Monitoring for live loops (was Re: looping as a profession)

["Jesse Ray Lucas" <jlucas@neoprimitive.net>]

Hmm...I see the signal chain you're getting at.  Although, I'm not exactly
sure how to mix the loop from the post-looper Y with the pre-looper direct
signal going to the amp.  In any event, this sounds like it would involve
three A/B/A+B boxes ($$$).  If not using A/B/A+B boxes, wouldn't a bunch of
Y-cables create weird impedence issues (like when you plug two guitars into
hi and lo inputs on a single guitar amp, their volume controls affect the
volume of one another)?

-J

----- Original Message -----
From: "Daryl" <highhorse@mhorse.com>
To: <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 6:07 PM
Subject: Re: looping as a profession


>
> Jesse, would it work to have a splitter box before your looper, sending
one side
> to your own amp, and sending the other to the looper with the mix for the
loops
> set at 100% wet?  (I don't own an EDP, but I assume this is controllable
> universally.) Then split the signal coming from the looper too, sending 
>it
to
> your own rig to mix with the dry, and sending only the wet to everyone
else.
> You could also click the output to your bandmates on and off this way.
>
> I use a splitter myself so I can have an uncolored dry sound that doesn't
go
> thru my looping stuff.  Plus, it's a safety device; if the complicated
stuff
> breaks down at least I can keep making noise!
>
> These examples of folks making all or some part of their living doing
music is
> highly inspiring!
>
> Daryl Shawn
> highhorse@mhorse.com
>
>
> >     I have tried using loops on some rock and funk gigs, but when
playing
> > with other musicians monitoring is the biggest problem.  It would be
nice if
> > my looping devices (a Boss RC-20, and now an EDP) had a dedicated "Loop
Out"
> > output, which would just output the loops, and no direct signal.  This
way,
> > if the drummer suddenly gets bass in his monitor he knows it's a loop
and
> > that he has to follow it.
>