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.
iElectribe Overview (Wall of Text) for Anyone Interested
I've been working with iElectribe all week, as some of you know, after having #$%@'d around with it a little bit here and there for about a year. I posted an overview of it on my blog to sell it to anybody who might still be on the fence about it; to use iElectribe is to love iElectribe. Also, there's a screenshot of iElectribe configured with a... screenshot of Gadget... as its background? Just for some sexy KORG-on-KORG action.
Last week, I posted a similarly exhaustive (and probably exhausting, too, for any potential readers) overview of BeatHawk, so, if you haven't bought that yet, either, or need a reason to dig it up, feel free to have a look.
There's stuff about theory, too. I've been talking a lot about rhythm and genre.
Anyway, have a good one!
Comments
These are some epically detailed write ups. I have my er1 gen one on my desk as we speak and have not gotten ielectribe since I have the hardware and am waiting for it to play well with others. Instead I've been focused on other drum machines that offer different opportunities. I still think elastic comes the closest to the er in terms of pure experimentation but there is just something special about the engine behind the er series. I'll import loops into live and then let it take a shot at turning them into midi, which with all the mangling produces some very complex rhythmic patterns. Those then get layered in with the original audio loop for some wonderful evolving effects, sometimes between traditional kits and a total loss of reality.
Anyhow great read, thanks.
Thanks for sharing
I'm looking forward to the continuation of the rhythm and genre series.
Awesome, iElectribe was the reason i got the iPad 1 back then. Had great fun with it ever since!
Am/was interested in reading an ielectribe diatribe. With so many iOS drum boxes out and about now I think the value of this one got lost in my shuffle. Good effort.
@lieslavish
Thanks for these.
Was particularly glad to hear about the "Cross" (who knew there's FM in this monster?! I guess RTFM...)
Also re: AudioCopy...Beathawk is one reason I've kept Audiocopy on my device, Beathawk is one of the few non Retronyms apps with Audiocopy implementation that actually works, so the Loopmaster sample sets I bought in AC have a fine home in BH...
Both of these reviews are welcomed - thanks for sharing! I've almost bought iElectribe about a dozen times. Now, I may be inclined to actually hit purchase next time it's on sale.
And I like Beathawk lots - seems like there is just so much protential for this app
Will read. I love iElectribe.
and it worked perfectly well. i assume it still does. I couldn't run elastic drums well on my ipad 2 though.
Thanx for this didnt know about the Flutter, i will reinstall iElectribe for try it
I wish the flutter was more predictable with at least a grid pattern that shows selected coordinate. As it is, it is very very hard to reproduce the same pattern so once you move your finger you're going to a random unpredictable place with no easy way to get back.(unless I'm missing something)
Could be fixed easily. My idea was to have a grid and highlight the selected square. The previously selected square could be represented by a dimmer or different color highlight.
Mine has a little grid, but you'd need pixie fingers to make it work. Good idea on your part...
Thanks for the support, guys. I'm very new to the blogging thing and I'm sure that I'll be refining my style for quite some time. For instance, I think that I spent too much time, this week, working on posts and not enough time actually making music, haha. As I work out a balance (and as I decide how much I want to divide my posts up into more manageable pieces, since I know that they're each kind of an investment in time, right now), I really appreciate being made to feel like all of the effort wasn't completely to waste.
I would love to hear more of your impressions of the ER-1. I did research as I worked, and it really seems like most people that bought an Electribe bought the samplers. I'd also love to hear how it compares to iElectribe, if you ever buy it.
On Monday (or, more realistically, Tuesday morning -- the tail end of MY Monday, so to speak) I'll be posting about modes, cadences, and instrumental styles. Thanks for reading; I really appreciate it, since I figure that the posts on theory won't have as much appeal as the ones about software (what little appeal they have), but I've really wanted to write about the more abstract concepts of music that you just can't seem to read anywhere; there's a lot of Music Theory 101 out there about chords and basic, functional harmony, but I think that I have things to say that might be useful to somebody that learns the way that I do.
I didn't really understand how the 'CROSS' feature worked until I wrote this overview, but it's really sick. They could have just used 'CROSS' to bind SYNTH 1 and SYNTH 2 into one FM voice, and it would have been cool. Since both synths are still sequencable separately, though, you only get the FM when they play together, so it's a rhythmic effect and even somewhat emergent, really. You could also just use the same sequence for both Synths to have a single, more consistent FM voice.
I hear you; that's why, in my article, I described Beat Flutter as more of an effect and as a way to add some 'robotic sensibility' to your rhythm, haha; it isn't as good for adding predictable variation in a performance aspect (although you could, in a production aspect, switch back and forth between flutter rhythms by sampling each flutter, which is what I'm doing). One cool thing about flutter that I didn't make terribly clear in my article is that, although flutter does use a "randomizer," it seems to almost completely stop randomizing once you settle on a position -- so, if you keep your finger in place (or use the 'HOLD' feature), it'll play a very stable rhythm. It won't jump around, going crazy with adding and removing parts or skewing parameters, while you're settled on a flutter that you like. But yeah, RETURNING to that exact flutter setting could definitely have been made easier, because the pad is very sensitive.
Oh, I didn't read your article yet @lieslavish
Will get to that soon.
You're right I forgot. So really all that needs to be done is get rid of that big white circle when you touch the grid and replace it with little highlight squares.
As is the grid is completely useless. nice that they put it there (maybe there was another plan for it originally?)
I figured that the grid was just a cosmetic thing, since I don't see anybody memorizing exactly what tiny square they were on even if they could see it under their fingertip (or the big, white circle that you mentioned). What would really help would just be a persistent count of your X,Y value in the upper right of the pad, or something. Some software implementations of the KAOSS PAD in KORG software shows this (but not most of them). I agree that it'd make flutter more useful, and why not? I don't think that KORG is big on adding little things like that to their apps, after the fact, though -- not like a smaller developer.
@lieslavish:Great information here.. Thanks...I enjoyed your write up of Beathawk as well.. I see you prefer it to iSpark. But iSpark has those six sample layers and seems to be laid out even more ergonomically if I'm not mistaken?
Double-posted, somehow. Sorry!
iSpark and BeatHawk aren't really comparable apps; I just mentioned it in my overview because, based on the way that iSpark was marketed (watching their commercials, they seemed to try to make it appear like a sort of beat studio), I expected it to be... well, a competitor to BeatHawk! They have very different purposes and I'm sure that which one you prefer will depend on how you intend to use them.
BeatHawk is a groovebox for making beats -- and, if you're going by the included samples, especially for making Hip-Hop in a variety of sub-genres (although you could definitely expand this with your own samples or IAP). In that context, having access to multiple sample layers isn't really a huge consideration, nor is pad ergonomics. BeatHawk is laid out exactly like an MPC or Maschine, which is what it's replicating.
iSpark is a drum machine with all of its built-in samples geared toward creating EDM rhythms. It's not for making instrumentals -- not for making basslines, not for making melodies -- although you can use it for that, with what I found to be quite a bit of extra effort (in fact, I'm actually just about to make public on my SoundCloud a beat that I made entirely in iSpark).
BeatHawk has very limited FX, since it's not aimed as much at EDM and has more of a bent toward creating full songs. iSpark has one of the most rich implementations of FX that I've seen in an app: two inserts for every single pad, two master FX, and quite a lot of performance FX to play with on top. It seemed to make my iPad Mini Retina have terrible latency issues with about half of those possible effects turned on, but I think that might have been an actual bug and not as much an issue with processing.
If you want an app that you can use to quickly punch out a song concept, BeatHawk is your boy. If you want a drum machine that you can pound out rhythms on and then perform over those rhythms by noodling with FX, I think that you'll like iSpark more. iSpark is a drum machine in the sense that it's like a suped-up, modern 808, or an Aira or something; great for playing and sequencing drums with all kinds of power over sampling and FX for making EDM rhythms. BeatHawk is a drum machine in the sense that the MPC is a drum machine, i.e., it's got all of the makings of a drum machine, but the workflow is conducive to creating full, instrumental "beats."
Hope that helps! Any more questions, feel free to PM me.
[EDIT] In short, iSpark seems more like it's built for a DJ to use to perform in an EDM club, what with the emphasis on FX and short, electronic loops. BeatHawk would not be good for that at all; it's more of a production tool for putting out song demos (or finished songs, if you weren't intending to add a ton of polish, anyway -- it does sound really good, even naked).
Another thing I think is pretty dumb about it is that it unnecessarily covers up the Oscillator controls. I don't see why the grid can't be made to fit right into the 'motion seq' and 'amp' space. It's larger than the current grid area but would ta ke up less space if the huge header bar was removed. Then with larger squares maybe my idea of 2 highlighted squares would work(one shade for current and another for previous) and you could go back and forth between two settings.
Anyway it's pretty hard to get Korg to listen to feedback. Pretty sure I tried.
@lieslavish: Thank you so much! I've never seen a head to head overview/comparison of the two apps like that before. I love Beathawk but from my iPad pro screen I didn't hear to much sonic variation in going to high velocities going from low to high in say, a snare sample. I also checked out your blog. You Bearhawk synopsis was invaluable.. Hat tip....
Beathawk(typo). Also re velocity dynamics , I guess this thing needs a controller of some sort
I'm not sure of what you mean; I'm sorry if I misunderstand. Both BeatHawk and iSpark seem to have pretty decent velocity dynamic control, I think. With iSpark, you can control velocity based on where you touch on the pad (I kind of wish that you could turn this feature off, since I ended up getting some erratic dynamics in my recordings before I realized that I have to be very, very careful of where I touch). In BeatHawk, on the left side of the screen is a button that says "Volume." This will temporarily put your last-selected pad over all sixteen pads, but at different volumes (velocities), with the lower-left corner being the softest and the upper-right corner being the loudest; the same system used in MPC's, which they call "16 levels." The difference in volume between the lowest and the highest is definitely suitable for playing ghost notes.
[EDIT] Of course, unlike in iSpark, samples aren't layered in BeatHawk (although, unlike in iSpark, preset instruments can be multi-sampled over various pitches). That being the case, the only difference that you'll hear in BeatHawk between a low-velocity hit and a high-velocity hit is the volume difference. For most genres, at least in my opinion, it's more than enough; in my mind, multi-layered samples only really have two purposes: when you really, really need to emulate an acoustic kit, say, for hard rock or something, and you don't actually have a drummer, or when you want to use it as a (more dramatic) effect. Then again, my musical background comes from listening to a lot of music that uses classic drum machines and simple samplers, so you could say that I'm used to rhythms sounding somewhat robotic, which is an effect in itself necessary for many genres.
In my opinion, sample layering is a cool feature to have, but I don't think that the dynamics that you get out of it is the sort of thing that every app needs. Just my opinion, though! When I have it (my MPC has it), I don't really use it.
@lieslavish good stuff. I didn't make it all the way through but look forward to doing so. Also, thanks very much for the iElectribe Tuning Guide. (Psst @Matt_Fletcher_2000, you probably wanna see this.)
No, thank you, sir, for the tuning-guide love. I still feel like a fool for spending so much time on that, haha, so I feel better that a few folks find it interesting. At least, that way, I can be a martyr, and is there anything better than that?
Thanks @syrupcore - I had a look and was intrigued. I just love the sound of iElectribe. With this info you could for example, build a sample kit of tonal 'hits' in a particular scale. Could be quite cool.
My personal problem right now is time. I have very little of it. I've just been noodling on Gadget on my iphone recently because it gets the quickest results bar none. But I do so wish Gadget had a better internal synth drum gadget.
This is a fascinating thread. Yeah, I always thought that there were more capable samplers, although the workflow itself on the electribes is worth the price of admission. It's just such a cool device, was then and still is, that gives you a VA engine that wasn't explicitly trying to be something else. From what I've seen and heard the ielectribe comes really close to capturing the essence, although from at least one youtube video, it seems tricky to get the same depth with kick sounds, but getting that kick is not necessarily why you're playing with a VA drum machine anyway, and if you really care, you'll isolate your kick track and process it separately.
Anyhow, here's an instrumental* I did using exclusively the ER-1 hardware as my drum source. I reversed some hits here and there instead of generating white noise for transitions.
https://soundcloud.com/richfrankel/beauty
*thanks to chipspeech for the one vocal line. This includes the synced bass hits around 2:00 and that goofy gunshot sound. All ER-1. Love that thing.
I think the more interesting question is how ielectribe compares directly to ispark, which I did purchase. Unlike what was said above, I don't see ispark as necessarily being geared toward djs performing unless we're saying the same thing about the electribe, which maybe is fair. Even though most of the included kits are sample based (I understand there is a hidden VA layer that hasn't been turned on in the UI yet), ispark is the closest I've gotten to the pure experimentation of the actual electribe hardware for glitch developing sounds. The fact that you get two insert effects per sound plus the macros and instrument parameters on each really allows for some knob tweaking fun and gets you to some really unique sounds no matter what sound you started with. I'd actually be curious to see what building an electribe kit into ispark would be like. The hardest thing to replicate would be the waveform shaper. Anyhow, all this is to say, I'll probably get the ielectribe as soon as it is either universal or part of gadget, but I think for someone looking for this sort of playground, ispark gets you really far with its own distinct sound.
@lieslavish
Ok I read through both of those. Excellent job man! I look forward to reading more. I especially like the comparisons of apps. I don't have beathawk yet but will consider it now. I have imaschine(didn't go for the sequel), gadget, patterning, dm1, elastic, impaktor, others? and was sort of waiting for beatmaker3 to see what they offer expecting it to be killer.
Again thanks for the good reads there!
Very cool beat, and I love the contrast between the electronic sounds, samples, and the acoustic. I also love how pretty and pop-like it becomes at around 2:30, which really turns the unusual into something unusually beautiful, and I love that more than anything in a track; when what is bizarre and fascinating blows up into something that's beautiful in a way that it couldn't have otherwise been if it wasn't bizarre.
I agree that the iElectribe vs iSpark comparison is a much more fair fight than iSpark vs whatever else. I think that you could say, for better or worse (depending on your needs), iSpark is sort of a modernization of the Electribe sensibility; it adds power, but with that added power comes (relative) complexity (Arturia should be commended for iSpark's simplicity, given what it does). I think that it really boils down to whether or not your beat has want for that sort of power, because iElectribe does give you much more immediate, hands-on access to what it has on offer. With iSpark's multiple pages, though, and (pending) modular UI, and automation editing and deeper sequencing options -- not to mention all of the effects -- it's true that you can do more. It can do more than what iElectribe does, but it can't do what iElectribe does in as musical a way as iElectribe does it.
For a lot of styles and rhythmic effects, iSpark is more suitable, but I think that it'd be a waste of its power to try to emulate exactly what iElectribe does, because iElectribe is laid out for a workflow of that purpose and iSpark isn't.
That's what I think, any way!
Thank you, sir! I love the idea of comparing apps, too, and the only reason that I haven't, yet, is because those would be much larger articles, haha. I do intend to do a series of 'app fights' in the future, though, where I compare different apps and describe how I interpret the differences in their purposes, what this does that others don't, etc. I find that sort of thing to be really interesting.
I was thinking more about being able to use the info to play a melodic line (or bass line) on a single track via incoming CCs.