Support |
how I understand your problem ??? 2 things 1- the quantized behaviour of the strt rec point is the only way in loop3 when sync IN. loop 4 allows you to strt rec at any point and end rec will be rounded to the next cycle point 2-the cycle (initial loop time) is determined by the 8th params changing it will allow you to have different lenght cycle 8 8th= 1 meas in 4/4 4 8th = Half note etc... Trust us all you wont regret your loop 4 upgrade Claude ----- Original Message ----- From: "AvgJoe" <paul_sanders@adelphia.net> To: <loopers-delight@loopers-delight.com> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2004 6:09 PM Subject: EDP syncing LoopIII vs LoopIV > Hi all, > > I just want to make sure I'm understanding something as a limitation in > LoopIII before I count on LoopIV to resolve my problem. > > My EDP has LoopIII. I'm syncing to midi clock from my Emu PX-7. I'll be > playing a drum pattern for instance. I want to be able to hit record on the > EDP, have it start right away, and hit record (or alt ending) again and have > it stop and loop from that point. > > The behavior I'm getting as I understand it is quantize is working with this > start of pattern pulse from the PX7, so if the pattern is 4 bars long and I > only want to loop 1 or 2 bars, my loop is padded with silence ot fill in the > pattern cycle from the PX7. > > I read the LoopIII based manual and tried to read between the lines ot > figure out things that aren't clearly stated there. I futzed with this >for > quite some time last night. Is this in fact a limitation of LoopIII that is > resolved in LoopIV? > > In reading through the LoopIV manual, "SyncRecord" appears to be what I'm > after, but it's not clear from what I've read what happens if I'm playing a > 4 bar drum pattern and only record 2 bars in the loop. It talks about > keeping track of the loop cycle count, etc, but that to me implies I >would > be recording more than 4 bars in this example. Do I have ot record to >some > cycle boundry? What happens if I record 5 bars, which is 1 cycle + 1 bar of > the 2nd cycle. > > Thanks in advance, > > Paul >