Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Hi Matthias,
First of all, man, my thanks for your kind words and support at this time,
and for taking the time to deal with these mails in the middle of the tour.
You said,
>Traditional looping means that a played phrase is repeated more or
>less as it has been played.
Agreed.
>Sliced looping (give me a better name, as you please) means that
>portions of phrases or notes are repeated in a sequence different
>from what they have been played.
Makes sense, and I like the name too! :)
>the EDP
>gained a level of functionality that was not intended to it and may
>turn it into the first tool of a technique other than what came from
>the Time Lag Generator, rather comparable with the tape slicing of
>the conrete music, if there is any precedent technique in the past
>(please correct me here!)
No, I agree with this very much.
>So considering this, you may understand in its totally positve and
>not at all exclusive way what I said: "Or maybe some new category can
>arise from the use of looping tools for which we may still find
>names... (I believe Andre is on such a track)"
OK, I can see your point here, and I appreciate the positive sentiment.
Let me try and explain my own reservations:
You say above that you feel the "sliced" techniques of the EDP
represent a new paradigm (for lack of a better word) that breaks from
the "time lag accumulater" paradigm, and on that basis it might
represent a new category other than "loop music."
The reason I find this strange and confusing is that the EDP is itself a
dedicated looper - everything it does involves a foundation of working
with audio in a loop-based format.
So, if music made entirely with a dedicated looper is placed in a new
category other than one called "live looping" simply because the sound
or the process of the music is different from what's traditionally
expected, then it seems to me that "live looping" as such is basically a
dead art form.
In other words, would be trapped in an historical point of view, unable
to accommodate new developments in its craft, and (most importantly
for this discussion) stuck with a collection of aesthetic and stylistic
associations that are there only because of our own expectations.
The alternative, to me, is to NOT treat the concept of "live looping" as a
category with specific technical or sonic restrictions. That means that
looping can encompass all kinds of styles and approaches, and
shows an ability to grow and expand and be redefined as new
concepts are introduced.
That for me is by far the more attractive option. But, I'm not
necessarily
after the same thing as you (though I'm not ruling it out!)
So, it gets back to my previous questions: what are you trying to define
or promote?
If "live looping" is supposed to be full-phrase repetition, post-Terry
Riley
sounding music, then the "sliced" school of looping doesn't fit. And it
means that "live looping" as a concept is clinging to a paradigm that's
close to 40 years old, unable to grow or evolve.
>In other words: For Gods sake stop this stupid exclusion paranoya, I
>am not at all like that and I dont see why I would have the slightest
>interest in that!
Sorry for the stress, Matthias - hopefully now we both understand
where we're coming from on this. And hopefully you already
understand how deeply I appreciate all of the time and work you've put
in to create the tool that can make the music we're now losing sleep
talking about. :)
Best wishes,
--Andre
--
---> http://Matthias.Grob.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .