Re: livelooping. Ambient.

[Mark Hamburg <mark@grubmah.com>]

I stepped into this mess several years ago and wisdom would probably teach 
me not to do so again, but here goes...

I see the term "livelooping" as potentially being about branding and 
existing for the benefit of the audience and in term for the performer. 
From a standpoint like this, "livelooping" sets some level of expectations 
and allows potential audience members to decide whether or not they like 
"livelooping" in the same way they might decide whether they like death 
metal, country, or polka bands. That's not to say that livelooping 
exclusive of those styles anymore than to say one couldn't have a death 
metal polka band, but to say that there is a commonality in the music that 
one can react to either favorably or unfavorably. This then works to the 
benefit of lesser known performers because they can say "you don't know 
me, but you like livelooping and I'm a livelooper."

This use of the term, however, raises some interesting issues and 
questions:

* It by nature excludes some people who use looping devices but who make 
music that an audience would not identify with what the term "livelooping" 
has come to mean to them.

* It opens a question about how to deal with performers who play music 
that sounds like it fits with the livelooping aesthetic, but who don't 
actually use loopers.

The other choice is to define the category as consisting of anyone who 
uses a looper in a live context. That works, but it's then perhaps no more 
meaningful from a broader audience standpoint than it would be to have an 
event billed as being "musicians using compression pedals".

So, the intended meaning of the term depends on the goals in using the 
term.

Mark

P.S. We noticed at Y2KX (I think) that the posters said nothing about 
"music". Did that have an effect on being able to pull in a broader 
audience? I don't know.