] [Thread Prev
Re: WHY - multiply?
Cripes...a lot of dicsussion on this! :) I have to say, I weened myself
off of Multply in Mobius recently, and now I'm just looping on additional
tracks because I can achieve the same goal but have more flexibility to
mute, manipulate, or reset individual parts.
Sidenote: I am syncing mobius to Live, but Next Loop is acting really funky.
Anyone doing this with success?
----- Original Message -----
Great to read you chiming in on this, Matthias! I may try answering
those questions for Mobius, since I've been using that looper a lot
over the recent years. If "unrounded multiply" would include closing
Multiply mode by Record it does not work over several tracks (for
parallel loops) in Mobius. But Mobius has another way to achieve the
same result: to apply the Instant Multiply or Instant Divide command
while having activated the Focus Lock for a number of tracks.
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Matthias Grob <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
nice... but the Instant only does factor 2,3,4 not the free chop out I do
with Unround, right?
Correct. It is not equal to Multiply-->Record but rather
complimentary. I particularly appreciate having 3 as an optional
coefficient. The Instant Divide/Multiply is also fun to "abuse", like
for example divide down to a very, very short loop down in granular
undergound and then maybe play melodies with it by speed shifting
until finally go back again along the Undo/Redo path until you are
back at the original loop. One can do this to a parallel loop while an
older loop plays along in a normal way.
so I am even thinking of building the Evoloop without loop saving
I second that decision. Today's world is already full of recording
devices, so there's no need to clutter up a performance instrument
with that function.
hm... its not the same... so save a single loop with another recorder is
less acurate and practical
I must say I love to record with the same laptop I loop on
and I would love to just insert an USB stick into the looper to have the
whole performance, even in a more editable way...
its rather the play back funcion I question. also, it needs more UI to
select the loop than just record
I was thinking more from the customer's point of view. I'd rather pay
for an awesome looper than for a little less awesome looper with a
built-in recording facility.
Greetings from Sweden