Re: Why I said Andrees music may deserve its own name

[Matthias Grob <matthias@grob.org>]

>on 5/31/03 11:37 PM, altruist@earthlink.net at altruist@earthlink.net 
>wrote:
>
>>  If "live looping" is supposed to be full-phrase repetition, post-Terry
>>  Riley
>>  sounding music, then the "sliced" school of looping doesn't fit.
>
>For that matter, Bill Walker using his arpeggiator to drive the pitch 
>shift
>on his Repeater wouldn't qualify as "live looping" under that definition. 
>I
>think it's probably too narrow.

true, thats another way, full-phrase repetition but with changes in it.
Per keeps recording a drone with his bow onto the repeater and then 
playing a melody with the Behringer pedal.

I dont think each trick is a different category.
A category only makes sense, when the feel of the music it produces 
is also clearly different.
and thats subjective, so its up to the each one...

>
>What Matthias is talking about could perhaps be called "time lag looping" 
>(a
>category that would also include Frippertronics, but you only get that if
>you have a Fripp to plug into the looper). I don't know that "time lag
>looping" is particularly more marketable than "live looping", but I also
>haven't seen a need to draw a line between Matthias's work and Andre's 
>work.

I dont see any "need" either, I just say its easy to justify and may 
make sense to the listeners since it creates a specific slicy sound, 
independent on what instrument its used on. It sounds somewhat 
electronic but clearly distinct from a analog sequencer or so.

I think a new genre comes up if someone starts it with a strong thing 
and puts up a name for it that makes others use that name and if the 
critical mass grows suficiently the press or science nails it down.
Whether there is a need for it or the name is "right" or the borders 
of the new genre is perfectly defined probably does not influence 
that much.

So its nice: we all basically have a chance to found things.
And Andre has the talent and the dedication and the slight fanatism 
needed, as it seems to me.

But I really stop this talk now, its not somehing to think about too 
much and probably rather personal than colective for the first move.
Lets see...

>The big part with "live" is distinguishing it from things like "Acid 
>loops".
>Though, of course, having a program called "Live" for working with
>pre-recorded loops messes with that.

funny, Per and I just talked about that. Yes, we should make them 
change the name :-)
or finally include the live looping functions! I made a contact with 
them last year for this, but did not feel the kind of interest and 
flexibility on their side to make an effort so far...
-- 


          ---> http://Matthias.Grob.org