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.
Comments
I would like to see Apple have more competition. Apple has designed their store with only one aim, to make money for Apple. Fair dues, they are a business, but also I don't see how much longer Apple can expect premium prices for hardware and such a high cut for software. How many other hardware/ software businesses get such high margins from all slices of the pie?
The app store is also really bad at promoting new music software. This I also blame for the sell it cheap at the start response, to try to get up the charts. Without AudioBus forums and the STR guys, I would probably not buy as many apps. I understand most Devs do not have any advertising budget.
Utter Bastards aren't they.
1) a higher profit margin for developers would enable them to make MUCH better apps. Apps that improve Apple's devices.
2) it would hurt Google (and Microsoft), since it would take away one more source of revenue from Google, because Google would have to follow Apple's lead.
3) the amount of money Apple makes with these 30% is insignificant compared to the rest of their revenue. They've dished out 10 billion bucks to developers in 2014 if I'm not mistaken. That means those were about 70% of what users were charged in that year for apps. Laughable in comparison to the rest of Apple's business.
it's really bad for business (Apple's business, third party developers' business and users). Apple's own bottom line would be positively impacted because developers would be able to spend more money on polishing their existing apps or making new ones. Every good app is an advertisement for Apple's hardware it runs on. It makes no sense to collect a tax on free advertisement.
What if developers take to the Synthmaster Player route? Give the app away for free as player/brain/demo etc. but have an online subscription account that we can purchase and port over new downloads via codes. All funds would go straight to the devs and stay within the current App Store guidelines.
Sadly this only works for new content, as far as I can tell. There's a difference between updates that enhance the feature set of an app and content updates that just add a new version of an existing feature (we're mainly talking about new sounds/new effects).
I think the bottom line is that music creation is probably too small a market to drive change at Apple; however, if you combine all of the small niche markets together, that could have a great impact.
The question becomes why would someone want to buy a new iOS device?
1. The software I already have will continue to work.
2. There will be new software developed to take advantage of the new device's capabilities.
3. Other hardware won't satisfy the first two requirements.
When Apple decides developers are just another source of revenue rather than business partners, they undermine the above three points. People will decide they can get a cheaper device from someone else if they believe their niche needs can't be met by Apple anymore. They can shift their niche activities elsewhere or find other things to do. Apple sales will flatten out as the Apple brand no longer stands out because people will feel there is no reason to stick with Apple since their needs and expectations are no longer being fulfilled. On the other hand, this could be as simple as deciding to upgrade less frequently since the new hardware doesn't offer anything they can't already do and may negatively impact what they're already doing.
Apple's doing what's good for Apple. Of course they love it when their customers have access to quality software for a pittance even if most developers don't even break even.
However, when one really thinks about it, buying an iOS app doesn't come with the same benefits as buying a desktop app.
First of all, an iOS app has no trial. Even with all the reviews, videos and screenshots, there's always an amount of uncertainty. And Apple is trying to make it seem like all sales are final and any refunds are awarded only on a case by case basis. In the EU they were obliged to offer no questions asked refunds and they tried to wriggle out of it by popping a message that forced you to agree that sales are final once you download the app. Then they got slapped and removed it.
Secondly, after buying an app, you are dependent on the developer's goodwill in updating and supporting it for free forever, because iOS is quite bad at backwards compatibility and paying for upgrades is not supported.
You are hoping that they won't decide to add IAPs, that Apple won't remove them from the store for some reason and that they can afford to stay afloat. More uncertainty.
Thirdly, iOS apps have fewer features, and are less integrated with one-another especially for power users.
So in the end, those apps are really worth less. Maybe not 0,99 or 4,99, but that's what customers are willing to pay apparently. If you're not happy with that, get better customers on other platforms. iOS by virtue of its huge customer base is full of fools, whiners and cheapskates and they all have an equal voice on the app store.
I'm not sure they do, it's a problem general to modern software and as the AppStore it's the only store that it's really relevant (I'm not sure but it seems like it is), nobody it's changing this model unless Apple do it. Don't see the change coming from google or Microsoft. Also on PCs you can bypass app stores but on mobile it's harder to do.
Ah, that makes sense. I know some of it is in the name of security, but some of it is also apple doing what they do (which they do well) by making the iBook app and iBook store able to link.
However, kindle is also an interesting example, as is all of Amazon, because you can buy music, movies, books, etc on Amazon and then their respective apps will download them directly. Strange that for music creation apps the same isn't allowed.
Anyway, if a great app that's going to be really useful comes out with no sale I will buy it. I'm trying to avoid the "toy" apps these days. By toy, I mean apps that dont need to do what I do but are cool and fun, not a reflection on the quality of the app
@lovedamusic Using the iPad for music's not that cheap, unless you use only a few instruments.
Logic X is 200 EUR and FL Studio Producer is 189 EUR. The iPad by itself will cost you more than that.
I have Logic. It's a miraculous bargain, I think.
I'm just talking about software. The cost of the iPad isn't relevant, but my iMac was a lot more money. A big part of the iPad's appeal for me is that it's mobile. However, I don't think I could get all the versatility and excellent sounding content on the desktop that I have on the iPad for so little money. In fact, I bought a lot of Alchemy content for way less than it cost for the desktop version---I didn't know at the time that it would be included for free someday with Logic. I could get SampleTank and content for much less on the iPad. Is there anything like Gadget or iM1 on desktop for that cheap? MTS is less on the iPad. I could go on... I don't buy lots of apps; just ones I believe I'll use.
You get tons of free software for desktop which are no toys too, like U-he synths, delays, reverbs, midi tools... whatever.
But back to the topic i also don't buy much apps anymore. Nearly no app in the last months. This is my decision because of iOS unstable nature, fast changes, new introduced limits, not much "pro" apps, searching in the huge store sucks.
Just look at the top selling apps and you know where the future is in the app store.
It's with everything. If i must work for less money and other trouble, there is a point where i think if it's worth to go on or should i look somewhere else?!
Apple has a monopol and that is really bad for consumers and developers.
I'm finally out of their game
Why doesn't Itunes have a sub-category for music like games - because Apple doesn't really care, why should when it doesn't earn them anything.
Music apps are very much the poor relation - I know because $10 of sales can put you in the top 100 albeit briefly, this means lots of great apps are not getting purchased, and the itunes model requires low price high-volume - unfortunately I do wonder if the volume just isn't there anymore?
But it's not just money devs slave away on their apps for - I made sure I created something I wanted to use first. It's kept me sane!
No more giving the devs headaches about what's going to be in the app, no more going crazy over wondering when an app is going to arrive etc... this definitely works for me, maybe I'm missing something but it seems so easy like it should already be that way. Maybe it just goes against the ethos of the shroud of mystery that surrounds software development , feature expectations, and release dates but I just wanna make music.
I think that music apps (and perhaps any serious or productive or non-entertainment apps) should be subscription. You pay for the app, but you’re really only buying a year’s use (or something like a year) from whenever you start the payment. If you don’t renew you might end up skipping a year or two (functionality stops and updates cease). But when you decide you do want to use it, you renew and you’re back in, you then get the updated version, and off you go again.
If one or two apps enforced such a subscription model, I’d rebel against it and be quite pissed off about it. But if it were widespread and generally the norm, I think I’d be quite happy to go along with it and accept it as normal.
As I've jumped on the development bandwagon, like Tony I'm focused on producing something first of all that I have an interest in and want to use.
I'm not saying that's true of everyone, but I think it might be a different motivation than the typical game developer who may be thinking of mass sales / low cost profit ahead of other concerns perhaps.
Just $0.02
Along with that, I think that we enjoy the privilege that the music apps we use are often of the highest quality among apps available on the app store, often produced by one-person entities vs. big companies like Korg, Steinberg etc.
As I manage the iPads in Music Education group, I still find music teachers balk at paying more than a couple of dollars for music apps there, and would often not even dream of paying $50 for Auria Pro - or even $20 - or even $10 - or, yes, even $5! That's "too expensive" for them. It's an attitude that's prevalent among many and fostered by the app store prices in general.
I am happy in general to pay the prices we do for music apps on the iPad - although I must say, that I do find those that range above $50 to often price themselves out of even my thinking because they begin to put themselves in the same market (even then still often a factor of 10 less) as desktop applications, and there are many situations at those higher prices I'd elect to buy a larger "more functional" (often) desktop application / VST. That's especially true with music applications that come with large sample libraries such as orchestral applications / VSTs.
Having said that there have been a couple of occasions where I've purchased an app for the iPad then also spent money on a desktop equivalent or companion - like Z3TA+ and Synthmaster (full desktop version). Why? Because I've been so impressed with the iPad version. Not true in every case. I still only have the iPad version of iMS-20 for example; the desktop version does not sound as good in the videos I've seen and comparing the two.
I'd also add though @u0421793 that I strongly dislike the idea of any subscription model where something stops working. I would drop iPad apps in a heartbeat if things went that way. I do not "purchase" (rent) any desktop applications that have started offering such subscription models. Never will. If I have already paid for something that works I expect it to continue working, and I'll pay more to upgrade if I desire to. I have no objection however to a periodic IAP upgrade price as we have for Auria Pro this time out. (The only issue for me with that was the amount - a tad higher than anticipated by many including me - and that only because of end-of-year budgetary constraints in the budget from my music business set aside for apps. I'll upgrade but not just yet).
I think there is good reason to be hopeful that things will stay viable on iOS for music making