Re: WHAT COULD WE DO BETTER? proposal for a new thread

["David" <vze2ncsr@verizon.net>]

I agree whole heartedly with Steve.

If the process (here, looping) becomes more interesting than the outcome
(presumably here, music), then all the non-gearheads can nod-off or run to
the bar or take a pee-break and hope the next person to hit the stage is
more interesting than a bunch of blinking lights.

David

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Lawson" <steve@steve-lawson.co.uk>

<snip>

> > 3) What are your pet peeves about looping shows?
>
> that the 'looping' part becomes more important than the music part.
>
> Looping can be a great tool for getting some press (as Rick has so
> masterfully shown in Santa Cruz), but for the musician, if that takes
over,
> you're doomed. The root of it all has to be musical - if it's technical,
> you're not going to find an audience beyond other people who do the same
> thing. The general public ARE interested in how looping works, but not to
> the point where they'll put up with shit music just to watch the button
> pushing. Great tunes + clever technology x great performance = winning
> combo.