Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Yet, after several years of software loopers, they don't seem to be planned out much better than the dedicated hardware boxes. The manufacturer benefits from not needing to produce a dedicated hardware platform and the user benefits from not having to pay BitTorrent to download the software (joke! but only halfway...). Now that there's many years of actual looping experience in the community of musicians, there is a set of commonly desired features which a manufacturer would do well to examine if they want to find lasting market acceptance. I mean, what were the ElectroHarmonix people thinking? Did they think that five minutes (or whatever it is) of recording time was going so dazzle everyone that the other myriad shortcomings wouldn't be a factor? I think they would have done better to do a wholesale functional reissue of the old box with no new features. Or Line6 with their MIDI clock issues on the rackmount delay modeler? If it's in a rack, people want MIDI, and they want it to work. What sort of market research and beta testing misses that? The tool will always dictate, to some degree, how you use it. And if you're a "I want to build up ever denser walls of sound!" guy, then it's good times in gearland for you. However, I don't think that covers the majority of people interested in looping technology, or it doesn't once that population is introduced to the idea of user-controllable feedback. On 8/26/05, Ben <benoitruelle@yahoo.fr> wrote: > From: "Travis Hartnett" <travishartnett@gmail.com> > > I've seen very little evidence that there's been much research on the > part of manufacturers as to what makes a great looper (and what makes > a frustrating one). For a looper with any prior experience just > reading the manual for most of these boxes, there always seems to be > at least one feature that immediately jumps out as being missing or > horribly implemented (variable feedback level and > record-straight-into-overdub being two of the usual culprits). > _____ > I agree but it depends of the way you plan to use the box. For me, I'll > choose a "multiply function" over the variable feedback. Record into >overdub > is the feature everyone needs, I guess ;-) > > I guess the ultimate perfect box will be a software one, ... > > Ben > > > > > > > > >___________________________________________________________________________ > Appel audio GRATUIT partout dans le monde avec le nouveau Yahoo! >Messenger > Téléchargez cette version sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com > >