RE: Evangelizing Apples and Oranges

[Francois LEBRUN <fr.lebrun@free.fr>]

thanks for this posting.

if somebody as good clues on improving the sound quality,
it is interesting (not meaning I need them, but I'd love to read
about other's experience and tips).

Also good point about the front panel design (not very impressed with the 
EDP,
lots of small labels; on the other hand, the display size is perfect, very 
readable).

crystal clear understanding at a glance of what's going on throughout the 
system at a given moment
I sure can see what you mean; and I also fully agree on the one about 
"press and hold these 3 buttons etc etc ..."

hmmmm .... mixed emotions I must say ...

-----Message d'origine-----
De:     S V G [SMTP:vsyevolod@yahoo.com]
Date:   jeudi 30 octobre 2003 18:21
À:      Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
Objet:  Re: Evangelizing Apples and Oranges


     In response to the current thread about comparing the EDP apple with 
the Repeater orange...
well I guess this topic hasn't arisen in over a year so why not take a 
whack at it...   :)

     The two devices are based on very different technology, each unit 
approaches seemingly
simliar tasks in very different ways.  The thing about it is that there 
are some functions that
are identical or very nearly similar on the two boxes.  They both 
radically depart from each other
pretty early on.  One of the big similarities concerns the loop starting 
point and the
seamlessness of the EDP vs. the artifact created by the Repeater.  Also 
that with the EDP, you can
go immediately from recording your first loop to overdubbing without the 
obligatory 1 second wait
that must be observed with the Repeater.  This all stems from the 
difference in design
architecture and I feel it is important to keep this in mind.  One 
architecture allows an enormous
number of possibilities along several paths, while the other architecture 
allows another enormous
number of possibilities along several other paths.

     I own a Repeater and not the EDP.  So I am very familiar with the 
quality of sound of the one
and not the other.  I hear a degradation of sound in the Repeater, though 
with proper gain
staging, it is very slight.  I have heard the EDP in several different 
situations, one of them
being in one of my bands where the guitarist uses one quite often.  Every 
time I've heard the EDP,
my sense is that the quality of reproducing a sound is much lower than the 
Repeater.  I wouldn't
like to make this a hard and fast judgement because I've never worked with 
it myself.  Certainly I
could do the necessary optimizations to pull the maximum tone out of the 
EDP and get a real sense
of it's quality of sound?  Has anyone else done this and what do you have 
to report?  My sense is
that the EDP sucks tone more than the Repeater.  A loss of high end while 
adding a digital
harshness is what I've observed from the EDP.  I'd love to hear that it's 
just improper gain
staging and that it can really sound nice after all.

     A point about the Repeater that I have come to enjoy more and more 
(and really a point about
the entire line of Electrix gear), is the incredibly well thought out 
front panel.  Even a step
above the rest of the Electrix line, the Repeater has such a nice feel to 
it.  The raised silver
section around the transport controls has these great details: Physical 
barriers between the
reverse and stop buttons and the play and record buttons to discourage 
sloppy or inaccurate
presses, indented undo, copy, and replace buttons to also encourage 
accuracy, very logical
arrangement and flow of the panel overall, without an overwhelming variety 
of "press and hold
these three buttons with your left hand while moving this fader with your 
nose and turning that
fader with your johnson to get such and such special functions...", 
crystal clear understanding at
a glance of what's going on throughout the system at a given moment.

     Andre LaFosse is a great example of someone who has gone in depth 
with the EDP and allows the
tool to inform his own playing style and musical output.  I use the 
Repeater in a similar way.  It
is so difficult to compare them.  Though it seems to be pretty easy to 
want something to be what
it's not.  Like any tool, I'd encourage you to look at each piece of gear 
as containing it's own
particular qualities and mysteries.  It is then up to you to unlock for 
yourself some of what is
available.  Depending on who you are and how you work and where you want 
to go, each tool will
work differently for each person.  

     I work in an improv trio (two keyboardists and one guitar).  The 
Repeater almost never comes
into play because the sound is already rich and full enough.  If that trio 
ever works as a duo
(which happens often enough), the Repeater gets quite a workout.  I rely 
on it to provide that
extra layer of sound which I can rest on and do other things.  And in a 
solo context, it becomes
an essential and well used friend.

     Stephen






__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears
http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/

application/ms-tnef