] [Thread Prev
Re: Loops looptimes timing and Questions (and loop4)
From: SoundFNR@aol.com <SoundFNR@aol.com>
Date: Friday, February 15, 2002 4:23 AM
Subject: Loops looptimes timing and Questions (and loop4)
>The questions are :
>Once you've set up a loop, in what ways do you alter the timing?
depends on which looper i'm using, usually compressing the loop and adding
sound then opening up the loop to hear the artifacts. On the EDP I use
Insert but as I have the Ins switch at REV, it's usually long presses and
such. In addition I find that multiplying the loop and only adding a bit
more, when not quantised let's me get the loop, well more full.
>How would you want to alter the timing if you could?
see above, if EDP went more time compress (meaning pitch), well then all
bets would be off, eh?
>Do you want to stick to conventional time signatures?
>How do the features of a looping device relate to this?
i'm never sure what i'll play and don't like being told to stick to a
signature I may have no interest in.
>And the Questions relate to:
>Looping in general.
>Looping on the EDP.
>Certain functions of the new Loop4 software for the EDP.
>With some looping devices, this an easy question.
>The loop time always stays the same.
>But with the EDP and Repeater, (others) there exists the
>chance to alter the loop time during performance.
>So in changing the loop length, what happens to the rhythm?
>If we just multiply the length by a whole number of times, the rhythm
>the>same, although the musical structure changes.
>Is the most important thing to "stay in time with a drum machine?"
>(which includes using polyrhythms)
No it is not, i'm not using a drum machine, but I can see the point.
Personally I am a big fan of letting the fingers/feet decide when a loop
should be cut or other.
>How many loopers out there are changing loop length in order to change
I do, but look more to the feel (groove) of the loop. so i'm not counting
but letting my ears dictate when the loop can be, supplemented is the word
that comes to mind. that and padding.
>...and who adds ("Inserts") a sound into a loop without regard for time
>signature? The length of the sound being added to the length of the loop
>without regard to any rigid timing constraint.
that's me, loops are great big open things for me, my signature is my
>For instance, you could be working with a loop of a lyric, and want to
splice >in a word to change the meaning.
>OK, post now gets EDP specific. To make sense of this you need to know
a >loop on the EDP can be made up of a number of equal length segments
>The EDP is possibly the only device with an Insert, so you can splice an
>extra section into the loop. This can be done either in whole numbers of
>Cycles, to stay rigidly in time, or for any time length.
>Do users find that without a drum machine synced, it is hard to make an
>insert that sounds in time, as you need to stay very accurately on the
exact >beats if the end of the Insert is going to match up?
N/A I have never tried synching myself witha drum machine.
>Is it easier to use Record as an alternate ending of Insert, so that the
>timing sounds right, even though you're basically aiming for the
>of regular time?
not really. kind of takes you away from what you were doing in the first
place. at least for me a somewhat different mindset.
>There are similar issues with the EDP Multiply function.
>Its possible to change the loop length either in whole numbers of
Cycles,>or by an arbitrary amount (with an alternate button for ending).
>How do EDP loopers use this ability ?
I go for the arbitrary amount all the way. Using Multiply and splicing off
parts of loops (now cycles), makes for a different approach, kind of like
how many different ways can you make a loop sound.
>LOOP 4 Survey.
>In Loop3, a number of alternate endings to Multply and Insert were given a
>"quick fix", so that they were useable when Quantise=OFF without crashing
>So Multiply ended by Reverse(when Quantise=OFF) would cause the loop to be
>trimmed to a new length.
>Also there are a number of similar functions, all governed by the same
>Insert ended by Reverse
>Insert ended by Multiply
>Now in Loop4 Matthias has worked out how to "properly fix" this, so that
>those functions are "Rounded" . That is , the Multiply or Insert will
>continue until it has completed a whole number of Cycles before
ending.>(this does not effect Multiply>Rec, Insert>Rec)
>This isn't Quantise, (you could always get that behavior when quantised),
>works to keep the Cycle length when Quantise=OFF.
>This is now in the Beta versions of Loop4, but one of the considerations
>"No features may be taken away from loop3 users".
>Are these "functions", or just "emergent artifacts", (a behaviour which
>not intended by the designer).
>Have the EDP Loopers out there become dependant on these?
Yes, well dependent is a heavy word. I have grown quite fond of the
opportunities afforded me by said function er, irregularites. Then again I
am a strong believer in making the most of the gear, so I kinda found these
"functions" quite usable.
>The loop trimming function can still be had if you hit Rec before the end
of >the whole number of cycles.
ahh, that's okay I guess. different mindset but adaptable in my brain.
>One example is the NextLoop>Multiply>Reverse trick.
>which allows you to take out a small section of loop while Reversing
it,>and then to return to the original loop.
>This is still possible under loop4, but is now
>Nextloop>Multiply>Reverse>Record, with an extra button press between the 2
>presses that determine the length of the section. (not as good)
>...but with the new fix, you can end a Multiply and go straight into
Reverse >without loosing the cycle structure of the loop ( just like if you
were using >Quantise)
I actually like that a whole lot!
>So what is the most important:-
>1)keeping a Cycle structure (even when not Quantised)
>2)Being able to to any time change easily??????
not sure I understand the question the way it is posed. I'm all for leaving
the weirder "functions" accessable.
>These questions came up during the Beta testing of Loop4, so Matthias
hinted >that I might send a post to the list to test the water on this one.
like a lot of others, anticipating LOOP4 and many thanks for the updates.
best regards, Pedro Felix - NYC 2002