Re: Looper -> multitrack

[Alex Stahl <alex@pixar.com>]

At 1:53 PM -0300 5/17/00, Matthias Grob wrote:
>Neil said:
>>...And often I wish I would have recorded the
>>instruments/lines on separate tracks from the start.  But now in the
>>'perfection' of the moment, they're all on one mono track! Of course an
>>entirely different type of music and feel results from starting on a 
>multi
>>track, and doing take after take, etc.
>
>There must be another way:
>Record the INPUT of the looper (not yet looped audio) to the 
>audio-sequencer of the computer, together with all the operations 
>(MIDI output of the looper).
>Then play back the file, feed the computer audio output AND the 
>recorded MIDI operations into the looper again. The loop should 
>become rebuilt exactly as it was.


This is exactly what I do. My bass has a separate output for each string,
they run into a Yamaha 03D mixer. The ADAT optical output of the 
mixer is split by a midiman digipatch, so it can go to two places: a 
9600 running mutltrack recording software and a G3 running my own 
looping stuff.

Channels 1-4 are the direct outs of the bass (and any other mics, 
synths or whatever) and they get recorded dry, along with the MIDI 
data which controls the looper, so that the loop can be rebuilt with 
an edit, remixed, etc.

Channels 5-8 are the quad looper outputs, and they get recorded into 
the multitrack as well.

Just last week I found that on a new 500Mhz powerbook, I can run 
several loopers AND record their signals to a little firewire disk 
drive, so I am pretty excited that I'll finally be able to move my 
instrument by myself again this year, and put an end to these 
recurring dreams that the band is starting and I am still unloading 
my van!

-Alex S.



>But now you have the whole playing information separately on the computer.
>So you can cut out wrong notes, change the sequence of the phrases 
>that build the loop, shorten... basically whatever you want, as long 
>as you keep track of the MIDI information that has to be edited 
>correctly together with the audio, otherwhise you loose the original 
>layering easily.
>The hard part of this method is that you can only listen the whole 
>piece from beginning, otherwhise the loops will be rebuilt wrongly.
>But then again, you can loop the same bits within the computer and 
>stop to use the external looper. At this point, you have the whole 
>freely looped song under control just as if you had it done by 
>multitracking.
>
>Its a shame I never tried this... especially since I am convinced 
>that this will be one of the main recording techniques in the near 
>future (probably with a looper build into the recording software, 
>like POLAR...)
>
>>It creates a whole new sense of being a player/composer that the loops 
>can
>>go for hours or weeks if you don't reset or turn off the power, but are 
>gone
>>the instant you do. I often get too 'attached' or regret having wiped the
>>slate, or suffer some anxiety in deciding betwixt the two.
>
>As TAO told me, to "disattach" is a very fruitfull exercise in 
>live... I have a hard time with it, especialy with old tapes ;-)
>And its not the same as devalorize.
>
>
>
>          ---> http://Matthias.Grob.org