EQ MAG: Loops

[ernest828]

I was looking forward to reading the current issues of EQ. The idea of using loops interestes me. However, I was once again reminded of why I have lost so much respect for the publication.

 

All loop topics were authored by Craig Anderton, our very talented moderator and the writing was informative but once again I really wish there was some more variety.

 

Surely Craig is not the only one using loops so I would have liked to have read three loop columns by three loop masters.

 

I don`t want to start another EQ argument but this is just another example of the magazine being run by two people: Craig and Mitch. Both are talented and informative but I think we need MORE VARIETY.

Its quite unfortunate.

 

Ernest

[Philip OKeefe]

Craig and Mitch (and John Krogh, who is on tour at the moment, but will be back) are definitely the "backbone" of EQ, but they're not the only people who write for the magazine. David Frangioni, Ethan Winer and yes, even yours truely are all active contributors.

[Gus Lozada]

Here's one more eventual collaborator

 

... well this might not appeal to anyone but I wanted to raise my hand

[Anderton]

<

 

Surely Craig is not the only one using loops so I would have liked to have read three loop columns by three loop masters.>>

 

As you found the articles informative (and I greatly appreciate that you felt that way), I have a simple solution: Just ignore the byline completely, and take the information in the articles for what it's worth. Frankly, the process of optimizing a REX or Acid file is pretty cut and dried; if someone else wrote the article it would likely present pretty much the same information.

 

But you should also know that loop masters are apparently not that easy to find. John Krogh proposed doing an article that collected a bunch of tips and techniques from people who are, as you refer to them, loop masters. Guess what? First, John had a hard time finding people who knew the subject in enough depth. And the few that he did weren't forthcoming with information. You're right, I'm DEFINITELY not the only guy using loops, but it's starting to look like I am the only one willing to give up his "secret techniques." (Which are basically the same as other people's "secret techniques," so who's zoomin' who?)

 

And frankly, if you check out a variety of sample CDs these days that claim to offer "Acidized" or "REXed" loops, it's pretty obvious that a lot of people don't know how to optimize loops. In fact, it's obvious they're CLUELESS, which is one reason why I wrote these articles: So people would learn that loops don't HAVE to sound like garbage when you stretch them more than a few per cent...there are ways to preserve fidelity.

 

Bottom line was there was a huge hole left in the mag when John couldn't get people to come through for his article, and believe me, the dude has connections. We had a choice of leaving the pages blank, which probably would not have endeared us to the readers, or having me fill in for the missing feature at the last minute...which I did.

 

For what it's worth -- and I don't want to sound too arrogant here -- I believe the quality of information contained in the articles was equal to or better than what most other people could have provided on those subjects anyway. I'm pretty sure there are few people who are nuts enough to have put as much effort into studying loops as I have, and certainly, even fewer who have the time, inclination, and/or interest to write up the results of those studies for a magazine. For example, I've never seen anyone mention the situation where the crossfade algorithms in acidized files can cause normalized files that are well below 0 to clip. Even the companies that invented the algorithms to do this kind of stretching weren't aware of this.

 

And actually, I am kind of an authority on the subject. For example, when Sound on Sound wanted to do a major feature article on using loops live, they asked me to write the article because they felt I really knew the subject (they'd also seen my live act, which helped). Music Run (France) and Keyboards, Recording and Computers (Germany) have also approached me for related articles for the same reasons. Even some companies have wanted me to do acidization or rexing for them because they've found that my files stretch better than theirs. Well, now they can just read the articles, so they won't have to ask any more -- they can just do it themselves.

 

Again, I don't want to sound arrogant, but there just aren't that many people who are authors, musicians, engineers, and producers, which is really the kind of skill set that's needed to write articles like this. Note that people like Phil, Gus, Lee, Ken, Ethan, and others here who have written for EQ have the same skill set. But it's not that common, which is why we're so friggin' grateful when a freelancer comes through for us (like all the people mentioned above have, in spades).

 

As I said in a previous post, we are ramping up our stable of freelancers, but also remember that there's significant latency. We started designing the July issue in April, and you won't see the additional freelancers start to come on board until September. In fact, I won't be writing a single feature for that issue. And let me tell you, I could use a break! You have no idea how long it took me to put those three looping articles together, let alone the Steve Winwood interview and the complete guide to ReWire, both of which are coming up in the August issue.

[boosh]

AnyBody called for a "loop Master" Just ask and I'll answer.

[urk10]

Sounds really cool actually,

 

I gotta get that EQ mag!

 

 

Thanks Craig!

[tradivoro]

First, I want to say, those loop articles were great, and extremely informative, and for a guy that rarely uses loops, it showed me that there are areas where I could be using this...

 

As for the other missing loop masters writers, one of main problems with these types of folks, whether they excel at loops or whatever, is that they're not very articulate or process oriented..

 

A lot of times in the past I've worked with these types, they do great work, but when you ask them a question as to how they did that, they answer, "uh, I kinda, go with the groove and the feeling and do my thing"... Words to that effect... Which is great for them, but not very informative or educational..

 

Hence, in my opinion, the lack of articles from the "loop masters" or masters of other self taught disciplines... They just can't get a process down from point a to g in writing...

[ernest828]

Again, I don't want to sound arrogant, but there just aren't that many people who are authors, musicians, engineers, and producers, which is really the kind of skill set that's needed to write articles like this.

Craig-I completely agree with you. I know you are a rare breed. Your writing is excellent. I also didn`t know that John was asking around to get outside input which has been my gripe.

 

As I said above, the articles were informative and I learned a heck of alot, I just wanted to hear what other people were doing with loops but I now see (and I`m not surprised) that not many are willing or able to articulate as well as you what exactly they do.

 

I`m looking forward to hearing other peoples input in future issues.

 

Speaking of loops...I would love to hear what you could do to one of my songs.

 

Ernest

[djwayne]

Craig, I just recently started working with loops and am really impressed with the possibilities. I purchased the "Alma Flamenco" loop cd from Big Fish Audio and have done a little with Adobe Audition's Loopology loop package. I'll have to check out the article. In the meantime, you can hear a sample of the Flamenco Loops at this link..look for the file "Flamenco Loop".

 

http://f2.pg.briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/djwayne2000@sbcglobal.net/lst?.dir=/&.view=l

 

I used to work a lot with loops with Opcode's Vision porgram, making my own loops from various sampled sounds and sequenced patterns.

[Lee Flier]

Hmm... well I am about the furthest thing from a looper as many of you know. But if I were interested in that, and I saw an EQ issue with a big series of articles about loops written entirely by Craig Anderton, I'd be jumping up and down for joy. Seems to me he is THE MAN when it comes to that subject.

[Anderton]

Ernest, thanks very much for your gracious response. Now as to..

 

<>

 

That would be really cool!! Send me some tracks, I bet this could be a really fun project to do an Ernest remix.

 

Warning: The experience may get you seriously into loops. Hearing some of my songs remixed blew my mind. I will make you sign a release saying it is NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY if you go out and buy and MPC groove box .

 

Just email me and we'll set up the logistics.

[halfguard]

i kinda thought the opposite. i was in borders picking up a book i ordered (art of remixing, by eric hawkins, which is pretty good.)and i happend to go by the mag section. i dont usually buy to many mags anymore. however, eq was right in front, i saw the word loops. went to it, saw it was by anderton, bought it without hesitation. im glad i did.

[linwood]

WOW, Craig you are too kind!! (Ernest, don't let him get away.) I think it's great that someone like you would take the time to "open a door" for a stranger.That's a fantastic offer.

[Jeebus]

Originally posted by Lee Flier:

Hmm... well I am about the furthest thing from a looper as many of you know. But if I were interested in that, and I saw an EQ issue with a big series of articles about loops written entirely by Craig Anderton, I'd be jumping up and down for joy. Seems to me he is THE MAN when it comes to that subject.

So Lee, what does Craig's asshole taste like? I know you mean to vouch for the guy, but I didn't see anyone here questioning his knowledge of loops. Sorry, but this post just comes across a little TOO enthusiastic for someone not even interested in the topic of discussion.

[Anderton]

No one was questioning my knowledge of loops, and Ernest said he even found the articles interesting. But he also didn't like that I wrote all the articles. What I believe Lee was saying was that she would consider it a plus that I wrote the articles. Someone else posted similar sentiments in this thread.

 

It's important to remember that writing articles for EQ isn't just a passion with me, it's a job and one that I take seriously. So I'm very glad when people like my articles because if they didn't, well, there wouldn't be much reason for the magazine to keep me around. As you've probably figured out, I wasn't hired for my youthful figure or good looks .

[Anderton]

<>

 

Ernest isn't a stranger, he's been on these forums for some time and contributed a lot. Yes, we disagree about some things and he gives me a hard time but you know what? All his comments stem from the fact that he actually gives a damn. That goes a long way for me. Besides, I bet it would be fun to do a remix of one of this tunes. I'm not just doing this out of the kindness of my heart, but because I'd enjoy it and frankly, I think Ernest would too.

 

And I always dig inter-forum collaboration.

[nursers]

Originally posted by Anderton:

No one was questioning my knowledge of loops, and Ernest said he even found the articles interesting. But he also didn't like that I wrote all the articles. What I believe Lee was saying was that she would consider it a plus that I wrote the articles. Someone else posted similar sentiments in this thread.

 

It's important to remember that writing articles for EQ isn't just a passion with me, it's a job and one that I take seriously. So I'm very glad when people like my articles because if they didn't, well, there wouldn't be much reason for the magazine to keep me around. As you've probably figured out, I wasn't hired for my youthful figure or good looks .

I can vouch for the 'it's a job' line. I got my rocks off writing my first couple of features, but 2 years later it's definitely a job

[Geoff Grace]

Originally posted by Anderton:

Ernest said he even found the articles interesting. But he also didn't like that I wrote all the articles.

Haven't you answered similar opinions of his before when discussing other issues of EQ?

 

Are you two stuck in a... ahem... LOOP?

 

 

Best,

 

Geoff

[Alndln]

Jeebus,next time try and show a little class and restraint if something annoys you,otherwise we digress into something not becoming of musical adults.Leave that for trolls.Peace.

[ernest828]

Haven't you answered similar opinions of his before when discussing other issues of EQ? Are you two stuck in a... ahem... LOOP?

Good observation. Craig is correct in that I do care about EQ, EM and Mix even though I have no financial involvement. All of these publications are monthly reads for me and I look forward to them but as I have stated here before I have noticed lots of change in EQ and was not crazy with the direction.

 

I have learned so much from these mags in the past 10 years and that is why I care about their direction. Obviously alot has changed in the past 10 years recording wise and sometimes I forget that.

 

Craig most likely has a better grip on where EQ needs to go and I respect that. I am glad to hear that future issues of EQ will have more contributors. That was my gripe.

 

Ernest

[djwayne]

I read a couple of the Loop articles online at their website, and found them to be very informative. Good tips, and right in sync with what's happenin' lately with music production.

[Anderton]

<>

 

Well I'd like to think so, but Mitch and I are constantly discussing where to go next, and we spend a LOT of time listening to others' opinions. That's why the feedback here is so useful to us. Of course, we understand that no matter what subjects we cover, some will appeal to some readers and not others. We actually were quite concerned whether the loops thing would fly or not, but so far, it looks like there is indeed a lot of interest in the subject. But sometimes our ideas tank, too

 

One of the best things about freelancers isn't just that they help reduce our workload a bit, but that they bring ideas about what they think are important into the mix.

 

We're all ears, and pay attention to any and comments we receive about the mag.

[Nawledge]

Craig...?

loops...?

f_ck yeah!

 

hows this for kissin ass jeebus.

you will not find another craig anderton, plain and simple. anybody with his experience and well roundedness is talking sh_t about loops, not talking about the sh_t they can do with them, for

all the bs people talk about loop validity 90 percent of them don't know anything about loops other than you can buy a sample cd of them and the other 9 percent would have to be reincarnated to amass what Craig has in his head, he doesn't look down on anything and oh yes he does know his Sh_t, dude follows no stereo types and is the only person like that that I've ever found in his trade. WITH that much wisdom and knowledge. all the other writers I see are like "I make 80s electronica cause I hate guitar, or I play guitar and rock so hard cause I hate electronic music" but you'll get none of that crap

from Craig, he's like the only Organic Music Journalist I've ever heard of. He is the reason for the diversity on this forum.

[ernest828]

I would love to read about how different convertors and clocks sound. There are so many clocks and convertors out there to choose from I would like to see someone try all the combinations and compare. This would be a major PITA but I have not seen anything like it and I think it would be useful, especially with most studios now in the digital realm. I think this is something most would welcome.

 

Ernest