Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Yes you exactly right on this topic one of your more important points is that you play the patches. I have found that rather then lacking expressive capabilities that MIDI actually shows up your deficiencies if you approach playing a MIDI enable instrument with an open mind you can make it do what you want it to. Two deficiencies I noticed in my guitar playing was a tendency to have a light glissando between playing positions and a pronounced quavering vibrato when playing a piano patch these tend to sound bad nothing to do but to stop doing this. MIDI offers fascinating possibilities to your playing range.I think the suggestion about triggering Sequencers is a great idea for a looper. On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 07:28, Ian Popperwell wrote: > Hi, > > I'm not a guitarist, but this post interested me because I do think a lot > about > what we expect of 'alternative MIDI controllers' and how we play them. I >agree > that the conversion needs to be fast, track/play well and be > reliable/predictable.I play a MIDI wind controller and really came very > quickly > to consider it a entirely different instrument from my saxophone - an > instrument (or I guess more accurately, part of an instrument together >with > the > sound source) in its own right - its different from a guitar synth (I >know) > coz > it is physically different from a sax (not a converter. Most of the >sounds > that > I play with it, sound terrible if played like a saxophone - for me, its >about > 'playing the patches', developing new ways of playing as suggested by >each > different sound - herein lies the excitement and creativity for me. I >think of > a pianist, who might first try playing all their synth sounds like a >piano - > this is certainly what I did when I first got my wind synth (I did what I > knew). I guess I'm questioning whether using all of our well-honed >instrument > techniques to 'play' the infinite palette of synth sounds through MIDI > converters/controllers, will do justice to those sounds, or if its more >that > these sounds might require a new set of playing techniques. Whether >guitar > techniques work for the guitar but might not for an un-guitar-like >patch? - > this is certainly my experience and philosophy with my wind synth. It >does > mean > that loops can become very stylistically varied and expressive, changing > sounds > with the associated playing techniques for them. What do others think? >There > must be a whole lot of experience of using >guitar/wind/drum/violin/etc... to > MIDI converters or purpose designed interfaces for non-keyboard access to > synth > sounds. > > Ian. > > > At 21:48 14/02/03 , you wrote: > > > > > I'm totally skeptical about all the midi pickups and midi conversion > systems. > > I wonder if there is anything out there with no >tracking/latency/interface > > problems at all? I mean I want to play a guitar synthesizer, which >means it > > really is a guitar, and it also really is a synth. I want to be able >to use > > all the methods of producing sound that I currently use with just my >guitar > > (bending, vibrato, tone control from the pick/fingers, legato, palm >muting, > > pick scrapes, muted strumming, harmonics, picking behind the nut, >altered > > tunings etc). I want every nuance of my playing to come through as much > as it > > would with a good overdrive pedal. As a lower priority, if it were >possible > > to also use digitally controlled analog design methods, and use things >like > > midi in/out, a sequencer, an arpeggiator, and split sound >strings/fretboard > > areas, that would be my other request. But, the fact is, I doubt all >this is > > possible in one unit. Maybe my b! es! t bet is to go for a GR-300, or >build > > my own, and use it with just looping, in lieu of a sequencer? I >honestly > > haven't done enough research to know. > > > > >