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: One for the plex FAQ

another days-old question:

At 9:43 PM +0200 4/28/98, Claude Voit wrote:
>Dear friend
>is this possible and how
>record the nextloop silently with the current loop playing

well, I guess the answer is no, unless you use more than one echoplex. But
I'm interested in what you are trying to do and why you want to do it this
way. (maybe it's interesting for some future looper)

Do you mean just a single pass, simple record on the second loop? (no
overdubs, etc). If that's what you want, is there some reason you need to
record it while the current loop is still playing? If you just go to the
next loop and start recording, there won't be any discontinuity. The first
time the "loop" plays will actually be you playing it while the echoplex is
recording, and from there on it will be the echoplex.

Or do you want to do something more?

If you want to silently develop some complicated loop with lots of
overdubbing, multiplies, etc., while another loop is playing, and then just
jump right to the new one, well that's just beyond the echoplex's
capabilities. You really need to have multiple loop tracks to do that, so
that one track is playing while you are working on another. Presumably you
would want to monitor the one you are developing, while the audience can't
hear it, right? which means multiple outputs even. That's just too many
things at once for the poor echoplex's processor to manage. Some future
looper generation I guess might be able to handle this sort of thing. Right
now you would have to use two loopers and a mixer to manage it.


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