RE: Ableton Live vs. hardware looper (Overdub)

[Joe Balestreri <metaman23@yahoo.com>]

I decided to go with Live instead of a hardware looper specifically for it's ability to record several loops of different lenghts (I can run 8-9 with my hardware), and manipulate them all independently... for my music, this is much more useful than recording on top of the same sound. 

As I see it, the main difference between Live and hardware devices is that with Live you have a preset tempo.  This brings up the problem of how to hear the tempo when you record your first loop... which can solved in different ways... I'm usually starting out with a couple drum loops, so it's not a problem for me. 

Joe B.

Matthias Grob <matthias@grob.org> wrote:

> > > > to record input at a basic level, but I can't figure out how to get
> >> > a loop to overdub.
> >>
> > > You can't do that in Live. Only by running a delay plug-in on a track,
> >> but that's rather limiting.
> >>
> >
> >Wouldn't recording onto a different channel/track be considered
> >overdubbing? If so, and I think the definition of overdubbing is that,
> >with independent control of levels, pan, etc---
> >
> >Neil
>
> I would not recommend to use it like that.
> Sure, in the studio, it means to add tracks, but to keep comunication 
> clear, I suggest that we keep the definition of the Overdub function 
> in the looping realm for "layering into the same sound file".
> The main advantage of Overdub is that there is no limit for the 
> number of layers, so it can never be imitated with separate
>  tracks 
> and I think it will continue to be a interesting function even when 
> we have several tracks.
>
>
> -- 
>
>
> ---> http://Matthias.Grob.org

_______________
www.metaman.us

---

Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now