Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
--- On Thu, 6/12/08, nick ingvoldstad <nickingvoldstad@gmail.com> wrote: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To me, "perfection" means it exactly meets the > defined requirements. The > problem is that different people and different situations > will have > different requirements. Here are mine: > > - intended for guitar players > - single-width floor stompbox (see Guyatone's Micro > Effects series) > - powered by 9V battery or standard Boss adaptor > - 30 seconds looping time > - true bypass (ideally) > - minimal controls: single footswitch, volume control for > the looped output, > one or two LEDs > - single loop only, no modulation, no overdubbing > capability > - cheap: US$100 each (want multiple loops? buy two) > --------------------------- > Does true bypass mean that anything you're playing, > whether being recorded > or not, always goes directly to the output without any > modulation? If so, I > agree. If not, please explain :-S With most guitar pedals, even when they're disengaged, the signal still goes through some of the circuitry of the pedal. The problem with this is that it can rob you of tone, even when you're not using the pedel. A pedal with true bypass, though, has a footswitch that mechanically routes the signal through nothing but the wires of the switch when the pedal is disengaged. This kind of switch (a "4DPT", IIRC) is more expensive, though. > I agree that there > should be no > modulation; this is a LOOPER, not a reverb pedal or a > phaser and no effects > would come with this. The only modulation one would be > able to do is with > the volume of individual tracks and of everything as a > whole. One thing I'm > not with you on is the single loop concept, with no > overdubbing capability. > To me, the point of this is to be able to layer and > construct soundscapes > and whole songs live in real-time with this one device, so > the ability to > record several tracks is key. While one can only have a > finite number of > tracks, the ability to consolidate multiple tracks into one > would allow the > user to in theory have infinite tracks, preserving freedom. What I want is something that's designed more to support a performing guitar player (playing songs solo, or as part of full band), which needs less in the way of supporting creation of soundscapes (which the rest of the band, and/or the player's playing and his pedals, will provide). Maybe this is more of a dumb "phrase recorder", recording phrases constructed with other pedals (delays, phasers, overdrive, etc.), rather than a looper that can let you manage layers of sound. Having only a single loop would also make the controls simpler and the unit smaller, I think. > --------------------------- > For me (admittedly I'm a beginner), there are a lot of > products that do a > lot (e.g., the Boss RC-2), but the more they do, the more > complicated the > interface gets, and the more cramped things get (e.g., the > Boss RC-2). I > want something that's single-use, easy to operate, and > cheap (again, see > Guyatone's Micro Effects series, or Danelectro's > effects "food" line of > pedals). > --------------------------- > I agree whole-heartedly with your minimalism; I think the > success of Apple > and Google has proven that most people also dig intuitive > and simple > products. For examples of the kind of thing I want (simple, cheap, do-one-thing fairly well), see http://www.guyatone.com/Microeffects.php And thanks for responding! Aloha, Brad __________________________________________________________________ Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail. Click on Options in Mail and switch to New Mail today or register for free at http://mail.yahoo.ca