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: EDP Feedback pedals...

Hi All,

Kim, I love this train metaphor. It made a lot of things clear for me.
Could you put NEXT LOOP in this metaphor for me. Will anything else fit?


Randy Jones

---Kim Flint <kflint@annihilist.com> wrote:
> At 12:39 PM -0700 5/16/98, Andre LaFosse wrote:
> >Feedback is linked to cycles; i.e. if you have a 20-second loop which
> >consists of one cycle, you won't hear feedback changes until that
> >20-second loop has come around to the start point again.  However, if
> >you have a 20-second loop built off of ten distinct 2-second loops,
> >you'll hear an audible change in feedback every two seconds.
> Actually, this isn't right. Feedback works over the whole loop, not
> cycles. If you have a 20 second loop that consists of a single 20
> cycle, or a 20 second loop that consists of 10 2-second cycles, the
> of feedback is the same. It wouldn't really be feedback if it did
> otherwise. The feedback level is applied after the loop audio
output, and
> before the loop audio is mixed back into delay line, so a given bit of
> audio still has to wait 20 seconds before it is heard again with the
> feedback setting applied. The feedback structure looks a little bit
> this crude ascii drawing:
>                                  _________
>                   ______________|feedback |__________
>                   |             | level   |          |
>                   |             |---------|          |
>                   |                                  |
>  input => ------>(x)--->|=========================|------> output
>                                delay line
> the idea of cycles and loops (were a cycle is a subset of the loop) is
> another sort of abstraction, and I'm not even very sure how best to
put it
> into the picture above. This is dumb, but maybe it works:
> Think of the path above as a train track that goes around in a
circle. Your
> loop would then be the train following the track, with the front end
of the
> train just reaching the back. Each cycle would be a car in the
train. Doing
> a multiply or insert adds cars to the train and makes the track
longer to
> let it fit. Now, if a given car (cycle) is at the feedback level
> when you adjust the feedback, it still has to go all the way around
> whole track to get to the output.
> >Building loops this way is interesting; not only can you hear
> >results much more quickly, but you can also set up a hidden rhythmic
> >foundation for a seemingly rubato loop.  In other words, if you've
got a
> >loop that's built off of several different cycles from the start,
> >you can insert, multiply, and otherwise cut-and-paste the thing to
> >produce highly rhythmically precise effects by working within the
> >underlying seperate cycles.  It's like painting over a brick wall,
> >then adding, subtracting, or re-arranging different bricks once the
> >basic picture has already been laid down.
> You're absolutely right about this part. Insert and multiply offer
tons of
> interesting possibilities for composing loops on the fly.
> kim
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Kim Flint                   | Looper's Delight
> kflint@annihilist.com       | http://www.annihilist.com/loop/loop.html
> http://www.annihilist.com/  | Loopers-Delight-request@annihilist.com

Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com