Re: EDP vs Looperlative

[PC <toejampc@gmail.com>]

Thanks for all the info.

I was able to locate a few similar threads going back a to a couple of  
years ago. In one of those threads, Bob said that he thought the best  
thing to do was to buy as many loopers as you can afford and start  
playing with them.

I like that advice ;-)

I want to do--more song oriented than new agey soundscapey stuff...

so songs with two or three distinct parts where I would have to mute a  
few tracks and go into a chorus and then resurrect those tracks when I  
go back to the verse or a bridge...

I'm thinking of using a drum machine or sampled drum loops for some  
stuff.

Philip

On Aug 7, 2010, at 5:26 AM, Rick Walker wrote:

> Wow, Andy,  I love the EDP,  but, to my ears, there is a distinct  
> difference in audio quality between my EDPs and my LP1.
> The LP1 is a lot crisper.   I actually like the sound of the EDP.   
> It has a 'warm' quality but hi fidelity is not one of
> it's top suits if you ask me.    The 'warmth'  is akin to the warmth  
> ascribed to the EMU SP 1200 drum machine.
> Lower fidelity but a very pleasing sound, musically speaking.
>
> I'm curious what other multiple users think about this topic.
>
> These are my thoughts having used both a lot in my looping:
>
> Also,  though there are a lot of Line 6 DL4 similar functions in the  
> LP1 as you mentioned,  there are also a lot of EDP styled functions
> in the machine (bouncing, replace, Q replace, multiply, etc.)  and a  
> few proprietary functions that make it different from both the DL4  
> and the EDP  (notably Scramble, Pitch manipulation - Mellotron  
> simulation with several on the way) so
> for my money,  the LP1 is a lot more versatile and 8 stereo tracks  
> with the ability to sync or not sync individual tracks is a huge plus.
>
> Progamming the LP1 is also vastly simpler than the EDP (merely  
> because you do not have to get deep into learning each individual  
> Midi footpedal
> programming but , instead use a midi learn function that is quite  
> simple on the LP1) from my experience.
>
> Their architecture is so different...........one, a mono looper than  
> has multiple loops that can only be played sequentially but with a  
> tremendous amount
> of very, very clever programming that allows for manipulation of the  
> loops.....the other,  a stereo looper (that purposefully eschewed  
> the kind of
> linear architecture of the EDP specifically because there were  
> multiple loops that one can navigate to or play simultaneously)
> that they really are different instruments.
>
> I agree with what Andy said earlier about being clear about what  
> kind of looping you envision yourself doing.
> Maybe you can post that and we can all give you a better specific  
> recommendation about which one would be best for your
> specific use.
>
>
>
> andy butler wrote:
>>
>> I have both set up for exact AB comparison, and while the LP1 has  
>> lower noise I couldn't say that otherwise the sound quality was  
>> better than the edp.
>> So the higher sample rate doesn't seem to bring an advantage,
>> (at least not to my ears which give up after 16kHz or so).
>>
>