Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
To add to the current debate, I would say there are varying levels of hiding behind technology and to see what the true motivation is. That gets you on a slippery slope one you start the debate. Personally, I realize my own set of limitations when I play. I am not particularly fast, but can be fluent when I take my time with things. I guess that looping allows me to build in small micro-steps sometimes, avoiding the need to make "the big statement now" kind of thing. I also realize that when I've tried to be some manner of shredder (trust that I was unimpressive) that I've done things that sounded completely unreal for me. I am not a blues, straight into the amp kind of cat and I realize that when I've tried to play like that, it is just not that interesting. So hence, I have a big board on the floor with all manner of processing goodies. Whatever gives you your true voice is what I would say. Whatever, that is go with that and celebrate it. It is a big world and someone will appreciate your uniqueness be you Fripp, Frissell or just plain me doodling to my border collie and cats. That is how I see it. I of course could very well be wrong. Todd -----Original Message----- >From: Kris Hartung <khartung@cableone.net> >Sent: Mar 17, 2006 11:35 AM >To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com >Subject: Re: what a loop has to say > >> I mean, if you follow the logic of 'hiding behind gear', where do you >draw >> the line? > >You don't. It's a spectrum, or a bell curve. No lines, no black and white. > >> When you pluck an acoustic guitar, you aren't making the sound- very >basic >> technology (strings vibrating over a sound hole) creates the sound. Are >> you >> then hiding behind the technology of the acoustic guitar? I guess only >> vocalists would be considered pure musicians then. ; ) > >Perhaps. I've seen this argued before, but that would be the extreme end >of >the spectrum and bell curve. With certain assumptions, one could make a >valid argument for this. > >> To me- if I can use it (whether 'it' be a bass, a wood block, a >Flanger, a >> laptop or a Repeater) to make noise, it's an instrument. From there the >> only thing that matters is how the artist chooses to use the sound >> creation >> device. > >I agree with you, philosophically here, but there are still glaring >examples >where not a lot of talent and artistic creativity in producing a piece of >music, but is relying primarily on processing after the fact. I can't be >convinced otherwise, because I see it in the flesh frequently. It is >easy >to say that we are all just using instruments and promote this "I'm Okay, >You're Okay" approach, but in my opinion this is also an all to >convenient >way to avoid the talent and creativity component, will varies in radical >degrees in performances. The fact remains, there are people out there >that >havne't really mastered there instruments or who are intermediate players >(and who will openly admit this) still struggligg with their main >instrument, who use gear to compensate for that. It's not right or wrong, >good or bad...I just see it and think it needs to be recognized. > >I'm talking way too much here and getting more acute in my opinions. I >apologize for that. I'll refrain from responding for a while. > >Kris > > > > >> Well that got a little more lengthy than I thought I was going to >> go.....just some Friday morning ramblings. >> >> >> >> >> >> "Kris Hartung" To: >> Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com >> <khartung@cableone.net> cc: >> 03/17/2006 10:46 AM Subject: Re: what a loop >> has to say >> Please respond to >> Loopers-Delight >> >> >> >> >> >> >> My wife once told me that when I sit down with my acoustic guitar and >just >> play freely, that what she hears sound more creative than anything else >I >> do with my gear, looping, etc. I find that sort of interesting >(sometimes >> discouraging)...makes me start to question what is really necessary for >me >> to express myself artistically, vs. hiding behind the gear. Heck, if I >can >> sit down at a gig with just my acoustic, and satisfy both myself and >> others >> artistically, I'd probably be retired right now with all the money I >would >> have saved! :) >> >> But I just love the effects, and I openly admit that "sometimes" they do >> substitute for true, raw creativity. I would be surprised if anyone on >> this >> list who uses a lot of gear thought or felt otherwise. It would take >> quite >> a artistic genius to ALWAYS, 100% of the time, have effects acquiesce to >> one's talent and creativity, rather than the other way around. Either an >> artistic genius, or a complete liar. >> >> Kris >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: daniel stevenson >> To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com >> Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 2:39 AM >> Subject: Re: what a loop has to say >> >> i do find the clean acoustic guitar to be my muse.yet ill mangle it with >> reverse and speed control.varible delay times seems to keep the sound >> pure.maybe just a phase im goin thru but nothing beats a good ole >acoustic >> source into a looper. >> my best regards, >> scary >> visionary. >> >> Kris Hartung <khartung@cableone.net> wrote: >> > Yep, to me a loop says, "Freedom." >> > G >> >> Speaking of which, does anyone find it easier to freely improvise when >> you >> aren't using layers and layers of effects, tone mangling devices, etc? >> I've >> found this to be the case with me. I love all the cool effects at my >> disposal - the Boss VF-1, hundreds of VST effects, LXP5, etc - but they >> sometimes produce artificial restrictions or boundaries on my >creativity. >> I >> tend to be more intentionally and genuinely creative, and less enamored >> and >> influenced by technology, when I just play with a clean guitar sound >with >> >> just a touch of reverb and delay for ambiance. You have nothing but the >> notes, basically, no window dressing to distract the creative process. >> I'm >> sure this is quite subjective and relative, but I'd be curious what >> others >> think of this. I guess just the simple sound of the guitar forces me to >> think more out of the box, rather than relying on the box. For example, >> you >> have a effect patch that has two octaves and panning delays that go on >> forrrrrrrever....you play one "note"...just one human data-point of >> interaction, and the gear takes credit for the rest of the interesting >> sound >> for the next minute. And I start to think to myself, what is really >> creative >> about that? I could play 10 notes in 3 minutes and produce a song that >> requires very little creative energy. It would be interesting to take >all >> >> of our looping songs and strip every single cool effect from them, >> resulting >> in just the initially, humanly generated notes and natural sound of the >> instrument...what might we discover? How much of the intrigue of the >song >> is >> generated by the gear vs. human creative energy? These are just open >> questions for discussion. I'm not necessarily making any categorical >> point >> here. >> >> And in this regard, I really respect a lot of the work of Derek Bailey, >> where its just him and his hollowbody guitar...quite amazing what a guy >> can >> do with just a guitar and amp. >> >> ...I'm off to bed now. It's been a long day. >> >> Kris >> >> >> >> >> >> Yahoo! Mail >> Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is intended for the >> use >> of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain >> information that is privileged, proprietary , confidential and exempt >from >> disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified >that >> any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is >> strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, >> please notify the sender and erase this e-mail message immediately. >> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> > >