[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: Repeater's Demise

--- Kim Flint <kflint@loopers-delight.com> wrote:
> At 11:39 AM 7/9/2002, Greg House wrote:
> >The looper in the DL4 also presents a feature checkmark (in
> marketing
> >terms) that other competing products probably feel they need to also
> >include.
> just correcting the history a bit here: Line6 copied the Boomerang
> feature set almost exactly for their looper in the DL-4.

I wasn't saying that they did any pioneering design work. What they did
was put a feature into a device that did other things that an "average
musician" might buy it for, only to discover the "jewel" later on.

The fact that the DL4 became popular with the looping feature available
means that anyone who wants to make a product that competes directly
with it will probably need to include a looping feature too. This
expands the availability of looping devices on the market (although, it
only really makes basic functionality available).

> so in reality, it is Boomerang that should get the credit for the
> basic feature check list for a footpedal looper.

Sure. The difference is that the Boomerang is a dedicated looper,
that's all it does. People won't buy it for a delay (or if they do,
they'll probably be disappointed).

I was interested in looping years ago, looked at the Boomerang 'cause
it was a cool concept, but I never got one because I just couldn't
justify spending that much money on something to experiment with. If a
DL4 had been available at that time, which offered several other useful
modes (at a lower price), I would have bought one instantly...and used
the looping mode. In retrospect, I'm sorry I didn't grab a Boomerang
back when. Would have been great, but how was I to know?


Do You Yahoo!?
Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free