Re: Re: The EDP and the Looperlative and me

[Rick Walker <looppool@cruzio.com>]

On 7/22/64 11:59 AM, Mark Hamburg wrote:
> I completely understand you preferring the Looperlative, Rick. My point 
>was to answer the question of why anyone might prefer the EDP which seems 
>to come as a shock to some people on this list.
I understand and respect your intentions.
> Though they might be dismissed as minor functionality, I'll note that 
>two items on my list can't be replicated on the Looperlative:
>
> * It doesn't have a big time readout that you can absorb at a glance.
This is true,  it's a small screen, but frankly,  I don't look at my 
looper when I use it.  I just
use it's functions, musically.     However, there used to be a device 
called a Midi Nome which had a visual
readout of BPM and generated midi clock.......I suppose that might make 
the Looperlative work for you if you wanted it to.

But really,  not all things are for all people.   Ableton's LIVE, as an 
example , is an amazing piece
of software.    I just don't like it for several reasons (one of which 
is small screen functionality)
and that's all there is to it.  My not liking it has nothing to do with 
whether it is a viable
solution for thousands of loopers.

   I just wanted to clarify what the Looperlative can do after reading your
posts about it.     I just had the feeling that you haven't delved into 
it deeply enough to figure out how
to make it work for you, but that's an assumption and we both know how 
accurate they are sometimes.
Also,  there's nothing that says you should use the Looperlative.    The 
EDP is a wonderful piece of
gear!   I've loved using mine in my life.

I do respect diversity.  I just want the record to be accurate,  hence 
my replies to your post.
> * I'm pretty sure it doesn't have a function to let you set the tempo in 
>advance which can actually be rather nice if you are using the looper as 
>the clock source.
Honestly,   I don't use midi in my work at all, but I know the 
Looperlative has
Midi Sync Record function,  so that means that you could send BPM  (if 
not bar length)
through any sequencer, drum machine or other midi syncable looper
> It could presumably gain the latter through a software update and maybe 
>approximate the former depending on how much flexibility there is 
>regarding its screen.
>
> But you nailed it when you said the question is whether you want to 
>spend your time working with multiple tracks or working in a more linear 
>fashion. Each can do a bit of the other, but each is also clearly 
>optimized around a particular point of view.

Yeah, and that's why Bob Amstadt decided to make the Looperlative.  He 
got excited watching live looping in action,  went out and looked at 
what was on the market and wished that there were more features
available that weren't at the time.    I'm pretty happy that he did.

Happy New Year and a big hug to you, my friend,

Rick Walker
> Mark