[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index][
Thread Index][
Author Index]
RE: Short loop fades more quickly than long loop with same feedbacksetting
I guess I don't see why feedback would have any better utility than fade -
it seems more limited, and its destructive nature doesn't seem like an
asset
in any situation that I can envision (I'm sure others are more imaginative
than I). Don't have time for an archive search now, so sorry if I'm
repetitive of something there.
Best wishes,
Warren Sirota
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Larson [mailto:jeff.larson@sailpoint.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 5:22 PM
> To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
> Subject: RE: Short loop fades more quickly than long loop
> with same feedback setting
>
>
> From: Warren Sirota
> > The points seem to be tied to specific looping implementations.
>
> There are two fundamental concepts, which lacking any formal
> definition we call "feedback" and "fade". The concepts are
> implemented by many loopers, though the names used are not
> always the same.
>
> Fading is usually taken to mean manipulation of the output
> level, either gradually lowering it to zero or raising it
> from zero. This does not modify the loop, so you can always
> "unfade" by moving the level in the opposite direction.
>
> Feedback is a destructive operation that involves
> re-recording the loop at a percentage of its previous level.
> The usual examples of this are the EDP or a tape delay with a
> special erase/record head. You cannot "unfeedback" unless the
> looper supports multi-layer undo.
>
> The formulas apply to feedback, not fading. This originated
> from a discussion on fading and how you could accomplish
> something similar to fading with feedback, but that they have
> different characteristics. They should be relevant for the
> EDP, Looperlative, or any other looper that supports feedback
> with this definition.
>
> Jeff
>