Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
kim,
since your (and matthias') thoughts are extremely important to me in my
looping life, i'd like to weave a bit of potentially pointless blather
raving
into this thread, for a brief minute.....
dt
kflint said:
>I tend to agree with this, although it's not always so lowbrow as you
>might
>think. A lot of that is a bit of a pose, and often times the people behind
>it are very sophisticated musicians.
>The possibilities for innovation and
>creativity are huge, and a lot of talented people have moved in that
>direction to take advantage of it. Andre did a nice job of commenting on
>that, no need for me to add anything there.
>The dance/electronic/hip-hop/etc. scene is definitely where I see all the
>innovation in looping as a method, as a process, as a tool, as a type of
>music. I see people there constantly pushing to evolve things and do
>something different, move it to the next level. The musicians, the
>audience,
>the dj's, and the press all seem to support and encourage that, it's
>ingrained in the scene in an interesting and healthy way. Loop concepts
>grow
>by leaps and bounds there.
>Another spot of innovation would be the solo instrumentalists, integrating
>loops into compositions and performances in interesting new ways,
>expanding
>their reach. I think you see that here in the many people looping with
>fingerstyle guitar, or cello, or voice. Probably there are innovative
>things
>happening in the academic/high-brow world, but I just don't follow that
>enough to know.
>Where I don't see much innovation with looping is in the droney guitar
>loop
>scene, the stuff often associated with Fripp. The music may continue to be
>vital and interesting, but the use of loops is pretty stagnant and
>complacent. Sorry, but I just don't see anyone pushing the looping process
>anywhere in that scene. (although it's possible that I just go so bored
>with
>it I stopped paying attention.)
>For me as a developer of loop devices, it is definitely the dance
>producers
>who are driving things. They are the ones forcing the innovation in tools
>and driving us with a constant flow of ideas. Trying to understand, meet,
>and anticipate their needs so that a looping device might be an effective
>instrument in that world is a very tough challenge! And the possibilities
>are so huge and fresh, along with the sheer volume of creativity, that the
>challenge is really quite exciting and fun. You really get the feeling
>that
>when a new feature is introduced, someone will jump on it and do something
>remarkable.
>With the droney guitar loop crowd, most of the push is to get one box that
>does all the things that different boxes available 10-20 years ago did.
>And
>that's certainly reasonable, but it's not exactly breaking new ground. You
>give them something new and they barely notice, maybe getting around to it
>after a few years. (and in 15 years they will just be demanding that
>feature
>in any new device!)
>anyway, that's my take.
>kim
well: i hope i understand some of yer frustrations as a developer and list-
maintainer/moderator. (mostly, ya know, i lurk, here: i usually
mass-dispense
w/the reading of any posts that compare/gossip about/overfocus upon/weigh/
any
particular artists' "value to culture", and look desperately for positing
forwards of the list-folks' creative "ideas", and technical/artistic
problem-
solving):
anyway, i might comment thusly:
1) for the purpose of discussion, i gotta state that methinks there's
nothing
intrinsically "wrong" w/"droney guitar loop" music, as there's nothing
intrinsically "wrong" w/not being attached to pushing "the forefront" of
*any*
kinda music nor technology, as there's nothing intrinsically "wrong" w/the
lack of desire and/or *ability* to push that "forefront", as there's
nothing
intrinsically "wrong" w/boredom; me, i listen to whatever music has the
power
to transform my day,
which is sometimes independent of my often virulent "need for *the new*":
sometimes not.
ya know, like:
sam barber & jon hassell & g.s. sachdev & howlin' wolf & arvo part & jobim
&
john adams & steve gorn & qawwali & terry riley & chris whitley,
ronnysides,
we, the i.s. picklz, spooky, t. singh, main, tricky, kevin shields,
disposable
heroes, bjork, khol nayak, ry cooder, thomas newman, etc.
and, technologically: an optigan is a terrible thing to waste, as are the
oud,
the national resonator guitar, a '60 alfa spider giulietta, a G3 mac,
working
isdn lines & toshiba librettos!
that being said:
2) me, too!, re: yer enthusiasm for past, current & potential
loop-activity in
the "dance" scene: some great things afoot, w/brilliant things to come.
(probably from one of my kids, who's deep inside nyc's trip-hop & battle
scenes.)
8-))
but: (my big 'but', as it were):
on the "droney guitar loop crowd" -(which, for better or worse, i do *not*
consider myself to belong to, as i've never belonged to any crowd, butcept
the
crowd of beings struggling for happiness, dontcha know)- as it relates to
furthering your (& other designer's) creative motivation for looping
instrument design:
3) a) not barring that heady thrust for "the new", i think that a
minor design
error can be made when discarding the old (loop-)farts' desires to
incorporate
20-year-old features into a new instrument; firstly, because its likely
that
those features may have some actual *musical* value;
secondly, because those self-same features can certainly afford to be
"modernised"/expanded upon; and
thirdly, given the sometimes-slow (but, incessant) proclivity towards
creative
expansion in human nature, its fair to assume that said features -as they
are-
have *not yet been mined to their fullest depth*.
b) as a mini-side-note to a), i've noticed a vaguely similar type
of chrono-
myopia in the musicians' world: futurist-espousing guitarists, illbient,
trip-
hop & ambient whatevers etc., uninquiringly-and, maybe even
disrespectfully,
by default, if you will- ignorant of the historical/cultural continuum of
musical/artistic ideas that, even subconsciously, may have at least *led*
us
to our current 'new' genres. honestly, i feel -and constantly battle- this
nearsighted tendency in my own small self.....
4) while i'm not sufficiently aware of the kinds of creative design demands
that the dance scene presents you w/as challenging, i feel compelled (for
some
probably egoistic horrid reason) to outline some of *my* frustrations as a
looper, over these past xx years (but, specifically, since 1981). however,
i
should preface this all w/a personal pointed statement of my honest &
extreme
support:
in the summer of '97, when i received the Loop 5.0 software for
the EDP and
after i had the foot-console's broken plastic switches replaced
w/heavy-duty
steel ones, i finally started to use the damned EDP *regularly*. (the
jamman
has been replaced, and for good reason; it's now just an additional unit:
an
assistant: the loop support team: sideman nŽe jamman). Loop 5.0 addressed
the
most damaging myriad bugs/weirdnesses (that previously had made the EDP
just a
wonderful promise to me), including all kindsa seemingly random
cliks'n'pops &
(unusable) glop in the audio: how?, i don't know:
but: thanks: really:
my sincerest gratitude goes to y'all for your (& matthias' & oberheim's)
considerable perseverance & fortitude. this *is* my endorsement of the
deep,
deep EDP w/Loop 5.0., (but *not* of the user's manual!), for what its
worth.....
my further comments about what i've been trying to get *anybody*
to build
into a looping instrument- for years- should not be construed as negating
the
real value of an EDP w/Loop 5.0 (excluding that user's manual).
so.
back in '85 ('86?, '84?), gary hall & i had some meetings w/a slew
of lexicon
executives, re: looping's future (new methods for
triggering/storage/manipulation), effects, etc.
one of the main things that i brought into (and carried out of) this
discussion was a focus on turning looping into an actual instrument. so,
what
do the more socially acceptable instruments have, that loopers lack?
among other things: a physical/visceral/visual "interface"; footpedals &
front
panels just don't cut it.
there remains ample reason to allow for the inclusion of some type of
external
controls attached to a looping instrument in order to provide the player
(!and
their audience!) w/ some physical correlation between what is
*played/manipulated* by the player & what is *heard* by all: the value of
this
physical ãcontrol surfaceä can't be over-estimated, as it seems truly part
&
parcel of what distinguishes any instrument as an obvious *instrument for
expression*, regardless of the resulting musical "idiom".
me: i like to *see* the dj *feel* what he's fucking with, i like to *feel*
(by
proxy) the guitarist destroy his shit. (as a sidenote: witness roland's
promising inclusion of a coupla dimension light-beams, as configurable
controllers, on 2 of their new products aimed at the dance marketplace)!
anyway: back to that meeting: i also noted that
synths & samplers had storage/future playback: computers had storage:
loopers
did not.
synths & samplers had audio mangling: loopers did not.
anyway: lexicon let everything that we discussed (so earnestly, it
seemed!)
slide by, insofar as i know, until lex employees bob sellon & joe waltz
developed the jamman *on their own time*, in the 90's.
also: c. '87-'88 (?), antony widoff & i (w/a young, brilliant
hardware engr.,
whose name i, unfortunately, can't remember) started working on "The Fly"
for
intelligent music. the fly was my idea of a looper: not necessarily highest
audio quality (but w/a good sound), pressure+positionally sensitive user-
configurable control pad (like an advanced "ribbon"), reversing, multiple
triggering choices incl. chromatic (or, configurable) transposition,
editing,
possibly polyphonic w/multiple assignable outputs, lfo & filtering options,
(!turntable inputs!) and, we hoped for eventual storage/recall capability:
all this to be done "on the fly" (get it? "do it on the fly"! ha, ha: ha:
my
marketing idea). this was meant to be sold to folks who might be
interested in
using live sampling for non-rigidified idioms, primarily: 1) rappers, 2)
producer/engrs, 3) drummers, 4) guitarists. but: our project was *far* from
being a priority, & intelligent's funding folded: end of chapter, at least
till some of these features showed up on yamaha's su10 phrase sampler, many
moons later.
(in '92, i inadvertently picked up some lit on matthias' original
paradis'
looper: though i couldn't afford to buy a second looper at the time, i was
intrigued & *very* enthused!)
i'll skip forward to the jamman: a wonderfully cheap device w/*so*
many less
features than i'd hoped for (though, it did -mostly- sync to clocks!) & a
marginally humane interface; they'd already fixed the hardware & most
software, when i was invited to "participate", so there was no real chance
for
me to get my admittedly self-serving points across. i'd also hoped for a
longer-term commitment from the lexies, whom i thought would evangelise the
fuck out of looping to the dance/guitar/producer markets to enable the
building of jamsuperman, but.....
i had pitched to them that one strong way to let musicians & salespeople
know
that looping (& the jammer) was capable of being an exciting *instrument
in
it's own right* might be to sponsor a *regularly scheduled* series of
educational clinics, over the course of 1-2 years, and they -nominally, but
with obvious reluctance in a large part of the camp- accepted the idea
(thanks
to heavy effort by looping devotee & internal lex-guy jon durant).
in the end i, myself, did a total of one such clinic: a dismal failure,
possibly due to the nearly complete lack of advertisement until the *actual
day* of the clinic, maybe?! so: natch, nobody @ lex wanted to take
responsibility for such a failure, and: lo & behold (self-fulfilling
prophecies being what they are): i did no more.
later on?
jamman dropped: no jamsuperman: cripes.
(my further discussions w/eventide, tc and yamaha, interspersed across all
these buncha years, bore no fruit.....)
in parallel to my ongoing micro-drama, of course, you all were banging it
out:
matthias/kim/Ÿberheim/gibson.
anyway: aw, shit! what am i blabbering about, here? i didn't mean
for this to
come across as "my looping summer vacation". sorry.
i's just trying to say:
whatever: i hope, kim, that you're not flatly chucking the
concepts and
general approaches of the old loop-farts (esp., guitar category) because of
your reaction to their/our musical output: i do find it somewhat out-of-
character, but this particular list *can* occasionally irritate with it's
ambient/shmambient guitargodgurugoo-
but: maybe it might be prudent -or even valuable- to get some of the
grandpas
involved in product design *before* there's a commitment to hardware,
functionality, market direction, et al.
maybe the fripp guy might yet have some unbelievably deep (yet marketable)
ideas!
fool that i am: i think *i* do.
i do look forward to working with ya, and soon.
dude:
best,
david torn