Re: stereo delay

["Stephen P. Goodman" <spgoodman@earthlight.net>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Simeon Harris" <simeon.harris@bbc.co.uk>
To: <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com>
Sent: 10 October 2001 11:30 AM
Subject: stereo delay


>
> thanks for the input chaps - just wanted to clear up a couple of things -
as
> kim has found out, recording an empty loop on the repeater and 
>overdubbing
> onto it, does not solve the bump problem (a small drop-out, or glitch on
the
> first downbeat) - even when recording without any sync (and there's no
> padding when in user sync mode) and even when doing lots of overdubs...
>
> i was using the jammans to create morphing loops that change over time, 
>by
> setting them up in delay mode (about 10 secs of delay, about 10 repeats)
and
> swelling in sounds with lots of delay and reverb, just like fripp and 
>torn
> do...they're not really "loops" per se and they're not synced to 
>anything,
> because they are ambient "tempoless" creations...(the two jammans are in
> parallel, cos they are mono devices and one treats the left channel and
one
> the right channel, so the stereo image is maintained as they are post
fx)...
>
> there are plenty of mono delay devices around, but not many of them have 
>a
> delay time of 10 seconds and the ones that do are either pedals, or
> horrendously expensive rack units which do loads of other stuff as well -
i
> just need some delay which i will leave set and then just feed them with
> some input as required during a performance...
>
> i think it's strange that some products will give you 30 seconds of mono
> delay, when 15 seconds of stereo delay would actually be more useful to
some
> people...
>
> i'll just have to find another pair of jammans somewhere i guess...

I am reminded of waaay back in the early PC days, a friend of mine jacked a
640kb RAM PC - remember those? - so it would use additional 64kb memory
segments and effectively increase it to an 896KB machine.  He did it by
making a new prom chip that had an altered address list to address the new
segments, in effect, and using a small assember routine to run that
addressed the new table.

In conjunction with the post above, I wonder if you guys could add loop
time/RAM if you had a modified chip on that level?  Just a morning thought.

Stephen Goodman
http://www.earthlight.net/Gallery_Front.html - Cartoons & Illustrations
http://www.earthlight.net/Studios * The free Loop of the Week!
http://www.live365.com/stations/218194 * EarthLight Online / Live!