[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index][
Thread Index][
Author Index]
RE: Looperlative - Max Time?
Yeah, I'm with you Rick. I always thought my JamMan's
32sec total limit to be more than enough time. When I
found out the Looperlative's specs I felt that they
were pretty generous. I think if you need more than
that you're probably better off with some other sort
of device like a multitrack recorder. If you don't
care about feedback Digital Performer's POLAR is a
great looper that allows as much time as you have ram
for.
Mark
--- "loop.pool" <looppool@cruzio.com> wrote:
> about the Looperlative's maximum recording time,
> mrweasel wrote:
>
> "That's not a lot.
> Any way to upgrade to 512Mb or even 256Mb?"
>
>
> I have to ask: what on earth would you do with
> more than almost
> 1 minute a track in stereo for 8 tracks in a live
> looping situation?
>
> Quite frankly, unless you are laying individual
> percussion sounds for a
> rhythm track,
> how frequently would you even use 8 tracks in a
> single piece of music?
>
> The concept of timbral masking rears it's ugly head
> if you start piling too
> much stuff
> onto a track.
>
> Even if you are running long ambient loops in a
> piece, how many of those
> tracks
> would you run at any given instance?
>
> Unless you are going, purposefully for a muddy mess
> one isn't going to run
> more than
> three or possibly for such tracks at a time. That
> would give you four
> stereo
> tracks at almost two minutes apiece.
>
> You can't even perceive a loop that is two minutes
> long as a loop.
>
> Sorry, but I just had to get that off of my chest.
>
> peevishly, but not without some sense of humor,
> Rick
>
> ps and forgive me, mrweasel, I don't know that
> actual answer to your
> question, but Bob Amstadt, the designer can answer
> it
> at the forum at www.looperlative.com.
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com