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
That’s an excellent album, marred only by lack of technology. What they needed was adequate monitoring from the mixing desk. It’s obvious they can’t really hear a good balance between each other and/or themselves, giving the impression that they’re out of time with each other. Also, more technology is required to vary the sounds in more interesting and diverse ways. There’s no fuzz, no delay, no attempt at making the instruments sound any different than they were out of the box, and no vocal treatments at all. All of this could have been done in the late 60s, but, apparently, wasn’t in this case.
Definitely my sort of music (although a little too self-similar or homogenous, compared with, for example, Shonen Knife, (and certainly, the Residents)). I notice that I appear to be listening to the whole album.
Is Eno getting old?
What's the problem with quantisation?
Turn it off if you don't like it.
Don't use undo is the strangest advice I heard all day.
Yeah.... and this is where we are different generations!
I just look into the future, don't care what was in 60' 70' 80' etc.
I mean the beatles and other famous bands were awesome but i don't think they would have been so big in a modern world without modern tools!
I couldn't find a single track from them i like.... Yes, flavour, different generation etc.
But i like Creedence Clearwater Revival f.e.
O.k. What i'm still amazed of are classical masterpieces from Mozart, Bach, Beethoven etc.
Would be interesting what such masters had done with modern tools.
I agree... Sounds a bit like old man scared of future tech!
I want to post something clever here but I guess I just return to my hybrid analog-digital rig to make more music.
(Just for the record: according to the standards of this forum I can be cosidered an old fart who happens to like both worlds.
)
The thing is, I’m increasingly realising that I simply don’t like listening to music made by marketing. Big music.
If an act, a band or an artist, conceives of a need for a song, goes ahead and writes the music and lyrics, plays, sings, records it, creates the cover artwork and names it, and makes it available, that’s a lot of work.
At each stage of the process, the originator can do it, or they can hand pieces of it over to someone else. At that stage, conflicts and arguments and compromises occur, sometimes for the better, but control has definitely been lost.
Some of the more successful acts are almost all the result of decisions of other people. Now I don’t know about everyone else, but I simply don’t trust everyone else to progress a work in the direction I would have conceived of it. Maybe that really wasn’t ever important, but there’s certainly a difference in result.
A lot of successful music that plays by the rules and involves a lot of people is not the same as music entirely governed by one person or group of people with no interference, no compromise, no influence, no competitive performance element or skill and in many cases, no frameworks of accepted wisdom.
Music made by marketing, especially a lot of the corpus of successful music, has every single detail nudged toward best practice by someone perceived to be qualified to make those sorts of decisions.
Actually, let me throw in a parallel. Woody Allen films.
He is still making films now that are what I would regard as ‘small’ films, in that he realises the requirement for the film, what job it should perform, and knows how it can be made. Once the funding is acquired he goes ahead with the process of creating and delivering it.
In reviews, they’re often not rated well. But then, they’re comparing his output (a film) with other more global wider-scoped product such as Star Wars, X-Men and Bourne (also, each, a film).
Woody Allen seems to successfully know how big his audience is (not big, yet not non-existent either) and has scaled his operation quite precisely to match the potential of the product. Now, he’s had decades of experience as a film maker, so certainly knows the language of film, yet he ignores a lot of “best practice” that more corporate interference would have introduced in order to get his output to compete with the reviews of X-men etc.
Exact.... this is how marketing works in the music buisness. I just hear what i like or what my biochemical reactions and my synapsis says i should like. And there are not much commercial songs i really like. There are a few but most of the music i hear doesn´t fit into the commercial area.
We live in a mass market decade and it´s all about marketing rather than creativity these days.
But like i said before, i don´t think that there is a need of musicians out there in some years because a consumer will just choose a mood and get the songs streamed for a few cents (or free).
There will be still live performances and some famous stars who makes big money but the independent musician will loose out. The "app store economy" will take over this for sure.
An awesome non digital way to create music. Looks like Leonardo Da Vinci is reborn as musician.
Analog gear.... eat this!
Interesting article. Most of the points I would make were made above, the main one being, whatever floats your boat, either creating or listening, is good shit.
The basic disconnect under his premise, is that the minute we began to record music, it was being manipulated to make it better. Even if that only involved doing 5 takes, or waiting until everyone wasn't tired or drunk, or their voice wasn't burned out from six months on the road, is manipulating the sound to make it better. And there was lots of overdubbing and splicing going on. And extra guitar and keyboard parts. I started going to concerts in the early 70s, and I'm sure like lots of you, I went to concerts with high expectations from album play, only to be somewhat or completely disappointed. That was music that was recorded entirely analog. Live albums were mostly made up of cuts from different nights on tours.
The second we started to capture it, we started to change it from what it was live.
Overall, I find I'm more or less in agreement with the article. (Although, to be fair, yes, I do use undo, Melodyne and multiple takes
).
I do a good amount of composition using an acoustic guitar or piano (yes, acoustic piano, not synth - though I do that at various synths too). I also create directly and spontaneously on the iPad, often (usually) using just the iPad keyboards (or other interaction mechanisms). Sometimes the performance as a result is less clean and polished than perhaps it could be if I were using an 88-key and hitting undo and redoing takes in a DAW. (Though, I do do that as well as I said).
I think where this article has an appeal to me in terms of iOS music production is that it resonates with me in terms of the immediacy of production on the iPad that I have found so refreshing in terms of creativity. And, yes, I've done less "undo" and correcting on the iPad than on the desktop. What happened happened, and it was music.
Also the "limitations" of using Audiobus has actually pared down the composition and creativity process - stripped away the sophistication (this is not a criticism!) to a point where for me the focus has been on the notes, the melody, the harmony, the rhythm, ths structure of the music - as opposed to "fixing" things.
I'm not a big fan of quantization or of the huge attention to detail - fixing the transients, making sure all the snare hits all sound "just so" etc. etc. ... I like to leave some of the imperfections there. I played it that way, that's the way it was played!
That was the music that came out. Not the production that sanitized it all. Now, I'm not arguing against good signal chain, good musicianship, good mixing, and good use of DAW tools and plugins and good mastering - not at all - but I am in agreement with the idea that we can overdo the "perfectionism" and lose the essence. (And even obscure the essence by doing so).
$0.02
BTW: Listening to that embedded music. Great. Really good. Enjoying it. "Imperfections" (or perhaps musicality
) and all ! (There's even a nicely humming noise floor in places. Kinda "authentic" 
)
The best musical experiences for me have always been from solid performers who know their instruments. These are the musicians whose work will stand the test of time and its these true musicians who will still have a place in music creation in the future. 15 years ago people were excited to see guys using just laptops in live performances clicking a mouse because it was new, now all such 'performances' will get is a face-palm. The press button DJs of today will meet the same fate sooner or later. At the end of the day music is about the human connection and while technologically reliant music is the order of the day now I don't think if will remain so for long. There will be a reaction against that soon enough.
Perhaps it's time to repeat linking this
Haha, so true! There are lot of famous singers i would say they can't sing at all. At least not live.
If post processing kill the main thing the most autentic music would be then a street musicians performance you listen to.
most of the music we listen to is edited like hell,
the recordings of classical music are layered & cut and edited to no end ...
and it still sounds alive
the thing is when I look at what sells I think meh, this is what they talk about?
Its not like these people have this wonderful music that made them famous, they are just famous for being famous and the music is a byproduct.
music still happens infront of the computer
so lets have some computerart now
Think about what a perfectionist like the old classic masters would do if they had post processing tools.... They would never finish a piece and ends up with doing a self lobotomy
But all this things happen with Art too f.e.
I bet my ass on that bach would have loved a sequencer, lol
+1
Bach was a sequencer, a human sequencer.
Think I might prefer to have Brian round for dinner...I also don't believe he falls into the 'old man on the lawn' box. Most certainly paid his visionary dues as regards the combination of music and electricity.
I don't know. I like his old stuff. (music for airports, another green world ...)
His newer stuff isn't that interesting to me.
Same here. His '70s material is untouchable. Cluster & Eno is another great collaboration. I recently picked up his collaboration with Harold Budd — The Pearl (1984). Very enjoyable and dripping in DX7 I believe.
I am fan of Harold Budd
https://johnnygoodyear.wordpress.com/2012/11/16/harold-budd/
@jooga1972 then label me a young fart who likes the best of both worlds.
The positive message from this, for me, is to not let the ability to perfect anything/everything in the digital realm prevent one from achieving the happy accident, the moment that's right even if not accurate, per se.
The disingenuous part is the categorical statement that bad notes were left in great performances, as if punching in didn't exist in the analogue domain and cutting tape with a razor didn't exist as a form of editing.
But, overall, I do think that the thing to take away has less to do with analogue vs. digital and more clinical vs. organic, and that transcends the mechanics and is all about process, constraint and restraint.
To all who are a bit down on Eno's newer (or at least newish) material, can I recommend "Bone Bomb" from "Another Day on Earth"
One of his finest, I think. Released 2005
I'm not labeling anyone, sorry if this is how my comnent occurred to you.
@jooga1972 I was being half way serious my friend
I was just stating I'm a young fart who likes old school and the "new school" techniques.
I'll give Eno the benefit of the doubt on this one (because he's Eno) but he does come off sounding a bit "get off my lawn". This stuff gets washed out in the sands of time.