Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
>on 5/31/03 11:37 PM, altruist@earthlink.net at altruist@earthlink.net
>wrote:
>
>> If "live looping" is supposed to be full-phrase repetition, post-Terry
>> Riley
>> sounding music, then the "sliced" school of looping doesn't fit.
>
>For that matter, Bill Walker using his arpeggiator to drive the pitch
>shift
>on his Repeater wouldn't qualify as "live looping" under that definition.
>I
>think it's probably too narrow.
true, thats another way, full-phrase repetition but with changes in it.
Per keeps recording a drone with his bow onto the repeater and then
playing a melody with the Behringer pedal.
I dont think each trick is a different category.
A category only makes sense, when the feel of the music it produces
is also clearly different.
and thats subjective, so its up to the each one...
>
>What Matthias is talking about could perhaps be called "time lag looping"
>(a
>category that would also include Frippertronics, but you only get that if
>you have a Fripp to plug into the looper). I don't know that "time lag
>looping" is particularly more marketable than "live looping", but I also
>haven't seen a need to draw a line between Matthias's work and Andre's
>work.
I dont see any "need" either, I just say its easy to justify and may
make sense to the listeners since it creates a specific slicy sound,
independent on what instrument its used on. It sounds somewhat
electronic but clearly distinct from a analog sequencer or so.
I think a new genre comes up if someone starts it with a strong thing
and puts up a name for it that makes others use that name and if the
critical mass grows suficiently the press or science nails it down.
Whether there is a need for it or the name is "right" or the borders
of the new genre is perfectly defined probably does not influence
that much.
So its nice: we all basically have a chance to found things.
And Andre has the talent and the dedication and the slight fanatism
needed, as it seems to me.
But I really stop this talk now, its not somehing to think about too
much and probably rather personal than colective for the first move.
Lets see...
>The big part with "live" is distinguishing it from things like "Acid
>loops".
>Though, of course, having a program called "Live" for working with
>pre-recorded loops messes with that.
funny, Per and I just talked about that. Yes, we should make them
change the name :-)
or finally include the live looping functions! I made a contact with
them last year for this, but did not feel the kind of interest and
flexibility on their side to make an effort so far...
--
---> http://Matthias.Grob.org