I want to second Cara's assertion that there is not a "best for blind
folks" anything. :-)
Without turning this in to a "what can blind people do?" thread, part
of living with any sort of disability is learning how to problem
solve. Some problems are worth solving, some are best avoided. So,
while the 45000 may require less problem solving in the sight
department, ultimately I think another looper may open up more
flexibility for this blooper.
And I'll throw in here that the 45000 really sounds like a GREAT
machine for some. And, I stand corrected. A loop artist could
certainly record verse on one track, chorus on a second, and
percussion on a third, and, as long as all of these elements are the
same length, could mute and unmute and loop to hisher heart's content.
But, i think that, for my next looper, I'll likely be choosing a
Boomerang which, while relying on lights to communicate settings, has
many customization options, particularly when the sidecar is used. So,
once I employ the assistance of a sighted person to configure things
just as i want them, I should be able to fly the rang without
I'll certainly let the list know how it works out for me.
On 12/11/13, Cara Quinn <email@example.com> wrote:
I so so so wish that there could be a pedal board version of the EDP!
Or at least a smaller version that would not need a rack.
Rather than have this turn into a 'what is my ultimate looper' thread, ;)
I'll just say that though I really find the feature sets of 'larger'
way more liberating creatively, I too, very much agree that smaller /
lighter footprints are where it's at.
iOS design and development - LookTel.com
View my Online Portfolio at:
Follow me on Twitter!
On Dec 11, 2013, at 1:02 PM, Steve U <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
The LP1 does rule as far as the features, it's amazing! Like an 8 track
recording studio at your feet! And so easy to use!!
But...the Rang III has a smaller footprint and is self contained (unless
get the side car). Also, the LP1 needs a foot controller for hands free
operation increasing its size even more. It's really nice to have those 8
tracks and I know once you get a smaller looper the features start peeling
away. I've pretty much exclusively used an LP1 and *LOVE* it, I really
do-happiness shaped into a singe rack space unit.
But lately I've been thinking about downsizing (following this post has
awesome in helping weigh the options). I think the Boomerang III is the
perfect balance of features and size. I've been really wanting to have a
> loop rig that is small enough to just bring with me on any "normal"
I play upright, electric, & resophonic basses and play different styles
different folks as an accompanist and also do a solo thing too. Sometimes
I'll do a solo looping tune or two with folks I accompany and my full rig
just a bit too big and just a little too inconvenient to always bring
Often I'll throw in my old RC2 to use in these situations but it's so
limiting musically it's a drag, all the while the LP1 sits at home! This
post has got me fired up, I'm going compact!!
So...does anyone want to buy my LP1!? I'll throw in the midi-buddy foot
controller too. I had Bob modify the midi in port to provide phantom
to the foot controller so no wall wart needed. It's in perfect condition,
I'd take $875 and pay for shipping as well (within reason). Contact me off
list if you're interested:
On Dec 11, 2013, at 11:22 AM, Andrrew Owens <email@example.com> wrote:
Wow with these 45000 and rang comparisons, actually the LP1 DOES rule I
On Dec 11, 2013, at 1:53 PM, Rusty Perez <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
Hi Sergio, I don't know if you have gotten a response, but I have been
thinking about this question in the past few days because I am looking
for a new looper.
Based on my research, I do not own either of these yet.
As I understand, the 2880 and 45000 have four "tracks" and a master
which are refered to as one "loop." These tracks are syncd together,
and they must all be the same length. They can play together, or
separately, but they CANNOT play one after the other. So, for example,
you cannot record a verse on track 1 and a chorus on track 2 and then
play them one after the other.
You can do this if you use the 45000 and record one "loop" for the
verse--which can contain four tracks--and one loop for the
chorus--which contains four more tracks.
Then, using the foot controller, you can switch back and forth between
your first loop for the verse, and your second loop for the chorus.
In contrast, the boomerang III has four possible loops at the same
time. These loops can be played together, or one at a time one after
the other depending on what mode you're in on the rang. Each loop can
contain any number of layers which are similar to the "tracks" on the
45000. You can stack on your loops, but the individual layers cannot
be panned like the individual tracks can be on the 45000.
One advantage of the rang is that you can use the sereal sync mode
which allows you to have one master loop which can be played at the
same time as the other two or three sereal loops. This is called
Depending on the mode you're set in, the rang can play parallel loops
of different lengths and they don't have to be syncd.
This is, in my opinion, the most important difference between the rang
and the 45000. On the 45000 each of the 4 tracks in a "loop" must be
the same length. Your "loops" can be different lengths, but they
cannot be played at the same time or "parallel."
So, with the rang, you can create your master loop, maybe a percussion
track, and it will play while you switch from loop to loop to loop
verse, chorus, verse style.
Now, granted, you don't have the same flexibility of mixing your
various layers in one loop like you can with the 45000, but that's not
important to this loopmaker at this time. Another big difference to
many is tha tyou can't save loops with the rang, but this loopmaker
doesn't care right now.
On 5/21/13, Sergio Girardi <email@example.com> wrote:
I was trying to sell my Boomerang 3 to a friend who is now interested in
am pretty sure the Rang 3 is more versatile as a looper and that the
>>>> 45000 cannot handle the 4 tracks in many different ways as the Rang
handle its 3 or 4 separate loops.
But this of the 4 tracks vs 4 loops had already confused me at the times
My friend for example insists that the 45000 has got 4 separate loops.
Could anybody help me in understanding the differences and advantages
these two loopers?