Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
At 05:20 AM 9/28/2001, SoundFNR@aol.com wrote: >Hi Kim (from andy) >andy: > > >Thanks for that Kim, but doesn't this mean I'd have to hit Insert and >move > > >that pedal simultaneously in order to go directly into Insert. > > >kim: > > no, it doesn't have to be simultaneous. The pedal control on the loop >input > > volume is independent of what function is running. So I would think >you > > could easily turn the volume down just before you do this insert. Or >you > > could use Quantize, so the Insert doesn't start until the next cycle > > boundary. Then you could press insert well in advance and then turn >the > > loop input volume down before it starts. >Ok, it's possible, :- stop noodling; push on pedal; hit Insert. that's right. although I don't see why you have to stop noodling. :-) The whole idea is that you could do this while you continue to play. >I haven't found a use for Quantise yet, as I don't use a dum machine. >................I mean drum machine Quantize has nothing to do with drum machines! It is just a question of how you approach rhythm in manipulating loops. With quantize off, all actions you do with the EDP occur instantly, exactly when you execute them. With quantize on, all actions occur at the next cycle boundary, with the machine executing them exactly at the cycle boundary. If having functions start exactly at the rhythm of the cycle boundaries is important in your use of loops, quantize is great because the machine can be far more precise with this than you could ever be. So you just press the button early and let the machine take care of the precision for you while you focus on playing something else. Usually people who use loops in more structured rhythmic music like this mode. On the other hand, if your music does not require such precision, or you prefer to be free off such constraints and like to be in control yourself, unquantized is probably for you. The cycle boundaries don't really matter anymore and you freely execute things where you feel it. This usually appeals to more ambient styles, and soloists. Practically, I think most people end up using a combination of both modes and switch back and forth depending on what they are doing. Even within the creation of a given loop you may want to do this. You might start out "free" and unquantized, building up some texture or whatever, and gradually form it into something more rhythmic and groove like. The startpoint function of the echoplex is really useful at that point, because most likely the "downbeat" of your newly groovy loop probably has little to do with the actual point where the echoplex thinks the startpoint is. So you tap the new startpoint, and then turn quantize on. Then all subsequent actions are quantized exactly to that point and are in perfect rhythm. > > also, since this loop input level control is always available you can > > actively control it while you are doing the insert or multiply, so >you > can > > continue playing and decide as you go what gets added to the loop or >not. > > in this case, it would be the same pedal you would have to control >feedback > > in Loop mode. For me that is something I want to have available all >the > > time anyway, so a dedicated pedal for that seems worth it. > > > >Yes of course, another lead, another pedal, and by next week I won't know >how >I did without it. that's correct. :-) > > One thing to note, this loop input level control that is available in >delay > > mode is actually an analog volume control. (necessary to have smooth >volume > > swells that we wanted in this mode, with no zippering noise that you > > usually get with midi volume controls.) Unfortunately that means this > > particular loop input level is not midi controllable. Feedback and >loop > > output volume are midi controllable. > > >Isn't the feedback setup different in Delay Mode too? >In Loop Mode the feedback changes at the loop end. >In Delay it can be used to fade out just a bit of the loop! no, the feedback is exactly the same in both cases. It doesn't matter if you are in loop mode or delay mode. Feedback is a live control at all times, and you can always manipulate it during a loop to just fade out one portion while maintaining another. Then you can overdub something new into that portion of the loop, so you might gradually evolve only one part while another remains the same. This is a great technique, I like that a lot. >Do I get an "Undocumented-Feature-Credit" for that? sorry, no. :-) Loop feedback has been discussed many times before. There is a whole section in the Echoplex FAQ about feedback control that is probably interesting for anybody to read: http://www.loopers-delight.com/tools/echoplex/FAQ8.html or you could try these archive searches: http://www.loopers-delight.com/cgi-bin/wilma_glimpse/LDarchive?query=echoplex%3Bfeedback&Search=Search&errors=0&maxfiles=1000&maxlines=0&.cgifields=partial&.cgifields=restricttofiles&.cgifields=lineonly&.cgifields=case&.cgifields=filelist http://www.loopers-delight.com/cgi-bin/wilma_glimpse/LDarchive?query=EDP%3Bfeedback&errors=0&maxfiles=1000&maxlines=0&.cgifields=partial&.cgifields=restricttofiles&.cgifields=lineonly&.cgifields=case&.cgifields=filelist >Can I pester Matthias for a MIDI controlled input mute to conpensate? you can try, but it will be your fault that the LoopIV software takes longer to finish. :-) kim ______________________________________________________________________ Kim Flint | Looper's Delight kflint@loopers-delight.com | http://www.loopers-delight.com