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
a good way to do it might be an au extension version as a new app with a discounted bundle for existing users.
@Seangarland
multiple instances, appears in-host. If you like those features AUx is the only way to get them.
...and the modality has attracted and continues to attract many talented developers, who are making new extensions, or adding the functionality to existing fx and instruments, while others (MTS, Cubasis, Modstep, AUM, ZMors, for me a hit parade) are enabling their existing hosts to handle those extensions
in other words, counter to some nay-sayers, and in spite of Apples general oddness, AUx is trending. This is itself a third benefit to the consumer because as new AUx stuff arrives, and sells, competition will be stimulated and newer (and better) stuff will keep coming, at least for a bit.
AUx will trend in spite of real number profitability. AUx will trend whether it makes sense business-wise or not. A thing called "other-directedness" is at work. As is the case with the hundreds of amazing free vst available for OSX and Windows, people who code music software aren't always in it for the $...and AUx is just another area where the people who make cool shit just for the sake of making cool shit now have something new to play with. Might be that AUx will trend slowly, and that in itself will increase its appeal. Think slow release of certain specialty movies, or what's called "intermittent reinforcement protocol" in operant conditioning models, which as you behaviorists know, is the most compelling reinforcement protocol of all...
+10
I can only speak for myself. But once AUM was released and Cubasis got AU-Extensions support I wen't on a shopping spree for AU-Extensions and got most of them...
The biggest question is really. Why doesn't AudioBus yet support Audio Unit-Extensions?
It should be a no-brainer really or is this something reserved for AudioBus 3?
I love the way AU-Extensions integrate into apps such as Cubasis, AUM, ModStep and yes even GarageBand.
I got all the AU(x) apps but then realized it was still eight hundred times easier to use my computer to put together a proper song. I just can't finger a DAW, it's just not Who I Am.
I hear that. right now for me GarageBand / iOS has the best compositional work flow and Cubasis has the best mixing workflow. Logic Pro handily beats both but desktop computers with querty keyboards militate against my compositional instincts, but they are fine for mixing.
So Its starting to look like: compose in GB -> iCloud Drive to iMac -> mix in Logic Pro
Hoping that Cubasis reworks compositional workflow and improves MIDI ppq in version 2.0 --- and that the GarageBand iOS team finally decides to allow us to mix.
That is good because I thought you said something like providing AU Extensions is perceived as being from developers who are aware of the trend and keen to oblige. Like only the really cool devs, man!
Apple is doing many things and making lots of money. IOS devices are not made primarily for musicians. That's a tiny segment of users, and Apple devotes a proportionate amount of resources to it.
@sirdavidabraham I can agree with cubasis being a wonderful editor, composition tool, and with a neat layout. Thankfully it came with the Yamaha otherwise I'd never touch it in that price range. Multitrack studio is better at editing really quickly and very efficiently audio. That's it though which is why I like it. It reminds me of my Mac workflow. Record some live instruments, layout some midi, bounce the midi, apply fades and crossfades with a mixer. Add AUM as well and you can master an entire album with those three programs. Multitrack daw is universal as well, looks nice on the iPhone. I bought all these apps like four years ago when a company gave me an iTunes gift card with a 4th gen. Cool to see all these programs grow up, especially audio bus. Audioshare used to have a browser as well.
OT: I'd like to thank Apple for allegedly engaging in ebook price fixing, i just got $80 in amazon credit. Apple is forgiven their AU(X) neglect for two (2) weeks.
It boggles the mind why Apple doesn't promote music/sound creation-related capabilities of IOS, especially the iPad. As a non-musician the only reasons I was drawn into the world of Audiobus, IAA, AUX, AUs, soft synths, Gadget, Arps, etc; was through my own efforts and determination (this forum included). Without that I would have most likely went no further than Garageband.
In a world where it's now increasingly difficult to differentiate yourself among phone and tablet makers they refuse to highlight and focus on one of the few things that could do that. They spend so much of their time and energy on the listening to music thing (with mixed results) while largely ignoring the creation of music potential.
I feel confident that more people would be involved in this if they knew about it.. It's pretty easy to impress people with this stuff and more importantly, get them interested in doing it themselves, when they are exposed to it for a time. I've seen it at parties after showing people something like Gadget or Audiobus with a few synths and effects loaded. It usually ends with, "What do I need to do this?" and/or "That's all done on the iPad???".
I just oon't get Apple sometimes.
I know this for a fact because I have talked to developers who have done this and they've shared this information with me. You can also check Appannie to see what happens when an app adds AU support. Here's how that looks:
No difference at all. If you didn't see the indication of a new version on the x-axis you wouldn't even be able to tell when it happened.
Absolutely not worth it.
Not in a meaningful way.
That's okay, I'm happy to shed some light onto the topic.
So now that you're on board, would you spend money on apps that are in the 20-50$ range, knowing what you're getting?
It's a strategy of Apple. They fear the chance of their apps looking to complex. That's why they hide these features for users who don't already seem to be interested in them. It's a terrible strategy, especially since they want to position the iPad as a 'pro' device.
graph confuses me a bit how many AU's were even out in September of last year? and the only host I recall was Multitrack studio. AU just came to Cubasis and GB in 2016...and if there's going to be a measurable effect it will be starting about now and into the fall of 2016. This is the time to encourage it not vociferously discourage it ☺️
That's a good question. I wouldn't have come to this point without the extremely buyer-friendly pricing we see today. If you'd asked me if I'd spend $30 on an app like Moog 15 a few months ago, I would have said no. At that price I would have thought that it's more for hardcore enthusiasts or actual musicians who's work or performance may benefit from the tool.
Now that I've seen many more apps... it's hard to say. I'm definitely more likely to spend $30 on an app than I was before. But then you have the psychological effect of comparing equally impressive apps selling for much less. Kind of a catch-22 I suppose.
I would agree that low pricing tends to degrade the perception of quality. People tend to think if it's expensive, it must be good and worth the higher cost. And some think that if it's cheap, it must not be impressive. Though, we both know that simply isn't the case. There are apps in the $2-$3 range that are very well designed, fun, useful, maintained, and kept up to date with all the latest protocols like Link, AU, IAA, AB, etc.
With regard to the AU topic of added value... I know in the beginning of my purchase history, and to some extent even now... if the veteran iOS users on this forum and others, who I know have bought pretty much every app there is... if they go nuts for some new AU app, then it influences my purchase decision. And they do tend to go nuts for the AU platform.
Case in point, I already have a few drum/beat oriented apps. In all honesty, more than I really need or even know how to effectively use. I absolutely didn't need another drum-based app. Yet, because many of the die-hard, hardcore app veterans on this board went all ga-ga over Ruismaker. I knew I didn't need it, but because they were all super-excited that it's AU, I bought it begrudgingly. I don't regret it and have now seen the light as to why they were excited about it, but had they not got all excited about the first AU drum synth, I most certainly would NOT have bought it. That's at least one sale that occurred as a direct result of an app being AU.
Take Frekvens recently added AU support for example. I like the app. It's fun, it's lightweight, it's inexpensive, and I like all this developer's other apps. But, I didn't use it all that much. Now, with AU I use it all the time, or at least try it out. And thus are much more inclined to sing it's praises every chance I get. That means adding AU has likely increased word of mouth on this app. And, it implies to the prospective buyer that this dev is on the ball, up to date, and maintaining his apps. That alone resulted in my buying many more of his apps.
This I did not know. If true, it explains a lot.
Are you saying that ongoing revenue stream for apps is insignificant? That seems a little hard to believe, but you would know better than anyone.
So, then the fact that if I (as a new customer) was DAW shopping and saw that Cubasis supports AU Extensions while Auria Pro does not, I would choose Cubasis, is irrelevant. There goes yet another assumption out the window...
Alright, let's have a look at the Frekvens grossing numbers after adding AU Extensions (spoiler: it jumps to rank 35 of the iPad paid charts and then disappears out of the top 200 after another day). If I had to guess then that translates to roughly $100 US of additional revenue for hours of work of reading the AU Extension documentation, testing, most likely buying host apps to run this in... etc.
Not worth it at all. Provably.
I'm not saying that it's worth it... and not entirely disputing anything you've said or now proven. I'm just saying there's got to be more at play here with regard to market growth. I could easily stop buying audio apps in a couple of months and forget about this whole silly obsession I've had for the last few months... and move onto another hobby, or back to my core skills as a photographer. That would be one ios app user out of the pool. But, I don't know at what rate new users are coming on board, and how many leave.
Would you say the potential new user pie is showing significant growth? Stagnated? Or declining?
It's definitely not insigificant. But free updates usually don't make a dent in the download numbers unless either a new market is reached by adding an important feature that people in that market needed before they were going to pay for the app, or the feature is monetised like an in-app-purchase.
For the x-th time... we're not talking about hosts. We're talking about actual Audio Unit Extenions inside of apps. And we're not talking about buying NEW apps that you don't own but the issue of not being able to make sure the existing user base can be monetised when adding this feature.
And it's interesting how you choose Auria vs Cubasis as an example. Auria is made by one guy. Rim Buntias. Cubasis is made by a team at Steinberg, which is owned by Yamaha. Guess which one of the two developers has to be more cautious with what they spend their time on?
I can't say for sure. Some indy developers are struggling, others seem to be doing fine. To me it seems like there are less new apps being launched in the last time but I don't have the numbers to really back this up. It could also be a good thing because we the market of synths and effects (and loopers maybe?) seems to be overcrowded. One important questions for some developers is how to fund ongoing development and maintenance of their apps. Making a new app every now and then isn't the right recipe for all developers though.
Maybe the value proposition of AUv3 encroaches on that of Audiobus? This may explain the dynamic on this Forum
I certainly can claim no expertise on what the financial reality has been so far — I'm only talking from personal belief, nothing more — but I can't help thinking that as time goes on, AU support will come to be a bigger selling point than it apparently is now. It's just going to take time.
Consider that even among us who are already into musicmaking on iOS there is some uncertainty as to the benefits of AU extensions vs. Audiobus and IAA. Yet it's clearly a trend of the future, not a fad. AU specs will improve sooner or later. Alas, probably not sooner, but still.
Those of us who've enjoyed the AUs so far available, can we imagine how we'd feel if the AU for a given app was scrapped and we had to go back to task-switching to use it? At least for my part I know that would be a significant step backwards.
We will have to wait for AB3 to see if AU will render AB obsolete I think
So when I say this has nothing to do with AU Extension hosts (which Audiobus 3 would be one of) because it's not hard to support it as a host. And when I say that there is provably very little revenue to be made by adding AU Extension support to existing instrument /effect apps. And then when we I talk about at the abysmal adoption rate of AU Extensions with apps made by professional full time iOS audio developers...
And then I throw in a little bit of extra info saying that technically Audio Unit Extension support has already been tested in Audiobus 3 but we're unsure if we need to add more to it for it to actually make it more appealing to users and developers.
You take all of that to construct a one liner about how Audiobus 3 be obsolete because... reasons? That's what you make of all of the information that I provide in roughly dozen posts choke full of graphs and detailed information?
Nice troll. You almost had me there.
You don't need any expertise on your own. You could just read my examples and look at the graphs. Or you could ask developers.
Without visibility on the App Store nothing ever happens. And there's not even a way to search for AU Extensions right now and get a full list. Anywhere.
Forgive me if this is a silly idea for whatever technical reasons I'm not aware of (and yes, I'm a little sleep-deprived right now
), but:
Would it be feasible to do AUs that are simply remotes for the standalone apps? That is, the app itself would be running in the background. The AU would be no more than an interface relaying the user's actions to the standalone app. It would do no processing of its own apart from that relaying. Can AUs communicate this way with standalone apps, or if not right now, at least conceivably?
I know this would of course mean no multiple instances, but with many apps that's not a problem. I'm just dreaming of how divine it would be to have an AU window open in AUM to play around with all or at least most features of Patterning, for example, without ever leaving AUM. Or losing any of the power of the app (considering AU specs are tight, based on things said here and elsewhere).
The benefits would include massively less development time (I assume) than for a full AU, since it would only be, indeed, an AU remote for the standalone app.
@Simo: Technically it's feasible. But nobody is going to make it because it's very confusing and it would introduce yet another 'standard' to interact between apps, which would fracture the market even more, even if it gained traction.
Uh, and that's a big distinction? OK. It was just an example of the first (and most expensive) app that came to mind where there was a comparison. The same would be true for any two comparable "actual Audio Unit Extensions inside of Apps".
Dude. I wasn't arguing. Your points were interesting and educational.
It's all just a bunch of armchair quarterbacking anyway. Independent independent devs and larger companies are going to find the path that is sustainable or go find something else to do. I get it. Nothing us existing customers that have already forked over our $4.99 B.S. about here is gonna influence that. The only thing that surprises me is that you have the patience to listen to and respond to so much of it. I would have checked out long ago.
@Sebastian, I did read your posts carefully and am not arguing at all about the current realities. I'm only expressing faith that things will improve. I may be wrong! I'm absolutely not disputing anything you've said, and I apologize if I gave that impression.
I only speak as a lone user who sees the AU experience as a great improvement, and probably even more so with the passage of time. I'm also trying to pledge support for the developers to whom we owe so much, and that's why I expressed the idea that at least I would indeed pay for AU support added to existing apps, if that were possible.
What would that look like? I actually became aware of AudioBus because I was trying to track down why some IAA instruments were fully supported in Cubasis and others not so much. It turned out that these IAA plugins had gotten access to the interface for free" with AudioBus.
If it turns out that AB3 would give developers AUv3 for "free" I'd hope that it would cover as much of the interfaces as possible so that developers can offer users the best integrated experience.