Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
I am afraid I didn’t read further before, sorry for dissing you here mark.
I do undertand your reasons now.
still I believe, that the looperlative will be a very cool machine – in the end – and the more imprtant questions is, if there’s any way of finding bob co-developpers to help him and expand the idea of this great thing
so
jayrope - berlin
From: mark sottilaro <zerocrossing2001@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 10:44:38 -0700 (PDT)
To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
Subject: Re: LP1 Rant warning! (was Re: Looperlative LP1 testers)
Hey,
I'm thinking of staying with my Repeater and ditching
the Looperlative. Bob's offered to take it back but I
imagine he'll just sell it for his $1500 price. I'm
not looking to make money on this, but I'd like to
retreive my full purchase amount. $1320 gets it
shipped to your door if you're in the USA.
M
--- mark t <aleatoric12@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you want to sell your LP1 i'll take it!
>
> On 5/2/06, mark sottilaro
> <zerocrossing2001@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > --- Claude Voit <c.voit@vtx.ch> wrote:
> >
> > > having followed the LP1 forum for a while, I'm a
> > > little bothered with the
> > > "throw in your ideas, boys" way of develloping a
> > > software.
> >
> > Boy howdy, Claude!! At first I thought, "what a
> great
> > idea, go to the people!" and then reality set in.
> > People are self absorbed jerks! I'm a self
> absorbed
> > jerk! I'm shocked that Bob's not gone crazy by
> this
> > point. I can't wait for the "let's change the
> logo
> > thread!" ;)
> >
> > I can't help but feel that in some ways, maybe due
> to
> > his design by customer input, that I bought a beta
> > product. The manual is poor (many features are
> barely
> > mentioned, let alone explained, if it wasn't for
> Steve
> > Lawson on the forum I probably would have returned
> the
> > LP-1), it's got outputs that aren't implemented in
> any
> > way and did ship with a fair amount of bugs. (many
> > have already been found and fixed) Was a night of
> my
> > life wasted because v 1.1 refered to midi channels
> as
> > 0-15? Yes it was. Another gone because the midi
> > clock sync didn't work? Yeah, that too. Another
> gone
> > because stopped tracks don't restart synced to the
> > clock...
> >
> > Also, because of it's very open yet unfinished
> form
> > I'm one of those frustrated owners. It's a tweak
> away
> > from being my dream looper. (there's curently no
> way
> > to use the midi tracks as separate loops when
> synced
> > to a midi clock and have them operate like the EDP
> or
> > the Repeater does, toggling betwen them) Judging
> from
> > what I read on the forum you could operate it that
> > way.
> >
> > If this was a product from a company like Roland
> or
> > Digitech, it would have been returned. Mostly
> when
> > those companies release a product it is what it
> is.
> > I'd have said, "Oh, this product does't operate
> like I
> > want it to. Bye bye." But now I have a product
> that
> > *may* change into what I want. This is kind of
> odd,
> > as rather than digging into if for what it is (a
> very
> > cool multi track looper), I can't help but think
> of
> > what it isn't and might be. LOOP TEASE!
> >
> > Will my tweak come? I don't know. I've put in
> > several requests but never got a "oh that's slated
> in
> > the next release" or "no, that's not doable at
> this
> > time" reply. The reply was "When it comes to
> multiple
> > tracks, especially when combined with MIDI sync,
> we
> > will need to spend more time defining how you want
> the
> > software to work. The software is still young and
> I'd
> > be happy to make changes to make operate in a
> useable
> > fashion." How much time? Do I be patient? I
> don't
> > develop hardware/software loopers so I have no
> idea
> > what it takes in terms of time to implement
> features.
> > Maybe my request isn't worth Bob's time as I'm one
> of
> > few that even care about this.
> >
> > As it stands now it's mostly useless to me *but I
> > couldn't know that based on prerelease
> information*
> > It's not even in my signal chain. I know I'm
> ranting
> > (I'm a good ranter, eh?) but $1200 left my bank
> acount
> > on something that's sitting on a shelf. Do I
> wait?
> > How long? Bob has been amazing and patient, but
> part
> > of me wishs that a bit more time was spent in
> initial
> > conception before it was released. If I knew that
> > this *is* the way the LP-1 is going to be for a
> long
> > time, I would have passed.
> >
> > I'm not saying the LP-1 isn't GREAT. It is a
> great
> > looper. In some ways it's the best. If you're
> not a
> > midi clock looper, this may indeed be your box.
> If
> > you don't care about cuing a new loop to start
> > recording at the end of the current loop AND then
> > going back and finding the first loop still
> perfectly
> > synced to your drum machine, this may be your
> looper.
> > If you want 8 stereo channels of midi synced (or
> not)
> > loops that don't all have to be the same length,
> this
> > may be your looper.
> >
> > Of course Bob is on this list so he's probably
> going
> > to read this. Hi Bob! Bob, I like you. I like
> the
> > Looperlative. I could not have done anything like
> > this at all. I have much respect for your hard
> work
> > and effort. Your ability to implement all our
> crazy
> > feature requests in a short time has been amazing.
> > I'd have told me to fuck off a long time ago. In
> a
> > sense I wish you would. Then I could say, "is the
> > LP-1 worth owning in it's current form?" and be
> done
> > with it. Like it is it's an itch in my brain that
> I
> > just can't scratch.
> >
> > Mark