AW: Another research paper!

["Rainer Thelonius Balthasar Straschill" <rs@moinlabs.de>]

Hi Darren,

first a hint to "new to this list" persons in general (and to you). We
normally prefer plain text posts (as opposed to HTML content). 

(main part)
although you made use of capital spelling, it was not always clear to me if
you referred to the device or the musician when you mentioned "Looper". I
would suggest that you begin with a clear disambiguation at the beginning
(e.g. "looper" is the device and "Looper" the musician).

(the "critical response" bit)
Although you use the word "often" in your opening sequence in this
paragraph, the remainder does not make that clear. It seems to me that the
message here is that looping technology (as an instrument or as a skill)
becomes only relevant when used live, as using it will give you the same
result as using a multi-track recorder or sequencer.

While this is true for a lot of artists, and most of the looping art could
also be done in very cumbersome ways using a DAW, I see a difference here
between the "looper for multi-part/multi-instrumental" approach and the
"whacky looping", where the looper is not only used to simply play back
parts of the performance as a backdrop for soloing, rather is used to 
create
new sounds and textures (think Andre LaFosse).

For that reason, I would either rephrase that last paragraph to clearly 
make
that destinction, or to drop it completely.

Best,

        Rainer