RE: Loopers-Delight-d Digest V04 #145

["matt davignon" <mattdavignon@hotmail.com>]

To me, "looping" is based on creating a sound bed (often of loops with the 
same start & stop point), soloing over it for a while, adding to the sound 
bed, soloing more, etc.

"real-time sampling" is more interactive - the musician is manipulating 
the 
samples just as much (if not more than) his instrument. He feeds sounds 
into 
his devices, than manipulates the devices. About half of the "real-time 
samplers" I know (Scott Looney, Bob Boster, Thomas Dimuzio on occasion, 
Lance Grabmiller) don't even use a real instrument while playing. They 
sample the other musicians on stage and spit that out processed versions.

Obviously there's a lot of grey area.

There's a Scott Looney mp3 on this page: 
http://www.edgetonerecords.com/catalog/4016.html




>Gary Lehmann at hqr@cox.net done wrote:

>Then how about "Real time Sampling" as a name for looping?
>Just trying to cause trouble . . .

>Then Mark Hamburg gone and said
>See my earlier message in which I attempted to make a distinction between
>"Real Time Sampling" and "Live Looping" from a listening experience
>standpoint. Both are done live. Both benefit from the rhythmic precision 
>of
>good looping equipment. It mostly becomes a matter of what the musician 
>does
>with it afterward and whether the loopy nature of the sample matters.

>I also noted in that message that there is a continuum and the distinction
>has to do with stylistic centers of gravity rather than hard boundaries. 
>In
>my categorization, Rick Walker floats around the live looping center of
>gravity. John Whooley floats around the real time sampling center of
>gravity.

Mark

_________________________________________________________________
Lose those love handles! MSN Fitness shows you two moves to slim your 
waist. 
http://fitness.msn.com/articles/feeds/article.aspx?dept=exercise&article=et_pv_030104_lovehandles