Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Matthias Grob wrote: > I am impressed, depressed... > I spent a lot of time switching from HW to SW myself, and I still dont > feel at home as you could see and hear at y2k7. > I had almost the same system for 15 years before, only upgrading effect > units, soldering arround in my fixed wiring sometimes to allow some new > control or combination, so that worked very intuitively to me. > But was it bug free? No! many times there was a bad contact somewhere, > usually coming up before the show, but sometimes during, as well... > Sometimes some setting was changed and not as easy to find as in the > computer, where everything is preset, just open the right file and all > is the way you saved it... > > I see the effort some musicians make from plain accoustic playing to > using HW effects. You did that step long time ago, possibly while > learning to play, so you dont even remember that. > > There are a lot of side conditions of how you set up the computer. I am > using the same macbook pro for everything in my life, which is not so > serious. I should have a unit just for live playing and leave it the > way it is, until some change which is well tested on another machine > can be moved to the live computer - a week or so before the next gig... Couldn't agree more; see my comments further down. > And this live computer could be a box with a touch screen and pedal > connected. A main drawback of the laptops are the exposed connectors on > its side. I think the whole setup should be ready wired in a save box > (I see that most loopers dont do this and spend a time hooking up all > their pedals and testing them each time they play). Agreed. I wrote something semilar in a previous post; i.e. having all prewired and organized as a standalone concept, using a USB touchpanel to prevent being able to mess with a _production_ environment. Again, more related comments below. > I actually tried > this with a mini mac in the same box as the pedal and the audio > interface, but failed, because the it has the video memory shared with > the main memory which produces clicks. > > ** always buy computers with video cards that have physical memory on > it (carefull, they try to cheat in specs!) ** Points taken! though I wonder which OS you used to have audible clicks? You do mention trying a Mac Mini, still with audiable clicks, which is a Bit surpricing to me. I've been thinking of using such. Rethinking.. Actually, video is a problem, as most SFF computers use shared vid mem. > So I think we should > - learn how to do it best on what there is arround now > - not touch the solution when we have one and play it over a longer time > - hope for faster and smaller (no HD) machines in the future > - hope for more realtime oriented music OS (as the Linux guys are > working on, while Vista goes the other direction...) > - hope (or work) for better looping software... > >>> difficult to just do what's needed and say "yup, it works, now close >>> the toolbox" >>> >> Yup, I follow you. My problem, at least in the PC world, is that the >> damn technology >> never lets you close the toolbox. :) > > > thats because you are not done with it yet. I bet we can come to a > arrangement we like so much that we stop looking at each plug that > comes out for a while and then make another upgrade when we feel like - > on a different machine... Agreed. This is exactly like doing software or service development in IT; you need a development and a productin environment. At this point of looping hardware/software development, AFAICT solutions aren't completely ready, so we _are_ into a development process. -- rgds, van Sinn