] [Thread Prev
Re: Why loop?
For me, the answer is multifold:
1) As a guitarist, I can create sounds available no where else. This allows
me to color my more conventional, melodic pieces.
2) I can create unpredictable pieces that let me get so lost in the moment,
it is truely blissful. The improvisational value of looping is amazing. I
can continuously apply sonic layer upon sonic layer or I can stop for a
moment and absorb what I've done and allow my previous input to dictate my
next move. Again, I can get so lost in my looping that it feels like
3) Having played in my fair share of bands, I am finally able to have a
creative outlet where I am self-sufficient. I'm not poo pooing bands. I
enjoy human interaction but right now, I thoroughly enjoy playing solo gigs
with my looping gear, my guitar, and not much else.
From: Morgan Lang <email@example.com>
To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com <Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com>
Date: Sunday, March 28, 1999 8:49 AM
Subject: Why loop?
>Hello, dear Loopers:
>Yes, it's question time!
>I just finished up a piece and was reminded of a question I meant to put
>the list some time ago: why loop? I mean "why" in the fundamental sense of
>addressing what it is about repetition that's good. Is "looping"
>the broader category of "repetition," or is it a particular type or method
>repetition? Aside from the obvious mechanistic differences, are there
>qualitative differences between music that is made by repeating phrases
>ahem, "real" time and music in which repetition is achieved by looping?
>these differences audible?
>I would imagine from the responses to the "things vs. computers" debate
>lots of people use looping devices in order to do solo performances in
>multiple parts can be controlled by the performer. If the "looping vs.
>repetition" question doesn't interest anyone, maybe people could describe
>enabling or limiting aspects of performing solo or in duos as opposed to
>ensemble playing where looping is rendered less necessary.
>Morgan Hamilton Lang.