. In this case, the difference is caused by different amp and mic being used for the profile compared to the amp being played live.

[@400_billion_suns]

@@mickeyguide3112 It has very little to do with the Kemper itself and everything to do with the profile that is loaded. If you're not familiar with how the Kemper works, it's not exactly an amp 'modeler.' It runs a bunch of test tones through a real amp+mic setup, at various volumes, and takes a bunch of measurements of response, eq curves, distortion etc. From that, it creates a 'profile' which, if done correctly, sounds *very* close to the original setup, both in tone and dynamics. So when you hear crappy tones out of a Kemper, what you're hearing is a crappy profile.

[@400_billion_suns]

@@deshawn4077 If done well, it will be so slight that in a blind comparison, you may be able to tell they aren't the same but you most likely won't be able to say which is real and which isn't. There are tons of videos of exactly this test all over youtube and the web, and the success rate of saying which is which is no better than a coin toss. Yes, there will always be a tiny difference with anything that copies tones, but that difference is small enough as to be inconsequential with a well-made profile.

[@sidestyle05]

Usually, it's nearly impossible to tell a difference with these kind of comparisons. But in this case, I can definitely hear the additional chime and sparkle on the Matchless

[@RudyJunior7]

I disagree. Usually its easy to tell the difference. I have a Matchless and am pretty much against modeling effects. The Kemper sounded virtually identical. If you have to A/B something more than once then it sounds very close. I am a tube amp junkie. That Kemper is impressive, still I'll never buy one.

[@Jeffy2n]

Listening with Sony headphones, both amp did give a good tone, the matchless was the clear winner. Fuller and richer in overall tone.

[@HubertMessenger]

Matchless is stereo, more „roomy“, Kemper is mono. Therefore it seem to sound less rich...

[@nobodys.shapeshifter]

Exactly what I heard. Also the kemper was quieter during the clean examples making it sound less bold.

[@dickjonesify]

Definitely. Huge setback for the Kemper clips.

[@serph2951]

ha, I knew it was something like this while listening though headphones, the Kemper easily wins here

[@EricLancheres]

Matchless 100% - Even in the blind comparison, it was easy to tell!

[@TheTouristBureau]

The Kemper sounds like the Matchless with a cold.

[@ribbonsofeuphoria5744]

Comment of the week 🏆

[@TimAyro]

Yeah the Kemper honestly sounded like shit here. I have a Kemper so no disrespect to it. But I think what we are hearing may be off with the Kemper, depending on how he recorded it.

[@boarderking133]

@@TimAyro difference is the cabs he's using.its not an amp to amp comparison.

[@kelkulot06]

A big one

[@Nightmoore]

That's spot on man. I was shocked at how easy it was to tell the difference when he started to A/B them.

[@chadsux]

Pretty amazing how close the Kemper sounds. The real difference I hear, outside of the ones you mentions, was that you could hear the “air” in the room with the mic’d amp. It could breathe of that makes any sense. Which gives it a more pleasant sound to it compared to the Kemper. And there’s nothing like the feeling and response of an amp and can at volume. But man that Kemper sure is a fantastic piece of tech.

[@dasutzt1980]

To me, as a digital player due to budget reasons, the matchless seems to have more depth to it, a kind of 3rd dimension, a Z-axis. Awesome video like always. Thank you.

[@chrisocallaghan4539]

The Matchless all the way: more dynamics. The Kemper sounds like the Matchless but with a rug over it.

[@danielweinfurtner]

yes, or with a compressor pedal with everything to 11.

[@michaeljamieson3582]

Exactly what I thought.

[@vltjd]

Both sound good, agree with your assessment of the Matchless compared with the Kemper, but you do realize that you can adjust that profile and probably get the sound even closer which is easier than ever with their new editor. Every time I think I need a new amp, I plug into the Kemper, find multiple great sounds and realize no amp can do this.

[@slash196]

Or better yet, just profile that matchless.

[@MintStiles]

You need to play a really good amp. Doens't have to be vintage at all, just has to be from a really good maker. It's just not the same as a modelling amp (very good). That last few bit of je ne sais quoi will always do you in for 3-5k lol.

[@bubkusjones]

The actual Matchless was superior by far. The Kemper, while good, did sound rather muffled in comparison.

[@depechex]

Different cabs, that's why. Huge impact on the sound.

[@depechex]

@@robokaos69 Exactly, I have my Kemper right next to me now, and I know what you're talking about. Seems like people don't know what they Kemper is...

[@jtn191]

He should (& could) profile his Matchless

[@carpediem4413]

Wow! The Matchless sounds sooooooo much better - what an amp! 😮 So organic and rich.

[@ramilrodriguez8340]

There is more detailed sound on the matchless, like a more complex sound. The kemper sounds like if you record the matchless and the file goes thru the compression of the internet, like when you convert a wav song to mp3. You loose detail. The dynamics, the harmonic content is way superior on the matchless. It’s alive!! I have a ceriatone dz30 I built and it’s definitely one of my favorites. I love it. I also built a SSS a Friedman BE clone, Marshall kind of amps, Hiwatt, etc, and the Matchless copy is definitely special. I’m building a second one with few mods like channel switching and switchable bright caps. It’s amazing how such a small tube like the el84 can sound so big and rich and full. I love el84’s.

[@brandonbussell5544]

Matchless has way more harmonics and is just more rich.

[@HappyPhilS]

Also, the Matchless is more musical. The modeling just adds noise to make an over driven tube sound.

[@stefannita3439]

@@HappyPhilS good thing the kemper isn't a modeler then

[@charlesreid9337]

"richer" is a great description for tube amps. I dont have high end stuff but i have reputable digital pedals etc etc and to me digital always sounds.. noisy..fuzzy in a bad way. though im sure if i played a $$$$ modelling amp id be amazed

[@barryjoslin432]

Indeed. There’s just “more.”

[@Torquemonster440]

100%... i completely agree.

[@kingkilburn]

The matchless sounds bigger and more alive. Without hearing it side by side I'd have thought the kemper was perfect.

[@MatthewScottmusic]

Nothing beats that beautiful tube saturation! However, the modeler does impress me.

[@VinnyCarpenter]

The Matchless just seems brighter, richer and fuller.

[@telecasterman18]

You did a really nice job recording the matchless and comparing the two sounds. I used to own a Matchless Lightning so I know how absolutely gorgeous, lush and rich those amps sound in person. The Kemper definitely sounds very similar, but, it has a subtle “clicky-sounding” pick attack harshness to the overdrive like all amp modelers and processor boards do. Matchless definitely has a nicer and more organic overdrive/compression. Nice video.

[@dannyllerenatv8635]

The Matchless sounds less compressed/more open

[@dkijc]

what I thought too.

[@gabrielrc99912]

agreed, i feel like was the same amp with different mics.

[@depechex]

@@gabrielrc99912 Different cabs used on the profiled Matchless of the Kemper. That's why they sound so different. If Paul would profile his Matchless, everyone would have a hard time figuring out which one is which.

[@Hickeroar]

The matchless sounds far more "rich," at least in my headphones.

[@nathaniellewis8443]

Agreed

[@boarderking133]

Which is from the the difference of the Kemper > direct out vs matchless >cab

[@aylbdrmadison1051]

@@boarderking133 : I would be more interested to hear the difference as you describe. But then even micro adjustments of mic placement make such a massive difference in sound that there is no way to compare them without turning off the mic and cab simulation of the Kemper and listening to them both in the same room and placed in the exact same position on the room and using the exact same cabinet/speaker combination. So, from a video, we will never be able to truly hear the difference 100%. Regardless, even through ear buds the Matchless sounds far superior to this recording engineers ears. That said, all ears are different and tastes vary wildly. So just because I or anyone else may disagree with you, what *matters to you* is how it *sounds to you.* Do your own thing and follow your own ears. This is how all the greats have done their own thing and a major part of what makes them great.

[@cliffgarrett]

The matchless sounds like it has more headroom, more dynamic, and cleaner/more full frequency compared to the kemper.

[@lbm5618]

Kemper in my opinion is completely null and void of any dynamics. You can simulate the dynamics with a little upwards expansion, but its still flat and not the same.

[@johncurtis4159]

Matchless without doubt - it changes the way you play - you like it better, and it comes through in your playing. The only real challenge is to amplify the joy of making music - nice work!

[@pierrecorin354]

Salut Paul, you will have the best sound by using your AB pedal and feed into both input, the magic happens when both channels are used at the same time.;..!

[@renatonyc]

Considering how much either of these cost, one must also consider the following: the value of each 5 years from now. 😄

[@zackfreedman2486]

The Matchless sounded better than the Kemper, I love the Matchless on my Axe FX 3 and it sounds great, maybe with the extra control over the model on the Axe Fx you could get it to sound closer. Either way both sound good.

[@philmartin7474]

Yes, but when you were recording the Matchless, were we also hearing the room mic or video mic in addition to the speaker mics? Because yeah, tge Matchless with all the mics sounded bigger, more alive, 3D depth and ambiant room sound with much more girth/low end, where with the Kemper it sounded dead dry and more flat, so depending on all the mics involved, the test may not be fair, but damn i sure do love that live amp sound for sure.

[@bryansahki3472]

Indeed

[@brienbell1797]

Yeah definitely agree. The Kemper just didn't quite have the life, or maybe even volume comparatively. Kemper sounds great, but once you play the real thing, it make the Kemper fall short. Anderton's does a lot of good videos on comparing the Kemper to the real thing, and I think they were able to have a set up where it was much closer, such that blind tests, people couldn't really tell a difference.

[@moskitoh2651]

Congrats for your buy! I liked the Kemper Tones more in the beginning of the video. At the very end the Matchless was a little bit ahead for me. As I have neither the money, nor the time for dialing in tones, always the Kemper for me.

[@shayhayden]

I think it would be a super cool idea to take a direct profile of the HC 30, then instead of switching between the inputs switch which head goes into the cabinet.

[@hammer5475]

The kemper is ok, the amp sounds great. In all my years, I’ve found having one killer sound verses a 100 ok sounds is the win. Live is the test of a piece of gear. You will find out at the gig the amp works better every time. If you have a crap guitar or a great guitar they will sound the same in the digital realm. The amp will make all the subtleties of your playing shine...

[@eddiesell8577]

The Matchless definitely has more warmth and natural harmonics to my ears.

[@livinthesound5182]

Matchless sounded really good.. Kemper, in direct comparsion sounded like a old digitech multiefekt hehe

[@boarderking133]

The difference you're hearing is between cab vs direct out. Not amp vs amp

[@aylbdrmadison1051]

@ livinthesound : While I agree with your first sentence, no it does not sound like an old digitech. It does however have the same problems. But the Kemper is far superior. I am a recording engineer and tube amp purist for those and other reasons, but I would love to have the convenience and flexibility of the Kemper myself. Even so, I would still record with my tube amps.

[@livinthesound5182]

@@boarderking133 i just said what i hear

[@livinthesound5182]

@@aylbdrmadison1051sorry but in this video, to my ears, the kemper sounded really bad... Nothing against digital stuff or something like that, just didn't like the sound of it...

[@mikeplahn7099]

I am telling you Paul the way it comes across in the video, there is absolutely no comparison between the two. It’s like going from SD tv to 4K. The matchless sounds unreal and of course your playing is beautiful as always. Makes me want one real bad. Lol

[@andylyons553]

Paul I just fell in love with the matchless amp. The Kemper does not even come close. There is so much more room and life in the recording, the Kemper comes not even close. The amp is wayyyy better! I could also tell the amp from the Kemper in the middle of the video. Hard to describe, the sound is airy and lush and yet powerful. The Kemper sounds flat against it. BTW the sunburst 59 Paula you used in other videos is just magic! Thank you for sharing!

[@valebliz]

Yeah, and that's the point, he recorded with different methods...

[@andylyons553]

@@valebliz yeah correct, there are more variables in the chain, like the mikes and the cabinet.

[@claudedaigneault1693]

My humble opinion. Matchless have a more open, warm and dynamic sound! Kemper is so compress and ... Matchless win even through youtube. Peace

[@kumudtsering]

I had this conversation with my friend the other day and came to the conclusion that the problem with digital amps is that they are "perfect" in a sense because that what digital does and thus becoming the issue. Real amps have all those imperfections that craft the sound we all long for imo

[@drtap1477]

There’s nothing that beats the indescribable feeling of playing through a cranked tube amp imo. Puts a smile on my face every time!

[@BobJones-bh9qz]

In the end, even though very often our minds shift our reality into what we want to hear, reality is just that, relative, so whatever makes your brain go tingly is perfectly valid, as long as it’s not overly detrimental to attain it

[@stanislavmigra]

I found, that after playing for like 1 hour on modeler (Helix or Axe FX), I develop ear fatigue. Never happen with tube amp.

[@mfam1306]

I think sterile is a better word than perfect. Modeling amps sound hollow, flat, sterile.

[@kumudtsering]

@@mfam1306 I don't know that I would 100% agree with you on the term "Sterile" because to me digital doesn't sound bad. I use Bias Fx 2 and have never been disappointed. I think that digital captures the sound of an amp but without it's flaws that gives it the feel we love.

[@rome8180]

No matter what you play, you have the greatest tone ever.

[@MrDavemiley]

Try running your Kemper into the FX send of your Matchless (Cab Sim -off) . You will be Amazed. .. Use the Normal channel FX in for your Kemper and the EF86 channel normally. I did that for three years. Killer set up.

[@sweatyboab]

Hey Paul, another great video! I used to gig a Badcat Blackcat 30R (much the same amp). Of course, it got way too heavy to gig. After 5 years of using digital modeling (boss gt10+line6 modeling speaker) live, I got my badcat repaired. The difference in bass thump and feel blew me away. My conclusion is that digital is great for non-discerning crowds. But, at home, my Badcat hits my pleasure sensors in the bullseye. The more I hear digital modeling the more I hear the lack of thump, just like in your upload. Close, but no cigar! Each to their own though 😊

[@jessekerley8625]

No comparison for me, I prefer the sound of the Matchless every time. The Kemper was harsh and narrow sounding. The Matchless is full and wooly, but still much smoother.

[@Dylanjenningsmusic]

Paul I just want to let you know how much you’ve helped me progress playing guitar in the last 3 years , you are one of a kind man ❤️

[@MichaelWWestbrook]

Congrats on the new amp! Such a versatile, amazing piece. They have some many great tones in them but can take some experimenting because everything is so interactive!

[@TheBoboMaker]

My main amp is a 65 Fender Twin reissue, but try playing that in a townhouse at midnight 😆 I needed a a budget practice amp, I tried a few and landed on the Line-6 Spider V Mark II. What sold me? The Matchless Chime model, it was love at first hearing. Since buying it 1 1/2 years ago I've explored the models. Some of the highlights were the vintage Plexi 45, and the Bassman, but I keep going back to the Matchless. Truth be told except for changing the cab from the 1×12 to a 4×10, I haven't played any other model for over 6 months now.

[@Dang...]

Congrats on getting your dream amp! Thanks for posting.

[@jreedy83]

"But more often, just be sensible and don't..." hahaha, love this guy

[@lonnyhandwork422]

Actually, I'm a little surprised at how different the Matchless sounded. The Kemper - as you rightly said - was a good sound so it's certainly not that the Kemper was "bad" by any means. It also depended on where on the neck you were playing - certain ranges amplified (no pun intended) the differences. But to my ears there'd be no competition - the HC-30 would be my choice (completely ignoring the fact that the Kemper can do a billion other sounds that the Matchless can't). All that said, I think you'll really enjoy the new- well-justified purchase. Congrats!

[@400_billion_suns]

His intention was for this not to be a ‘which is better’ comparison, but from the comments it’s clear that’s how it’s being seen, unfortunately. I kinda wish he had done this video a lot differently, because it’s giving the Kemper an unfair showing. The Kemper is a profiler. It makes ‘copies’ of amps, cabs, and mics that it sends a set of test signals through, listens to the output, and then works some kind of secret-sauce internal algorithms to re-create the amps. It does this with startling accuracy in many cases - much better than what we’re hearing here. The problem is he’s using somebody else’s profile, made with somebody else’s amp/cab/mic, in somebody else’s room (could have even been an isolation box). The Kemper can get *much* closer to the sound of the Matchless than what we hear in this clip, and no I don’t own one so it’s not ownership bias. :)

[@400_billion_suns]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/aWOQqYaKh8ylftk

[@damienomusic]

Seems like a new “dream amp” appears every month or so..

[@sqlb3rn]

well you can have like 30 dreams a month to be fair

[@marco4570]

You gotta advertise what the sponsors give you as a youtuber. Never forget

[@jimwoodard64]

Dream guitar too. What a BS title. We all know that the real thing is always best, but you don't always have that luxury, nor do you always have that money. At $2500 used, I would hope it was great.

[@brandall101]

Lucky us to watch a man regularly living out his dreams.

[@carpediem4413]

YT is basically one big commercial

[@ScottyMcYachty]

Both sounded great, but the Matchless had a sweetness and presence... this kind of top-end fidelity that knocked me out. The Matchless also had a fatter bottom end that blew the Kemper away for me. Maybe a bump in the bass and treble controls on the Kemper might've made it a closer contest, because the basic tone was REALLY close in my submission.

[@labdrive]

If you play at home, and you are in love with the Matchless sound, you keep the Matchless. If you play in front of a public, live, you have to check what will be your preferred sound sitting in the room while hearing he Matchless or the Kemper thru the house PA. If you want more than one sound, then choose the Kemper.

[@juanka78]

Man, seriously? The Matchless destroys Kemper.

[@DK-md2pu]

No it does not "destroy" the Kemper. They are really close and you are only saying that because you KNOW what he is playing. In a track you would not be able to tell if you were not told.

[@juanka78]

@@DK-md2pu in a track...yeah, probably. But one VS the other like this even a deaf person could tell the difference.

[@stevie_772]

@@juanka78 you would feel the tube amp act different when playing

[@soundstorm9508]

@@DK-md2pu if you can’t hear the stark difference between the two then you might not have the best hearing, it’s pretty obvious

[@RByrne]

It definitely blows away the Kemper here, but it's only because it's presented in a way that it's easy to hear a difference. In a band situation, it would be tough to notice a difference.

[@fertirado3236]

Wow that's a great amp really feeling good for you Paul, personally, my dream amp would be the classic big Marshall amp JMC 800, hope someday I can get it ;)

[@fertirado3236]

I make Music videos and would appreciate advise for growing btw

[@starkiller9243]

Really good content buddy !

[@tmorelli1982]

The JCM800?

[@fertirado3236]

T M yeah that is it! Just didn’t remember the name of the model

[@gibs8412]

i had a jcm 800, loved it, then got a 900, loved it, then got a new dsl, love it even more, and you can get a good 800 sound w a dsl. also have a el84 100/100...and had a rack mount 9000 i think it was called... love em all...

[@StefanSchmidtRegensburg]

Hi, Why didn't you profile your matchless and compare the sound to your own profile instead of getting close to different profile? I know from profiling my own amps, that the Kemper misses some of the very fine texture in the high mids but it seems to get closer than your comparison. From what I'm hearing I totally agree with most comments, that the keeper sounds less brilliant here.

[@TimMallick]

exactly, profile done correctly, with this amp, would be far closer. its actually not a valid comparison unless the profile being compared is done with the amp that its being compared to

[@valebliz]

The point is also he recorded with different methods. Of course if you put various mics in front of a real cab you'll have a more 3d sound than a di output...

[@abelgomez5106]

Hi Davis !! The Amplifier is really very nice, but in response to the video command I think that the digital emulation has already been installed. Ami the same thing happens to me with my equipment, the audio of the valve is beautiful, but to reach the final audio that the public will hear if we do it in an analog way, taking the guitar out of this equation, we have the whole set of pedals + head valve + box + microphones, as there are so many mechanical components, the variables and dynamics they generate are infinite, and at the audio level it is wonderful !!!, but on the other hand (digital) in a 12 x 12-inch box .. .you have everything !!!! and it sounds excellent, almost imperceptible to the ear of an experienced musician (imagine the common public) smaller size, less weight, less money.

[@ElectricDoggyland]

Back in the 90s I went with a friend to a Detroit Guitar show at the state fairgrounds. It was in a fairly large building with isles of vendors. The noise was incredible, but as we entered the building and started walking the first isle I could hear this tone cutting through it all, sweet, loud and clear as a bell. Two isles deep and in the very back was a downriver music store booth that the sound was coming from. They had a few amps and guitars and other assorted equipment, but the source of the sound was a strat plugged into Matchless DC30. I had to play it so I stood in line. I was unfamiliar with Matchless so the person working the booth filled me in and then handed me the guitar (turned out to be a well worn original 57’ sunburst strat that played and sounded like butter). The Matchless- I was floored by the tone, responsiveness and dynamics and it was loud (in a good way). I remember a booth directly across had a Mesa dual recto half stack and people were cranking it but the Matchless was in another league altogether, cutting through the din in that hall with a sound that made me put that amp on the top of my wishlist (and the guitar too, but I decided owning a house was more important at the time). Great amps, and after, Bad Cats carried the torch pretty well - but the Matchless was the holy grail of tone.

[@jsalmons84]

The Matchless just sounds like it has more of everything. The Kemper sounds constrained by comparison.

[@BrettPapa]

Dude that is my dream amp too! Way to go! So jealous!!!

[@qua7771]

Would Bad Cat make one. I think they do custom builds.

[@johnbuell8035]

Don’t you have 2 Friedmans, Brett? The Dirty Shirley with a strat is the setup I would most like to try.

[@malloc_01]

Not a Kemper owner or fan here, but honestly judged by the recording: Kudos to the Kemper ... I’ll stick by my VOX anyways :)

[@TheFlashingDots]

I swear these are both trying to sound like my AC15

[@DonnTarris]

If you listen on headphones, the matchless has some room in it, much more open, probably due to the ribbon mic being far enough back that it doesn't compress the background away. It also has spread/width to it with the 2 mics creating a stereo image. To make the Kemper sound more like the real deal, you'd have to put it into the room as well, digitally at least. I still get so much more inspiration playing through a real amp, even my tiny Gibson GA-5 using a R10 ribbon about 2 inches away from the front and a pair of AT ribbons about 2 feet back to catch a hint of room. Amazing how these small amps can sound huge when recorded well! Love your videos!!

[@chadmurphyplays]

I've played a Kemper live for over 5 years. The Matchless kills those profiles. The real test will be to profile YOUR amp with that signal chain into the Kemper and see if they hit the mark.

[@JackFou]

In the recording they actually sound pretty different imho. Is the Matchless recorded via a microphone in the room while the Kemper is recorded directly into the DAW? Or is the Kemper also going through a cabinet which is mic'd up? I feel like it would probably sound much closer in the room when you hear both of them through speaks/cabinets.

[@Pauld62]

Just read a reply where Paul said he used the direct out on the Kemper into the DAW. Also I've never seen a more unified comment section lol.

[@protruuls541]

Why am I watching this without headphones..

[@lechefmusic]

😂 same here

[@EmmanuelNataf]

It's a KZbin upload… not a WAV file ;)

[@raksh9]

I'm watching it on my phone, even worse!

[@kanjosidr]

@@EmmanuelNataf not that big of a difference tbh. KZbin sound isn't what it was like 7 years ago when it really sucked

[@jaedii7287]

Егор Сидоров yeah you can still get a pretty good idea from KZbins audio

[@jonnylikertrommer]

The matchless sounds more dynamic. The kemper sounds like it have a low cut on it. Congrats on getting your Dream amp!

[@TheAgentAssassin]

Leave the matchless on overnight and play it. Once the tubes get warm the bell like chime really starts to sound rich.

[@bodeaninbama]

Paul, the C30s have a very unique rectifier circuit. It can take a single 5AR4 (GZ34) or a pair of 5V4G (GZ32) rectifier tubes. In your video you can easily see the socket that is missing a tube. That is where the 2nd 5V4G would go. Do yourself a favor and find a NOS pair of 5V4G rectifier (they are relatively cheap) tubes and try those instead of the 5AR4. I think it gives it a slightly creamier tone and I love it. But it comes down to taste, some C30 owners love the dual 5V4Gs, some the single 5AR4, but you paid a lot for this amp, you should hear everything it is capable of.

[@PF4U]

Can you profile "your" Matchless to hear the difference? The Matchless sounds more open. Less congested. The Kemper, in comparison sounds a little more blanketed.

[@PaulDavids]

Would be interesting yes. I don't know if I have the gear to really get a killer profile tho

[@PF4U]

@@PaulDavids I thought this may be the case. I covet the Kemper but use a HX stomp into an Alto TS310 when I don't use my Working Dog Rottweiler and pedals. My favorite HX presets are Matchless based. Your Strat into that Matchless is a blissful tone!

[@BluGuitar]

Great demo!!! At the first impression the Kemper sounds „nice and sweet“. You may think that’s ideal, as the Sound is so nice and smooth - never in danger to be so direct that it could hurt. I’m missing some transients with the Kemper that give the guitar more definition: more nuances when you play different notes, more musical dynamics. It sounds like the strings are 100 years old and can’t ring anymore. The Matchless sounds more alive - at any setting: volume on the guitar on full or down. And then the more you will play your guitar through the Matchless , the more you will find out how much more of your - and the personality of your guitar is there. Of corse that can also hurt if you dig in deeper, but I can decide if I want that and adjust that with my playing or a rounder setting on the amp. That’s the musical dynamic that is possible with your instrument. I found that this musical dynamics from your instrument is not translated the same with Modellers. I came to the personal conclusion that I don‘t want to afford to miss that quality of directness and openeness for my playing... and I found that lacking in any Modeling amp - even in the ones I designed ;-) But of corse the convenience of digital products is unbeatable... Thomas Blug

[@samhainlimon]

Very well said. Your right there is still a trade off between the real amp and the modeler. As slight as it may be. It's been said before. In a live setting the audience most likely will not appreciate this but for me the joy I get when I play a real analog signal vs a model is huge even when the difference between the sound and feel are relatively small. The culmination for me is still in playing a real amp. It makes me so much happier than the modelers I've played so far. I really enjoy the playing and in the end that's why we do it. That feel as well as the sound.

[@AndrewHeskett]

Thomas, you articulated that so well. In place of a modeller, a preamp with a highly adjustable tone stack, a power amp with adjustable negative feedback, eq at every stage would probably be a better solution. That’s if you need to cover a lot of timbral ground. I’m not sure such an amp exists though. Maybe the ampX? 😁

[@BD-me4nk]

The Kemper sounds like it's running through a different speaker.

[@PaulDavids]

Definitely. The Kemper isn't running through the cab, but I used the direct out.

[@davidnewell3669]

@@PaulDavids There's yer problem. No wonder they sound so different.

[@slash196]

@@davidnewell3669 Yeah, on recorded guitar sounds the cab/impulse response has by far the largest effect on the overall tone of anything. If you're using a random profile of that same amp it's going to sound same ballpark but not actually identical. The point of the kemper is that you could capture EXACTLY the sound of that matchless in that room with those mics.

[@PaulDavids]

No it was 100% my intention to use both amps how I would use them irl. So the Kemper direct out, and the Matchless miced up. No one buys a tube amp so that they can profile it with the Kemper, everyone just downloads profiles. So in a way this comparison makes even more sense.

[@CHAPI929292]

@@PaulDavids I don't know how the Kemper works but why didn't you try getting the Kemper to match the amp? (the other way around)

[@donyoung7874]

With the clean tones the Matchless had more presence, like you said. A little fuller sounding. Initially, as you A/B'd them I thought they sounded really close, especially on the middle and bridge pickups. Congrats on the Matchless! They're wonderful sounding.

[@kelbydurnin165]

Definitely prefer the matchless in these examples, it's just warmer and feels more genuine I guess. It's hard to describe to me, but it also has more personality. The kember feels kind of compressed

[@charaiveti-charaiveti]

i used my headphones and here's my verdict: matchless is... matchless :)

[@AnalogOpher]

Matchless: glorious cream and lush overtones. Kemper: I wish i was a Matchless.

[@tephros19]

I really like your sentiment that heaven sounds like a slightly overdriven tube amp.

[@Brimac123]

Very slight fuzz of comp. VS Analog hug of the tube. Both sound great. Like the Matchless!

[@ortonnorth]

Hi Paul, take a look at the compressor in the amp settings (not the pedal) . If you turn it down to 0 it will sound more open.

[@samueltaylor2757]

I can hear a decent amount of reverb and more stereo separation in the Matchless tone. The Kemper sounds like is further away and missing bass presence. Oddly the mic'd Matchless sounds like it was recorded through a tube pre-amp and a room with nice acoustics. In short, the Matchless sounds like it is actually in the room with you but the Kemper is kind of like a fairly dry signal but versatile signal. If you gave me the chance to play with one... its gonna be the Matchless

[@ogawasan5581]

Paul : Plays literally anything . Me : yeaaah i'm stealing that 😂

[@Gaslight.Guitar]

The real deal sounds way better to me.

[@nat2r]

Yeah, the Kemper sounds overly compressed

[@marcusstrymon693]

Goddamit especially at 8.00 the kemper has too much too dirt while the matchless is just so fat and full

[@jegr3398]

The real deal always sounds best. And by real deal I mean hand wired tube amps vs digital modeling that tries to replicate the sound.

[@nat2r]

@@jegr3398 ever see a Kemper go through it's modelling process? Still p neat.

[@soto44123]

I'm so impressed with th4 Kemper. While you were switching from the Matchless to the Kemper, I heard near zero differences. But that is probably because I was not sitting where you are. I hear all of it through my studio monitors. It makes sense to use a Kemper for live shows. I hate having to lug around my crazy heavy and deafening vintage Fender Twin Reverb and pedals.

[@martyskrobis874]

The Kemper profile is really close in sound ... but the Matchless? At least in this video and IMHO just Breathes! Good job, congratulations and Enjoy!

[@treehouse722]

I thought the Matchless sounded more full-bodied and musical throughout.

[@twirlyboggs]

Man that matchless sounds like you took the blanket off the kemper

[@sousayes]

I have a Hc too. One question: which cabinet did you use with the Kemper? The Matchless cabinet?

[@PaulDavids]

Direct out to studio monitors. I didn't want to change something to the sound I've always loved and played with. In a A/B comparison that wouldn't be logical, but this is more a total package comparison: How I always played with the Kemper v/s how I will be playing with the Matchless.

[@jancreighton]

@@PaulDavids ah, and therein lies the fatal flaw in this comparison. I too, wondered about the slightly more meaty sound of the genuine Matchless Amp/Cab vs the slightly more hifi (and thinner/more anemic) sound of the Kemper. Even if the Kemper profile is profiling the the cab too, it is nonetheless being 'photocopied' one more time running it through the (PA) amplifier and monitor system. Those monitor speakers (FRFR etc.) will be no match (excuse the pun) for the sheer beef, authenticity and immediacy of whatever speaker is lurking inside that Matchless cabinet. My guess is that a merged Kemper profile, set up minus the cab element, amplified and fed into the real Matchless Cab would yield results that would be so close as to relegate the genuine Matchless amp to the status of being a period curio, albeit a very nice one.

[@PaulDavids]

It's not a flaw though. I'm comparing how I used the Kemper versus how I will use the Matchless. Within these parameters I tried getting somewhat close. That's it.

[@wayneknazek7362]

Hey Paul, I have to comment. First off, because I love your vids! I'm 72. Been gigging since the mid (make that MOD) 60's! And still gigging. (When ya think ya know it all . . . it's time to start learning!) If someone can't learn from you, they're brain dead! LOL That all said . . . I love that amp! Strongly tempted to find one. It would have to be on stage next to my Fender tube amp! I've used "2 amp rigs" forever! I love the warm brown thang, no doubt. But I also MUST have a Fender sparkle maker in my rig! For me, the must haves to gig are . . . Duct tape, a Strat and . . . an AB switch! HA! The invention of duct tape is the ONE thing that allows us to gig! Gotta have it. And the day the AB switch was invented . . . my life got so much better! LOL I also noticed the Tone King pedal. Killer, right! Interesting note (to me, anyway) My dad made me my first guitar pedal. It was the early 60's. No one had effects pedals! (No one my age.) They weren't sold in stores yet. I had a REAL FUZZ TONE! Took my dad about 15 minutes! It sounded HORRIBLE! And everyone wanted one! LOL No controls. Just the on/off switch. And it was SO FUZZY! My best to you! Wayne Reed

[@frankgreco]

From a pure tonal pov imo, there's no contest, honestly. The Kemper is the amp to tour with for simplicity, travel costs, and consistent/reliable behavior. But that Matchless sounds fantastic.

[@TrevorStark]

Dat klinkt geweldig :)

[@depaus9461]

TrevorStark wel he

[@stanislavmigra]

DOnt know, how they sound in a room, but you were much more inspired to play thru Matchless.

[@RedemptionArtsTeam]

Most of the time, that's all that matters.

[@stanislavmigra]

@@RedemptionArtsTeam 100% agreed. Thats why I still have valve amp at home.

[@scottemmonsmusic6001]

Have you profiled your Matchless? The tone is all in the profiling technique.

[@petedavis7970]

So, a small correction. Unless you're running some sort of overdrive pedal in front of the amp, you're not overdriving the EF86 (a pentode). The EF86 is taking its input directly from the guitar which will be insufficient to overdrive the tube. This is the same, of course, for 12AX7s (triodes). The single EF86 in the Matchless, however, will amplify the guitar signal around as much, or maybe even more than the first two 12AX7 stages and will give you much better signal to noise ratio. In my personal amp, I also have a pentode in my preamp (in my case a 6U8 which has a pentode and triode in the same bottle) and instead of in the first stage, I put the pentode in the second stage and drive that with the triode. I did this specifically so that I could overdrive the pentode without needing a pedal in front of it. I also breadboarded the whole amp before I built it and tried with the pentode in both the first and second stages, but the second was much better. Note: I've never played a Matchless ?C30, but after looking at the schematic, I'm wondering what it sounds like jumpering the channels. I'm guessing not very good, since the 2 preamps are out of phase with each other and likely to cancel out a lot of signal.

[@skylermeredith2522]

The matchless responds more to the picking dynamics, which is the 3D'ness or open sound that people are referring to. The kemper does sound like there is a drive in front of it which is the compression we are hearing.