Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
See interstitial comments
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 6:07 PM, nick ingvoldstad
<nickingvoldstad@gmail.com> wrote:
> Wow! Thank you all SO much for taking the time to respond and help me
>out
> with this. I've taken the time to address every one of you :)
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Modular. Different aspects of every function should be up in the
> "preferences settings" to activate or deactivate. You would come
> pretty close by taking the existing Mobius looper and integrating
> everyones favorite scripts into it (extended EDP paradigm).
> ---------------------------
> I agree; since everyone is going to want to use this differently, I will
>be
> doing my best to make it flexible by having preferences for a couple
>things:
> When and how it begins recording, when and how it stops recording,
>whether
> or not record takes will be beatmapped and cut to fit the tempo (won't
>want
> loops to diverge unless you're doin a little Steve Reich experiment
>haha),
> etc.
>
> I've downloaded Mobius and am playing with it and exploring its features.
> It seems more complicated than I want. For instance, I don't think it's
> necessary for the looper to know what time signature you're playing in.
>I'm
> having a hard time finding scripts for it on Google, I assume its that
> people write them and host them online for others?
> ---------------------------
> For those who don't like to start out "in the music" there could be
> "functionality presets" in the preferences so they can start out "in
> the looper".
> ---------------------------
> I'm not sure what you mean by this, could you elaborate?
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Per forgot to mention that it should have MIDI, Firewire, USB2, and
> optical interfaces to work cross-platform with "NIX, Mac, and PCs, and
> have 3 expression pedal inputs, too.
> ---------------------------
> I do like the idea of having it interface with MIDI, Firewire, and USB.
>If
> this becomes expensive it might just have to be USB and MIDI. What would
> the advantage of having Firewire capabilities along with USB be? I
>probably
> am not thinking of something, but I know that Macs and PC's both support
>USB
> and that Firewire is faster than USB, but if that's the only advantage
>then
> I think USB is fast enough.
And Bill Gates told us that no one would need more than 640 KB of
memory ... USB 2.0 has issues, as others have indicated. My point,
however (partly havnig some fun with Per about the unusual brevity of
his first response) was to stress that flexibility in an interface is
a good thing, but NEVER underestimate the need for speed. You can
never have too much RAM, too fast a processor, or too much storage
space ... or too many loops.
Having multiple possibilities for interfacing with external hardware
gives tremendous power to the user.
> As far as pedal inputs, I was thinking that people could run their
> instruments through a pedal and then run that into the input if they
>wanted
> to do so, and multiple inputs would allow people to run different pedals
> into different inputs, using them simultaneously. Is this the
>functionality
> you were getting at? I'm not sure exactly what you mean by that.
> ---------------------------
Again, partly in jest and partly in recognition of desire to have
control over as many possible forms of expression as can be had.
> Oh, and 8 1/4" stereo inputs and
> 8 outs, plus cost less than $500 US ... oh, and list members get to
> beta test it first!
>
> *GRIN ...hey, we ARE dreaming here.
> ---------------------------
> I like the idea of multiple inputs and corresponding outputs for each
>track
> if one wishes, along with one 1/4" output for the sum of all, if that's
>all
> one needs. It SHOULD cost less than $500, I am not planning for it to be
> more than that.
> ---------------------------
See above; more is good, lots more even better.
> P.S. Can you make it go to 11 1/2? 11 is so, I don't know ... so 90s.
> ---------------------------
> Again, I'm sorry for not being able to communicate fluently with you all
> yet, but what do you mean by this? 11 what?
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An obviously dated cultural reference ... search Google for Nigel Tufnel:
...
Marty DiBergi: Why don't you make ten a little louder, make that
the top number and make that a little louder?
Nigel Tufnel: (pause to think it over) These go to eleven.
(http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/This_is_Spinal_Tap)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/These_go_to_eleven
>
> The perfect looper, though I really don't like that term "perfect", is
>one
> that would morph and evolve with me over time, adding new features and
> removing others, vs. being a static set of features and functionality.
> ---------------------------
> What if when a new version were released, you could mail yours to them,
>pay
> the difference, and get the new version in return? Or would you like to
>be
> able to request features to be added or removed from your model, and get
>a
> customized machine shipped to you?
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 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 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.
> ---------------------------
> 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.
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Also, while there is a certain amount of "electrical engineering"
> required here, in practice I think your bigger problems will be
> software development and manufacturing economics.
> ---------------------------
> You're right, the most difficult part will be software development. As
>for
> manufacturing economics, it's not as much of a limiting factor as it is a
> check. The more insane features I want it to have, the more it will
>cost.
> But the more insane features it has, the more narrow its user demographic
> becomes and the less flexibility it offers. At this point, I can't
>estimate
> the manufacturing cost.
> ---------------------------
> I'll assume you're familiar with the devices out there now from the
> Boss RC-2 on up to the Looperlative and Gibson Echoplex. Do you have
> a particular price point or market segment in mind?
> [...]
> You will probably get more specific advice if you can pick which range
> of the market you would like to target.
> ---------------------------
> Instead of starting with a market segment or a price range in mind, I am
> starting with its functionality. I am disregarding the issues of price
>and
> difficulty of development while I solidify its concept and features.
>Once I
> have a prototype, I will begin researching development costs and then I
>will
> start primming and tweaking based on these "reality checks", cost and
> development. In the end, I would say this would be mid-range, with its
> price between $100 - $500. I would like to offer many of the features
>that
> existing machines do, selling it for much cheaper. Though researching
>many
> of the products out right now, much of the more superfluous features
>will be
> excluded without question. Like the Echoplex's Substitute feature....
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Be careful about declaring features of existing tools as being
"superfluous" (again, see above ... the hubris of hardware and
software designers).
> Jeff hit the nail on the head here. Honestly, I think the economics is
>the
> largest issue. It is easy to look at the market and say that electronics
> are cheap, but the reality is that they are only cheap if you are willing
> manufacture several thousand. I have investigated options for
>manufacturing
> the LP1 for less money, but without a huge amount of investment capital,
>it
> can't be done.
> ---------------------------
> In the beginning, I will buy parts in small quantities, being more
>expensive
> but safer for a venture like this. Can't buy parts assuming I'll sell
> thousands immediately. If I offer Virginia Tech a portion of sales, I
>may
> be able to receive a grant for my investment capital, allowing myself to
>buy
> parts in greater quantity and thus sell it more cheaply.
>
That's all I have to add right now ...
Dennis