Re: BOSS RC-50 impressions

[Paul Richards <paulrichard10@adelphia.net>]

(so perhaps you may look to yourself when you make what 
could possibily be considered condesending remarks 
about how people make music)

Boo. Hiss. A 'dig' at the end of an olive branch.

--
Paul Richards

---- mark sottilaro <zerocrossing2001@yahoo.com> wrote: 
> Nathan,
> 
> Tone is something that doesn't translate over email. 
> I was just making a little joke, not meant to be
> condesending at all.  I'm sorry if it came off that
> way.  I was more poking fun at how we all use the term
> "real time" as if there's anything else.  I totally
> know what you were really talking about and if you'd
> read some of my other emails you'd see that I too am
> eager to find that "zen" state where interface fades
> to zero and it's just you in the moment making music. 
> I actually really liked the prose like nature of that
> comment!
> 
> If it means anything, you've made me interested in the
> RC-50 enough to look into it and see what it does.  My
> comment also caused a comment about it's "fade"
> function which when used with a phrase may be able to
> give me the ability to fake a feedback "morph."  I
> guess this remains to be seen, but I'm interested to
> hear reports from the early adopters.  I have friends
> who love their RC-20s and I've seen performances where
> it's used to great effect.
> 
> If there was any negitivity implied in my email, it
> was toward Roland who seems to be developing some
> pretty cool little loopers, yet seem to be ignoring
> what a lot of us consider a very important "deal
> breaker" feature: the feedback control.  I don't know
> if you actually care, but yes, I am into doing things
> that are evolving and ambient, but I also love the
> traditional verse/chorus style of pop music that can
> be done with loopers.  My hope is to find a single
> device that allows the combination of these two styles
> of looping.
> 
> Speaking of condecending, I've also seen amazing shows
> that have envolved the manipulation of prerecorded
> loops and the use of laptops for audio (I use neither)
> so perhaps you may look to yourself when you make what
> could possibily be considered condesending remarks
> about how people make music.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> --- Nathan Stueve <nathanstueve@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > m a r k -
> > 
> > perhaps we have different concept of what it means
> > to create loop based 
> > music in "real time".
> > all i'm expressing is that this device allows me to
> > construct precisely 
> > synched sets of loops by playing instruments on the
> > spot during a 
> > performance, rather than relying on pre-recorded
> > bits or staring boringly 
> > into a laptop screen.
> > feedback control is not particularly important for
> > me, and it's very easy to 
> > remove and add loops from the set while the other
> > two are still going, not 
> > to mention the possibilities for complex layering
> > and further manipulation 
> > and that arise when sequencing software is woven in.
> > maybe you're some kind of evolving ambiance artist
> > or something which is 
> > fine, but i can't really understand why you would
> > attempt to deride my 
> > comments with a condescending tone.
> > in any case, i hope somebody makes the perfect
> > looper for you so you'll be 
> > happy.
> > 
> > - n a t h a n
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
>