Re: "Live Looping"

[Mark Hamburg <mark_hamburg@baymoon.com>]

I'm not sure whether you are disagreeing with me. That was essentially my
point. There is a stylistic similarity to the work of Mssrs Walker, 
LaFosse,
Grob, and others. Enough of a similarity to start talking about a genre.
(Note that music need not belong to only one genre.) At the same time, 
there
are other musicians using loopers whose music seems much further removed
stylistically and wouldn't be part of the same genre.

The problem I'm pointing out is that "live looping" -- particularly in the
absence of some other definition -- isn't that much different from "wah-wah
music" as a name.

As a relatively inclusive guy, Rick Walker may not like it, but to define a
genre/movement/what-have-you, it's going to have to exclude someone
otherwise it's meaningless.

Mark

on 4/11/04 4:59 PM, David Kirkdorffer at vze2ncsr@verizon.net wrote:

> Sarcasm mode = on
> 
> Hmmmm....... let me see.... naming a genre of music that requires 
>specific
> capabilities derived from any of a number of devices that is used to 
>create
> the music.... I have it!!!    FuzzBox Music!!!
> 
> Sarcasm mode = off
> 
> Is there such a thing as wah-wah music??
> 
> I have sympathy with the desire to have something that consolidates music
> with loops in it, but if you can find a term that will cover Classical,
> Opera, Jazz, Rock, Hip-Hop, Country and Folk, then I definitely want to 
>know
> it!
> 
> David