Chris Muir wrote: >Let's say that Brittany Spears decides to get interested >in looping. She is orders of magnitude more popular, and therefore >would bring this technique to the public better than anyone to date. >Does that give her the right to name the technique after herself >(e.g. SpearsScapes, BritanyLoops) and not credit those that came >before her? and- >Yes, but none of the examples that you listed had the hubris, the >arrogance, the gall (mitigated or not) to name a technique after >themselves and obscure the real origins. Hey Gang- It occurs to me that we are defining Frippertronics as being only the physical technique of looping, that the "heartless venal one" was in a sense putting his copyright/trademark on that technique. I always thought it was simply a description for the end product, which wouldn't have existed without the musical input of RF. So I'm not sure if we're talking about arrogance or gall here, perhaps only a showman's clever turn of phrase to satisfy the need for a compelling capsule description of a rather oblique process... Mark P.S. Yes, I am somewhat biased, I saw RF do Frippertronics live at the Mabuhay Gardens (a loop from this show exists as "1989" on Let the Power Fall), and it was powerful musical experience for me. And as wondeful as "1989" still sounds, I wish you (and I!) could here it with the original soloing present. A shame that marvelous night went into the ether...