|
That's why I've gone the software route. If an idea occurs to you, you can always find a way of doing it with software, (so far anyway). What this should mean is that software loopers produce more innovative music than hardware since they have more options. Sadly however, too many options can be a bad thing - too much technology, too little input from the player etc. I find myself nowadays doing a lot of knob twiddling in one track and almost none in the next. Keeps me off the streets though eh? peace G ps is James Sidlo still on this list? I've been listening to Pseudobuddha a lot recently - V COOL! Subject: RE: A multi channel looper Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 13:11:01 -0500 From: aovil@wfubmc.edu To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com Yes, that would work great, but I think a multiply function was pretty important to him if I recall. I’m not sure about the twenty but I know the RC-2 will not do this because I have one. I think the Rc-20’s cannot either, but I could be wrong on this. For me, that would be a deal breaker and it’s the main reason I sold my otherwise awesome 2880. If there is anything I have learned from pouring money into this bottomless pit of looping gear over the last few years, it is to get what you want right off the bat because you will end up spending more money in the long run if you don’t. For me at least, it is a pretty bad disease. Once I get a piece of gear that can’t do what I envision musically, all I think about when I’m playing is “it sure would be nice if it could do X”. I don’t feel the same way about other instruments though, I can live with a guitar, bass, sax or drum kit that doesn’t have “quite the right tone” I envision but as soon as a looper limits my creativity I get annoyed with it, Maybe I’m just a glass half empty kind of guy but would any of you agree with this? Ace
From: scott hansen
[mailto:evanpeewee@yahoo.com]
Do you have a story that started on Hotmail? Tell us now |