Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
(so perhaps you may look to yourself when you make what could possibily be considered condesending remarks about how people make music) Boo. Hiss. A 'dig' at the end of an olive branch. -- Paul Richards ---- mark sottilaro <zerocrossing2001@yahoo.com> wrote: > Nathan, > > Tone is something that doesn't translate over email. > I was just making a little joke, not meant to be > condesending at all. I'm sorry if it came off that > way. I was more poking fun at how we all use the term > "real time" as if there's anything else. I totally > know what you were really talking about and if you'd > read some of my other emails you'd see that I too am > eager to find that "zen" state where interface fades > to zero and it's just you in the moment making music. > I actually really liked the prose like nature of that > comment! > > If it means anything, you've made me interested in the > RC-50 enough to look into it and see what it does. My > comment also caused a comment about it's "fade" > function which when used with a phrase may be able to > give me the ability to fake a feedback "morph." I > guess this remains to be seen, but I'm interested to > hear reports from the early adopters. I have friends > who love their RC-20s and I've seen performances where > it's used to great effect. > > If there was any negitivity implied in my email, it > was toward Roland who seems to be developing some > pretty cool little loopers, yet seem to be ignoring > what a lot of us consider a very important "deal > breaker" feature: the feedback control. I don't know > if you actually care, but yes, I am into doing things > that are evolving and ambient, but I also love the > traditional verse/chorus style of pop music that can > be done with loopers. My hope is to find a single > device that allows the combination of these two styles > of looping. > > Speaking of condecending, I've also seen amazing shows > that have envolved the manipulation of prerecorded > loops and the use of laptops for audio (I use neither) > so perhaps you may look to yourself when you make what > could possibily be considered condesending remarks > about how people make music. > > Mark > > > > --- Nathan Stueve <nathanstueve@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > m a r k - > > > > perhaps we have different concept of what it means > > to create loop based > > music in "real time". > > all i'm expressing is that this device allows me to > > construct precisely > > synched sets of loops by playing instruments on the > > spot during a > > performance, rather than relying on pre-recorded > > bits or staring boringly > > into a laptop screen. > > feedback control is not particularly important for > > me, and it's very easy to > > remove and add loops from the set while the other > > two are still going, not > > to mention the possibilities for complex layering > > and further manipulation > > and that arise when sequencing software is woven in. > > maybe you're some kind of evolving ambiance artist > > or something which is > > fine, but i can't really understand why you would > > attempt to deride my > > comments with a condescending tone. > > in any case, i hope somebody makes the perfect > > looper for you so you'll be > > happy. > > > > - n a t h a n > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com >