Re: The EDP and the Looperlative and me

[Rick Walker <looppool@cruzio.com>]

On 7/22/64 11:59 AM, Mark Hamburg wrote:
> My suspicion is that if I ignored a bunch of functionality on the 
>Looperlative and built up an appropriately programmed MIDI controller, I 
>could probably get what I want, but I feel like I'm threading a needle 
>whereas the EDP actually has a fair amount that's tuned and ready to go 
>out of the box with nothing more than its standard controller pedal and 
>possibly an expression pedal for feedback (though see the notes about 
>stereo...).
I hear all the things you say about the EDP versus the Looperlative but 
one thing mystifies me?

The EDP was labyrinthine to understand and took a long time for me.  It 
was not intuitive until
after I got the paradigm.

The Looperlative can be programmed in 5 minutes with any midi controller 
because of it's
midi learn function.

It is so vastly easier to use than the EDP that it's not funny, imho.

It is true that it has a different paradigm than the EDP which had to 
rely on clever
programming to make up for a very old and slow processor.    IMHO,  the 
people who
invented and programmed the Loop IV software are all a bunch of 
unmitigated geniuses.
It's an amazing instrument and truly different than the EDP, but
I find I can do everything I like about the EDP in the Looperlative and 
a whole lot more
(especially with 8 simultaneous stereo tracks and the ability to have 
them sync or
not sync together).

But I'm a multi-instrumentalist and I think that the Looperlative's 
fluidity in handling multiple
timbres and indepenedent tracks with all of the vast ability to process 
the outputs appeals
to me more than if I were, say,  a solo guitarist,  where the approach 
is intrinsically more linear.

The EDP is the coolest expression of linearity, but to me, it's like 
comparing a black and white
television with a color television when it's put up against the vast 
amount of possibilities of the
Looperlative.

respectfully,   Rick Walker