Re: loops, ambient or otherwise

[Mike.Biffle@wj.com (Mike Biffle)]

Thanks Reg for such clear and devoloped definitions regarding looping. 
Most of 
my comments are in reply to your feelings about Robert Fripp below.

Reginald Hunt wrote...

>The topics below obviously touch on some interesting fundamental points:

>Music and Artistically Valid Noise

>Yes I consider them different. Possibly Music is a subset of AVN. Or they
>are side by side under a larger category(?) For me, method of production 
>is
>irrelavant to whether I wish or need to hear the final result. Granted,
>Music and AVN are broad subjects. They are not always about a final sonic
>result per se. But sometimes they are. And sometimes those sonic results 
>are
>meant to achieve states of mind other than joy, anger, or pathos. Of 
>course,
>approval of those states of mind is an essentially political choice.

>By method of production, I refer to technology and technique, and also to
>the envoronment the work is conceived in. Good work can be produced by
>situations ranging from a lone person in his apartment to a band/orchestra
>in a live venue. But since the discussion here relates to Looping as the
>technology/technique, I bring up the next point....

>****************************************************************************
>*********

>My operating definition of "looping" has been this:

>Electronically or mechanically repeated time segments of audio. The time
>segments would be at least about 1 second. Obviously, the time segments 
>must
>be shorter than infinite, or else no repeat occurs.  

>A person sitting at a keyboard and playing the same phrase over and over
>manually is not looping, he is repeating. Yodelling in a canyon is not
>looping, it is echo. The effects can sometimes be similar using any of the
>three. Which is why I bring up the next point....

>****************************************************************************
>*********

>The purpose of looping to me appears to be:
>To create interesting repeating patterns of sound (Music or AVN) easily.
>To create thick layers of sounds unachievable in any any other 
>economically
>feasable way.
>To create a One-Man-Band.

>Any uses of looping I've experienced has fallen into one or more of those
>categories. Notice that I do not include any specific political,
>psychological, or aesthetic goals. Looping in itself is neutral to these.
>However, any technology or technique has uses that are immediately
>suggested, and others uses that are discovered or developed after 
>experience. 

>****************************************************************************
>*********

>Unfortunately, the human animal can suffer from the tendency to follow
>sheep-like (or lemming-like). Ambient music has suffered from its 
>contingent
>of brain dead devotees, as has Fripp. Originally, ambient music was not
>intended as a hypnotic tranquilizer (which looping inherently lends itself
>to). It was meant as music which operates equally on different levels of
>awareness simultaneously. Persons who assume that loopers are into ambient
>music by default, are a type of bigot. But don't damn a style of music 
>for 
>that.

Does this imply that 'bad' ambient music has actually impaired our ability 
to 
perceive Mr. Fripp? How nasty of the mediocrities. 

I'm not sure how 'ambient' music was originally intended. Was there a 
group 
charter for the genre or something? Or are we now following sheep-like, 
some 
authority on the subject? I'd like to think that even the most unassuming 
person
who purchases *any* cheesy sounds to alter their environment, is somehow 
taking 
a rather active measure to alter their experience somehow. Most 
commendable! 

Bigot? Let they without sin cast the first stone! Those mindless drones 
have 
infected us all... Animals indeed!

>Fripp has always been an acquired taste. His explorations extend beyond
>music per se. He has always questioned the audience-performer 
>relationship,
>and the effect of the music business on musicians. His actions at
>performances are reflective of all that and probably more. He's never been
>about being a "hot" player. The many comments I've seen here and elsewhere
>asking why he doesn't "rip it up", or about him leavng the stage and
>observing the audience, shows a lack of understanding about the artist.

To believe that I don't understand the artist because I have preferences 
as to 
what I might experience at a performance seems a little PC to me. I've 
been able
to enjoy the vast differences in much of Fripps output. Fripp doesn't have 
to 
always rip, but if I shell out to go see him, I'm hoping I might get some 
tiny 
portion that which I know to also be alive somewhere in his soul as well. 
After 
all the pendulum does swing both ways.

>Fripp has never been about being a Looper, either. For him it is a method,
>not the point. Seems to me, that's a good lesson for a lot of us.

>Reg

I dislike being boxed in by labels and expectations as well. Did you study 
with 
Mr. Fripp or what? I have been a Fripp fan and have followed his 
techniques and 
attitudes quite closely since 'In The Court...'.

I've found that as I've grown older, I sometimes have to cut to the chase 
a 
little quicker than I used to. If I lack understanding about Fripp as an 
artist 
because I hope to see him in a comfortable, non-combative setting, which 
might 
allow for undistracted listening, then so be it. Let me be 'responsible' 
for my 
own listening experience without dictating to me. Maybe I'm just an old 
intolerant fart as well. Who am I to dictate?

If lectures become a larger part of other artists performances, I may 
begin 
having a harder time enjoying them as well. Although I might actually 
pursue 
some artists due to their engaging communication style and content. I 
believe 
Fripp is starting to sound redundant to me at this point. Hopefully the 
pendulum
will swing again and I will enjoy many more years of delightful Fripp 
output.

I find it somewhat totalitarian though that Fripp expects certain 
conformities 
from his audience without somehow realizing that his audience might expect 
some 
regard for their needs as well. Especially having shelled out their ducats.

I have my own artistic requirements and expectations of an audience as 
well, but
I find that it gets quite complicated when I consider the many possible 
ways in 
which people listen and communicate. With that in mind I find it a little 
harder
to tell them to shut up and listen or some other such dictate. Maybe when 
I get 
completely fed up with their antics, I'll lay down the law as well. More 
power 
to Mr. Fripp.

Loop on brother...
-Miko Biffle

>****************************************************************************
>*********
>****************************************************************************
>*********


From: "Liebig, Steuart A." <LiebigSA@Maritz.com>
To: "'Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com'" <Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com>
Subject: RE: location & Loopers' CD
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 18:17:26 -0600<>Resent-Message-ID:
<"vt6_M.A.yJF.WJm10"@ferret>
Resent-From: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Reply-To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
X-Mailing-List: <Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com> archive/latest/2728
Resent-Sender: SmartList <lists@slip.net>
Resent-To: rphunt@tiac.net
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 16:29:25 -0800

Yeah, I tend to think of loops as being only a small part of the
live/recorded imporvised or composed experience. A small part of the
canvas, sometimes you need to do alot sometimes a little; sometimes
intense noise, sometimes tonal bliss . . . If all you are doing is
looping, well I don't know . . . are you playing music or IC chips? . .
. I only say this because I have friends who have gone this route and
I'm not really sure that it leads to what I consider an important factor
in music: human interaction. (Often have the same problem with totally
pre-recorded concerts or music concrete.)


> ----------
> From:         Kim Flint
> Reply To:     Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
> Sent:         Monday, February 2, 1998 4:04 PM
> To:   LiebigSA@maritz.com
> Subject:      Re: location & Loopers' CD
> 
> At 03:44 PM 2/2/98 EST, paparuda o o wrote:
> >
> 
> >yeah! even more, i would actually like to meet other loopers; 
> 
> I think that is generally a great idea, and probably my biggest
> motivation
> for creating this whole monster of an internet address! Get together!
> Collaborate! Share ideas! Real-live or Virtual! Go forth and Multiply!
> 
> 
> (pun intended there....)
> 
> 
> >it's seems to me that most of the loopers are into "ambient" 
> >instrumental music.  
> 
> I'm not. In fact, I'm morally opposed to being an ambient musician.
> What
> others choose to do with their lives is their own business, but I
> resolutely
> refuse to have anything to do with this ambient stuff. I'm deeply
> offended
> by any implication that being into looping means I'm ambient. I'm
> proud of
> my long history here resisting the ambient tyranny that threatens to
> overcome all other loopists! I will also continue to resist shameless
> idol
> worship of this Fripp fellow. Soundscapes, poundcakes. Not for me! 
> 
> of course, neither of those is as sick as being a deadhead. Those
> maniacs
> are actually planning to open a Grateful Dead theme park in San
> Francisco.
> The apocalypse will arrive none too soon.
> 
> this, of course, gets many smiley's:  :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
> 
> 
> >so, please, if you have a copy of the "loopers CD", or 
> >would like to share your (COPYRIGHT protected) looped music 
> >can you let me know? 
> 
> that CD project actually is not yet completed. As I understand, it's
> in a
> bag on someone's shelf awaiting arrival of the still-vaporware-Layla
> sound
> card. Seems likely that CD #2 will arrive before CD #1.
> 
> kim
> _______________________________________________________
> Kim Flint                     408-752-9284
> Mpact Systems Engineering     kflint@chromatic.com
> Chromatic Research            http://www.chromatic.com
> 
>