Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
>What, are you on drugs? Demoted to esoterica is dead in my book. Hard >disk recording didn't kill tape? It sure did. When was the last time >you saw a tape based looper in a store? When was the last time it was >manufactured? Sure, there will be die hard people who will still hold >on to old technology, but as a mainstream thing it will be gone. Well, it's funny you should ask, but just last week actually: http://www.fulltone.com/stpframe.html Click on the link for "Tube Tape Echo" and you can see a brand new product with two dead technologies as selling points. And pretty much every guitar store I go into that deals in old effects has a tape Echoplex for sale. And it's easier than ever to find two Teac reel-to-reels if you want to replicate the classic frippertronics/time-lag accumlator/whatever system. Reel to reel analog recording still seems to be holding on also. Actual animal gut guitar strings, now there's something that's been demoted to esoterica, but there's oodles of recording studios that still use and even prefer recording to tape versus digital. I do think the cassette portastudio market may be suffering, but even those things are still being produced, purchased and used. >I can't remember when the last time I saw a cassette for sale. I see them at gas stations all the time. And they still sell cassette deck/boomboxes at my grocery store. >Vinyl is >dead to most consumers and only pressed for DJs who still cling to it >because of it's certain characturistics. And people who prefer the sound and experience of vinyl LPs, which would explain why I can buy estoteric releases like the new Radiohead on vinyl. Or could if I preferred the vinyl experience, which on the whole, I don't. >The Pod may not have killed the tube amp, but I'm sure it's made a dent >in it's hull. Fender and Vox are making virtual tube amps. I use a >Johnson and I love it, dare I say, almost as much as my Ampeg. Virtual >tube emulation is still new, give it time. I'm sure it will make tube >gear less and less viable for many manufacturers. Yeah, but if we substitute "transistor" for "digital emulator" (or "Rockman" for "Pod")? The same things were said about solid-state amps (and other audio equipment), but the old stuff is still very, very desirable to a lot of people and new examples are being successfully marketed. Just because something isn't the newest design or even holds the dominant market share doesn't mean it's "dead" or "esoteric". The emulators have many great things, and I use them myself for a lot of things, but absolute tonal quality isn't usually the first thing mentioned as a selling point. > We could argue for days about the merits of old technology, and there >are >many. Some resurface, like analog synthesis. However, lots of >people look at >the new Moog synth with it's wood sides and say, "I'll >take the Korg MS2000 >for 1/5 the price of the Moog thank you." Well, if it's the wood sides and basic sound they're focusing on, then yeah--go for the Korg. But there's a lot of differences between the two if you're digging below the surface, and if you want a certain set of those qualities and features, then the Moog is pretty much the only solution. Half of what made Moogs great (and half of what made it frustrating) wasn't whether it was actual analog components making those sounds, but the interface. >Mark Sottilaro (who'd pay $200-$300 for a software looper that did what >he wanted) So, is that $200-$300 on top of the host program to run this, or $200-$300 total? If you can't find someone to write it for you at that price, then you're just being unrealistic, and personally, I'm doubtful about the viability of that price point. On Monday, August 25, 2003, at 07:22 AM, Travis wrote: > Near as I can tell, nothing in the music gear industry ever gets > killed, except for maybe wax cylinder recorders.