------------------------------
Loopers-Delight-d Digest				Volume 97 : Issue 183

Today's Topics:
  RE: hearing a mistake repeated ad in  [ "Joseph Buck" <josephbuck@hotmail.c ]
  RE: hearing a mistake repeated ad in  [ Kim Flint <kflint@chromatic.com> ]
  You know what I want?                 [ life to you is a dashing bold adven ]
  Re: Synth Looping (was LOOP: Introdu  [ floyd@voicenet.com ]
  RE: It could be a new looping device  [ David Kirkdorffer <DKirkdorffer@exa ]
  RE: It could be a new looping device  [ "T.W. Hartnett" <hartnett.t@apple.c ]
  RE: It could be a new looping device  [ Kim Flint <kflint@chromatic.com> ]
  Re: You know what I want?             [ "Jesse Kudler" <jkudler@wesleyan.ed ]
  Street looper's.                      [ miguel.barella@poyry.com.br (MAT) ]
  Re: Street looper's.                  [ "G. Peterson" <rainham@connection.c ]
  Re: hearing a mistake repeated ad in  [ PainPete@aol.com ]
  The ongoing saga of Oberheim          [ Andre LaFosse <altruist@shoko.calar ]
  Re: looping in Italia                 [ RA336@aol.com ]
  Pt. 2                                 [ Andre LaFosse <altruist@shoko.calar ]

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: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 12:48:02 PST
From: "Joseph Buck" <josephbuck@hotmail.com>
To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Subject: RE: hearing a mistake repeated ad infinitum can be especially 
    painful.
Message-ID: <19971028204802.3880.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain

One of the truly trancendent things in my quiver is to tap it to set up 
a polyrhythm...

>one of the "charms" of the looping technique is to figure out how to 
make
>that clunker sound like it was meant to be there. I have found two ways
>(other than stopping and beginning again, of course):
>
>1. cover it up. play something else very loud to drown out the mistake. 
>maybe stack a chord with that interesting, extra note :-)
>
>2. add some things around the mistake that make it sound intentional.
>this can be tougher to do, but can lead the loop in interesting 
directions.
>
>does anyone else have any suggestions?
>
>Pete Gilbert (PeteGilbert@msn.com)
>
>----------
>From: 	Kim Flint
>Sent: 	Tuesday, October 28, 1997 13:19
>To: 	Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
>Subject: 	Re: hearing a mistake repeated ad infinitum can be especially 
>painful.
>
>I always use the mistakes to develop the loop in a different way. Even 
more
>of a growth inspiring challenge than listening to how badly my playing 
has
>gotten lately, which I'm already keenly aware of.
>
>Or I just press Undo.....
>
>kim
>
>At 10:55 AM -0800 10/28/97, Julia & Dave wrote:
>>IMHO, After you've heard a mistake looping ad infinitum, maybe it's 
time
>>to ask yourself if it should still be considered a mistake.
>>
>>DK
>>


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 12:58:08 -0800
From: Kim Flint <kflint@chromatic.com>
To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Cc: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Subject: RE: hearing a mistake repeated ad infinitum can be especially
  painful.
Message-Id: <2.2.32.19971028205808.00a1358c@pop.chromatic.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 07:36 PM 10/28/97 UT, Pete Gilbert wrote:
>one of the "charms" of the looping technique is to figure out how to make
>that clunker sound like it was meant to be there. I have found two ways
>(other than stopping and beginning again, of course):
>
>1. cover it up. play something else very loud to drown out the mistake. 
>maybe stack a chord with that interesting, extra note :-)
>
>2. add some things around the mistake that make it sound intentional.
>this can be tougher to do, but can lead the loop in interesting directions.
>
>does anyone else have any suggestions?

Another idea is to take number 2 to an extreme, and accentuate the mistake
so that it becomes a dominant feature of the loop, and add new elements that
relate to what had once been a mistake and is now the central theme.

Along the same lines, reduce the feedback of the loop some, and take this
mistake as a new direction in the loop. As the old stuff is dying away, add
new elements related to the "mistake." The loop will transition to a new
phase, where everything relates to the clunker element. Bring the feedback
up again when the old stuff is suitably gone and the new form has suitably
developed. Sometimes this means that the original mistake has died away too,
leaving you just with your response to the mistake!

This sort of feedback action works best when you have a way to change the
size of the loop to make it shorter. On the plex, for example, you do a
Multiply-Record to redefine the loop length to something shorter. That way
the feedback does something in a reasonable length of time and it doesn't
take an hour to transition to the new phase. Once you get to the new phase
you multiply it out again.

My favorite sorts of mistakes are the rhythmic ones. The repetitive nature
of looping forces everything to be rhythmic in some way, so even things that
are internally un-rhythmic become so by being repeated. I love this effect,
and it happens best when I totally botch something that I had meant to play
in time. I will usually then play off this rhythmic tension, to accentuate
the new odd rhythms I've unintentionally produced.  Eventually, the new
rhythm begins to dominate, and I'll do the feedback tricks to take out the
old stuff and resolve the rhythmic tension.

anyway, back to work....

kim



>Pete Gilbert (PeteGilbert@msn.com)
>
>----------
>From: 	Kim Flint
>Sent: 	Tuesday, October 28, 1997 13:19
>To: 	Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
>Subject: 	Re: hearing a mistake repeated ad infinitum can be especially 
>painful.
>
>I always use the mistakes to develop the loop in a different way. Even more
>of a growth inspiring challenge than listening to how badly my playing has
>gotten lately, which I'm already keenly aware of.
>
>Or I just press Undo.....
>
>kim
>
>At 10:55 AM -0800 10/28/97, Julia & Dave wrote:
>>IMHO, After you've heard a mistake looping ad infinitum, maybe it's time
>>to ask yourself if it should still be considered a mistake.
>>
>>DK
>>
>>----------
>>> From: David Kirkdorffer <DKirkdorffer@exapps.com>
>>> To: loopers-delight@annihilist.com
>>> Subject: hearing a mistake repeated ad infinitum can be especially
>>painful.
>>> Date: Tuesday, October 28, 1997 6:36 AM
>>>
>>> 	>8.   Do you find looping to be a valuable pursuit in regards to
>>> 	>      developing composition skills and playing technique?
>>> >
>>> It can be very helpful as a compositional sketchpad.  Regarding "playing
>>> technique" ...looping may force you to play more carefully, since
>>> hearing a mistake repeated ad infinitum can be especially painful.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I got a hoot out of reading this!  There's nothing like that moment of
>>> exquisite pain when one realizes he or she has just pasted the "wrong"
>>> note to, what had up to that point been, a beautiful loop.
>>>
>>> David
>
>
>______________________________________________________________________
>Kim Flint                   | Looper's Delight
>kflint@annihilist.com       | http://www.annihilist.com/loop/loop.html
>http://www.annihilist.com/  | Loopers-Delight-request@annihilist.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________
Kim Flint		       408-752-9284
Mpact System Engineering       kflint@chromatic.com
Chromatic Research             http://www.chromatic.com

------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 16:10:52 -0500 (EST)
From: life to you is a dashing bold adventure <afn39111@afn.org>
To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Subject: You know what I want?
Message-ID: <Pine.A32.3.95.971028160841.25045A-100000@freenet2.afn.org>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

A looper and a theremin.  Wooo!

(Wooo (woo) (wooo (woo (wooo))  woo)

My hell: to know everything--except how to change anything.
Chapter One is always right:  http://www.afn.org/~afn39111

------------------------------
Date: 28 Oct 1997 21:20:47 -0000
From: floyd@voicenet.com
To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Subject: Re: Synth Looping (was LOOP: Introduction)
Message-ID: <19971028212047.26017.qmail@omni2.voicenet.com>

> From: Kim Flint <kflint@annihilist.com>
> Subject: Re: LOOP: Introduction

> At 10:46 AM -0800 10/28/97, Julia & Dave wrote:
> >Hi, and welcome.
> >
> >Nice to see more synth people on the list.

> yes, definitely! Gotta dilute all these damn guitarists. I'd love to hear
> more about how you guys use synths in your loops, as I continue to drift in
> that direction....

Hahaha.   I play guitar witha GR-50 so I also play a Wavestation-SR
a Matrix-1000 and a Microwave from the fretboard.

I love to lay down loops starting with pads and sweeps to "paint"
a backdrop.  Then I overdub and/or multiply this adding some guitar
parts and more synth textures.  I have a tendancy to get the mix a
little too thick at times but by the time that happens it seem to be
too late to try any "undoing".

The ability to maintain and control separate loops to have them fade
ion and out would be great.  What do you think, do I need another
Echoplex or two?  Hmmmm......

 - Phloide

------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 16:29:25 -0500
From: David Kirkdorffer <DKirkdorffer@exapps.com>
To: 'Kim Flint' <kflint@annihilist.com>, Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Subject: RE: It could be a new looping device.
Message-ID: <30C4F9E5EBE1D0118B760000C0DD100F2F507A@MAIL>
Content-Type: text/plain

To add my two bits, for your new effects device -- make sure you:

1.have separate input and output level controls
2.add a compare feature to check before and after parameter changes
3.spend some real quality time evaluating the interface and ease of use
aspects of the processor
4.use a large display so that "modes" or "functions" used can be seen
from 15 feet away
5.make power supply usable in US & International (with switch or
automatic) 
6.add return/send routing so outside effects can be inserted into the
chain too
7.have a good manual, please
8.have a keypad so users can go from set-up 24 to set-up 71 directly
from device without needing midi
9.

	-----Original Message-----
	From:	Kim Flint [SMTP:kflint@annihilist.com]
	Sent:	Tuesday, October 28, 1997 1:54 AM
	To:	Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
	Subject:	Re: It could be a new looping device.

	I just remembered where this thread started.....


	>Hi out there.
	>
	>I'm in the process of establishing a company with a product
line of "out
	>there" musical effects and accessories. What I refer to as "out
there"
	>is anything that is wild, bizarre or in some way new and/or
different
	>that other products on the market.
	>Therefore I would ask all of you "out there" people to tell me
what you
	>would like. Everything from small ideas to complete product
descriptions
	>will be appreciated.

	well, I'm not giving away my ideas, but some advice if you want
to avoid my
	flaming wrath:

	a) use a real power supply, not wall warts!

	b) if there is a bypass, make it a true bypass or make the audio
path clean
	enough that nobody can tell.

	c) don't use the wrong type of capacitors in the audio path or
crappy
	sounding opamps. Good audio circuit design always!

	d) build it to last, for real musicians to use and abuse. Don't
design your
	products like shoddy consumer electronics.

	e) if you go digital, use good quality convertors. The prices
are low, use
	the good stuff.


	>I don't think and hope that this letter in anyway break to
rules for
	>this list. After all, we will all benefit from this.

	I certainly don't have a problem with it. :-)  Love to hear more
about what
	you are up to.

	kim



______________________________________________________________________
	Kim Flint                   | Looper's Delight
	kflint@annihilist.com       |
http://www.annihilist.com/loop/loop.html
	http://www.annihilist.com/  |
Loopers-Delight-request@annihilist.com

------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 97 15:39:20 -0000
From: "T.W. Hartnett" <hartnett.t@apple.com>
To: "Looper's Delight" <Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com>
Subject: RE: It could be a new looping device.
Message-Id: <199710282135.NAA07404@scv2.apple.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

>1.have separate input and output level controls
>2.add a compare feature to check before and after parameter changes
>3.spend some real quality time evaluating the interface and ease of use
>aspects of the processor
>4.use a large display so that "modes" or "functions" used can be seen
>from 15 feet away
>5.make power supply usable in US & International (with switch or
>automatic) 
>6.add return/send routing so outside effects can be inserted into the
>chain too
>7.have a good manual, please
>8.have a keypad so users can go from set-up 24 to set-up 71 directly
>from device without needing midi
>9.

I'd add, if it has a fuse, make it accessible from the back without 
having to remove the unit from the rack.  Sadly, the Echoplex does not 
have this feature, as I discovered last weekend.

Travis Hartnett

------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 14:23:04 -0800
From: Kim Flint <kflint@chromatic.com>
To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Cc: "Looper's Delight" <Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com>
Subject: RE: It could be a new looping device.
Message-Id: <2.2.32.19971028222304.00a11418@pop.chromatic.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 03:39 PM 10/28/97 -0000, T.W. Hartnett wrote:
>>1.have separate input and output level controls
>>2.add a compare feature to check before and after parameter changes
>>3.spend some real quality time evaluating the interface and ease of use
>>aspects of the processor
>>4.use a large display so that "modes" or "functions" used can be seen
>>from 15 feet away
>>5.make power supply usable in US & International (with switch or
>>automatic) 
>>6.add return/send routing so outside effects can be inserted into the
>>chain too
>>7.have a good manual, please
>>8.have a keypad so users can go from set-up 24 to set-up 71 directly
>>from device without needing midi
>>9.
>
>I'd add, if it has a fuse, make it accessible from the back without 
>having to remove the unit from the rack.  Sadly, the Echoplex does not 
>have this feature, as I discovered last weekend.

sorry Travis! I agree on that one. I think the decision for the echoplex was
made for cost and liability reasons. If I recall right, there was some UL
type reason for putting it inside, and of course, the slick power input
jacks with the little fuse drawer cost a lot more. 

Actually, the best option is the self-resetting fuses, that don't require
replacement after they get set off. You just disconnect the power and let it
sit a minute or so after you fix whatever is causing it to blow, and the
fuse resets. Those are typically used in computers and workstations these days.

kim
________________________________________________________
Kim Flint		       408-752-9284
Mpact System Engineering       kflint@chromatic.com
Chromatic Research             http://www.chromatic.com

------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 17:47:55 -0500
From: "Jesse Kudler" <jkudler@wesleyan.edu>
To: <Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com>
Subject: Re: You know what I want?
Message-ID: <01bce3f3$87e19fc0$cf4c8581@jkudler.stu.wesleyan.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

You know what I have?

-Jesse

-----Original Message-----
From: life to you is a dashing bold adventure <afn39111@afn.org>
To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com <Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com>
Date: Tuesday, October 28, 1997 4:24 PM
Subject: You know what I want?


>A looper and a theremin.  Wooo!
>
>(Wooo (woo) (wooo (woo (wooo))  woo)
>
>My hell: to know everything--except how to change anything.
>Chapter One is always right:  http://www.afn.org/~afn39111
>
>
>

------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 22:39:04 +0300
From: miguel.barella@poyry.com.br (MAT)
To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com 
Subject: Street looper's.
Message-ID: <00003FE9.4007@poyry.com.br>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: cc:Mail note part

Just as a curiosity:

In a recent trip to Barcelona (Spain) I had a chance to see, listen and talk
to two street players that were using JamMan as part of their equipment.

They were playing at the "Ramblas" using a 12V battery to power all the gear.

Both used the same kind of effects were the JamMan was the most important
piece among several short delay units, compact Zoom stuff etc. with a lousy 
amp.

They met on the sreet by accident and both were left hand players.

Carlos was from Amsterdam and played tapped guitar in a soft and fluid jazz 
style.

The other musician was from Australia and played a dulcimer (used like a 
guitar) with a GK-2 driving a GR 50 in a more "wild" style.

It was a lot of fun to see loop music performed on the street and a good 
school to: I noticed that they had to be very fast in order to attract
people's attention, there was not much time to build up the loop and develop
the idea as the "audience" did not spend more than 1 or 2 minutes listening
(of course there were exceptions).

Thats it.

Miguel

------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 21:42:35 -0500
From: "G. Peterson" <rainham@connection.com>
To: <Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com>
Subject: Re: Street looper's.
message-id: TCPSMTP_GEN.13024.5638@204.138.111.39
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Miguel, would you send me your email address.

Cheers,

Gordon

rainham@connection.com

----------
> From: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
> To: Rainham
> Subject: Street looper's.
> Date: Tuesday, October 28, 1997 9:42 PM
> 
> 
> Just as a curiosity:
> 
> In a recent trip to Barcelona (Spain) I had a chance to see, listen and
talk
> to two street players that were using JamMan as part of their equipment.
> 
> They were playing at the "Ramblas" using a 12V battery to power all the
gear.
> 
> Both used the same kind of effects were the JamMan was the most important
> piece among several short delay units, compact Zoom stuff etc. with a
lousy 
> amp.
> 
> They met on the sreet by accident and both were left hand players.
> 
> Carlos was from Amsterdam and played tapped guitar in a soft and fluid
jazz 
> style.
> 
> The other musician was from Australia and played a dulcimer (used like a 
> guitar) with a GK-2 driving a GR 50 in a more "wild" style.
> 
> It was a lot of fun to see loop music performed on the street and a good 
> school to: I noticed that they had to be very fast in order to attract
> people's attention, there was not much time to build up the loop and
develop
> the idea as the "audience" did not spend more than 1 or 2 minutes
listening
> (of course there were exceptions).
> 
> Thats it.
> 
> Miguel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 22:14:31 -0500 (EST)
From: PainPete@aol.com
To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Subject: Re: hearing a mistake repeated ad infinitum can be especiallypainful.
Message-ID: <971028214344_218958232@emout05.mail.aol.com>

In a message dated 97-10-28 21:05:15 EST, you write:

Too bad life doesn't have an "undo" button...

<< To:	Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
 
 I always use the mistakes to develop the loop in a different way. Even more
 of a growth inspiring challenge than listening to how badly my playing has
 gotten lately, which I'm already keenly aware of.
 
 Or I just press Undo.....
 
 kim
  >>

------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 20:15:32 -0800 (PST)
From: Andre LaFosse <altruist@shoko.calarts.edu>
To: loopers-delight@annihilist.com
Subject: The ongoing saga of Oberheim
Message-ID: <Pine.SGI.3.91.971028200403.8132A-100000@shoko.calarts.edu>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

The following information should be of interest to anyone curious as to
the current state of affairs at Oberheim in general, and the company's
customer service relations in particular. 

One week ago I recieved a phone message from Pat Murphy, stating that my
Echoplex was ready to be shipped back to me.  I called him shortly
thereafter and spoke to him in person.  He informed me that the repair
work had been completed, and that my unit had recieved a new circuit
board, as well as the software upgrade.  He also said that my initial
cashier's check for $35, sent to cover the initial repair and processing
costs, would be returned to me, and that the second check, for $45, which
I had sent directly to Pat on the instruction of Mike Lyon, would be
refunded. 

I then asked Pat if there had been any problem in tracking down the
malfunction which had prompted my sending the unit in the first place -- a
trace of digital noise present in the decay or fade-in of notes into or
out of silence, which appeared when the mix knob was set to an
intermediate position within the two extremes and disappeared when the
knob was at one extreme or the other. 

In spite of the fact that I had previously outlined this problem, both in 
e-mail to Dean Fouts (who had initially handled my repair job when I 
first sent the unit to Oberheim in mid-July) and in a typed note which 
was taped directly to the cashier's check which had been in the box with 
the unit, Pat didn't seem to know what I was referring to.  He did say, 
however, that due to the current state at Oberheim, there had not been 
time to run an exhaustive check on the unit, and he added that with the 
new circuit board and upgraded software, I essentially had a brand-new 
Echoplex, specifically citing the fact that the record and overdub 
functions worked.  Of course, since both of those functions had been 
working when I had sent in the unit in the first place, this did not 
speak volumes about the efficacy of the repair work.

Today (Tuesday the 28th of October, one week after my conversation with
Pat Murphy), I recieved my Echoplex via UPS.  Upon opening the unit, the
first thing I noticed was that the very note I had written, explaining the
technical problem I was encountering, was sitting atop the Echoplex, still
taped to the cashier's check just as it had been when I sent it in July. 
 
The second thing I noticed was that the four main control knobs on the
left-hand side of the unit are considerably further-out from the face of
the unit than they had been before I sent the unit in.  The feedback knob
seems to be more or less the same, but each knob to the left is
progressively further out along the shaft extending from the pot on the
outside of the unit; this is taken to an extreme on the input kob, which
is actually detached from the main shaft of the pot itself and can be
easily slipped on and off of the pot.  Although the pot still seems to
work, the knob itself is completely loose of the shaft. 

The input knob had been firmly affixed to the pot when I sent my unit in
to Oberheim three months ago. 

I then plugged the Echoplex in.  Sure enough, the upgraded version of the
software was intact.  I then began recording a loop; I faded in a note and
then let it die out. 

The exact same problem, which I had sent my unit in a fourth of a year ago
to have fixed, was and is still very much in evidence.  The same digital
noise is present at the fade-in or fade-out of notes into or out of
silence.  The noise disappears when the mix selector is turned to either
one extreme or the other. 

The analogy I would draw to the current situation is that of taking a car
in to have brake work done, being deprived of the vehicle for far longer
than I had been quoted, and then finally getting the car back with a new
transmission and polished exterior, but with the same brake problem firmly
intact and the previously undamaged rear-view mirror dangling by a thread
from the side of the car door.  In neither case does this sort of
treatment fall under what I would characterize as acceptable behavior. 

I appreciate the fact that Oberheim replaced the circuit board.  Since it
obviously made absolutely no difference in solving my problem, I would
have appreciated even more their taking some steps which would have
corrected the malfunction. 

Given that an account of the problem I had been experiencing had been both
sent to the customer service representative via e-mail and contained in
the very package itself, I have to wonder exactly why it was that this
problem was not addressed. 

Pat Murphy said that there had not been time to run as in-depth of an
analysis as would have been possible.  I don't know how long it took
Oberheim to replace the circuit board, swap the software, and break the
knob on the input pot of my unit, but it seems to me that actually reading
the instructions I had provided with the unit and checking for the
specific problem I had detailed therein might have been a more effective
solution than arbitrarily replacing scads of internal electronics and
hoping that the problem (which they did not seem to be aware of, nor
capable of discerning from carefully written and provided information)
would be solved. 

The irony for me is that I had originally sent my Echoplex in to the
company because I felt that the esoteric nature of the device was such
that the repair work would be best left to the very company which had
marketed and released the product.  The unit is now in worse condition
that when I had sent it in: in addition to the nebulous digital noise
problem, I now have to fix the detached input knob. 

There are a great many questions and allegations running through my head
at the moment, but they all fall under the banner of one general issue,
which is: What exactly is the problem at Oberheim, and what is it which
seems to be preventing the company from being able to function in an
intelligent manner? 

Message to Tim Spaulding, Pat Murphy, and all others at Oberheim: If you
want to undo the exhaustive self-inflicted damage done to your company,
start by actually taking the time to make sure that your repair jobs
actually repair the items you recieve, and avoid causing any further
damage than was originally present.  I waited over twelve weeks for my
unit to be recieved.  I certainly would not have minded waiting a bit
longer if that extra time had been taken to ensure that the device had
been repaired; I do, however, take exception and offense to my item being
"serviced" in a sloppy, arbitrary, and ultimately ineffectual manner.  The
evidence before me is that no one at Oberheim even bothered to find out
what the specifics of my problem were. 

I feel sorry for Kim Flint, Matthias Grob, and the rest of the Echoplex
design team for having their vision entrusted to a company which seems
incapable of being able to function properly.  I feel sorry for the many
users who have been waiting all too patiently for Oberheim to get their
act together.  I feel sorry for myself for having spent three months
waiting in vain for a repair which was not done.  And I feel a bit sorry
for Oberheim itself, which seems oblivious to the damage it is exacting on
itself in any managerial form, and incapable of correcting the turn of
events. 

I wish any other Oberheim customers the best of luck in their efforts at 
dealing with the company.  Based upon my own personal experience over the 
last three months, they will most certainly need it.

--Andre LaFosse

------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 23:37:11 -0500 (EST)
From: RA336@aol.com
To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com
Subject: Re:  looping in Italia
Message-ID: <971028233711_27368613@mrin45.mail.aol.com>

I'll be looping guitar with *Alice* alongside Mick Karn and Steve Jansen in
Italy and Germany in ear;y November for any of you interested in looping as
an element in "pop" music...
cool stuff.

be cool,
Robby Aceto

------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 21:23:58 -0800 (PST)
From: Andre LaFosse <altruist@shoko.calarts.edu>
To: loopers-delight@annihilist.com
Subject: Pt. 2
Message-ID: <Pine.SGI.3.91.971028210743.10572A-100000@shoko.calarts.edu>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

In attempting to assess the apparently unrepaired status of my unit, I
have checked over as many details as possible.  I have noticed the
following items: 

-- The four parameter LEDs, which had previously been orange, are now 
green.  This leads me to believe that the front panel electronics were at 
least in part replaced.

-- The contents of the note which I wrote in the original box were as 
follows:

"This Oberheim has the following problems: The fade-in and fade-out of 
notes is accompanied by a distinct grainy digital noise, which 
corresponds to a flickering of the INPUT LED.  This occurs when notes are 
fading into or out of silence, or (occasionally) when notes of a 
continuous duration occur at an intermediate level, not loud enough to 
send the INPUT LED into normal illumination.

This noise is present both during loop recording and playback, as well as 
when the MUTE mode is engaged.  (It is equally as loud in MUTE mode as it 
is during normal recording/playback).  Note that when the INPUT/LOOP knob 
is set to either extreme setting (i.e. either one or the other source), 
the sound disappears.  It is only apparent when the INPUT/LOOP knob is 
set to a position somewhere between the two extreme settings.  There is 
also occasional popping and other noises present when turning the 
INPUT/LOOP knob, which suggests the problem may reside in the pot for 
that control."

The knob which I referred to as INPUT/LOOP in the above note is actually
labelled MIX on the unit, with sub-labels "dir" and "loop" on either side
of the knob.  There is a seperate knob labeled INPUT, which is the knob
that is currently loose from the pot shaft.  I can see where some
confusion could have been created from my mis-labelling of the MIX 
control, but my secondary description "(i.e. one or the other source)" 
should have cleared this discrepancy up.

Regardless, I would have hoped that from the description above, the
principal problem would have been searched for in the first place.  If
there was indeed any confusion regarding the problem or its localle, or
any inability to detect the problem in any form, I would have expected to
be contacted for clarification on this matter. 

Another possibility is that this phenomena is indigenous to the Echoplex
design, but Kim Flint said that if this noise was accompanied by a
flickering of the INPUT LED, then the noise was definitely above standard
levels.  The fact that no one else on this list has reported this element
suggests that the problem is with my unit; the fact that the circuit board
(and, apparently, at least some of the electronics for the front panel)
was replaced suggests it may be a more generalized symptom. 

Any insights or explanations as to any of the above, or any further steps
to take, would be greatly appreciated. 

--Andre

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