Re: future loopers(nic)

[msottilaro <sine@zerocrossing.net>]

Here's some features I'd like to see: The ability to pre set your loop time in terms of MIDI clock.  In other words, say, I'm going to start the loop NOW and then automatically have the loop end after a predetermined length without any further intervention AND have it go into overdub automatically.

The loops are stereo, of course.

Touch sensitive Jog shuttle.  I want to be able to manipulate my loop as one would a record.  I'd like the choice to have the loop end up continuing where ever I left off (Similar to the Repeater's slip function) or have it snap back to where it should be if I had not screwed with it.  Either way, snap back should be available at all times.

<drool> Think about this possibility with multiple loops of different lengths playing back at the same time.  </drool>  If Repeater users haven't experimented with splitting stereo loops and slipping one side against the other, you haven't used your Repeater enough!

Decay and feedback available to me at all times.  Not feedback, which has to wait for the end of a loop to vary the volume, but the ability to have the loop decay gradually at a specified rate.  Available while in record, or not in record.  Standard EDP style feedback as well.

Put these into a looper that will sync to a MIDI clock and I'd fall over myself selling what ever I had to to buy one.

Mark Sottilaro


On Sunday, August 17, 2003, at 11:22  AM, Fsksync@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 8/17/03 2:44:11 AM Pacific Daylight Time, SoundFNR@aol.com writes:
>
> You want the ability to play loops of different lengths simultaneously then?
>
> >
> > Furthermore, if combined with the possibility to assign measure =
> > (bar/beat numbering) and a beat quantize capability, this would enable =
> > the buildup, superimposition and individual manipulation of loops that =
> > are a defined ratio of time to one another - I.e., true polyrhythm. =
> > E.g., my first loop element is a 12/8 but my next loop element (within =
> > that loop location) is a 5/8. (BTW herein lies also the added value over =
> > having separate loopers doing the multiple-loop thing, other than cost).
> >
> > I have more, equally ill-thought-out ideas... How about (MIDI) pitch =
> > shift *during* record?
> >
> > Nic
>
> Any suggestions you have would be interesting.
> No need to work out ideas, just imagine the sounds
> you'd like to make without bothering about whether
> it's practical
>
> andy butler
>
>
>
> This kind of thinking is pretty much exactly along the road that led me to abandon the simple audio-lag-generator  (dual tape recorder thingie) approach in favor of midi sequencer loops. I can have any number of different length loops happening, with different logical structures, done as layers in the larger construction of the composition. Of course, it's not Live Looping (tm), but for the moment that I create each layer, it is a spontaneous expression. Since I tend to be a studio act and haven't inflated my Balls (tm) enough to get up in front of an audience yet to do my thing, this is cool for now. Hopefully some mutation of this approach with the Live Looping (tm) approach, plus a huge supply of viagra from those friendly email folks who won't go away is in my near future.
>
> Tim the loopin' eunuch