Re: evangelize EDP please

[John Mazzarella <jmazzarella@erols.com>]

Paul Greenstein wrote:

> Thought I would throw my own feelings about the Repeater back into the
> ether:
>
> I have a Repeater already, but am considering getting an EDP as well.
> My feeling was (and this has been reinforced by some of the writings on
> this mailing list, both technical and conceptual) that the EDP has more
> depths in terms of the possibility of random musicality. One of  the
> ways I use the Repeater is to record a musically straightforward, even
> 'pretty' loop of indeterminate length. I then flip out of overdub mode,
> and start to insert material, gradually breaking down the structure of
> the piece, taking it in mostly unpredictable directions.
>
> It looks like the EDP would lend itself more to this kind of approach,
> (I assume) due to features like Insert/Divide etc. My understanding (am
> I wrong?) is that the EDP will quantise insertions to the beat, which
> would obviously make it easier to create a 'musical' effect (which may
> be desirable from time to time).
>
> Paul
>
> On Wednesday, October 29, 2003, at 04:31  pm, Greg House wrote:
>
> > --- Lance Chance <lrc8918@louisiana.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Not to be argumentative, or to discourage anyone from getting an EDP
> > (which
> > sounds like a great unit), but you make some statements about the
> > Repeater which
> > I don't understand.
> >
> > You mentioned the easier foot pedal setup. Well, yeah. The EDP has a
> > dedicated
> > foot pedal that you buy pre-configured. It doesn't get much easier
> > then that.
> > With the Repeater, you have to use a midi controller, which means
> > programming it.
> > That's always going to be more complicated. However, I've noticed that
> > many of
> > the more advanced users of the EDP also use a midi controller with it,
> > to make
> > more options and more control immediately available. The difficulty of
> > programming a midi controller will be about the same whether you're
> > controlling a
> > Repeater or an EDP, so I don't really see this as a big advantage.
> >
> > And yes, while you can buy that simple dedicated foot controller for
> > the EDP,
> > they charge you almost as much for this basic metal box (which
> > consists of just 7
> > switches and a handful of resistors) as you might pay for a nice
> > Behringer MIDI
> > foot controller, which is infinitely more versatile.
> >
> > Now, I -really- like the fact that you can plug an expression pedal
> > directly into
> > the EDP and control feedback (and other parameters?). That's a really
> > nice
> > feature.
> >
> >>   i find the repeater more
> >> difficult to use in a studio environment, where it's stutters and
> >> fluttery
> >> artifacts are much more apparent than in a live venue.
> >
> > I've never heard any "stutters or fluttery artifacts" when using my
> > Repeater. It
> > plays back what I play in. Is there a specific sequence of events or
> > functions
> > you use which triggers this?
> >
> >> if i had to drop one, i guess it would be the repeater, because
> >> though it
> >> can do a whole lot more, the work that i have done with my edp and
> >> just my
> >> guitar is much more professional sounding than the work  i have done
> >> with
> >> the repeater.   so, despite not being able to even twist the durn
> >> delay time
> >> (grrrr) on the edp, for me it finally came down to sound quality.
> >
> > Given that the Repeater has higher fidelity then the EDP, I don't
> > understand this
> > comment. I've never had any problems with it's sound quality, as long
> > as it's run
> > at the right signal levels, it's line level, and if you try to run it
> > at
> > instrument levels, it'll be noisy. That's not unique to the Repeater.
> > Most studio
> > effects are like this.
> >
> > Or are you talking about the slight ticking sound some people get on
> > track 1 when
> > using the CFC? Apparently that varies in intensity from unit to unit,
> > mine
> > doesn't do it.
> >
> >> the edp
> >> sounds awesome.  no doubt.  it is warm and full and loops without the
> >> slightest hint of a pop.   i make a lot of textural soundscapes and
> >> this
> >> thing about pops at the loop point is almost a tie breaker right off
> >> the
> >> bat, for me.   if you are an ebow player, i bet that you know what i
> >> am
> >> talking about.
> >
> > I am, and I don't. I hear a very slight change (usually a little
> > surge) in volume
> > around the loop point on the Repeater, never a pop. It's never
> > bothered me.
> >
> >> i say get the edp.
> >
> > I don't necessarily disagree, depending on what someone wants to do,
> > and how they
> > like to work.
> >
> > For me, the Repeater works in a very intuitive way and it allows many
> > many
> > flexable options for manipulation which the EDP doesn't (time
> > stretching/contracting, pitch manipulation, panning, time shifting,
> > multiple
> > tracks for realtime mixing, effects loop, etc). The EDP, on the other
> > hand is
> > extremely powerful in other respects.
> >
> > Compare what you like, how you work, the level things need to run in
> > your rig,
> > and what features you want to use while playing, and the choice will
> > probably
> > become clear.
> >
> > Greg
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears
> > http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/
> >
> >

Yes the EDP does Quantise insertions to the beat.  I use this feature all 
of
the time.  I create short random ostinatos by creating an empty one bar 
loop
and then playing notes from a particular scale while tapping on the insert
button.  After a few passes, the EDP will spit out a really cool ostinato 
in
the key that I'm playing.  I'll then change the start point of the loop to
where it feels naturally at the one, and overdub a short drum beat(by
tapping on my acoustic guitar).  I'll often then multiply that out and lay
down a 4 to 8 bar bass line underneath that ostinato.  This has become a
staple of my live performance.  Fun, fun, fun!

John
www.johnmazzarella.com