Re: delay -> looper || player -> loopist -> musician

[Kim Flint <kflint@annihilist.com>]

At 11:00 AM -0800 11/22/99, K. Douglas Baldwin wrote:
>As always, Matthias, I enjoy your posts immensely. Some comments on this
>most recent thread:
>
>>>> Some of the last posts about t.c. and such leave the impression that 
>any
>>>> delay is a looper as long as it has enough delay time (and is 
>stereo?!).
>>>> But a delay unit just repeats all the time!
>>
>>>> ---> what turns a delay into a loop unit?
>>
>>As you say it nicely, Dr. Knox:
>>> ... making it an "instrument" rather than an "effect"
>
>
>I believe that "making it an instrument" is  more internal than external.
>For me, the question is "at what length does a delay become an 
>instrument?"
>and my answer would be, "around two seconds".

For me, the loop length is nearly irrelevant to it being an instrument.
What matters is interactivity. An instrument to me includes an interface of
some kind that lets my heart, brain, and soul interact and connect with the
sound. The interface connects me intuitively, so I express what I want
without having to think about the mechanics too much. But interactivity is
key. There have to be features to let me continue to work with the sounds,
evolve them, change them, screw around with them, be continually involved
in it. To me a looper is a data instrument, it lets me manipulate audio
data in real time. Add to it, subtract from it, shift it, sequence it,
shuffle it, flip it, chop it, mutilate it, reconstruct it, evolve it.

The kind of looper that just records something and then just sits there
spitting it back at you, offering no way to continue manipulating and
interacting with the loop, that's not much of an instrument. It's a passive
device, just doing it's thing without you. Might as well play a cd and go
home.

Similarly with a lot of delay things, its more of an effect. It just sits
there doing it's thing, and you don't get involved beyond what sounds you
dump into it, and the way you react to the sounds coming out with some
other instrument. That's just an effect, not an instrument. It might be a
really interesting effect, but still: no user interaction, no instrument.

>>I created only textures for about a year. Then, when rhythm came into the
>>loops, it was a great revelation! Texture is nice, but groove is a 
>natural
>>consequence!
>
>I wonder if this is an organic, predictable consequence of looping. I
>started adding rhythmic pulses early in my "serious" looping experiments
>just because it seemed the way to go. I had never heard anyone else doing
>guitar-based rhythmic loop music prior to that. It just felt right.

To me, looping was always about rhythm from the start. I love the way it
forces anything into a rhythm, and the hypnotic, dance-y feel that the
locked-in, tight rhythm loop gives. I've long sought rhythm in music
anyway, and loops were a perfect way to get more of it.

Of course, I can't stand cloudy ambient music, maybe that has something to
do with this too. :-)  I even fast-forward over the irritating ambient
stuff that always seems to be put in the beginning of drum and bass
tracks....

But even with ambience, loops force a rhythm. I can see why it might help
you ambient guys find the beat. ;-)


About time somebody started an interesting thread here. :-)

kim


______________________________________________________________________
Kim Flint                   | Looper's Delight
kflint@annihilist.com       | http://www.annihilist.com/loop/loop.html
http://www.annihilist.com/  |