Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
What would be interesting approach, rather than Bob relying on a select few master loopers or key representatives of the looping community to drive the feature set for him, would be to rely on the general population of loopers to define and "prioritize" the feature set. Large corporations do this, so why not with the LP1? Future Product Marketing folks in large companies like HP, Dell, IBM, etc...will go to their most valued customers in all the customer segments (commercial, SMB or small medium business, and consumer), and they will ask them which features are most important to them, and them ask them to prioritize them, given we can't boil the ocean. They take this seriously because then they end up developing a product based on customer need. After that it is a constant partnership and negotiation between the marketing folk and R&D to see what they can feasibly develop in time to make their product launch. What would be nice is if Bob had someone create a web-based survey of all the available features on the LP1, first release, along with list of possible features, and have us prioritize the entire list. In other words, let the potential buyer define the feature set. It's not as if there are hundreds of thousands of loopers out there, as in the case of a computer or iPod, so this is actually an ideal product development situation for a developer to take advantage of. Travis is always asking why companies don't ask their target markets what they want in a product...this is that opportunity. Just a thought. It makes a lot of sense to me. And as a result of this survey, we mind discover that there are some features on the first release of the product that aren't on the top of the list of priorities for the larger community of potential users. Kris ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Lawson" <steve@steve-lawson.co.uk> To: "Loop List" <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2005 5:08 PM Subject: Re:feedback/features/new loopers... > >>>I believe this confirms my understanding that the Looperlative > LP1 will only > do rounded multiply, correct? This makes sense, given the mention of > intervals (aboe) of how long you want to extend your next loop, 4, 8, > etc. > This is indeed a "bummer" for me, because I always use unrounded > multiply > and enjoy the freedom of how long I want the new loop length to be. > This is > why I don't like quatiziation. I like to have total control of my > looping > output. I don't want the machine altering the time of my playing in > any way > or format....howeer, I also undertand that there will likely be many new > features added to the LP1 unit, in future releases of software which > I hear > will be frequent. Perhaps unrounded multiply will come out fairly > quickly. > It's definitely a hard requirement for me.<<< > > The speed at which any update happens depends on a few things, I > guess - firstly, how important Bob sees it to be to the people he > views as his core potential users (LD being pretty tight in the > middle of that group) secondly, how easy it is to do, so there may be > a few fun things that get thrown in early on just because they don't > take much effort to write. The other factors I guess include > everything else that might encroach on Bob's coding time, like day- > job and the marketing side of the looperlative. > > I've sent Bob a huge list of things I'd like to see on the LP1, based > on how the system seems to work to me - some of them are EDP > functions I'd love to see moved across, others are new functions made > apparent by the possibilities of the box. I'm sure the features list > will grow and grow, it'll just take some patience. What's great is > that the features list by NAMM will be enough for a heck of a lot of > loopers to want one, and those with very specific needs (like > unrounded multiply) will have the choice to wait until it's added (or > if it's added... I'm sure if it can be it will be) or to buy one now, > enjoy all the other features and see what new compositional and > improvisational options the new box throws up. > > I for one certainly want to be able to do the 'unfolding multiply' > like the EDP does, where you don't need to know the number of > multiples before you start, but am equally happy that I have this new > form of multiply to work with and can see it creating loads of ways > of making loop music sound less repetitive. > > Another thing you can have, obviously, with the looperlative, is 8 > stereo unsynchronised loops, so you can do 'unrounded' multiply > without needing to chop up the original loop... a different effect, > but if the point is to have an ambient loop and then impose some time > structure on top of it (one of the ways I use unrounded multiply), it > can be done without the end-glitch that unrounded multiply gives you > in the loop that's being chopped... > > cheers > > Steve > www.stevelawson.net - site > www.stevelawson.net/store/ - shop > http://steve.anthropiccollective.org - blog > > > >