Coffeehouse Guitar (was: RC-50 FEEDBACK WORKS)

[mech <mech@m3ch.net>]

Title: Coffeehouse Guitar (was: RC-50 FEEDBACK WORKS)

At 12:32 AM -0400 7/20/06, Jfloridis@aol.com wrote:

> "If you're just a coffeehouse
> guitarist looping a few rhythm chucks
> over which to lay a solo (and this is nothing against coffeehouse
> guitarists -- there are some damn fine ones out there), then a
> looper
> with no feedback is gonna work just fine."
> perhaps it's the just in "just a coffeehouse guitarist..."
> that stings a little.....  : )

Agh!  I hate that little word!!!  I use it far too much -- I usually make it a point to go through and delete as many instances as possible when editing a post -- yet it still comes back to bite me no matter how many times I re-read before hitting send.

Needless to say, that isn't what I meant at all.  How about...

        Change: "If you're just a coffeehouse guitarist looping a few rhythm chucks...",

        to this: "If you're a coffeehouse guitarist just looping a few rhythm chucks...".

Kinda changes the emphasis there.  The latter is actually much closer to what I meant.  Especially since I was really trying to go out of my way *not* to trivialize coffeehouse guitarists, then there I go and put my foot into a different beartrap.  D'oh.

1000 pardons, Effendi!

> as far as feedback with the rc50,
> the detailed descriptions in buzap's postings specifically, i'll have
> to spend some time with that, but i know i don't want to be messing
> with mixers.....that kind of screws the whole point of having
> everything in one unit.

Yeah, I'd generally agree that once a mixer comes into the picture, I find it's easier to toss the dedicated foot pedals.  Then fall back to a portable setup with everything pre-wired into a small rack plus a controller.

And, as Daryll pointed out, Buzap obviously put a lot of time and effort into that write-up, and does deserve a great deal of thanks for going through and documenting the workaround.

        --m.

-- 

_______
"Snakes on a Plane..."