RE: Short loop fades more quickly than long loop with same feedbacksetting

[Warren Sirota <wsirota@wsdesigns.com>]

Jeff said:
 
> A multitrack looper can simulate feedback by putting each
> overdub on a different track and lowering the output level of 
> the earlier tracks.  This works until you fill all the 
> tracks, then you have to start throwing something away. 

Excellent observation. But then you can background mix old tracks as you
near capacity in order to free up memory and cpu, and go on forever if
that's your wish (though making this clear in the UI might take some
inspired design). Although I haven't done this yet on my system, it's not
difficult, at least in MAX.

> With
> true feedback, the layers can decay over an unlimited number 
> of loop iterations.
> 
> Putting overdubs on separate tracks works very well for
> "arrangement" looping, where you record a beatbox pattern, 
> then overdub a bass line, then some rhythm guitar, etc.  

Well, that *is* more my style, although I don't use canned patterns or a
beatbox (hw or sw), and my spontaneous arrangements are wacko, and the
looper then does some crazy things with it.

>Here
> the loop doesn't evolve in the same way.  Each layer stands 
> on its own and you want to mix them individually.  In this 
> case fades make more sense, you may want to temporarily fade 
> out the rhythm guitar, but then fade it back in later.

Exactly. Except I usually group tracks and fade them in/out together 
instead
of one at a time.


> A more advanced use of feedback is to "play" it using a
> continuous controller pedal. 
> The simplest use of feedback is 
> to set it to a fixed value, like 50%, so the layers decay 
> steadily.  But you can also dynamically change feedback as 
> the loop plays to create volume swells or tremolo effects in 
> the background as you overdub new layers.

That seems is a little more interesting than mapping a CC pedal to the
volume of a track or set of tracks. I believe that I could pretty readily
accomplish this via non-destructive multitrack "feedback" (using volume
controls) if that became a priority for me. And a single track could 
control
the feedback, so everything would fade or swell together (and "negative"?
feedback is possible, where volumes increase instead of decrease). 

How do you create a swell with destructive feedback, anyway? As I recall, 
at
least on the EDP, no matter where you set the feedback knob, the volume of
the loop never increases without new input.

It still seems to me that the destructive nature of the feedback is an
implementation artifact rather than a feature. 

> Of course, it is nice if a looper provides both features :-)

I couldn't agree more.

Warren