Re: Popularity/influence/etc.

[Andre LaFosse <altruist@earthlink.net>]

'Allo David,

Hedewa7@aol.com wrote:

> well..... if the reality of the process is *known*, they'd then likely be
> aware that said process ---at the moment --- precludes a pure-software
> solution, eh?

I would say no, actually.  Simply because at the Tech Salon yesterday, a
lot of people (including Carl Stone) were saying that the best solution
for real-time looping was to get a laptop computer.  And Peter Freeman
opined that, for him, looping was something that wasn't overly based on
any specific hardware set-up, as it was pretty quick and easy to learn
the ins and outs of a new hardware box, should a current one disappear.

All of this was said after I'd already done my solo EDP thing.  And
there were similar points of view expressed by people in the audience. 
Not everyone was of this opinion, of course, but my feeling (which may
not necessarily be terribly accurate - I'd be interested if Richard or
Stig had a different take) was that the consensus there was basically:
software is the way to go.  

So my thought is: if a crowd of knowledgable loopers and music
technology-heads don't feel that a specific hardware interface and
feature set is necessarily connected to a deep use of the software
inside (and again, I would have to say that the consensus there
yesterday was that it was not), then how are you going to get that idea
across to folks in general?

> personally: i cannot recreate this (chimerical/mercurial/evolutionary)
> process in sw, thus far, so.....

I'm with you on that.  And there's also the basic financial reality of
being asked to fork over the cost of a laptop, the right software, a
good audio I/O, and any additional hardware you might need to interface
with/control said sw realm.  That sort of thing is utterly out of my
reach at this point - an EDP and a decent MIDI foot controller look
positively cheap by comparison.

> 'a few days splicing and dicing'.....
> what we can do in (almost) real-time can take hours/days/weeks/etc to
> recreate in a sw-solution.....

Hell yeah!

> ..... and up pops the specter of player-dom:

:()

> what is the depth of interactivity 'tween player/input 
>instrument(s)/looping
> instrument?

Or for that matter, between player and instrument BEFORE any looping
takes place.  'Cause if it don't sound good without a looper, it ain't
gon' sound any better after we've heard it 20 times in a row...

> >So you have Jimi Hendrix playing the Stratocaster, which prior to his
> >break was a pretty unpopular guitar on the verge of being discontinued.
> untrue!

Really?  Mea culpa.  I definitely recall reading an article on Jimi to
the effect that he allegedly single-handedly saved the Strat from
extinction...  but just 'cause it was published thus, certainly doesn't
(to quote Captain Picard) make it so.  Thanks for the clarification.

And on that note...

--Dre