Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 08:56:04 +0200 (MET DST) From: Olivier Malhomme To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com Subject: I'm gonna get some In my long (it appears so) quest for unexpensive ways to get a jamman, a vortex or an echoplex, I suddelly wonder... In france the current is 220 V at 50 hz. Does these units have wall warts (in that case, i just swap the wall wart, it is easy) or do they have internal current transformation (in that case, I would have to open the machine, and that is less easy for me, not to mention that I fear having to do such things...) Pleaaaaassse tell me Olivier Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 01:52:14 -0800 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: kflint@annihilist.com (Kim Flint) Subject: Re: I'm gonna get some >In my long (it appears so) quest for unexpensive ways to get a jamman, a >vortex or an echoplex, I suddelly wonder... >In france the current is 220 V at 50 hz. >Does these units have wall warts (in that case, i just swap the wall >wart, it is easy) or do they have internal current transformation (in >that case, I would have to open the machine, and that is less easy for >me, not to mention that I fear having to do such things...) >Pleaaaaassse tell me > >Olivier The Echoplex was designed for international traveling. It has a good, rugged internal power supply with a switch on the back to change between 110V and 220V. You shouldn't have any problems with this. (I designed it, I should know!) In fact, it is made to be quite tolerent of wide votage swings and dropouts, so if you have some sort of power surge or sag on stage, your loop won't die. I spent 5 very long days at the frankfurt musik messe demoing the thing on 220V and it never blinked. I think the Jamman has a wall wart. In my humble opinion, wall warts are the work of the devil, and anyone that designs them into a professional music product ought to be beaten senseless with partially used power strips and whipped with flimsy little power cords. And then they should be made to stand in Guitar Center for a year, explaining to every customer why exactly they are being charged $20 for a manufacturer-labeled wall wart that cost said manufacturer less than a dollar. But I digress...... 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: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 03:12:15 -0800 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: kflint@annihilist.com (Kim Flint) Subject: Echolplex syncing >Kim, > >>the answer here is to use midi clock for syncing. It does work in the >>current shipping version, although the upgrade that is not yet shipping has >>made huge improvements in this area. > >Does this only work for loops that are already recorded, or can I use the >MIDI clock to create new loops that sync with the sequencer, as well? Yes, you can have the sequencer generate midi clock, and sync to that. You can set the length the loop will be in relation to the sequence tempo, so for instance you can make your loop equal 8 beats, 7 beats, 3 eighths, whatever. The echoplex, once it is synced, will stay locked to the sequencer and not drift. This works reasonably well in the current shipping software, and the not-yet-shipping upgrade has many improvements in this area. To do it: Set the sync parameter to "in" Make sure you have the echoplex in reset, and midi out from sequencer is in midi in of the 'plex. Make sure your sequencer is set to generate clocks. Start the sequencer. It will send midi clocks, which the echoplex will happily monitor. If you look at the display, you will see a little dot flash at the sync interval. This interval is determined by the 8ths/beat parameter, which basically tells the echoplex how many 8th notes will be in the basic loop cycle. Press record, the echoplex starts recording. (If you are using the quantize function, its a bit different. I'll explain below) You have to wait until after the clock starts to start record. Otherwise the echoplex doesn't know its supposed to be syncing to something. Play stuff, press record again. The echoplex will continue recording until the loop is the appropriate length, end the recording automatically, and start looping. Your loop should be in time with your sequence. If you use the quantize function, which basically quantizes the timing of your echoplex actions, the echoplex will wait until the next sync interval to start its recording. This way your loops are not only the proper length, but the beginning point of the loop is right at the beginning of the measure in the sequence. Hopefully that makes some sense. (its quarter to 3am, I'm a tad groggy...) Play around with it, the practical experience will make it more obvious. I use this technique for live type playing a lot, to sync my loops to drum machines. One thing that is fun to experiment with is to use 8ths/beat to set the meter of your loops to be different from the meter of the sequence. So you can get 3 verses 4, say. One thing I've had a lot of fun with is to take a two bar drum machine groove and record it into an echoplex that is synced to it, with the echoplex's 8ths/beat set to 15, for example. So I record 15 of the 16 eighths in the drum pattern, and loop that along with the original. With the loop shifting one eighth each time through, the simple little drum machine suddenly sounds remarkably creative! Another thing to try is syncing multiple echoplexes together with different 8ths/beat, to get fripp-like multi loops going where the different loops are related by some ratio. Using the echoplex to generate midi clocks and control a sequencer is also really fun. Basically, set things up the reverse of before. Sync=out, midi out of echoplex to midi in of sequencer. Hit record, play your thing, hit record again. The echoplex will then generate midi clock and send a start-song message to the sequencer. The sequencer should then start, in time with the thing you just played. I also do this with drum machines, so the pattern comes in at the tempo I just played. I showed Neal Schon how to do this and he went into his studio and riffed away with his rhythm machine 8 hours a day, every day, for months. (writing material for the upcoming Journey album that I'm sure you're all dying to get ;-) ) Its real fun to have the sequence kick in with you like that. Its just like having a real band, except they actually listen to the tempo you set and don't mind if you make them start over 300 times while you refine your guitar riffs. Hope this gives you all something to occupy yourselves with....I'll probably put stuff like this up on the web page when I get to it. Then we can have diagrams and audio clips and such too. And feel free to share your favorite techniques, I'm sure many of you have thought up tricks that never occured to me.... 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: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 03:13:42 -0800 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: kflint@annihilist.com (Kim Flint) Subject: Re: Echolplex problems >>Is one or all of your units pretty old? I think the first 50-100 were >>really prone to this. New ones are less so. Shortly before I quit g-wiz I >>came up with a design improvement that totally solves these problems. I'm >>pretty sure it is not part of the current fab. Its a bit more complicated >>than a resistor swap, but I'd be happy to explain it. Just promise you >>won't all electrocute yourselves! > >Yes, the units were purchased soon after they came out. Please send the >procedure when you get a chance. Oberheim has my units right now, anyways, >so there's no hurry...Thanks! > >- Chris > >--------------------------------------- >Chris Chovit >cho@gomez.jpl.nasa.gov >--------------------------------------- I think I will put up an Echoplex hardware hacking guide on the web page. There are a bunch of mods you can do, most of which are pretty easy. 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: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 03:40:28 -0800 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: kflint@annihilist.com (Kim Flint) Subject: Re: Hello and such >>MacLoop! Matthias has been evangalizing for this idea for ages. Somebody >>definitely has to do it. A protools plug in and a standalone would be my >>choice. > >Way too expensive. I've been thinking more along the lines of Deck or >Logic Audio. The machines are getting fast enough that one doesn't >necessarily need to drop $10k on ProTools hardware. If people balk at >$900 for an Echoplex, do you think they're gonna drop $15k for a >machine and ProTools?!? > >BTW, Bias Peak on the Mac has some "automatically loop this think I'm >recording" features built in. It's a shame that they only support two >stereo tracks. My thinking for a digi plug-in is that there is already a large installed base, and there are plenty of other tools that can work well in conjuction with a looping tool. And by "standalone", I meant something like Deck, same as you're talking about. A cheap software app that takes advantage of the audio and processing in the pc. Problem with that, though, is you only have a stereo input so you can't record multiple sources into different loops at once. And you have a crappy multimedia codec digitizing the audio. The other problem is that most sound cards don't let you record and play back at the same time. Using a pc/mac for looping is really something that would only apply to studio use, though. Not many people are willing to lug their computer to rehearsals, gigs and on tours. Its a big risk, and expensive to do it safely. One thing that concerns me, design wise, is the real-time performance of the mac/pc while its handling lots of I/O, audio processing, and disk accesses. The reaction time is critical in looping, and desktop os's are not designed for this. This is a key reason why I'm much more interested in designing the ultimate looper as rack gear specifically designed for these tasks. Then you have much more control over the real time performance, and can optimize busses for good audio/dsp performance. And you can include the appropriate I/O to meet looping needs, have very good quality audio, professional jacks, a rugged chassis, etc. Also, it would be a simple matter to include networking interfaces to hook it up to your pc for expanded control interfaces. I think this can be done at a reasonable cost, easily in line with what other quality audio processors cost. 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: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 03:56:04 -0800 To: Loopers-Delight@slip.net From: kflint@annihilist.com (Kim Flint) Subject: Re: Echoplex/Jamman >By the way, perhaps you could tell me, you fortunate guys, before I spend my >BIG bucks on it, what differences between the two units, what I can do >xith one, not with the others, what kind of memory they do accept to >increase their delay time, if I can do it myself, if you can add one >memory chip at a time (some electronic units accept only changes by pairs) Well, this will all be on the web page some day. In the mean time I dug up some old mail I sent to someone a while back. Since several people have asked for more info on the echoplex, this will hopefully help: ****************************************************** The Echoplex is a lot of fun and useful in many different situations. I'm kind of amazed at the diversity of musicians that use it. Everything from hip-hop dj's to bluegrass guitarists to brazilian percussionists to acoustic soloists to jazz flute players! Here is some info I sent to someone else, hopefully it helps you too: the best bet is to call Oberheim directly and ask for one, (brochure) hopefully they will actually send it. They are at: Oberheim 732 Kevin Ct. Oakland, CA 94633 510-635-9633 Also, reviews of the Echoplex appeared in Keyboard (7/95), Guitar Player (9/95), and Electronic Musician (8/95). The keyboard and guitar player ones are most informative, but they are all very good. Amazingly enough, there is a web page for it buried within the Gibson site: http://www.gibson.net/products/oberheim/ob2.html Possibly even more helpful would be to call Gibson's coustomer service dept. at 1-800-4-GIBSON. Ask for Alan Green, he knows the most about it there. He might be able to help you find a store in your area that has one in stock. One way to try it out is to buy it from someplace that offers a money-back guarantee if you are not completely satisfied. I think a lot of the mail order places do that. A good one to try is Bananas at Large, 415-457-7600. They often have echoplexes in stock. And another cut and paste: I think you should try out the Oberheim Echoplex Digital Pro. (Now I should tell you that I'm extremely biased about this because I was one of the people who designed it!) Pesonally, I'm fanatical about looping, as are the other people involved in designing this, and we designed the thing from the ground up to meet our needs. I've used the jamman and the boomerang, and I think they both have a lot of work to do to catch up with us. If you like, I'd be happy to tell you all about it. My phone number is below. Here are some features real quick: - well designed, performance-oriented user interface - optional foot controller for the rack unit - expandable up to 200secs of loop time - infinite overdub - very cool reverse loop effects - "multiply" function to create long loops over multiple reptitions of a shorter loop - Multiple undo's for removing overdubs from a loop - Up to 9 independant loops available at once - fully midi controllable - sync functions for working with external time sources (or generating clocks) - etc., etc., etc., Robert Fripp, Adrian Belew, David Torn, and many, many others are using the Echoplex. >Where can I get one? Call Oberheim for a dealer near you. Many of the mail order places carry it as well. >How much will it hurt my pocketbook? I'm not quite sure of the list price. $800 I think, but you should check with Oberheim or your dealer. Street price should be significantly lower, as always. >How much memory does it come with as shipped from the factory? Two factory configurations: 1Mb, for 12.5 seconds, or 4MB for 50 seconds. >How much can it be expanded to? Memory is expandable to 200 seconds with standard 30-pin simms. If you plan to expand it, buy the 12.5 second version and get the memory for it yourself. (its cheaper that way) >Are there any spec-sheets online anywhere? http://www.gibson.net/products/oberheim/ob2.html >Is there a faboo foot controller available or included? yes, there is a foot controller available. It also responds to midi control >Is it shipping? yes, for over a year now! We are currently finishing up a software upgrade which adds several new features and improves others. look for that too... ********************************** y'all happy now? 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: 13 Sep 96 08:12:30 EDT From: Jon Durant <74074.1316@CompuServe.COM> To: "INTERNET:Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com" Subject: Re: Satan's Wallwarts and so much more Hey gang, I'm glad there's so much going on here in loop land, and I'd like to add my coupla cents worth. OK, maybe a dollar. First, thanks Kim for clarifying the origins of the wallwart. I was fairly certain that it was Satan (not a bad guy, really. He's just misunderstood...) but now I have good authority on it. And, yes, JamMan and Vortex both use the beasts. The ultimate design is what's in the PCM 80, ie a switching transformer that simply needs the right plug. Works great, and apparently all future Lex products will use it. (Note that I said apparently...) Now, about this Vortex thingy: Thanks to Dave for the very kind review. A couple of notes about what it can do: It's basically a modulating delay. So you've got chorusing, flanging, tremolo, rotary speaker-ish stuff, and that sort of thing. (Gerneric useful stuff with odd names like Choir, Shimmer, Aerosol, Orbits) But the hook is, as Dave noted, they're dynamic--they respond to your playing. (or not, if you so choose) Then you have a whole host of ridiculously weird effectoids. Bleen, Fractal, et al. These things do ring modulaty or looping echoes with death flange that mutates into the oddest sorts of things. Useful on a daily basis? You decide. On my first record (Three if by Air) this kind of oddity is most clearly audible on the last cut where an e-bow driven guitar is sent through a very odd pitch shift thing on the LXP-15 (Evil 3rds in the V2 software, my program) then sent through this bizzaro Vortex thing that I created from Fractal and Bleen. The sound will rip your head off in headphones. Way twisted. The beauty of Vortex is how easily you make the sounds your own. The morphing thing is really happening, and some of the halfway points are really fun. There's a bunch of oddities on my next record (due in Fuebruary, will be mixed by Mr. Torn) from the Vortex beast. OK, now the Jamoisity: I'm now using two JamMen. One in front of effectoids, one in back of effectoids. Generally, the front Jamperson is used as long echo, wherin I'll play with the feedback control throughout the piece, sometimes longer, sometimes shorter, depending on where I'm going. The second Jamperson is the looper, where I'll be able to loop the effected stuff, and go beserk on top of it. There are several pieces on the new record where this stuff will be in evidence. Mostly, though it allows quite a bit of freedom. My single biggest gripe with the JamMan is that you can't loop from within the Echo mode. A simple request, but it didn't get done. So, this allows me to do something like it. You can go to 100% feedback, but everything you play gets added in... One other thing about storage of loops and ideas: I ALWAYS have mics set up in front of my amps, which can go to a DAT or my DA 88. Anytime something happens that I like, I record a couple of minutes of it, then if I want it again, I can load it back in. Not perfect, but then again perfection isn't what I seek within my music. I'm looking for vibes and space, and this works (perfectly) for that. If nothing else, when you've got it recorded, you can listen to it, and you should be able to recreate it. Oh yeah, the memory on JamMan is PC Zip chips, and *don't* get 'em from Lexicon. They bought in on very unfavorable terms and are stuck with 'em. But if you call the marketing dept (as opposed to Customer Service who are in posession of the big ticket items), they'll give you some 800 #s where you can find it cheaper. Not cheap, unfortunately. (If they give you difficulty, let me know. I still have some influence. Not much, but some...) OK? Cool. Keep looping. Jon Durant (ex Lex, now Alchemist) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 09:52:53 -0400 From: "S. Patrick Hickey" To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com Subject: Re: I'm gonna get some JamMan uses Wall Warts (tm). > In my long (it appears so) quest for unexpensive ways to get a jamman, a > vortex or an echoplex, I suddelly wonder... > In france the current is 220 V at 50 hz. > Does these units have wall warts (in that case, i just swap the wall > wart, it is easy) or do they have internal current transformation (in > that case, I would have to open the machine, and that is less easy for > me, not to mention that I fear having to do such things...) > Pleaaaaassse tell me > Olivier Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 09:55:06 -0400 From: "S. Patrick Hickey" To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com Subject: Re: I'm gonna get some Yes, but wall warts locate the problem of transformer noise *far* away from the precious signals. So it simplifies design. Pat ***SPH brzrkr@nielsenmedia.com Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 10:15:05 -0400 From: cwb@platinum.com (Clark Battle) To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com Subject: Re: Moo. Here's one we seem to have forgotten: Bill Frisell. Bill has used short spontaneous loops as ambiance in a live setting for years. I believe he uses a custom device with 16 seconds of infinite delay. During a piece he samples a bit of something, speeds it up, slows it down, and mangles it. Then, he'll fade in the loop at some opportune time in the performance. There is plenty of this on his album _Power Tools_. He shares that drunken, warped sound with Torn but in a different way. Bill F. doesnt use a whammy bar, all his warping is done by bending the neck as he plays. He's got killer jazz chops too. Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 11:44:11 -0300 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: matthias@bahianet.com.br (Matthias) Subject: Technohoploops? >There are >other genres where looping is real prominent as well. Hip-hop, techno, >house, trip-hop, ambient-techno, dub, etc have all developed looping in >interesting ways, and now those influences are pretty much common place in >pop music. I am not really into this music yet, its hard to find in Brasil, and not very my taste, but I imagine that it has a lot of loopy caracter. Are there records out with such heavy looped rythms? Would this be a way to use real drums and percussion to combine the machine like steady rythm with the real punch of unacurate human hit drum? It would give a nice stage picture, too: imagine the drumer walking around stage, grabing an instrument every now and then, hitting it short and intense. In between he has time to relax or act, but the sound slowly grows to hell... (it is possible to connect an infinite number of pedal boards or single overdub pedals to the ECHOPLEX, so you can operate it from various points on the stage!) >In fact, one thing I'm really interested in discussing on this list is the >different approaches and techniques to looping found in different styles of >music. I think we can learn a lot from each other by sharing these >different approaches and reapplying them in our own music. This is exactly it. I hope we can exchange some sound samples about it, too. Matthias Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 11:44:25 -0300 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: matthias@bahianet.com.br (Matthias) Subject: MacLOOP (was: Hello and such) >> >I really like this idea. Once you take the hardware issues (digitizing, >> >user interface) out of it, it's just a matter of throwing CPU and RAM at >> >the problem until it goes away. >> >> MacLoop! Matthias has been evangalizing for this idea for ages. Somebody >> definitely has to do it. A protools plug in and a standalone would be my >> choice. Actually, after trying to stay analog forever, I bought my first computer (Mac cx) in '89 only because I saw an advert of the first MO disc and understood that this was the size and speed for music and that the HD recording had started and that I needed to do a looper on the computer. I applied as a Apple developper and Digidesign developper. I ended up developping the stand alone version first, mainly because the computers did not become adapted to stage. Independent LCD screens came around then but did not turn popular as I had expected. Why? >> >Performance interaction could occur via any MIDI device, >> >and new/clever functionality could be added at the software level. A gui >> >with a keyboard and mouse could be used, rather than the tiny knobs, >> >buttons and LCD screens that can fit on a 19" rack. Can anyone understand why under the zillion models of Apple, there is none made for the musician, who always was the most faithfull mac client? It would be very easy to do a 19" rack version with a LCD screen for stage and a ordinary monitor for home! All the musicians and studios and probably even some industries would want that model! >Actually, I'm a professional programmer, and I have a pretty good grasp >of numeric analysis programming and how audio works. My usual >environment is Unix, but I'm sure I could pick up Mac/Windows programming >easily enough if I tried. Ups, there might be some problems... >Yeah, I'm seriously considering buying a new Power Mac just to work on >this idea. What do y'all think? Would you be willing to use a personal >computer for a looping device? Do you HAVE a computer capable of this >sort of thing? All the necessary hardware is built into Power Macs and >most modern PCs. The whole thing could be sold as software, or even >given away. > >Let's think about this. What sort of features would we like to see? Well Dave, if you really do it, I will be very happy! - One thing would be a shareware version, that does the basic for everyone to play. Go ahead. - Another thing would be the soft version of the ECHOPLEX which I could help with soft modules for the functions. All that rounding and syncing is nothing easy! - The real thing would be a HD recording program which works with integrated loops, so we can record what we loop, loop what we record and edit the loops we recorded by relooping. This is definitally a comercial project that has to be done in colaboration with a enterprise that developped HD recording. >What about the user interface? A MIDI Pedal board with "volume" controller input for the FeedBack and maybe other parameters. There is a lot to do! Lets loop a bit first... Matthias From: "Steven R. Murrell" To: "'Loop'" Subject: Fun Stuff Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 11:29:43 -0400 Hey everybody, Just thought that I would share something that I have found to be interesting and fun. One thing that I like to do with my JamMan is layer loops that are in identical tempos but different time signatures. If done in a certain way, the resulting layered loop will be a rhythmically complex melody which repeats itself once every time through the loop. It helps immensely if you have the ability to record long loops (I have 32 second expansion). Example: Record first layer in 5/4 playing notes or chords on beats one and three and play this for exactly seven measures (35 beats). Then record a second layer in 7/4 playing notes or chords on beats one and three and play this for only five measures (again 35 beats). As the loop repeats, beats one and three are coincident with respect to both patterns, but as the loop continues the patterns diverge and then converge making for a very nice sound. I did this last week when a drummer friend and I were messing around at his house. I played this pattern using chords on my Stick (as opposed to single notes) and then played other synthy sounding stuff in real time above the loop. About ten minutes into this thing, his wife came into the studio. "This is scaring the hell out of me" she said. Try it, Steve Murrell - Indian Rosewood Grand Stick #1202 smurrell@ford.com Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 10:58:22 -0500 (CDT) From: Dave Stagner To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com Subject: Re: Hello and such On Thu, 12 Sep 1996, Ray Peck wrote: > I've been thinking about this since seeing DT last year in SF. I was > thinking that if I were to try this sort of thing myself (which I'm > far off from doing!), I'd want a Mac-based system that let me do > multiple tracks, each with different loop times, and to be able to > change them on the fly. > > Think of this sort of thing. Sorry if it doesn't make sense: it's > kinda hard to explain. I know EXACTLY what you're talking about; I want to do the same thing. The way I see it, this program should be able to run multiple loops simultaneously, and either mix them together or switch back and forth betwen them. If each loop is an independent entity from the mixer, then loop length is arbitrary. New loops could be created as copies of old loops, or as rational relations to other loops (1/3, 2x, etc), or with their own arbitrary length. > The system could also use spare time, if it has any, to do > pitch-to-sheet music conversion so you could *really* see what you > were doing. > Now THAT would be scary and difficult. :} > A PowerMac could do all this with no additional hardware (although you > might want a Digidesign AudioMedia card for better a/d d/a). Deck > will do 8 tracks off of the hard disk on the slowest PowerMac (my > 6100/60). Should be easy to do tons of tracks out of DRAM. The sound source should be irrelevant. It should be able to get sound off the stock Mac inputs, Digidesign, Turtle Beach, or Korg cards, or any standard-format sound files off the disk. It should also be able to save your loops in standard audio formats, as well as a custom format for the system (collections of loops, a set of performance notes attached, etc). > > Now. . . > > Would anyone buy it? > If I could afford it. :} Maybe I should sell my children. :P -dave By "beauty," I mean that which seems complete. Obversely, that the incomplete, or the mutilated, is the ugly. Venus De Milo. To a child she is ugly. /* dstagner@icarus.leepfrog.com */ -Charles Fort /* http://www.leepfrog.com/~dstagner */ Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 08:54:54 -0400 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: Chris Chovit Subject: Re: Hello and such > >To start out a track, tap out a few beats on a footswitch. The system >syncs, and shows a graphical metronome. Record the first track, >tapping another switch for the beginning and end of the loop. You >could immediately start recording the next loop (or wait 'till the >next go-around), and could specify the length of the loop relative to >the first one with a couple switches, by specifying a rational ratio >between the lengths. Imagine two "increase the factional part" >switches. > >numerator >--------- >denominator > >1 tap gives you a second loop 1/2 or 2/1 as long, three taps gives you >2/3 or 3/2, etc. You could easily make loops that are 7/8 as long, or >whaever, to get really interesting repeating patterns >(cf. "Discipline"). I have been doing something like this using multiple echolplexes, connected via the brother sync. I use one echoplex to create a "fundamental unit" loop. Then, I create loops on additional echoplexes, which are a multiple of this fundamental unit. Finally, I can go back to the original unit and mulitply its length too. Using four echoplexes, for example, I can have them repeating every 4, 5, 6, and 7 beats, respectively. This makes for some great entertwining melodies, which don't sound repetitious -- they sound like they are forever changing. Obviously, having multiple echoplexes can be costly...Currently my brother and I each have 2 units, so between us, we use 4 units. This also gives us the capability of separating them in space -- we are currently using a quadrophonic setup, with each looper given its own channel, adding a "spatial dimension" to the music. Another trick I like, is to run a loop through an effect, like a slap back delay, and sending this into another looper (and another channel). This makes for some "mind-tweaking" sounds. I am interested to know if anyone is using Opcode MAX to create custom interfaces with the echoplex. If This is something that I would like to undertake, but I would like to know if anyone as already doing this. If not, please send suggestions for interface capabilities. My idea is to use an ART X-15 footpedal to control multiple echoplexes. I'm still in the brainstorming mode, so suggestions are welcome! - Chris P.S. In a previous message, I had referred to the Setve Reich album as "Music for 16 Musicians" -- Sorry for leaving two musicans out....the correct title is "Music for 18 musicians". --------------------------------------- Chris Chovit cho@gomez.jpl.nasa.gov --------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 09:22:45 -0400 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: Chris Chovit Subject: Re: Hello and such I'm not sure this message was sent correctly...I'll try it again. Sorry if its a repeat.... > >To start out a track, tap out a few beats on a footswitch. The system >syncs, and shows a graphical metronome. Record the first track, >tapping another switch for the beginning and end of the loop. You >could immediately start recording the next loop (or wait 'till the >next go-around), and could specify the length of the loop relative to >the first one with a couple switches, by specifying a rational ratio >between the lengths. Imagine two "increase the factional part" >switches. > >numerator >--------- >denominator > >1 tap gives you a second loop 1/2 or 2/1 as long, three taps gives you >2/3 or 3/2, etc. You could easily make loops that are 7/8 as long, or >whaever, to get really interesting repeating patterns >(cf. "Discipline"). I have been doing something like this using multiple echolplexes, connected via the brother sync. I use one echoplex to create a "fundamental unit" loop. Then, I create loops on additional echoplexes, which are a multiple of this fundamental unit. Finally, I can go back to the original unit and mulitply its length too. Using four echoplexes, for example, I can have them repeating every 4, 5, 6, and 7 beats, respectively. This makes for some great entertwining melodies, which don't sound repetitious -- they sound like they are forever changing. Obviously, having multiple echoplexes can be costly...Currently my brother and I each have 2 units, so between us, we use 4 units. This also gives us the capability of separating them in space -- we are currently using a quadrophonic setup, with each looper given its own channel, adding a "spatial dimension" to the music. Another trick I like, is to run a loop through an effect, like a slap back delay, and sending this into another looper (and another channel). This makes for some "mind-tweaking" sounds. I am interested to know if anyone is using Opcode MAX to create custom interfaces with the echoplex. If This is something that I would like to undertake, but I would like to know if anyone as already doing this. If not, please send suggestions for interface capabilities. My idea is to use an ART X-15 footpedal to control multiple echoplexes. I'm still in the brainstorming mode, so suggestions are welcome! - Chris P.S. In a previous message, I had referred to the Setve Reich album as "Music for 16 Musicians" -- Sorry for leaving two musicans out....the correct title is "Music for 18 musicians". --------------------------------------- Chris Chovit cho@gomez.jpl.nasa.gov --------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 09:12:42 -0400 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: Chris Chovit Subject: Re: Technohoploops? >(it is possible to connect an infinite number of pedal boards or single >overdub pedals to the ECHOPLEX, so you can operate it from various points >on the stage!) I have been using one footpedal to control multiple echoplexes, using an A/B box (or an A/B/C box for three units). I imagine that this would work just as well to have multiple footpedals control one echoplex. THe important thing is that the footpedals are not in the circuit AT THE SAME TIME. AS you probably know, the footpedal works as a resistor in the circuit, with different resistances corresponding to the different footpedal functions, so I don't think you can have multiple footpedals connected at the same time, without screwing up the resistances. Your idea would be great, using multiple echoplexes, all "brother synced" together! In this case, any one of them could be used to start the first loop. Then, you could jump around stage, adding loops which would be synced to the "master". - Chris --------------------------------------- Chris Chovit cho@gomez.jpl.nasa.gov --------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 10:29:00 -0800 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: kflint@annihilist.com (Kim Flint) Subject: Re: Technohoploops? >>(it is possible to connect an infinite number of pedal boards or single >>overdub pedals to the ECHOPLEX, so you can operate it from various points >>on the stage!) > >I have been using one footpedal to control multiple echoplexes, using an >A/B box (or an A/B/C box for three units). I imagine that this would work >just as well to have multiple footpedals control one echoplex. THe >important thing is that the footpedals are not in the circuit AT THE SAME >TIME. AS you probably know, the footpedal works as a resistor in the >circuit, with different resistances corresponding to the different >footpedal functions, so I don't think you can have multiple footpedals >connected at the same time, without screwing up the resistances. You can have multiple foot switches hooked up, just so long as you don't press multiples switches at the same time. >Your idea would be great, using multiple echoplexes, all "brother synced" >together! In this case, any one of them could be used to start the first >loop. Then, you could jump around stage, adding loops which would be >synced to the "master". > >- Chris Yeah, that's the idea! A big point of the BrotherSync in the echoplex is to do just this, hopefully more people will give it a try! 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: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 10:25:55 -0800 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: kflint@annihilist.com (Kim Flint) Subject: Re: I'm gonna get some >Yes, but wall warts locate the problem of transformer noise *far* >away from the precious signals. So it simplifies design. > >Pat ***SPH >brzrkr@nielsenmedia.com You mean, It simplifies design for people who aren't very good at it. :-) It also makes it easier to deal with regulatory agencies, since the wall wart manufacturer has the responsibility to pass all the requirements for electrical safety. And its usually cheaper than doing your own supply. And it causes great pain and suffering throughout the land..... 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: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 12:17:02 -0500 (CDT) From: Dave Stagner To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com Subject: Re: MacLOOP On Fri, 13 Sep 1996, Matthias wrote: > Can anyone understand why under the zillion models of Apple, there is none > made for the musician, who always was the most faithfull mac client? > It would be very easy to do a 19" rack version with a LCD screen for stage > and a ordinary monitor for home! > All the musicians and studios and probably even some industries would want > that model! I definitely concur. I'm used to seeing PCs in industrial-strength rackmount cases, and it amazes me that the same isn't available for the Macintosh. Maybe one of the new clone makers will pursue this market. Reliable rackmount VGA monitors are available, as are robust pointing devices. All that really needs to change is the case. On the other hand, I don't play live. All I have is a home studio setup. I use a preamp with speaker emulation, and do all my monitoring through headphones or stereo speakers. In such an environment, using a desktop computer is much less of an issue, because it isn't subject to transportation abuse. > Well Dave, if you really do it, I will be very happy! > - One thing would be a shareware version, that does the basic for everyone > to play. Go ahead. Well, if I do this, I'll either give it away, or find some distribution channel to sell it. Those of you in the audio industry, do you think a major vendor might pick up something like this and redistribute it? I'm a programmer by nature, which is the logical complement of marketing. :} > - Another thing would be the soft version of the ECHOPLEX which I could > help with soft modules for the functions. All that rounding and syncing is > nothing easy! How comfortable with C++ are you? :} Yeah, the hard part is going to be dealing with the musical manipulation of the sounds. Digital emulation of analog concepts is always a lot uglier than it looks. > - The real thing would be a HD recording program which works with > integrated loops, so we can record what we loop, loop what we record and > edit the loops we recorded by relooping. This is definitally a comercial > project that has to be done in colaboration with a enterprise that > developped HD recording. Now I'm starting to think. Why would it have to be done in collaboration with an existing company? It seems to me that the existing companies have been practically the enemies of our musical needs... the marketing problems of the Echoplex and Vortex are cases in point. Or maybe the reality is that we're such a tiny subculture that there simply isn't a real market for such tools. :/ But what I'm talking about here is a purely software project. I don't want to build new hardware; I want to take advantage of existing hardware to get it to do what I want. This flies in the face of the electronic music equipment industry. It's all about selling you another rack device. If I want to give myself headaches arguing with managers and marketers that the developers and users know what to build better than they do, I'll just go to work. If I could build something like this and then convince Digidesign or Lexicon or whomever to distribute it for me and pay me royalties, all well and good. But mostly, I'm doing this so I can make the music that's in my head, struggling to get out. :} > >What about the user interface? > > A MIDI Pedal board with "volume" controller input for the FeedBack and > maybe other parameters. Controllers should be virtual and arbitrary. There are basically two classes of controllers - on/off switches and continuous controllers. Any given software function should need one or the other. Users should be able to arbitrarily assign controllers to functions. For example, you might want to control feedback via a footpedal, or via an onscreen fader controlled by the mouse. That's the problem with dedicated hardware... it ties you to specific input devices and limits your controls. All the physical controllers we need... expression pedals, footswitches, faders... are available on the open market from specialized vendors, with nothing more than a MIDI port needed to use them. So why invest effort reinventing the wheel, at least at this point? > There is a lot to do! > Lets loop a bit first... > > Matthias An interesting aside... do you think of your looping device(s) as an effect, or as an instrument? For me, the JamMan and Vortex are instruments in and of themselves, not just processing for my guitar. They're just instruments that need an outside tone source. -dave By "beauty," I mean that which seems complete. Obversely, that the incomplete, or the mutilated, is the ugly. Venus De Milo. To a child she is ugly. /* dstagner@icarus.leepfrog.com */ -Charles Fort /* http://www.leepfrog.com/~dstagner */ Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 19:06:40 -0300 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: matthias@bahianet.com.br (Matthias) Subject: VHS HiFi Todd Madson wrote: >By the way, did I tell you that I store loops on VHS Hi-Fi videocassettes >because >DATs are a bit steep for me? It works, too. You just need a decent VCR >without the >typical compression most of them have (i.e. you get what you pay for, the >better >ones are pretty crystalline sounding...) I did that for a while, before DAT became available, but after a few months I heard a noise of the head frequency on the tapes, getting stronger. Maybe I had a bad machine? Or it is not serious really? Matthias To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: ToddM@LaserMaster.Com Date: 13 Sep 1996 17:49:45CST6CDT Subject: Matthias: >>By the way, did I tell you that I store loops on VHS Hi-Fi videocassettes >> because DATs are a bit steep for me? It works, too. You just need a decent >> VCR without the typical compression most of them have (i.e. you get what you >> pay for, the better ones are pretty crystalline sounding...) > I did that for a while, before DAT became available, but after a few months > I heard a noise of the head frequency on the tapes, getting stronger. Very odd - I've never heard this before. I actually also use the tapes at parties. I'll do a tape for a theme (i.e. 8 hours of christmas music that never repeats, 8 hours of scary music for halloween, 8 hours of space music for those nights when nothing else is happening). What about eight hours of loops? Wow, set it to self-regenerate and just have a hypnotic trance session (like Michael Hoenig's "Departure from the Northern Wasteland", that's another good hypnotic one with Lutz Ulbricht of Ashra and Agitation Free fame (as well as Micky Duwe from the latter)). > Maybe I had a bad machine? Or it is not serious really? I'm thinking that's what's happening here, either that or you overdrove the signal so that it distorted in some way or maybe the tape wasn't up to it. You have to use high quality tapes. I'd get your deck checked out. Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 19:06:45 -0300 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: matthias@bahianet.com.br (Matthias) Subject: Re: A BAND of loopers! studio seventeen productions wrote: >I recorded and performed for >five years creating live in-the-moment loops, Bryan looping drum machine and >synth with a JamMan and a 16-second delay and myself on energy bow and >guitar & synth with the setup noted above. > >A BAND of loopers as it were! Gee, what an old dream! I never really managed. How did you sync the stuff? Did you use miked instruments, too? Matthias Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 19:06:49 -0300 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: matthias@bahianet.com.br (Matthias) Subject: techniques and tricks >I also want to do a section of my favorite echoplex techniques >and tricks. Most people who own them have only touched the surface of what >they are capable of. Usually a few examples of the interesting techniques >possible with the deeper functions really opens the creative floodgates. Yep, the most interesting for my taste, because it prevents from really copying the "stars", but gives new touches for each to find better HIS thing, which brings more for the player and for the listeners. How about posting the "playing hints" chapter of the LOOP delay manual? Someone could improve the language maybe... You have that? Matthias Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 19:07:47 -0300 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: matthias@bahianet.com.br (Matthias) Subject: Re: Unidentified subject! Ray Peck said: >I have a recording, which I made myself, of Eno discussing "It's Gonna >Rain", and explaining that that's where he got the idea, which was >passed on to Fripp. What means "the idea" in this case? When I was about 8 years old, I "discovered" the capability of fathers tape machine to create echoes. I had a great shock, in fact, because it was an increasing one. But I did not create music on it, then. Like so many... I think its even hard to discover the step from the echo to the loop. I certainly was influenced a lot by Pink Floyd that used echo as rithmic base, and so was Eno, maybe... So your recording is very interesting. Would you mind to write down the dedicated part so we can post it? Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 19:06:53 -0300 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: matthias@bahianet.com.br (Matthias) Subject: Re: Unidentified subject! >At first, I was upset that I couldn't "edit" >or "save" my loop with the jam man -- but I have found that this has freed >me up: I'm not concerned about getting it "just right." I just play! I >have had a lot of fun with this approach, especially when there is no-one >around to jam with. That was very much the intention of the LOOP delay: The more you give away (by switching it of), the more you receive next time (by inspiration). >However, I've also created some loops, that I enjoyed >so much, it was rather painful to erase. Put them on tape and listen to them. You learn without noticing. >I am interested in learning some of the techniques people are using to >save, and possibly edit loops, after the fact. I have a Macintosh -- are >there some good (and inexpensive) digital editors out there for the Mac? I use DECK by MakroMedia (OSC, really). There are a lot of bugs in it, but you can do nice cross fades and its very cheap compared to its complexity. Matthias Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 19:06:58 -0300 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: matthias@bahianet.com.br (Matthias) Subject: Re: Essential loop recordings Kevin Holm-Hudson wrote: >Is there room on this list for looping not supported by technology? I'm >thinking for example of Erik Satie's _Vexations_ (a slow piano phrase >repeated 840 times--taking some 17 hours; I participated in a group >performance of this in the early 80s) and Terry Riley's seminal _In C_, >which certainly involves looping although manually played. Shure! I think the crystalization point is not technology, but REPETITIVE HAPPENINGS How we do them and what they do to us - including consideration of what goes on in the brain and such. I proposed that LOOP GROOP in the first LOOP delay folder, but I did not know about the Internet then, and it took Kim to do it... >Glad to see this list is up and running so quickly! Its absolutely amazing Matthias Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 19:07:52 -0300 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: matthias@bahianet.com.br (Matthias) Subject: Re: Hello and such Are you still under "Hello and such" ?? >One thing that concerns me, design wise, is the real-time performance of >the mac/pc while its handling lots of I/O, audio processing, and disk >accesses. The reaction time is critical in looping, and desktop os's are >not designed for this. True problem. No time to read a block first from the HD. >This is a key reason why I'm much more interested in designing the ultimate >looper as rack gear specifically designed for these tasks. Then you have >much more control over the real time performance, and can optimize busses >for good audio/dsp performance. And you can include the appropriate I/O to >meet looping needs, have very good quality audio, professional jacks, a >rugged chassis, etc. Also, it would be a simple matter to include >networking interfaces to hook it up to your pc for expanded control >interfaces. I think this can be done at a reasonable cost, easily in line >with what other quality audio processors cost. And a SCSI port to save the loops? Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 19:07:33 -0300 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: matthias@bahianet.com.br (Matthias) Subject: Re: Hello and such Kim, animated: >>MacLoop! Matthias has been evangalizing for this idea for ages. Somebody >>definitely has to do it. A protools plug in and a standalone would be my >>choice. then Ray Peck cooled down: >Way too expensive. I've been thinking more along the lines of Deck or >Logic Audio. The machines are getting fast enough that one doesn't >necessarily need to drop $10k on ProTools hardware. If people balk at >$900 for an Echoplex, do you think they're gonna drop $15k for a >machine and ProTools?!? > >BTW, Bias Peak on the Mac has some "automatically loop this think I'm >recording" features built in. It's a shame that they only support two >stereo tracks. Matthias warms up: The idea would be, that any looper could step into a professional studio and play with the features he is used to, only that the recording goes on a HD and with all layers separate so editing and mixing is possible. Without this, there never will be serious loop music CD products on the market! In other words, if there are enough of us coming out of the kitchen (someone mentioned something likely?), all studios will buy the Loop Plug In to serve us... Sure we need a cheaper version for everyone to fool around at home. How does that "automatically loop this think I'm recording" feature work? Sounds interesting! Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 19:07:04 -0300 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: matthias@bahianet.com.br (Matthias) Subject: FeedBack / Kids Dave Stagner wrote: >Here's a technique I use with the JamMan to get a more flexible, >improvisational feel from it. When I first got it, I tended to use it to >start a loop, then punch in more layers. But what I found was that >things just got bigger and louder and bigger and louder. It had a very >one-way dynamic. Now, rather than using the looping functions, I usually >prefer to just use its delay function. There are 16 delay feedback >levels, controlled by the knob on the front. Turn the feedback up high >and start looping. At 16, you effectively have infinite repeat. As >things build, you can turn the feedback down and let a loop fade, then >turn it back up and add more to the loop while the older material floats >in the background. This makes for a much more dynamic and rewarding >looping improv, I think. VERY important, this discovery, at least for me looping started when I connected a volume pedal into the FeedBack loop of a Roland 3000 delay. That is why we spend about one third of the processor power in the Echoplex for the 256 step glitch free FeedBack control. So please connect a pedal to it! >I just have two problems now... first, I don't get to do nearly enough >looping. I don't have a studio space safe from my two toddler children, >and they like to play with knobs altogether too much. The only way I can >play is to go through my long setup process after the kids go to bed, and >tear it apart before they get up in the morning. Hang it all up to the ceiling and just connect the instrument and pedal at night! (well, I have no kids, just cats...) >Second, I'm primarily an acoustic guitarist, not electric. I don't play >electric much and I'm not really comfortable on it. Hopefully, I'll be >getting a new acoustic with a pickup soon, and I'll see how that works as >a tone source. I rather like the idea of sending the warm, woody sound >of an acoustic guitar through my effects and seeing what comes out! Its amazing how many of the loopers play accoustic guitar. Did you try with a microphone and headphones? Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 20:47:58 -0300 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: matthias@bahianet.com.br (Matthias) Subject: multiple loops (was Re: Hello and such) Chris wrote: >I have been doing something like this using multiple echolplexes, connected >via the brother sync. I use one echoplex to create a "fundamental unit" >loop. Then, I create loops on additional echoplexes, which are a multiple >of this fundamental unit. Finally, I can go back to the original unit and >mulitply its length too. Using four echoplexes, for example, I can have >them repeating every 4, 5, 6, and 7 beats, respectively. This makes for >some great entertwining melodies, which don't sound repetitious -- they >sound like they are forever changing. I have done this with two loopers and liked it very much too. It reminded me of someone dancing on a ship that crosses the waves of another ship... >Another trick I like, is to run a loop >through an effect, like a slap back delay, and sending this into another >looper (and another channel). This makes for some "mind-tweaking" sounds. Did not understand this one. The other looper would run at the same loop time? or with such a "integer" relationship of different number of beats? Does it create a "stereo" effect, or what is the tweak about it? Thanks Matthias Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 20:47:52 -0300 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: matthias@bahianet.com.br (Matthias) Subject: Re: Technohoploops? >>(it is possible to connect an infinite number of pedal boards or single >>overdub pedals to the ECHOPLEX, so you can operate it from various points >>on the stage!) > >I have been using one footpedal to control multiple echoplexes, using an >A/B box (or an A/B/C box for three units). I imagine that this would work >just as well to have multiple footpedals control one echoplex. THe >important thing is that the footpedals are not in the circuit AT THE SAME >TIME. AS you probably know, the footpedal works as a resistor in the >circuit, with different resistances corresponding to the different >footpedal functions, so I don't think you can have multiple footpedals >connected at the same time, without screwing up the resistances. Sisi, thats what I am saying: You CAN use the pedals directly in parallel, at the same time, because they are "open" when no switch is pressed. In fact, the front pannel keys and the foot pedal keys are in parallel, too. Even if you press two switches at the time, the software will hold it, as it does if you press two keys on the same pedal board (yes, that was a hard one to do: you can even hold Overdub and do Multiply-Record to correct loop time, and you are back in Overdub until you release it! Kim gave the idea, but I had to put it together %-/ ). Did you manage to control simultaneously two machines from one pedal board? I have done it, it takes an opertional amplifier. But its not acurate. Use MIDI. >Your idea would be great, using multiple echoplexes, all "brother synced" >together! In this case, any one of them could be used to start the first >loop. Then, you could jump around stage, adding loops which would be >synced to the "master". You are probably the one with the most Echoplexes in the world (I have two to make stereo sound and an old one for programming) - so show us what is possible ! In my vision of this stage, there was one machine, operated from several points to make the process visible - more interesting than switching on a drum machine program. The second machine for the second musician, at least... Fascinated Matthias Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 17:26:40 -0700 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: studio seventeen productions Subject: Re: A BAND of loopers! At 07:06 PM 9/13/96 -0300, you wrote: MATHIAS NOTED THAT I SAID: >studio seventeen productions wrote: > >>I recorded and performed for >>five years creating live in-the-moment loops, Bryan looping drum machine and >>synth with a JamMan and a 16-second delay and myself on energy bow and >>guitar & synth with the setup noted above. >> >>A BAND of loopers as it were! > >Gee, what an old dream! I never really managed. >How did you sync the stuff? >Did you use miked instruments, too? > >Matthias > > MY REPLY: We made no attempt to sync technology wise. Five years of shared playing experience (we played for two years as an acoustic guitar duo working in the new standard tuning for guitar before we mutated into the electronic/ambient looping band BINDLESTIFF) and empathy did the trick. Most pieces started with one of us and the other could join in: however, at no time were our loops similar in any way, duration wise especially. It just WORKED. The best band I've ever been in, bar none (BINDLESTIFF). Generally, we never used miked instruments (except on some studio-ized overdubbed non-live stuff). Sometimes we started together, and prayed we'd stay in sync. Amazingly, in the main, we did. And if not, kill your loop and restart until you are...not too hard with experience. Our setups are completely different: Bryan prefers REVERBING AND EFFECTING HIS SOUNDS and THEN looping them; I prefer looping them and then "treating them" a la ENO. I've often created a loop, and then made five or ten or twenty different recordings of it using the Digitech TSR-24S processor for different rooms, reversals, etc. The fact that we sounded so different helped, yet we PLAYED "together" even though the setups differ wildly. Please check out some of the BINDLESTIFF tracks on our page (address below) this was a remarkable experience to say the least!!! Or email me for a free catalog. The work with Bindlestiff is some of the most important I've undertaken. It freed me of old standard tuning: it freed me from my perfectionistic overdub-it-till-it's dead habit...and now I create (and destroy) loops as Kim was describing...I've often killed loops that were so beautiful it was painful. But you KNOW you can do it better, later... IF NOT, you record them. Maybe processed several different ways... more on this later! thanks for listening dave at studio seventeen 1734516817345168173451681734516817345168173451681734516817345168173451681734 516817345 lead me in with a count of seventeen... (Mr. Blint, Consequences/Godley & Creme) visit: http:www.adnc.com/web/ambient/index.html seventeen: the ambient music page Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 20:30:27 -0400 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: Chris Chovit Subject: Re: multiple loops I wrote: >>Another trick I like, is to run a loop >>through an effect, like a slap back delay, and sending this into another >>looper (and another channel). This makes for some "mind-tweaking" sounds. Matthias replied: >Did not understand this one. The other looper would run at the same loop >time? or with such a "integer" relationship of different number of beats? >Does it create a "stereo" effect, or what is the tweak about it? Yes, it creates a stereo effect (or quadrophonic....or octophonic...or..). I'm getting carried away, of course. Let me briefly describe my setup: I use a 4-buss mixer, which has 6 effects loops. All my instruments go into the mixer inputs. 4 of the effects loops are dedicated to 4 Echoplexes. The remaining two effects loops are used for traditional effect processors (TEP's). The outputs of the Echoplexes and the TEP's are all sent back into the mixer inputs, so they can again be sent through the effects loops. Typically, I send each echoplex out a separate buss, and send each channel of the two (stereo) TEP's out its own buss. So, with this setup, I can start with a very simple loop, and create a whole sound space from that single loop -- by effecting the loop, then looping that, then effecting that loop, then looping that.......etc. And, as you suggest, the new loops need not be the same time length, as the original. With enough processing, the new loops need not sound anything like the original! I have started with a drum beat, and used processing (delays, reverbs, harmonizers) to create rich textures! The "tweak" is the way I feel when I send a loop through a short delay (50-100 ms) or even a reverb, and send the effected signal through a separate channel -- ie. the dry signal comes from one side of the room, the dealyed or reverbed signal from the other side. Pink Floyd used this technique -- I think Jimi did too....of course, you don't need a looper to do this -- a TEP with separate outputs would do the trick. The quad setup is just icing, really....doing away with the linear signal flow is the important thing. I can effect the loops & loop the effects, indefintely. Is the looping device an instrument or an effect? Is looping a recording or a performance? It seems to me that the boundaries are dissolving........ - chris --------------------------------------- Chris Chovit cho@gomez.jpl.nasa.gov --------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 21:14:12 -0400 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: Chris Chovit Subject: Re: Technohoploops? Matthias wrote: >Did you manage to control simultaneously two machines from one pedal board? >I have done it, it takes an opertional amplifier. But its not acurate. Use >MIDI. No, I haven't tried to control two machines simultaneously. I would like to create a mutiple-unit interface, using Opcode's MAX. I would like to build it in a modular fashion, so as to keep the interface flexible (ie. easy to change/upgrade). I imagine I will start creating basic functions (record, overdub, undo, etc.) which works on multiple units. Then, I can create function sequences -- [for example, one push of a button could start one unit looping, the next push of a button could both: end that loop and start a new one, etc. -- (the Jam Man has this "phrasing" cabability, but it is an "un-undo-able" overdub)] Another capability I would like to have is to be able to switch between loops (within one unit) on multiple units. For example, assume I have two loops in each of 4 units, and all 4 units are currently playing their respective loop #1's. Then, one push of a button could make (up to) all 4 units switch to their loop #2's -- on the beat! In this way, I could create different sections of a "song" (verse/chorus, a/b/c, etc) and be able to switch between them with one push of a button. My goal is to be able to create simple (James-Brown-like) arrangements -- on the fly -- and "orchestrate" them while jamming on top of them. I would appreciate any feedback on this, before I get started. If I am careful, I can create some MAX code that would be both flexible for me, and usable by others. >You are probably the one with the most Echoplexes in the world (I have two >to make stereo sound and an old one for programming) - so show us what is >possible ! With this forum, we can discover the possibilities together! Thanks to Kim for getting the ball rolling! - chris --------------------------------------- Chris Chovit cho@gomez.jpl.nasa.gov --------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 15:33:46 -0300 To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com From: matthias@bahianet.com.br (Matthias) Subject: Re: multiple loops Thank you Chris, for your description! I can kind of imagine the sound now, but we want to really hear it... >The quad setup is just icing, really....doing away with the linear signal >flow is the important thing. I can effect the loops & loop the effects, >indefintely. Is the looping device an instrument or an effect? Is looping >a recording or a performance? It seems to me that the boundaries are >dissolving........ This is a difficult question for all of us, and important when we explain what we use to play a whole orchestra live, in nearly real time (or for the manufacturers and stores: to explain it to customers). It is similar to an effect only in its mechanic and electronic structure. The musical function has nothing of an effect, since it does not alter sound. I call it a RAM recorder, too. Spontaneous sound memory. Sound mirror. But none of the expressions so far is explaining what it does to whom does not know it. Any suggestions?