Loopy Pro: Create music, your way.
What is Loopy Pro? — Loopy Pro is a powerful, flexible, and intuitive live looper, sampler, clip launcher and DAW for iPhone and iPad. At its core, it allows you to record and layer sounds in real-time to create complex musical arrangements. But it doesn’t stop there—Loopy Pro offers advanced tools to customize your workflow, build dynamic performance setups, and create a seamless connection between instruments, effects, and external gear.
Use it for live looping, sequencing, arranging, mixing, and much more. Whether you're a live performer, a producer, or just experimenting with sound, Loopy Pro helps you take control of your creative process.
Download on the App StoreLoopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.
AudioShare web browser bye bye
Many may wonder why the AudioShare bugfix is so late (fixing issues on iPhone 6, etc).
It's because it got stuck in app review. They decided that since AudioShare has a built-in web browser with downloading capability, and since AudioShare is a music-focussed app, and "downloading music from third party sources is forbidden", so it can't be approved.
It doesn't matter that you actually can't download music that is not supposed to be downloadable. For example, a track on SoundCloud (which was their example of "third party sources") can only be downloadable if the author has marked it as such.
Also it doesn't matter if you host your own file on your own web server, etc. The problem is that the browser can download music files, period.
So.. If this feature is important for you, avoid the coming AudioShare bugfix update!
Comments
Thanks for rhe warning.
Just one question: If it was forbidden, it was forbidden since it featured the web browser, isn't? Why right now? (Well two questions, actually).
aww I love the browser in audio share. it's perfect for sampling from you tube, and downloading samples online. Audioshare. please don't remove this feature
I read recently that MP3 files can contain malware. Maybe that's their concern.
How is he meant to not remove it, now that Apple have said they won't approve the app update if it remains?
That's crazy, Then how can they allow any browser at all such as safari or chrome, which can also be used to download music files?
This apple's fallen far from the tree
Wow, that really stinks. I used the web browser to download and unpack zip files of app presets. Boo Apple.
It's funny only a few days ago we were discussing the 'possibility' of an audiobus enabled web browser, Apples 'spy core', may have been secretly hanging around, sorry to hear this news, well one rotten apple....
Actually I don't think Mobile Safari or Chrome can be used to download music files? Only images. Tapping a music file just opens the embedded player for streaming. Otherwise there would be no need for the browser in AudioShare...
But there clearly is a need, but it seems other considerations are prioritized (stopping illegal downloading of music, I guess?)
Apple is screwing themselves over by having us jump through hoops even when we're engaged in legal activity. There are other apps out there with web browsers you can use to download files and then simply use open in to get them into AudioShare. It's a ridiculous waste of our and Apple's time doing reviews with this sort of pseudo law enforcement mentality. Any user with half a brain or knows someone with that much can download the files. Their process frequently seems to have no rhyme or reason behind it.
Problem is "legal activity" isn't going to be universally true in this situation. That would require trusting that all material available for download is "legal", and that's obviously not the case. It sucks what Apple did, but it's easily explicable at the same time. I will avoid this update as long as possible.
By Apples warped logic, if a crazy terrorist constructed a weapon using an iDevice, an illegal activity, would they stop making iDevices just because they may be used for an illegal purpose. The very same logic could be used for 'banning' a multitude of things.
I'd consider that hyperbole. At least in the United States, the amount of people who have been handed their ass for "illegally" downloading music is not insignificant. Apple does a majority of their business in the U.S. currently. Do I think that it sucks? Absolutely. However, I'm not going to pretend to not understand Apple's concern in liability with this situation.
If you really want to complain about this, the better source would be the major labels who are twisting the arm of the U.S. federal govt. into acting like their toadies.
So in the U.S. Apple could be held accountable for 'people' using iDevices to illegally download material/data?
So if I use a browser such as Safari on MY Ipad to play music from a website, run the audio output into my cassette recorder (like many of did in the 70's via FM radio transmissions:), would that be legal? Apple may have to ban Safari.
Pretty sure this is Apple's exact concern. If you're sampling from YouTube, you are violating someone else's copyright.
I've had Audioshare for years now and just learned about the browser feature in the past week or two when Jakob posted instructions for installing his Sunrizer presets. Wasn't sure what else it could even be used for until it was brought up just now.
@j_liljedahl GoodReader still has this functionality. Sunvox allows you to do peer to peer web browsing to download files in that you have to enter the Sunvox web address for your device into the web browser on the other device or computer to transfer the files.
+1
Had to laugh, don't dare use YouTube, have you never watched anything on it, that is of dubious copyright infringement? So Apple should ban YouTube?
iCabMobile browser can download and unzip still at present. BeatTime can do audio and video including U Tube. This stinks.
Not sure if you're serious. I don't make the laws.
I think Apple has been a major player in online music for a number of years. People downloading music files onto their computers or devices doesn't seem like a realistic concern as people seem to stream rather than have a collection of music these days (which is reflected in Apple's forays into creating music streaming services). It seems more of a legacy of the Napster years and the shrinking music retail market.
The idea seems to be don't bother to allow legal downloads of music, just throw the baby out with the bath water by preventing all music downloads except through corporate outlets with their apps. Screw individuals who want to collaborate or just transfer their own music from one device or computer to another. I don't think it's been a coincidence that iTunes and iCloud have been integral to backing up and restoring iOS devices, it's their platform and they want us to go into their store whether we want to buy the music they're peddling or not.
I can understand Apple to a degree(if it's about downloading copyright material?), but, if you didn't want your material to be accessed so easlily, don't put it on YouTube. Simple as that! Even Microsoft are doing this with Windows 10(YouTUbe downloading,/BitTorrents, etc)Restricting the same as Apple. If it happens, & you need to download stuff from the Internet, Apple might encourage people to Jailbreak there devices? There's always a way.
This really sucks big time and it is just plainly an insane move on Apple's part.
I wonder how long the 'other' file-managers get to keep their web-browsing/downloading capabilities?
And how long will we be able to store mp3 or other audio files on our iCloud/DropBox/GoogleDrive accounts?
File Hub (My Go-To file manager for other non-audio files) still support downloading of all file-types, streaming/downloading of movie-files and a host of other features well worth having.
Guess the future install of 'advanced' apps will have to be done by 'side-loading' apps using Xcode but that on other hand requires access to the source code for the app...
rolls eyes
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hyperbole
If someone says that sampling from youtube violates copywrite, and you automatically jump to "Watching anything" on youtube, you really don't have much by way of an honest position in this discussion.
It seems apparent that you don't like copywrite law. I am pretty sure most folks on this forum don't like copywrite law. But that alone does nothing for your argument.
I don't speak of Laws as such, only the thing that binds us, one and all, I speak of developers as well, Terms and Conditions, the law of the land!
I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt and say that the improper placement of a comma changed the entire meaning of the sentence...
"have you never watched anything on it, that is of dubious copyright infringement"
meaning to me: The quality of the content of youtube videos is laughable and thus who would want to enforce a copyright on the videos?
vs.
"have you never watched anything on it that is of dubious copyright infringement"
meaning to me: There's so much copyright infringement going on in the youtube community already, that Apple trying to enforce the subject copyright standard would probably have to ban youtube itself.
Either way, saying "ban youtube" in the context of this argument is stupid, no matter how the sentence is meant to be constructed. The statement they quoted clearly said "sampling" off youtbe, and they spun it into the material being uploaded to youtube. COMPLETELY different processes!
I stand by the word I've used in my previous two posts in this thread...hyperbole.
This is a classical example of "Quilty until Proven Innocent", meaning just because a tool/app can be used for illegal activities it should be banned. Wonder how long it will take for Apple to ban Spotify because it allows download for off-line listening???
For me personally I've only downloaded zip-files(patches and free sample packs) with AudioShare, other files i transfer from computer to AudioShare using WiFi-Drive.
As long as the files are *.zip they are also possible to download with Safari and sent to AudioShare using 'Open In...'.
(That is unless paranoid Apple automatically starts to scan all downloaded *.zip files for suspicious content).
It must be some legal BS behind all this or otherwise we would be very restricted on our desktops too??
(I can imagine it's the record/movie industry since there are gazillion units out there where media can be consumed and someone want's complete control over when and where the content is used).
If Apple really want's to set an example on how not do do business they should ban all apps & file-managers for the iOS that are capable of downloading files from 3rd party source (AudioCopy with the IAP SoundPacks is just one example).
Hopefully this is just a bad dream...
Pinch me, so that I may awaken.
Audioshare is also AB compatible and an IAA host, which Spotify is not. You can't disregard this fact when thinking about why Apple made this decision.
Yes, there is a direct alternative still available (won't name it now in case decision makers could be reading this). I wouldn't be shocked that it is something as unfortunate light bulbs going off in Apple's head, and these alternatives being cutoff in the future. This already happened with Anytune+. But again, AB/IAA is the common factor and that means something...