Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
At 09:27 AM 9/14/2002, ArsOcarina@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 9/14/02 4:45:20 AM, steve@steve-lawson.co.uk writes: >[Steve quoting Kim] > > >> The "storing" part and the "transferable" part always seem like nice- > >> to-have features. It would be a nice little check box to have there on > >> the EDP brochure - You can save your loops and easily transfer them > >> to PC! > >[Steve's comment] > > >I have to say that at the moment I'd have no need of those features in > >an EDP. I guess that for me was the biggest different between the EDP > >and the Repeater - EDP is ostensibly a looper/mangler, Repeater seemed > >to be a versatile real time sampler...valid distinction? probably >not... :o) > >I sort of agree with some of the above. But one of the things that is VERY >"nice" about saving loops to reuse later is capturing the "How the hell >did I do that? Gee, I wish I could save it." sort of event. The reuse >may or may not involve performance directly. It may be educational -- >to disect the loop and determine what the heck is really going on in >it -- finding out how and why it works. > >But, there are plenty of "work arounds" for this -- the most obvious being >simply recording everything you do (not always possible). How is that a "work around"? To me it sounds like the most obvious and useful way to do what you want. You want to be able to analyze a loop later to understand what you did to get the loop, to learn from the techniques and reuse them. So do as Claude suggested, Use a DAW of some sort, record a track of the audio going into the loop, a track of the resulting looper output audio, a track the midi commands that controlled everything the looper did, and a track of the midi time stamp output of the looper. Then you have a complete record of the *process* you went through to get the loop. That's what you want right? Then you can analyze every step of it. As source material for later sound creations you have a complete record to work with. You can even recreate it back in the looper up to a certain point in the middle of the process if you want, and then do something different from there. If you just saved the loop at the end, six months later you'll listen back to it and have no idea at all how you created it and no record at all of the evolutions it went through to get to that point. >I agree with Steve that the Repeater has a lot of "sampler" >characteristics >rolled into it's looper feature set. I guess that was what I eventually >figured >out and made my decision NOT to purchase one. I've seen several people refer the Repeater as "sampler" like, but I don't see that at all. Samplers achieve multiple elements at once by having "voices", not tracks. Samplers can play x number of "voices" at once. Any of the loaded samples can be triggered instantly to fill one of those voices. You don't have to wait for the current sample to finish before triggering another. If you have all the voices playing and try to play another one, it will do some sort of "voice stealing" to allow the new one to play. You can even have the same sample triggered several times in different voices, overlapping itself. Samples can be varying in length. Samples can be triggered at different pitch, generally done by simply varying the sample rate of the playback which also changes the length and gives the munchkin/giant effect. Samples can be triggered at different volumes, by using the velocity sensitivity on a midi controller. "Loops" are generally created in and driven by sequencers, either built in or external, that trigger a collection of samples in a repetitive way according to a pre-planned rhythm. The Repeater is not like that at all. The Repeater is like a "multi-track recorder". There is a big difference in design philosophy and user interface between that and a sampler. kim ______________________________________________________________________ Kim Flint | Looper's Delight kflint@loopers-delight.com | http://www.loopers-delight.com