Re: the meaning of loop music

["Doug Cox" <dougcox@pdq.net>]

But does it really matter if a phrase (in this case "Live Looping") that a
group of people take up to describe their approach to live music is really 
a
genre, a style, an approach, a whatever?

That only matters if the goal is some sort of hyper-correct linguistics
classification.

If the goal is to bring attention to a group of musicians and their music,
however closely or distantly related their music is defined (by genre), 
then
"Live Looping" can meet that goal as well as any other phrase.  It's
descriptive of the approach that many of us use:  it clearly implies the
"live" aspect, which many of us consider important.   And then there's
"looping".  Nice and tidy. :)

Another thought I had on the subject of LOOPING as a genre or somesuch:
Perhaps we don't have, or aren't looking at, a good historical example of
something as powerful and fundamental as live looping tools coming to
fruition.

For instance, if live looping is viewed as a "media", or the technical
approach used in creating your art, is it hard to imagine a parallel to
other interesting media, or technical approaches?   Is it hard to imagine
artists who use, for instance, *electricty* in their work, getting 
together,
using their common theme to promote shows and their work, and actually
attracting a group of patrons who are interested in the concept of
"electricity in art"?  And ultimately, isn't that the goal of these
marketing concepts we've been discussing?

And just imagine the diversity in their work.  Everything from tiny watch
mechanisms to giant machines.  From light to sound.  From heat to movement.

I'm in.

Doug