RE: looping as sin

["Liebig, Steuart A." <LiebigSA@Maritz.com>]

FYI

Apparently, I wasn't very clear in what I wanted to say.

Solo Looping wasn't NECESSARILY the problem in my view:

If music is creative, it's creative . . . however if the MACHINE is
dictating the "music" ("playing IC chips"), and NOT the player. Then I
do have a problem. If the machine HINDERS or LIMITS flexibility or
musical decision-making I believe the tool is in charge and not the
operator. (Of course it is cool to react to what is being spit back at
you . . . lots of grey area here to be sure.)


> ----------
> From:         Reginald Hunt
> Reply To:     Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
> Sent:         Wednesday, February 4, 1998 8:58 PM
> To:   LiebigSA@maritz.com
> Subject:      RE: looping as sin
> 
> The remark. The writer was stating that solo looping was not music.
> 
> Reg
> 
> 
> At 11:32 AM 2/4/98 -0600, you wrote:
> >Was it the comment, or the syndrome that was pitiful?
> >
> >> ----------
> >> From:      Reginald Hunt
> >> Reply To:  Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
> >> Sent:      Tuesday, February 3, 1998 10:18 PM
> >> To:        LiebigSA@maritz.com
> >> Subject:   Re: looping as sin
> >> 
> >> Come on let's face it. Just like any other subject, there are some
> >> folks
> >> concerned more with the technology than what it produces. We need
> >> people
> >> like that, but we can't evaluate performers strictly by their
> degree
> >> of
> >> technological innovation (which I've seen done here).
> >> 
> >> Yes, the remark about playing ICs when looping is used by itself
> was
> >> pitiful.
> 
>