Looper's Delight Archive Top (Search)
Date Index
Thread Index
Author Index
Looper's Delight Home
Mailing List Info

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

Re: The "DT and RF" approach to looping

At 7:46 PM -0700 5/1/98, Michael P. Hughes, Ph.D. wrote:
>Last week someone mentioned the "David Torn/Robert Fripp" approach to 
>David pointed out that he didn't actually share an approach to looping 
>RF and I see his point; on the other hand when people have in the past 
>many have) referred to the "DT/RF" approach I've generally understood what
>they meant.
>So, to in some way explain what I think we mean when we use the phrase 
>to perhaps undo some offence), I think I've taken the DT/RF approach to 
>Take one adventurous improviser;
>Plug into mondo FX;
>plug them into a Looper;
>plug that into more mondo FX.
>As opposed to the "Bill Frizzell" approach (which started the debate) 
>Take one adventurous improviser;
>plug into a looper.
>Does this make sense?

Seems to me like a rather gear-centric definition! I would say there's a
lot more to it then that, and that's what I imagine David is talking about.
Things like:

        What purpose are loops serving in the music?
        What context are they placed in?
        What does the use of loops means to the given performer?
        How do they approach developing the loop?
        What do they do with the loop once they've got it?
        How much is it compositional vs. improvised?
        Is it rhythm? texture? background? foreground? Solo? Supporting?
        What are the favored techniques employed on the given set of gear?
        and on and on....

It doesn't surprise me at all that david would consider what he's doing
with loops to be very different from Mr. Fripp is up to. To me they seem
completely different, and like they approach looping in very different

It also doesn't suprise me that he got a bit miffed about it. It's a little
bit disrespectful, don't you think, to take two innovative (and quite
different) artists and lump them together like that. He's not the only one
either. I've heard a few other well known looping innovators express (in
private, of course) some amount of annoyance that they keep finding their
name in the same sentence with Fripp's. Or worse, that fripp's is the only
name mentioned in a reference to looping. I don't think it's a disrespect
of fripp at all, more like annoyance that people don't seem to be really
listening to what they've done with looping, or that credit isn't being
given to the people who were doing this long before Fripp or who were much
more innovative in their use of loops than Fripp has been. Fripp certainly
popularized this approach for some people, but maybe it's time to give more
credit out where it's due?

kim "stirring shit up again" flint

Kim Flint                   | Looper's Delight
kflint@annihilist.com       | http://www.annihilist.com/loop/loop.html
http://www.annihilist.com/  | Loopers-Delight-request@annihilist.com