Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
> And as I asked above, is that a description of your music or your role in > it? To me it sounds equivalent to saying "andybutler--guitarist" or > "andybutler--synthesist" or "andybutler--vocalist". > > kim ...put another way - is there such a thing as 'drums music' - is music that features drums a genre? It's instantly recogniseable as music with drums in, it's got a following (I know a lot of drummers who buy CDs based on who the drummer is on it), and there are festivals built around it (Rhythm Sticks in London every year - featuring everything from solo tabla to The Stewart Copeland big band, via gamalan... is it a genre? no. does it work as a marketing tool/catch-all term for promo purposes? yes. you lot are so 'modern' - arguing about this stuff - it's all good - if it works, use it, if it don't work for you, leave it. Gimme the po-mo version - if there's a looping festival, I'm up for playing, if someone asks what I do, I'll say I'm a bassist, who plays solo sometimes - that usually leads onto questions about what on earth I'm doing playing solo bass, so I explain the looping thang... I don't need to describe myself as a looper, unless it's offered to me as a category, and don't really mind either way. having said that, there doesn't really seem to be any pattern to how people connect with what I do - many obviously don't connect with it at all. some like the solo bass angle, some like the looping, others (shock! horror!) actually like the freakin' music and don't care how it's done... it's all good, I tell yer... Semantically, I can't see 'live looping' fitting any common useage of the word Genre. however, if it works for you, go with it. If it gets the press interested in your music, WTF - use it! It doesn't really say anything about the style of the music - what do Andre and Howie Day have in common, other than two legs? I'd say the guitar is probably a stronger link than looping, but either way, the crossover in their audience is going to be based on the broadness of the taste of the listener, not in their love for or loathing of looping.... Geoff made some allusion to qualifying as a live looping artist being based on the amount of looping going on, rather than using it as an effect (my interpretation, perhaps), which seems a little pedantic - does frisell do enough to be classed as a looper? He's looping most of the time, you just can't tell, it's so seemless and so constantly evolving.. looping or no looping? who cares. He doesn't need it to market what he does, or explain what he does, he just does... by all means, discuss where you're coming from, but either way, if it works give it try... If you can find an angle that gets you heard in your town, that's great! And if you can somehow piggy on someone else's work, or do what Rick's done and pitch loads of fairly unconnected artists in a looping festival stylee in a way that seems to work, great. If you hit a ceiling with that, try something else - go with bass festivals, or experimental music festivals, or pop festivals, or 25th anniversary of whatever festivals. It's weird, it seems like you're arguing diametrically opposed views for the same reasoning... Kim's right in one sense, that trying to define what the style of 'live-looping' is will probably result in a view of it as being vaguely new age, vaguely ambient... the sort of stuff that lazy journos describe as 'frippertronics'. However, Rick's all inclusive approach to putting on his festivals is trying to do the same thing - present looping as a very inclusive approach to music, in much the same way that a forward thinking guitar fest will put on some widdly stuff along side an acoustic strummer to show the breadth of what guitar can do... So in one sense you're all pushing in the same direction. big love, Steve www.stevelawson.net