------------------------------
Loopers-Delight-d Digest				Volume 97 : Issue 158

Today's Topics:
  Newbie alert!                         [ mark sottilaro <msottila@mailbox.sy ]
  Re: Old loopers never die, they just  [ mark sottilaro <msottila@mailbox.sy ]
  Re: music                             [ improv@peak.org (Dave Trenkel) ]
  Re: music; and Looping near London (  [ David.Orton@mail.bl.uk (David Orton ]
  Looping Philosophy                    [ malone <malone@arts.usf.edu> ]
  Re: music                             [ "Matt McCabe" <mattm@bi-tech.com> ]
  Re:Music Discussion Questions         [ Edward_Chang@mail.amsinc.com ]
  Re: Newbie alert!                     [ improv@peak.org (Dave Trenkel) ]
  Re:Music Discussion Questions         [ improv@peak.org (Dave Trenkel) ]
  Re: Newbie alert!                     [ Len Seligman <seligman@mitre.org> ]
  Re: Oberheim Echoplex Digital Pro --  [ buzzard@world.std.com (Sean T Barre ]
  Re: Newbie alert!                     [ Rik Elswit <rik@well.com> ]
  Re: music                             [ Pete Koniuto <pkoniuto@bu.edu> ]

Administrivia:
Looper's Delight
****************

Please send posts to:

Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com

Don't send them to the digest!

To subscribe/unsubscribe to the Loopers-Delight digest version, send email
with "subscribe" (or "unsubscribe") in both the subject and the body, with no
signature files, to:

Loopers-Delight-d-request@annihilist.com


To subscribe/unsubscribe to the real Loopers-Delight list, send email
with "subscribe" (or "unsubscribe") in both the subject and the body, with no
signature files, to:

Loopers-Delight-request@annihilist.com


Check the web page for archives and lots of other goodies!

http://www.annihilist.com/loop/loop.html


Your humble list maintainer,

Kim Flint
kflint@annihilist.com

------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 11:29:18 -0500
From: mark sottilaro <msottila@mailbox.syr.edu>
To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Subject: Newbie alert!
Message-ID: <342156D5.4AD1DE5A@mailbox.syr.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Hello all,

This is my first post to the Loopers Delight mailing list.  I've been
using a beefed up (32 sec) JamMan to do loop based music live for about
3 years.  I currently play guitar/midi guitar in an ambient band called
Sleeping and an experimental dance/techno project called Zero Crossing. 
(yes I bow to the Gods Fripp and Eno) Both are based in the
Syracuse/Ithaca NY area.

So here's my question:  We're about to add a new member to Zero
Crossing.  He will be manning a sampler and has recently purchased a
JamMan.  I've been synching my JamMan, via MIDI, to the MIDI clock of an
Ensonic TS-10 keyboard.  So far no complaints, except the inability to
synch to multiples of 5 and 7.  Yeah, I know, get an Echoplex.  I intend
to take the MIDI out of the TS-10 and go through his JamMan into the
keyboard's new Yamaha board (not sure which model) and then finally into
my JamMan.  Are we going to run into any synching problems?  If so are
there work arounds?

My other question is what all this about jammidimystery?  I've been
running my JamMan in stereo since the beginning without a problem (I
think?) Am I misunderstanding the problem?  Be patient with me, I'm a
newbie.

Also, I'm contemplating trading up to the Echoplex.  Any suggestions on
what I might ask for my 32 sec JamMan?  Anyone interested?  Any used
Echoplexes out there?  What should I expect to pay for the Echoplex? 
I've seen the $560 price at the Loopers Delight webpage.  Is this
realistic?

And for Kim, I haven't yet seen the name Bill Laswell here @ Loopers
Delight.  Much of his music involves looping and is quite beautiful. 
Look for stuff on his Axiom/Subharmonic label.

-- --
Mark
 

@
¿??? IAMNOTHERE
c  

------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 11:48:32 -0500
From: mark sottilaro <msottila@mailbox.syr.edu>
To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Subject: Re: Old loopers never die, they just...(Re:music)
Message-ID: <34215B56.DCA5D7D6@mailbox.syr.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

I think that maybe the point behind looping is that you (the musician)
is responsible for adding the unpredictable element.  If you just played
loops over and over with out any embellishment, things would get really
boring very quickly.  Also, if you have the ability to control the
JamMan via MIDI, you can send a message for it to start fading as you
are adding to it.  It's very primitive (you are limited to short med.
and long fade times) and not accessible via the front panel (what were
they thinking?) but useful in keeping things "evolving" over time. 
Check out Steve Reich's early works.  It's really beautiful minimalist
tape stuff.

-- --
Mark
 

@
¿??? IAMNOTHERE
c  

------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 08:51:17 -0800
From: improv@peak.org (Dave Trenkel)
To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Subject: Re: music
Message-Id: <v01510101b04702344ab4@[128.193.5.233]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Kim Flint wrote:
>So how about this, what music are you all listening to these days? Which
>artists are inspiring you for looping or otherwise? If I go to the record
>store on Saturday, what should I get?
>
I've been listening to "As Is", by We, on Asphodel, quite a lot lately.
They're part of the New York "illbient" scene. The first track mixes some
very cool Rhodes piano loops with some extremely bass heavey (I mean
really, the first drum kick made my stereo amp shut down the first time I
played it) heavey drum 'n bass, it's almost like a d 'n b remix of "In A
Silent Way". Also, Funki Porcini's "Love, Pussycats & Car Wrecks" is
another recent fave. I really think that the jazz/drum 'n bass fusion thing
is finally producing some mature works, with this disc and the recent
Squarepusher stuff.

Another very nice CD I've been listening to almost daily is Choying Drolma
and Steve Tibbetts "Cho", on Rykodisc. Drolma is a Tibetan Buddhist nun,
and she was recorded singing traditional songs at her monastery in the
Himalayas. Then Tibbetts added various guitars and processing, with a few
other western musicians on percussion and strings. This disc is not
particularly loop-based, but it's deeply beautiful, Tibbetts displays
remarkable restraint and respect for the source materials.

Also, I've been pulling out my old lps of synthesizer music from the '60's
a lot lately, Morton Subotnick's "Silver Apples of the Moon" and "The Wild
Bull" in particular. I'm amazed at how advanced some of this stuff is,
there's been very little synth music that approaches this, either sonically
or compositionally, in the 30 years since it was recorded.

>Here's another one we haven't delved into for a long time: What is it about
>looping that makes it interesting, fun, musical?  Why do we want to do it?
>Why does it show up in so many types of music? Is it something in human
>nature, learned from culture, what?
>
Jeez, Kim, why do you have to ask the hard questions, can't we just go back
to talking about 3rd cousin sync?

A few weeks ago, I found in a box of non-working music gear an Ibanez
analog delay pedal I bought in 1979. This was my first "looping" device, I
used it for, among other things, making my monophonic synths play chords by
arpeggiatting them in time with the echos. I replaced a pot and put new
batteries in it and it still works.

I was always fascinated by the sound that remained after I stopped playing,
it seemed to be an entity of it's own, and this led me to experiment with
just about every delay technology, from tape looping to digital delays to
samplers to the JamMan. Every once in a while, I come up with a loop so
complete in itself that it just doesn't need anything else, and I'll leave
it playing in the studio for hours, sometimes for days, checking in with it
every now and again.

Looping acts like a microscope looking into sound events. A loop lets you
hear, through repetition, details of a small piece of sound that would have
been missed when it was first sounded. Not all sounds can take this
scrutiny, but when you find one that does, the effect is almost magical.

Anyway, this is some of what keeps me looping...


________________________________________________________
Dave Trenkel : improv@peak.org  : www.peak.org/~improv/

"...there will come a day when you won't have to use
gasoline. You'd simply take a cassette and put it in
your car, let it run. You'd have to have the proper
type of music. Like you take two sticks, put 'em
together, make fire. You take some notes and rub 'em
together - dum, dum, dum, dum - fire, cosmic fire."
                                            -Sun Ra
________________________________________________________

------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 16:56:50 +0100
From: David.Orton@mail.bl.uk (David Orton)
To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Subject: Re: music; and Looping near London (back around again)
Message-ID: <0007CE29.001424@mail.bl.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: cc:Mail note part

     A brief announcement of my appearance at The Clock Tower Balcony Bar 
     Croydon, UK 19-ix-97. 7-8pm support slot, playing prior to the main 
     performance by Robin Williamson (ex ISB) in the Braithwaite Hall.
     
     Why Loop? I think its the immediacy of the results. Not waiting ages 
     til the next group practice to find the `masterpiece' isn't that after 
     all (not usually a surprise that, of course...). The whole `painting 
     with sound' thing. As someone else noted, the fact that overall you 
     never repeat yourself (even though each loop IS doing just that, I 
     suppose) - though I may try to use the same components/compositional 
     fragments/what have you, every loop is unlike the others.
     
     Who to hear? David Toop has a new album out, so new I forget the 
     title, but which is ambient in an almost physical soundscape way as 
     described in the Oceans of Sound book (blimey, that makes no sense at 
     all). I cant/wont explain/describe it - but do try to get a listen of 
     it.
     
     Photek I just bought today, and have high hopes for from the previous 
     works of his I've heard. Roni Size and `New Forms' (I think) also has 
     some moments (well on 2 CD's lasting a hour each, it should). I think 
     Ben Neill has been mentioned before. This is one of my favourites from 
     this area from the last little while. I think its because the trumpet 
     adds a `human' element, and I think its the inclusion of `real time' 
     instruments in the Toop album(s) (or at least the semblance of them) 
     which appeals above the primarily sample-based D'n'B guys (though this 
     is an somewhat fine distinction, I know)
     
     Enough
     
     David
     <http://subnet.virtual-pc.com/~or38751>
     NB: 2 new .WAV loops added this week

------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 97 12:04:36 -0500
From: malone <malone@arts.usf.edu>
To: <Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com>
Subject: Looping Philosophy
Message-Id: <199709181602.MAA21427@satie.arts.usf.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

     Many of us have written to the list, or at least considered why 
looping is of such interest to us, so I'd like to try and address a small 
portion of that interest.  Part of what intrigues me, is the notion of 
process in Looping, as well as the 'music' or materials of Looping 
existing in layers.  Every kind of music, from pop to classical to punk 
etc. exists in layers; there are those elements close to the surface 
(melodies, riffs etc) and those things that have a larger and more 
background function (structure, form etc.) The foreground is the easiest 
to perceive, while the background is more difficult, and all the while 
they have a relationship to one another. For example, a technique that 
Bach would often employ involved tonal areas which reinforced the tonic 
triad of the piece. For example, if the piece was in C major, there would 
be tonal areas of C major, E minor and G major - which outlined the tonic 
triad. This shows a relationship between the background and the 
foreground, though we don't necessarily perceive those key areas as a 
reinforcement of the tonality.
     In the counterpoint of Bach, particularly fugal writing, the 
compositions are a result of process; of manipulating melodies 
superimposed on top of each other. There are many ways of developing 
these melodies (which I won't go into to prevent boring you *completely* 
to tears) which we perceive as either background or foreground events. 
When we loop, we are creating layer after layer. After that very first 
germ of an idea we put down, immediately our brains seek out order (or 
disorder) and try to build upon what's been previously recorded.  It's an 
*active* type of composition; it's real-time. Once we put it down, 
there's no going back. And there's also the excitement of not really 
knowing how it will come out. 
     All of us here have at one time or another have sat back and 
marveled at a loop we've created. Every time the cycle passes we hear 
something different. I think part of what we experience is the perception 
of these layers at different times and points of reference. It's a sort 
of musical Mobius strip that seems to have only one surface, but many 
dimensions. These layers provide a sense of depth and meaning, and I 
believe that is a part of the attraction to Looping.
     If anyone is interested in continuing this privately, my Masters 
Thesis dealt with many of these issues, culminating in decidability 
problems in music analysis. (though looping was not involved....but 
there's always a Ph.D.....) The title is "A Connection Between 
Schenkerian Analysis and Godel's Theorem: The Urlinie as Formally 
Undecidable." I am fascinated by musical perception, and this notion of 
'why we Loop" is no less intriguing.
     There are many other factors for sure; things like making music with 
a machine, the tenuous nature of the loop (though with enough 
electricity, could go on forever). I'm interested in hearing why others 
out there find Looping interesting.

SM

------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 09:07:41 -0700
From: "Matt McCabe" <mattm@bi-tech.com>
To: <Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com>
Subject: Re: music
Message-Id: <199709181604.JAA22656@gw1.bi-tech.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Why loop?

Because there's always the potential of creating something beautiful and
magic.....and then you turn your gear off and it's gone...but you really
don't mourn it's loss (the loop) because you know the potential to do it
again is still there...only in a different form.

Matt

------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 97 12:22:00 EST
From: Edward_Chang@mail.amsinc.com
To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Subject: Re:Music Discussion Questions
Message-Id: <9708188746.AA874610705@mail.amsinc.com>

  I'm not much into the repetitive loop stuff that I've been hearing alot
  on the radio these days, usually classified as "noise" by the DJ's, but
  some of the artists who I think are really telling stories in the "loop
  domain" are

  anything by Stock,Hausen and Walkman

  Beeboobee (Japanese DJ, cassette only release, mixes Japanese pop, porno,
  news, soap opera, noise loops together)

  DJ Hellshit and MC Carhouse (Otomo Yoshihide and Yamantaka Eye live duos)

  any Squarepusher

  Alec Empire, "The Destroyer" - esp. track 9, "The Peak" is total loop/DnB
  mania done4 in turbo-metal mode.  I saw him live last month and he DJ'd
  his own records on 2 turntables with various loop devices - I'd rarely
  heard of using your own catalog as live materials, at first I thought it
  was a rip-off, but then I appreciated the improvisational element that
  approach added.

  Why loop?
  The root reason is because unique rhythmic textures can be readily
  created in a short amount of time.  Also when I'm creating loops, it
  feels similar to mixing chemicals to create an unusual mixture, or
  painting over and over different parts of a canvas.

  ed chang

------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 09:32:37 -0800
From: improv@peak.org (Dave Trenkel)
To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Subject: Re: Newbie alert!
Message-Id: <v01510100b0470d8072d8@[128.193.5.208]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>Hello all,
>
>This is my first post to the Loopers Delight mailing list.  I've been
>using a beefed up (32 sec) JamMan to do loop based music live for about
>3 years.  I currently play guitar/midi guitar in an ambient band called
>Sleeping and an experimental dance/techno project called Zero Crossing.
>(yes I bow to the Gods Fripp and Eno) Both are based in the
>Syracuse/Ithaca NY area.
>
Welcome! Your ambient band should do a show with my ambient band Sleep
Deprivation, just to really confuse the audience.

>So here's my question:  We're about to add a new member to Zero
>Crossing.  He will be manning a sampler and has recently purchased a
>JamMan.  I've been synching my JamMan, via MIDI, to the MIDI clock of an
>Ensonic TS-10 keyboard.  So far no complaints, except the inability to
>synch to multiples of 5 and 7.  Yeah, I know, get an Echoplex.  I intend
>to take the MIDI out of the TS-10 and go through his JamMan into the
>keyboard's new Yamaha board (not sure which model) and then finally into
>my JamMan.  Are we going to run into any synching problems?  If so are
>there work arounds?

Yes, you will have syncing problems. I've experimented with 2 JamMen this
way. The problem is that the JamMan does not re-send the MIDI clock it
recieves, it generates a new MIDI clock based on its internal clock, and
sends this down the line. So the second JamMan is not going to sync to the
original source, it will sync to the first JamMan, the second seems to sync
at 1/2, 1/3, or 1/4 the tempo of the original sync source. And if the first
JamMan is in loop mode, and it hasn't recorded a loop yet, it's not sending
any clock at all, so if you want to record a loop before the person with
the first JM, you can't. My solution has been to use a MIDI splitter after
the clock source (in my case a Roland MC 303 groovebox), with one stream
sent to our guitarists jamman, and one sent to my rack.

But, I've been wondering lately if there's a more versatile solution to
this. Right now, everything assumes we're going to sync to one device, the
MC303, but I think this is kind of limiting. I can see several different
possibilities:

The current setup, with the MC driving both JMen

One of the JMen acting as sync source for both the MC and the other JMan.

One of the JMen in "free range" mode, with no sync, while the MC and other
JMan are synced.

All three units in free range mode, for chatic overlapping loops.

So, how do we do this? Right now, I leave my JMan synce all the time, and
unplug the guitarist's JMan from the MIDI splitter when he doesn't want to
be synced. I suppose a programmable MIDI patchbay, like a JL Cooper or
something could handle this, but that seems to be more complexity than I
want to add to our already too-complex setup.

>
>My other question is what all this about jammidimystery?  I've been
>running my JamMan in stereo since the beginning without a problem (I
>think?) Am I misunderstanding the problem?  Be patient with me, I'm a
>newbie.

Other people here can, and hopefully will, explain this better than I can,
but the JamMan only loops in mono, and it sends the same loop out of both
outputs. It does pass any stereo inputs through in stereo, but if you loop
a stereo source, the 2 channels will be summed to mono. If you want to loop
in true stereo, you need to sync 2 JamMen together, except you can't
because JamMen don't sync together very well. The EchoPlex has a feature
called Brother Sync, which lets you use 2 plexi on each side of a stereo
signal.
>
>Also, I'm contemplating trading up to the Echoplex.  Any suggestions on
>what I might ask for my 32 sec JamMan?  Anyone interested?  Any used
>Echoplexes out there?  What should I expect to pay for the Echoplex?
>I've seen the $560 price at the Loopers Delight webpage.  Is this
>realistic?

Yeah, the used 32 second JamMan is worth about $50, and I'll take it off
your hands if you ship it to me....

Just kidding, the Jboys are getting pretty rare these days, and I haven't
seen one for sale for a while, and I think the last one I saw was going for
around $250.

>
>And for Kim, I haven't yet seen the name Bill Laswell here @ Loopers
>Delight.  Much of his music involves looping and is quite beautiful.
>Look for stuff on his Axiom/Subharmonic label.
>
It's not for my lack of mentioning him, at one time or another I've owned
just about every record he's put out (no small feat), and while his hit
ratio hovers at less than 50%, his good stuff is among the best there is.

OK, enough bandwidth already...

________________________________________________________
Dave Trenkel : improv@peak.org  : www.peak.org/~improv/

"...there will come a day when you won't have to use
gasoline. You'd simply take a cassette and put it in
your car, let it run. You'd have to have the proper
type of music. Like you take two sticks, put 'em
together, make fire. You take some notes and rub 'em
together - dum, dum, dum, dum - fire, cosmic fire."
                                            -Sun Ra
________________________________________________________

------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 09:44:45 -0800
From: improv@peak.org (Dave Trenkel)
To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Subject: Re:Music Discussion Questions
Message-Id: <v01510101b0471882096a@[128.193.5.208]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Ed Chang writes:
>  I'm not much into the repetitive loop stuff that I've been hearing alot
>  on the radio these days, usually classified as "noise" by the DJ's, but
>  some of the artists who I think are really telling stories in the "loop
>  domain" are
>
>  anything by Stock,Hausen and Walkman
>
>  Beeboobee (Japanese DJ, cassette only release, mixes Japanese pop, porno,
>  news, soap opera, noise loops together)
>
>  DJ Hellshit and MC Carhouse (Otomo Yoshihide and Yamantaka Eye live duos)
>
Oh yeah, I should have mentioned this in my earlier post, this 19 minute
mini-CD pretty much rules.


________________________________________________________
Dave Trenkel : improv@peak.org  : www.peak.org/~improv/

"...there will come a day when you won't have to use
gasoline. You'd simply take a cassette and put it in
your car, let it run. You'd have to have the proper
type of music. Like you take two sticks, put 'em
together, make fire. You take some notes and rub 'em
together - dum, dum, dum, dum - fire, cosmic fire."
                                            -Sun Ra
________________________________________________________

------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 13:44:35 -0400
From: Len Seligman <seligman@mitre.org>
To: msottila@mailbox.syr.edu
Cc: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Subject: Re: Newbie alert!
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19970918134435.007100e0@dharma.mitre.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 11:29 AM 9/18/97 -0500, you wrote:
>
>Also, I'm contemplating trading up to the Echoplex.  Any suggestions on
>what I might ask for my 32 sec JamMan?  

Mark,

Here's a data point: in the recent Rogue Music on-line auction, the high
bid on an 8 sec JMan was $350. 

As far as Echoplex prices, I called several places and the best I could
find was about $700 including the foot controller.

-Len

------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 13:56:25 -0400
From: buzzard@world.std.com (Sean T Barrett)
To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Subject: Re:  Oberheim Echoplex Digital Pro -- Market Demand &
    Availability Stu dy
Message-Id: <199709181756.AA21602@world.std.com>

Pretty comprehensive.  Nice job.

I'm not a professional statistician, but I wanted to take some
time to correct what I believe are some misleading statistics
and interpretations.  No flame intended.

>*	Almost 40% of EDP owners live within 80-90 miles of Oakland.
>And 54% of all the EDP owners also live between Los Angeles and
>Berkeley, California. 

This statistic is impossible to interpret without similar statistics
about the entire sample (e.g. if 54% of the entire sample lived between
LA and Berkeley, it would mean something quite different than is
implied!)  The detailed results cover part of this (but no number
for LA-Berkeley).

>*	Seventy-six percent (76.4%) of those who have tried an EDP
>indicate they also own an EDP.  This can be interpreted to testify that
>three-quarters of those who try an EDP go on to buy an EDP.

This really can't be judged with much certainly without more
data.  For example, anyone who buys one without trying it first
ends up in this category.  (That such people exist seems likely,
since, for example, the apparent paradox observed in another
set of questions--don't want to try, but want to buy--can be
explained by people with this intention.)

>                                             This may mean that
>contacting 1000 existing EDP owners (from user supplied warranty card
>information) via direct mail with an offer to buy another EDP could
>instantly yield orders for sales of 462 EDP additional units.

I know you said "may" and "could", but I want to stress that
the obvious general danger here is generalizing from the sample
of "people who subscribe to loopers-delight" as being reflective
of all consumers.  It's certainly _possible_ that all EDP owners
are hardcore loopists like people on this list (what else are
they doing with their EDP, after all), and certainly that's more
likely the case than Digitech delay owners.  But even suggesting
it translates directly into sales is questionable.

Also, I wasn't going to tweak you for reporting results with the
extra decimal place, but, really, 462?  Assuming just +-1
respondent (which is probably an underestimate of the error),
the original statistic (6/13, I assume) goes to 6/14..7/14,
which is 42-50%, or 46 +- 4%, or 460+-40 units in your example.
Reporting the extra decimal places just implies more accuracy
than is really there, adding a false authority to the numbers
which, if the reader knows better, makes them more suspicious
of the results.

>*	However, on the whole, the number one reason for wanting to buy
>an EDP is it's perceived as the "Best Overall Looper" cited by 34.2% --
>which comes from combining the answers "Better than JamMan" (17.1%) and

The members of loopers-delight have access to a very current, active,
up-to-date information source on the merits of various looping devices
(namely the mailing list itself); perhaps this merely implies a form
of consumer education Gibson needs to engage in to increase demand.
But I certainly wouldn't expect people without access to this list
to have the same perceptions as things stand.

Anyway, these are all just minor interpretation issues.  I
just don't think statistics should be presented in the "best
possible light to prove a point"--which is why I'll never
play well with marketing departments...

And, off topic, I strongly recommend a read of the old classic
"How to Lie with Statistics" to anyone interested in the subject
of the various ways statistics can be misleading.

Like I said, overall, good work.  Thanks.

Sean Barrett

------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 11:19:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: Rik Elswit <rik@well.com>
To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Subject: Re: Newbie alert!
Message-Id: <199709181819.LAA00328@well.com>

"Also, I'm contemplating trading up to the Echoplex.  Any suggestions on
what I might ask for my 32 sec JamMan?"

Don't sell the Jamman yet, unless you've already lined up an Echoplex to
buy. Oberheim's last shipment didn't fill the backorders, and new ones are
hard to find.

------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 15:18:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: Pete Koniuto <pkoniuto@bu.edu>
To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Subject: Re: music
Message-ID: <Pine.A32.3.96.970918143908.171763A-100000@acs5.bu.edu>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Thu, 18 Sep 1997, Matt McCabe wrote:

> Why loop?
> 
> Because there's always the potential of creating something beautiful and
> magic.....and then you turn your gear off and it's gone...but you really
> don't mourn it's loss (the loop) because you know the potential to do it
> again is still there...only in a different form.
> 
> Matt

Interesting.  I've read similar comments on this list
in the past.  But for me it's a little different.  Very
often i'll create a loop, sit back and listen to it,
and end up quite displeased with the results of what
felt like a very cathartic creative experience.  The
process was the experience of the evening and not what
was produced.

But usually, being an archivist at heart, i'll throw
the loop down to DAT anyway once i'm finished (that is,
if i was too entranced at that delicious moment just
before the loop's "genesis" to remember to hit record
before i began).

Then, say two days later, i'll listen back to what
was created and think not so badly of it and find
a few good things there that i may try to incorporate
into a future attempt.  Then a week later i'll find
myself hearing things i hadn't heard before, 
relationships, textural movement, distant subtleties,
and i'll think, "Schitt, that ain't bad!  Maybe i'll
run it by a second and third pair of ears."  And they
often blow people away, these little creations that
kind of annoyed me the night they were born.  And 
sometimes, after several weeks, i'll want to listen
to it over and over--i end up really loving it.

The corollary of this, of course, is that often when
i immediately think on first listen that i've created
something quite magical, two weeks later i don't really
care for it.  Even then, i'll ask for other opinions,
and they are often in agreement with my own.  "Oh...
ummm....that's...well....yeah....ummm, not some of your
better stuff, man."

Anybody else experience this?  This certainly isn't
the rule.  I mean, on creating a loop i really like
i don't immediately think, "Ah schitt, this sounds
amazing to me--it must suck."  But the scenario above
happens to me quite often.  I haven't really meditated
enough on this to figure out why.

Any thoughts?


Pete Koniuto


-----------------
Music Library
Boston University
617-353-3705
pkoniuto@bu.edu
-----------------

--------------------------------