Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Well look who woke up! It's Kim! Nice to have you back, your posts are always great. I totally agree with Kim. While the Repeater is set up to save your loops, there is rarely a loop that doesn't get overdubed with or without some % of feedback. I found trying to get the loops off the compact flash card to be like memories of a dream where you know there was more but you can't quite get it. Recording the whole damn thing (nice for me I'm always synced to a midi clock so extracting loops is painless... more painless than getting them off the Repeater's card) is for sure the way to go. Mark --- Kim Flint <kflint@loopers-delight.com> wrote: > At 04:02 PM 1/29/2006, loop.pool wrote: > >kim wrote: > >"....with people who are serious about looping and > have been doing it for > >some time, they usually are performing a whole > process with loops. Building > >it up, taking stuff out, manipulating the loops, > changing the loops, > >evolving it from one thing to another. There is not > some static point where > >you would save something. " > > > >I agree with you there, kim, but on my last long > tour, I saved my favorite > >loops onto my Repeater and now am having a lot of > fun going back > >and using them as Ur loops in new compositions > (which are not > >real time), completely out of the context with > which they were made > >originally. > > Sure, I agree with that. Looping is a great way to > generate a lot of ideas > for composing or a lot of source material for > compositional building blocks > later. > > But then I still don't understand why you would only > save one single > still-frame static loop out of the whole process of > creating and evolving > the loops in a given piece. What if there were many > great points during > that process that you want? Or what if a point you > didn't think was > interesting in the moment suddenly becomes really > interesting two weeks later? > > And as you suggest, oftentimes the magic moment is > in the middle somewhere, > just before you manipulate the loop in a different > direction. In the heat > of performing, I doubt you would think to stop and > save the loop right at > that point, or that you would want to interrupt your > performance to do > that. You would be going on with your playing, and > then only later think > how you really liked that spot two minutes into the > piece that is now > completely obliterated by all the loop manipulations > done after that moment. > > That's why I think it makes far more sense to just > record the whole > process. Forget about saving a single static loop. > Save all the audio of > the whole looping process, both input and output. > Along with that, save all > the MIDI output of the looper. The MIDI commands > will serve as marker > points so you can later see everything you did, > where the loop start and > end points are, etc. You can go back through it and > find all the good > points, and not have interrupted your creative > process with typing in file > names in the middle of a performance. You could even > recreate the whole > thing back into the looper if you wanted to, just > plug it the other way and > press play. > > It's real easy. At the beginning of the piece, press > record. At the end, > press stop. then you have everything, like a movie > with time code and the > director's instructions, rather than a single frame > with no context. > > kim > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > Kim Flint | Looper's Delight > kflint@loopers-delight.com | > http://www.loopers-delight.com > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com