Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Sorry folks. I thought I had explained my point plenty well already, but apparently not. Rick insists I have to answer directly each of his posts. I'll limit it to two. Since I already made all of these points answering other people's posts, this will be pretty repetitive. It sure feels that way to me. At 09:46 AM 5/26/2003, Rick Walker/Loop.pooL wrote: >It's also important to say that I guess I just get a little tired of >people >(and not necessarily you, Kim) constantly putting down the people who >actually like to be called loopers. are there people doing that? I haven't heard it I guess. Most people calling themselves "loopers" are describing their role in the creation of the music. Like somebody who plays trumpet calling themselves a "trumpeter". It describes tools, techniques, and instruments. Conflict erupts when people try to use "Looping" to refer to particular genres of music, whether they mean to or not. (or styles, categories, types etc. I seem to use these words interchangeably, sorry.) When you go out into the world promoting "Looping" or "Live Looping" it sure looks like that's what you are doing. When that happens it threatens to confuse what a "Looper" is, since it suddenly starts referring to a particular type of music. Then lots of people get pissed off because their self-descriptive use of "Looper" suddenly means they play that type of music when they don't. So they either fight back or they avoid anything at all to do with the word "Looper". >There is ,of course, always a constant danger of preaching to the >converted >of course, but the fact of the matter is thatrallying together as a >community of people with common cause >who are interested in promoting and learning about the thing that they >love >is not a bad thing. yes, that is what we do here at Looper's Delight. The point though is that "Looping" is generally an idea being promoted to other musicians as a type of instrument or tool or technique. The goal is to get more musicians interested in Looping. It is not promoted as a musical style or genre or whatever, because it isn't one for one thing. But also because that works directly against the idea of promoting Looping to a wider range of musicians. >you wrote: >". But I don't see how it does much to directly promote looping outside of >that realm." > >I actually challenge your assertion that looping festivals don't promote >to >people outside of the realm. I have played to literally thousands of >non-loopers in the 25 some odd Looping festivals,several looping tours >and >dozens of solo, duo and trio gigs that I have done as a self professed >Live Looping Artist. I calculated that I performed on local FM radio last >year a total of over 12 hours. That went to out to thousands of >'normals' >(lol) >in my region and over in the South Bay (with several million people within >earshot). I was interviewed in countless magazine articles and, indeed, >we >had a long cover article on the Metro newspaper which went out to most >people in our county (100,000 population) on specifically the Live >Looping >Movement. I've had strong interest from both national and international >electronic music magazines and currently have a 30 minute television >special rotating constantly on local cable access as we speak. Rick, your efforts are amazing. But doesn't this mean all these people now think "Live Looping" is a type of music that sounds like Rick Walker? When we are promoting Looping to other musicians, as we do with Looper's Delight, there is a clear description of Looping being more of an instrument or a set of tools that musicians can use for whatever type of music they like. Musicians can readily understand that this is about the tools. However, when you promote this idea of "Live Looping" to the public they will naturally understand it as a type of music, not a type of instrument. Non-musicians don't care very much what instruments are used or how they are played, they care about the musical result they hear and whether they like that or not. That is the problem that frustrates people here. When you go out into the public and say "Hey everybody, come check out this new Live-Looping scene", the public will understand that to mean a style of music. When they do come check it out, whatever they hear first will equal the "Live Looping" genre for them, and they will judge if they like it or not. That's a problem for everybody else. Using the term in such a way harms everyone else's ability to promote themselves since it now refers to some other style of music. On the other hand, if you go out promoting "Live Looping" to the world as including all sorts of different types of music, ordinary listeners will just be confused. You are really promoting the tools/instruments/techniques side. That is all the term "Live Looping" can mean if it's not about the musical result people listen to. It's just like promoting "Trumpeting" to the masses. That's great, but you have to realize the only people interested will be musicians who currently play that instrument or are considering it. That's a really small market. Most other people don't care about the tools, they care about the resulting music. What use is "Live Looping" to them if it is any kind of music? They will only find this term confusing and not useful in helping them find music they like. Marketing "Live Looping" to the non-musician world is pointless if there is no obvious style of music for them to respond to. So that's why I don't understand this as a mass marketing strategy. Either it's pointless if there is no genre associated with it or it's harmful if there is. > All kudos to the solo bass movement but using that angle with >reporters just fell flat on it's face whereas talking about the metaphor >and >technology that surrounded that auspicious event really excited the >journalists and I think for three salient reasons: >1) It was new and they didn't know about the technology so it peaked their >interest with all due respect, you are in Santa Cruz, CA. Santa Cruz is an eclectic, affluent suburb to Silicon Valley, the tech center of the world. Anything weird, arty, and related to technology will immediately get any journalist's interest when serving that area. But it hardly represents most of the rest of the world. Also, novelties sell papers. When the novelty is used up, then what? >this last fact can't be overemphasized: We have had a really awful time >with the notion of community in our culture (Northern California at >least) >sense the end of the 1960s and people are so hungry for it that they are >fascinated (almost universally when I talk to most 'normals') by the fact >that a lot of people have that feeling of inclusion. This bit seems strange, and sort of unrelated. Is this one of those "when I was young everything was better" nostalgia trips? Look around. There are little scenes and communities everywhere. People gravitate into all sorts of little groups. I love finding them. I spent the past few weeks traveling around Northern California and found them everywhere. Artisan communities on the Mendocino coast. Snowboarders at the top of Squaw Valley. RV people in campgrounds. Boating people on mountain lakes. Latino communities in the central coast. Metal sculpture artists in Oakland. The Indian community of the guys I work with. Innkeepers. The black community I live in. Community groups in small towns. etc etc. It's really fascinating, but it's also really real. If you keep pining after the past, you'll miss the present. >I'm not saying that everyone who uses a looper needs to feel a part of >that >specific community (merely defined as the people who think of themselves >as >live loopers). Far be it from the truth. It appears to me that people using Loopers were not having any problem feeling a part of the Looping community when we were just talking about it as the tools and instruments we use to create music. We all share the common bond of using the same type of instrument and techniques, and that's why the community of Looper's Delight exists. Musicians with a common instrument sharing ideas and what not. It was only when a few people started trying to make "Looping" or "Live Looping" into something beyond just the musicians using the tools that people suddenly want to disassociate themselves. How is that building community? >I'm saying that what is, IS!!! right. What IS, is "Looping" has already been in use for a long time to describe instruments, tools, and techniques used by many people. Suddenly trying to give it a new meaning now causes conflict. Adding "Live" doesn't really change it that much. >How can this be a bad thing? Why do people constantly get upset that we >are just trying to promote a community. Maybe you should take that reaction as a clue that something is wrong with your approach? >If we called ourselves the STRANGE HAT COMMUNITY and did exactly what we >are >trying to do I say that the world is a tiny bit better for our efforts >and >that we should actually be applauded. Precisely. If you came up with a different phrase that didn't already have a clear usage and meaning, and wasn't already used by tons of people, there wouldn't be any conflict. kim ______________________________________________________________________ Kim Flint | Looper's Delight kflint@loopers-delight.com | http://www.loopers-delight.com