Re: What are the looper features that manufacturers are stupid to leave out?

[andy butler <akbutler@tiscali.co.uk>]

Matt Davignon wrote:
> A source of amusement for me is that every few months, a discussion
> comes up on this list along the lines of "what are the features you
> think no looper should be without". Within a few emails, we have specs
> for a looper that has so many necessary "basic features" that it would
> cost more than $1,000, and would be very complex to operate.

:-)
yes, too easy to get carried away...but not everyone missed the point.



> In the end, I think I like the idea of creating one line of devices
> for simpletons like myself, who mostly want a long looping time,
> feedback control, reverse/half speed and a simple, intuitive
> interface. 

that's more like it.
...but there's also those unglamorous features like stop/start
and not having to go through some complex sequence to re-record a loop.



> If you gave me the ability to pitch bend the loop like a
> tape machine, and I'll be as happy as a pig in shit. (Perhaps even
> happier.)

;-)
see, it's just too tempting to ask for the feature you know is
a specialist requirement.

> Then one could create a second line of devices for the feature hounds.
> That could have the multiplies, divides, midi syncs, multiple loops,
> undo, fraction replaces, etc for the folks who want all the bells and
> whistles.

I'd put Multiply into the "essential" category(unless multiple loops
are available). 
...and I'm kind of thinking you would too if you'd played around with it.


andy


>