Re: dual loop technique?

[Clifford Novey <clifsound@earthlink.net>]

Sorry to quote such a lengthy post but I had to respond to the following
description.
Greg, I like the sound of your idea- but it gets very cerebral to me with 
it all
in writing- how about an example made available on your website (if you 
have
one, if you are able)
I just cant "think through it" without simply wanting to HEAR what you are
talking about-

Only a suggestion...

It makes me think of J. McLaughlin- the odd times and another pattern 
merging
with the first- (I love McLaughlin)

Cliff

Greg Meredith wrote:

> Bob,
>
> i work with a single JamMan. However, when i do multiple loops, i often 
>do
> it manually. That is, i do it using polyphonic instruments, e.g. stick or
> piano, and/or i employ multiple players. So, this may or may not be on
> target as the kind of technique in which you might be interested.
>
> However, what i do is to think very much about the 'phase' structure of 
>the
> piece. i relate each loop to a common tick (finest audible subdivision of
> the beat). But, i try to emphasize a different pulse in each loop. This
> gives the soloist or improvisational voice the opportunity to mix 
>pulses. i
> look to create loops where the different pulses get maximally out of 
>phase
> and then come together for a kind of tension-release effect.
>
> For example, i may have one loop with a strong 5/4 pulse and another 
>with a
> strong 4/4 pulse. If the shortest note (in both loops) is an 1/8th note,
> then they are synchronized by an 1/8th note tick. In this case, if both
> loops are 1 measure long, then they would come together every 40 ticks
> (assuming the measures don't repeat internally). i then try to write my
> loops to maximize the tension, via harmonic structure, dissonance, 
>dynamics,
> etc. just before the 41st tick, and then resolve on the 41st tick.
>
> This technique gets more interesting when the loops are more than one
> measure long. In the example above, 40 ticks is 5 measures of 4/4, and 4
> measures of 5/4. That is, if we repeat a single measure of 4/4 5 times it
> will line up exactly with a loop that repeats a single measure of 5/4 4
> times. If we then make the 5/4 loop be two measures long, each measure
> observably distinct, then we don't have a real line up, i.e. pulse and 
>note
> values line up, until 80 ticks go by. But, we have the pulses lining up 
>at
> the 40 tick mark. Similarly, every 20 ticks there is a mini-"node point",
> where a subdivision of the beats of the two loops come together. By 
>playing
> with mounting the tension and resolving, slightly on these internal node
> points, you can create really interesting effects.
>
> Note: i have intentionally left out what i think increases tension 
>because i
> think that's different for different ears. Tritones, for example, make me
> happy.
>
> Another interesting technique is to create an 'outer' loop which uses the
> inner loop as 'events'. So, we could use the same 5 against 4 structure 
>in
> the example above as a guide for triggering the 5/4 loop or the 4/4 loop.
> The question you have to decide is the duration of the event. If you set 
>it
> equal to the duration of the longest loop, you only get the loops 
>playing at
> the same time every 20 'events'. If you set it shorter, you get more
> overlap.
>
> (This approach, imho, seems much a much more promising application of
> fractals to music. The dimension along which the piece is self-similar is
> time. The application above says what happens to the structure of the 
>piece
> as you increase the time dimension. Clearly, you see a similar 
>structure. As
> you diminish time, the same thing out to happen. More specifically, as 
>you
> diminish the time, you get closer to the pulse of the frequencies that 
>give
> rise to our experience of the note. My (untested!) belief is that if this
> pulse is related by a number of iterations of an IFS to the musicians
> experience of the basic pulse(s) of the piece, then you get appealing
> noise.)
>
> Finally, it may seem to many that one must relate each loop to a common
> tick. But, i would suggest to a person that feels this way to listen to 
>the
> work of Conlon Nancarrow, who uses player pianos to do looping and other
> interesting and related things. He sets the rhythmic relationships 
>between
> the voices (take this to mean a generalized notion of a loop) to be
> non-integral numbers. In fact, some of his pieces have voices progressing
> with respect to each other at a rate measured by a transcendental number
> (i.e., it's not even rational).
>
> i hope this helps.
>
> --greg
>
>         -----Original Message-----
>         From:   Bob Campbell [SMTP:astropulse@hotmail.com]
>         Sent:   Wednesday, January 20, 1999 11:08 PM
>         To:     Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
>         Subject:        dual loop technique?
>
>         I'm interested in hearing ideas about how 2 loop devices
>         can be used creatively together. I use JamMan's so am 
>specifically
>         interested in exploiting that device, but any generic technique
>         ideas are of interest.
>
>         Bob
>
>         ______________________________________________________
>         Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com