Looper's Delight Archive Top (Search)
Date Index
Thread Index
Author Index
Looper's Delight Home
Mailing List Info

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: livelooping. Ambient.





> Is one looper's music less (or more) legitimately "live-looping" music 
> than another's because it might be a blues . . . or pop song cover . . . 
> or a polka?

Ask Michael Klob

> 
> If such a thought were (or had ever been) a part of this community I 
> would not have stuck around for 16 years.
> 
> If it ever gets to that point, I'd feel ashamed to have been a part of 
> it for so long.
> 
> Just my 2 cents.
> 
> If the criteria for a particular piece of music being somehow more 
> legitimate as "live-looping" music is a consideration of whether or not 
> it could have existed in any other way or form or category . . . and 
> that its existance and form was especially and neccessarily dictated and 
> dependent on a pirece of hardware instead of a musician's mind, then 
> we've already crossed some sort of line somewhere methinks.
> 
> Think very carefully about what you are saying.
> 
> These ideas could have implications you don't intend.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Ted

Jokes apart, I deeply resonate with you, Ted.

-f




> 
> On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 9:02 AM, andy butler wrote:
> 
>> essentially yes....need to work on the definition.
>> 
>> With livelooping the form can take on unique features
>> which take the music out of any regular genre classification.
>> 
>> "any musician who owns a looping device" is likely to produce music 
>> where the effect of the looping device is secondary to other 
>> considerations of musical classification.
>> 
>> The 12 bar blues is loopable, but you wouldn't want to call
>> it livelooping.
>> 
>> Let's have another go.......
>> 
>> Music in which the sounds are the result of an interaction
>> between a musician and an instrument, while the form is uniquely the
>> result of the interaction of a musician with a looping device.
>> 
>> andy
>