[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index][
Thread Index][
Author Index]
Re: Critique of Critique of Feedback at Max
Is there an estimate of decay time based on position of feedback dial?
For instance, how long will it take for a layer to decay completely if
the feedback dial is positioned at 3 O'clock? 12 O'clock? 9 O'Clock?
Regards,
Jeff
On Wed, 2002-08-14 at 15:00, Michael Clark wrote:
> The red pill or the blue pill? Both!
>
> M...
>
>
> At 11:30 PM 8/13/02 -0700, you wrote:
> >Oh my, it's some loop philosophy... how can I resist? 8()
> >
> >How ya doin', Rick?
> >
> >"Rick Walker/Loop.pooL" wrote:
> >
> >> Matthias (whose music I adore and who I consider a good new friend)
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> "I just shortly repeat what Kim an me pointed several time at on
>this
> >> list:
> >> With FB constantely at max, the loop turns into a ball on a
>chain: The
> >> phrase you started with keeps you in the same mood, you cannot evolve
>when
> >> you feel its time, just revolve, chopp off... ;-"
> >>
> >> This can happen, certainly, but there are many ways of making
>music.
> >> I, personally, am not a fan of Jazz Fusion as an example,
> >> but to categorically state that this music keeps you in the same mood
> >> because I don't happen to enjoy the form is absurd.
> >
> >I personally didn't take Matthias' comment as an aesthetic judgement at
> >all. To me, it's an expression of a technical concern, and a very
> >important and valid one at that: what do you do with a loop once you've
> >built up a texture, if you don't have feedback control?
> >
> >I would speculate that the comment about "the same mood" is not a
> >reflection of Matthias' personal listening taste, but rather the
> >loopists' challenge when working with a loop without feedback: how do
> >you evolve the texture aside from either overdubbing more and more
> >layers to it (thereby creating an ever-denser texture), and/or ending it
> >abruptly (which are the two possibilities Matthias described in his
> >original remark)?
> >
> >Feedback is an incredible tool for this sort of thing, and Matthias'
> >incredibly fluid and organic style would be unthinkable without it.
> >It's just like I couldn't imagine doing what I like to do without a
> >momentary Replace function (and, increasingly, 8th/cycle quantization,
> >cycle-quantized loop switching, DirectMIDI, etc. etc.) - that's MY own
> >solution to how I develop a loop and change its direction. (Ironically
> >enough, I can regularly play a whole concert without ever touching the
> >feedback control...)
> >
> >> I love repetition, personally. I have loved Terry Riley, Philip
>Glass,
> >> Hamza El Din, Reggae, et. al.
> >
> >I like their stuff too. And I would point to works like "In C" or
> >"Music For 18 Musicians" as good general examples of the sort of
> >principle Matthias is talking about: the idea that you can evolve the
> >loop by fading various elements in and out of the picture, and that over
> >time, the entire textural content of a basic "loop" can completely
> >change and evolve, in subtle and organic ways.
> >
> >> It's really o.k. if Kim or Mattias don't. But let's keep our
> >> communications and our aesthetic biases clear. A personal aesthetic
> >> predilection is exactly that: a personal predilection. It's ok
>to have
> >> them without being judgemental about others.
> >
> >I don't believe either Kim or Matthias are opposed to repetitive music -
> >if they were, they'd very likely find something to do with their lives
> >other than design looping software! 8()
> >
> >And in the case of Kim and Matthias, it's important to remember that
> >you're talking about two guys who have designed several versions of a
> >software which is utterly without peer in its particular focus and
> >design angle. There are things the EDP was doing in its software
> >version 8 years ago that STILL haven't been duplicated or matched. I
> >can only imagine how frustrating it must sometimes be to have spent so
> >much time working on an instrument that's still so underrated and
> misunderstood.
> >
> >So I'm all for discussing these expanded possibilities, because it
> >increases the general understanding of the tools of the trade. And it
> >also allows a fascinating insight into some of the creative corners of
> >the design process in general. For instance, the EDP's
> >painstakingly-programmed 127 discreet feedback values assume a
> >tremendous amount of significance when you see and hear Matthias'
> >seamless work. Some of the more "out there" Echoplex functions make
> >more sense when you find out that Kim Flint is a big hip-hop, jungle,
> >and heavy metal fan.
> >
> >I think it's fantastic that there are folks like yourself, Rick, who are
> >making great music with very simple units like a DL4. But I also think
> >it's important to make people in general aware of the possibilities that
> >lie beyond simply recording, repeating, and overdubbing. A lot of these
> >techniques are not very difficult to use, they already exist in many of
> >the devices people presently own, and they can open tremendous doors
> >into different technical and aesthetic avenues.
> >
> >It's one thing to choose to work within very tight technical
> >constraints, the way you have. But it's another thing to be unwittingly
> >constrained by one's own expectations of the parameters that are
> >available, simply because they never explored the other options out
> >there, you know?
> >
> >> Everyone is Creative. I think there is a disturbing trend in
>western
> >> culture specifically to be perfectionistic and judgemental.
> >> I think that we, as artists and loopers have a great opportunity to
> >> reverse this trend (if only in a small,small way) and actively support
> >> people's creativity. It's all good.
> >
> >I agree that it's important to encourage people to do their thing. But
> >I also adamently feel that it's JUST as important to approach an art
> >form from a respectfully critical point of view.
> >
> >In other words, don't just settle for what's commonly available. Don't
> >just work within the parameters of what we commonly associate with these
> >tools. Don't just accept that looping HAS to sound a certain way.
> >
> >Why shouldn't we challenge ourselves - and one another - in a healthy,
> >respectful, encouraging way, to go beyond what we expect, and what we
> >already know we can do?
> >
> >I haven't seen anything that Kim or Matthias have said that I would
> >describe as disrespectful to other people's music. Can they be blunt?
> >You bet. Direct? Absolutely. Fed up with the status quo? For sure.
> >Challenging? I sure HOPE so. But I think that's how any art form grows
> >and develops - by having a healthy dissatisfaction with the way things
> >are already done.
> >
> >Maybe this is easy for me to say, Rick, since I've heard both of these
> >gentlement express their very deep respect and appreciation for your
> >music. So I know they're not knockin' ya... far from it, in fact.
> >
> >Well damn, I guess this is a brain spew and a half. Time to get back to
> practicing!
> >
> >Hope y'all are well tonight.
> >
> >Woo hah,
> >
> >--Andre LaFosse
> >The Echoplex Analysis Pages:
> >http://www.altruistmusic.com/EDP
> >
> >
>
>