RE: RC-50 Users Must Be Busy

["Joshua Carroll" <josh@infinivert.com>]

Oh wow... If that's the case, I definitely won't buy one.  Won't do much
good if it can't slave to a sequencer.

--Josh

> My friend mentioned to me that he contacted boss about a different issue
> as
> well. he tried to slave it to his drum machine midi clock and it would 
>not
> stay in sync. They've acknowledged the problem and said he should make 
>the
> rc-50 master only.
>
>
>
>   _____
>
> From: Jfloridis@aol.com [mailto:Jfloridis@aol.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 4:31 PM
> To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
> Subject: Re: RC-50 Users Must Be Busy
>
>
>
> continuing my thoughts on the rc50, i have continued to find it a nice
> unit.
> i've used it in ways i had not anticipated, ie., single mode loops from
> section A to section B, which i had not done before.  mostly using that
> for
> compositional stuff, hearing how sections would sound back to back.  i
> also
> confess that i have used the rhythm tracks to do some writing.  initially
> i
> thought there was no way i'd mess with those, but i burried my attitude
> and
> had some fun with it.
>
> for me, whether i keep the unit or return it hinges on that damn "glitch"
> as
> paul calls it at the end of the record and the begining of the playback.
> it
> bothers me that much.  i'm really not sure what to do about it.  playing
> through it just seems like a lame way to get around it.  the fact of the
> matter is it shouldn't be there.  if anyone else has experienced this and
> truly has found a consistent way around it, i'd be all ears.  maybe i do
> quieter loops than others, as when i try to loop more subtle chord
> progressions or motifs with any space in there, it really is
> jarring.......again, only for the first time around, but still, that's
> just
> ridiculous.  maybe i should try another one somewhere and see if maybe
> mine
> is particularly bad.
>
> so in closing, still having fun, but still frustrated as well,
> john
>
>