Re: Loopstock idea

[Marklar <sine@zerocrossing.net>]

Oh, yeah, I did miss your post.  That sounds like a great idea.  This could
even facilitate little or no gap between performances, allowing more
breathing space over all.  As much as I like an open style of Loopstock, I
hate being pressured to set up super quickly (which always causes me to
misconnect something)

on 2/18/02 9:23 PM, Hans Lindauer at armatronix@charter.net wrote:

> I like that idea, Mark.  I actually proposed something to that effect a
> couple of days ago in response to Andre's keen assessment of the 
>situation,
> but it was buried at the bottom of my (long) gig story, so I'm not 
>surprised
> if you missed it.
> 
> The venue is long and narrow, with the entrance in the middle of one 
>side,
> so my idea was to set up either end of the room as a performance area, 
>and
> then it would work exactly as you described, with somebody always playing
> while the next act sets up and the previous act breaks down.  Acts with
> set-up times potentially longer than 30 minutes can start setting up 
>three
> acts in advance.
> 
> Instead of running my system the way I had originally intended, I'll 
>split
> it in half, which will still leave plenty of power at each end of the 
>room.
> A friend has volunteered to loan me his stage monitors and an amp, so 
>there
> will be a nice monitoring system at each stage.
> 
> Fifteen 30-minute performances with ten minutes between each one, plus a
> thirty-minute break at supper time, only puts us at ten minutes past 12 
>at
> the end of the night.  If we run long, we won't get evicted.
> 
> -Hans
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Marklar" <sine@zerocrossing.net>
> To: <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 8:23 PM
> Subject: Loopstock idea
> 
> 
>> So, I've been doing some thinking as to how so many acts could go on in
> such
>> a short time period.  My idea would be to have two staging areas, 
>probably
>> right next to each other.  An "on" stage, and an "on deck" stage.  That
> way,
>> while act "a" was playing, act "b" could be setting up.  The success of
> this
>> would depend on the size and layout of the room.  Acts that had their 
>own
>> small sound systems, could even set up tertiary mini stages in corners 
>of
>> the room.  This way, there could be little or no dead air between acts.
> One
>> acts loop could even cross fade across the venue to another acts loop.
>> Lot's of possibilities for collaboration.  I, for one, would volunteer 
>to
>> have a small PA (Some powered speakers and a Mackie 1202 mixer) which 
>I've
>> found to be fine for medium/small rooms.
>> 
>> Mark Sottilaro
>> 
>