Re: difference harmonix 45000 and boomerang 3?

[Andrrew Owens <rootpile@icloud.com>]

Wow with these 45000 and rang comparisons, actually the LP1 DOES rule I 
guess!!



On Dec 11, 2013, at 1:53 PM, Rusty Perez <rustys.lists@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Sergio, I don't know if you have gotten a response, but I have been
> thinking about this question in the past few days because I am looking
> for a new looper.
> Based on my research, I do not own either of these yet.
> 
> As I understand, the 2880 and 45000 have four "tracks" and a master
> which are refered to as one "loop." These tracks are syncd together,
> and they must all be the same length. They can play together, or
> separately, but they CANNOT play one after the other. So, for example,
> you cannot record a verse on track 1 and a chorus on track 2 and then
> play them one after the other.
> You can do this if you use the 45000 and record one "loop" for the
> verse--which can contain four tracks--and one loop for the
> chorus--which contains four more tracks.
> Then, using the foot controller, you can switch back and forth between
> your first loop for the verse, and your second loop for the chorus.
> 
> In contrast, the boomerang III has four possible loops at the same
> time. These loops can be played together, or one at a time one after
> the other depending on what mode you're in on the rang. Each loop can
> contain any number of layers which are similar to the "tracks" on the
> 45000. You can stack on your loops, but the individual layers cannot
> be panned like the individual tracks can be on the 45000.
> 
> One advantage of the rang is that you can use the sereal sync mode
> which allows you to have one master loop which can be played at the
> same time as the other two or three sereal loops. This is called
> parallel loops.
> Depending on the mode you're set in, the rang can play parallel loops
> of different lengths and they don't have to be syncd.
> 
> This is, in my opinion, the most important difference between the rang
> and the 45000. On the 45000 each of the 4 tracks in a "loop" must be
> the same length. Your "loops" can be different lengths, but they
> cannot be played at the same time or "parallel."
> 
> So, with the rang, you can create your master loop, maybe a percussion
> track, and it will play while you switch from loop to loop to loop
> verse, chorus, verse style.
> 
> Now, granted, you don't have the same flexibility of mixing your
> various layers in one loop like you can with the 45000, but that's not
> important to this loopmaker at this time. Another big difference to
> many is tha tyou can't save loops with the rang, but this loopmaker
> doesn't care right now.
> :-)
> 
> 
> Rusty
> 
> 
> On 5/21/13, Sergio Girardi <simpliflying@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello everybody,
>> 
>> I was trying to sell my Boomerang 3 to a friend who is now interested 
>> in the
>> Rang3.
>> I
>> am pretty sure the Rang 3 is more versatile as a looper and that the
>> 45000 cannot handle the 4 tracks in many different ways as the Rang can
>> handle its 3 or 4 separate loops.
>> But this of the 4 tracks vs 4 loops had already confused me at the 
>> times of
>> the 2880.
>> My friend for example insists that the 45000 has got 4 separate loops.
>> Could anybody help me in understanding the differences and advantages of
>> these two loopers?
>> Thanks!
>