Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
How about Brown 25? ~Tim > [Original Message] > From: Art Simon <simart@gmail.com> > To: <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com> > Date: 11/18/2005 8:03:36 PM > Subject: Re: Naming a software looper > > I vote for "Opium Toll". "Helios" is a close second. I'm a big fan of > Stockhausen's "Trans", so I'm all for dream inspired art. > > (Hi Warren, I think we were in the same program at Mills a couple decades ago) > > On 11/18/05, Jeff Larson <Jeffrey.Larson@sun.com> wrote: > > > > > The things that are most unique about this looper (I think, I hope) are: > > > > > > - instant gratification, easy learning curve > > > > That would probably be unique among software loopers with similar > > features. There are several easy to use loopers, but they don't have > > all the features you list. > > > > > - Can be operated in hands-free mode; works with most >footcontrollers > > > (but a multi-bank footcontroller is best; basic functions can be in > > > the first bank, advanced functions in others) > > > - CD-quality, stereo looping > > > > Every software looper I've seen supports MIDI control and CD quality stereo. > > > > > - loop layers are independently mutable and re-mixable > > > > It depends on what you mean by "layers". A few loopers support > > multiple "tracks" which you record and mutate independently, and if > > the tracks are made to be of identical size you achieve an effect > > similar to layers of overdubs. The challenge here is to make it so you > > can record into successive tracks as easily as you would just make > > several overdub passes in a single track looper. > > > > > - built in digital multitrack recorder makes pristine recordings of your > > > live playing, your loops and aux inputs (like the people you're playing > > > with) > > > > That's probably unique, though I know of one that has a relatively > > crude way to capture an entire performance. What typically happens is > > that the looper is itself a VST plugin that runs within a host that > > supports recording. > > > > > - peak limiting on the output. In later versions, different forms of > > > multiband compression will be supported > > > > May be unique at the moment. > > > > > - with a touch of your toe (here I go into marketing-speak), you can > > > save all the loops into individual files for later processing with > > > Acid or the DAW of your choice. > > > > Several of the more complex loopers will allow you to save loops to > > files. I know of one that let's you save all state with one touch-o-the-toe. > > > > > - PC (XP) and MAC (OS/X) > > > > I can't think of any non-commercial cross-platform loopers. The >closest > > thing would be the PSP-42 and PSP-84. > > > > > - support for VST plugins to modify the input to the looper and the > > > total mix output > > > > Having the looper host plugins is a powerful concept, but I would > > suggest you consider having the looper *be* a VST plugin > > instead or in addition. If you want to get into the VST hosting > > game, then you're going to be competing with the likes of Bidule, > > EnergyXT, and Live. If ease of use is the primary goal, then being > > a limited host is a good thing. But if you want to be flexible, > > being a VST is better. > > > > > - affordability - I anticipate 3 versions, one at $89 or so, one at > > > $199 and one at $299. > > > > With all due respect, I think you're going to find that the market for > > a software looper priced over $99 is rather small, especially if > > you're targeting customers for whom "ease of use" is a primary concern. > > > > Jeff > > > > > > > -- > Art Simon > simart@null.net > http://art.simon.tripod.com > http://artsimon.iuma.com