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 Store

Loopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.

Phasemaker: GOING UNIVERSAL!

1…911131415

Comments

  • brambosbrambos

    @u0421793 said:
    What about: keep the envelopes as they are, but add a 'jump back again' counter in which you can select an amount of cycles (or infinite). This jump back again counter would have another parameter other than just how many times to loop, it'd also have a delta parameter which pertains to distance along a curve to extend the end points into.

    If the delta is zero, it only loops the sustain portion (ie, flat line, indistinguishable from just normal sustain with no looping).

    If the delta is the middle value, the loop starts from halfway down the initial decay and ends halfway down the release (which hasn't happened yet, but you get a preview of it here) and then it rubber-bands backwards from the halfway decreased release down point back up through the sustain level (for technically an infinitely small amount of time as it crosses through) and back out to the halfway deflated initial decay point, and then cycles forward again.

    The result is that at zero repeats and zero delta, everything's the same. Max (infinite) repeats and max delta, you've got a wild full-scale-deflection LFO, and in between, there's mild continuum effects.

    Fancy! I had to re-read that twice, but that's a really nice thought.

  • SamuSamu

    @brambos said:

    @Samu said:

    Ok, that makes sense... like a pad/drone mode for extremely long envelopes.

    Or 'longish' sweeps for those Ddddoooooouuuuuugggghhhhh bass sounds :)

    Comprendo. Although you could arguably achieve the same with a Down-ramp-LFO B)

    So how can I 'replace' the operator envelope with a single-cycle ramp up/down LFO that also respects the operator volume? ;)

    Other 'classic' parameters to consider would be Note to Envelope scaling.

    I know, I know the intention of Phasemaker is not to replicate classic FM-hardware.
    (I'm still hoping Yamaha will come to their senses and add IAP to FM Essentials).

  • brambosbrambos

    @Samu said:

    Comprendo. Although you could arguably achieve the same with a Down-ramp-LFO B)

    So how can I 'replace' the operator envelope with a single-cycle ramp up/down LFO that also respects the operator volume? ;)

    Single-cycle will be tricky, but you can simply make sure there's a note-off before the LFO cycle restarts. And you can essentially bypass the envelope by setting the decay to 0 and the sustain to 127.

  • SamuSamu

    @brambos said:

    @Samu said:

    Comprendo. Although you could arguably achieve the same with a Down-ramp-LFO B)

    So how can I 'replace' the operator envelope with a single-cycle ramp up/down LFO that also respects the operator volume? ;)

    Single-cycle will be tricky, but you can simply make sure there's a note-off before the LFO cycle restarts. And you can essentially bypass the envelope by setting the decay to 0 and the sustain to 127.

    Here's one of the example 'sounds' in the beginning of the tune that will benefit from longer envelopes.
    It's simple 2OP fm with slight feedback on the 2nd operator and a longish envelope :)

    (Yeah, I'm busted I love space-synth too much).

  • theconnactictheconnactic
    edited October 2016

    Hey, folks: here's my first attempt on using Phasemaker extensively in a song. All drums except toms and crashes, all synth parts and the bass where programmed by me with Phasemaker and recorded and arranged with Auria Pro. The guitars were recorded live. Enjoy!
    Dimitri.

  • oat_phippsoat_phipps

    @Samu said:

    @brambos said:

    @Samu said:

    Comprendo. Although you could arguably achieve the same with a Down-ramp-LFO B)

    So how can I 'replace' the operator envelope with a single-cycle ramp up/down LFO that also respects the operator volume? ;)

    Single-cycle will be tricky, but you can simply make sure there's a note-off before the LFO cycle restarts. And you can essentially bypass the envelope by setting the decay to 0 and the sustain to 127.

    Here's one of the example 'sounds' in the beginning of the tune that will benefit from longer envelopes.
    It's simple 2OP fm with slight feedback on the 2nd operator and a longish envelope :)

    (Yeah, I'm busted I love space-synth too much).

    Oh yeah that's the stuff

  • JohnnyGoodyearJohnnyGoodyear

    @u0421793 said:
    What about: keep the envelopes as they are, but add a 'jump back again' counter in which you can select an amount of cycles (or infinite). This jump back again counter would have another parameter other than just how many times to loop, it'd also have a delta parameter which pertains to distance along a curve to extend the end points into.

    If the delta is zero, it only loops the sustain portion (ie, flat line, indistinguishable from just normal sustain with no looping).

    If the delta is the middle value, the loop starts from halfway down the initial decay and ends halfway down the release (which hasn't happened yet, but you get a preview of it here) and then it rubber-bands backwards from the halfway decreased release down point back up through the sustain level (for technically an infinitely small amount of time as it crosses through) and back out to the halfway deflated initial decay point, and then cycles forward again.

    The result is that at zero repeats and zero delta, everything's the same. Max (infinite) repeats and max delta, you've got a wild full-scale-deflection LFO, and in between, there's mild continuum effects.

    Impressive. Adding this to the Boffin file.

  • Gaia.TreeGaia.Tree

    Very interested in this app, is it tunable to 432hz?

  • wimwim

    Is it just me, or does the Legato seem to be ridiculously slow? No matter how low I dial it, anything above zero takes forever to slide to the next note.

    Other than that, I'm loving this. At first it was just intrigue, and I wasn't getting much out I liked, but after days of not being able to put it down I'm starting to be able to dial things in the direction I want them to go. I just made the best Tuba patch ever. What I'll ever do with a Tuba patch I'll probably never know, but it makes me grin every time I play it. B)

    An option for longer envelopes would be cool too. Maybe an evelope multiplier or something.

  • brambosbrambos

    @wim said:
    Is it just me, or does the Legato seem to be ridiculously slow? No matter how low I dial it, anything above zero takes forever to slide to the next note.

    The legato-knob controls the speed rather than the time - so higher values mean faster legatos. Turn the knob to max for near-instant glides :-)

  • wimwim

    @brambos said:

    @wim said:
    Is it just me, or does the Legato seem to be ridiculously slow? No matter how low I dial it, anything above zero takes forever to slide to the next note.

    The legato-knob controls the speed rather than the time - so higher values mean faster legatos. Turn the knob to max for near-instant glides :-)

    Wow, can't believe I didn't even try that out! I must be getting rusty. Thanks!

    Bass-ackwards and counter-intuitive IMO. If I'm turning "up" the legato, I would expect the legato would increase, not decrease. It's like a volume knob attenuating the volume the more it's turned up.

    And how does it make sense that when it's all the way turned "down" it's "off" but to get to the next closest thing to off, you crank it fully the opposite direction? Sorry my friend, but on this one I just can't follow the logic.

    Not that I really care now that I know, but just sayin' B)

  • srcersrcer

    @theconnactic said:
    Hey, folks: here's my first attempt on using Phasemaker extensively in a song. All drums except toms and crashes, all synth parts and the bass where programmed by me with Phasemaker and recorded and arranged with Auria Pro. The guitars were recorded live. Enjoy!
    Dimitri.

    Like it!

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]

    Off topic, but PhaseMaker has got me programming the Casio CZ app too :)

  • theconnactictheconnactic

    @srcer said:

    @theconnactic said:
    Hey, folks: here's my first attempt on using Phasemaker extensively in a song. All drums except toms and crashes, all synth parts and the bass where programmed by me with Phasemaker and recorded and arranged with Auria Pro. The guitars were recorded live. Enjoy!
    Dimitri.

    Like it!

    Thank you, @srcer!

  • brambosbrambos

    Soon.

  • DeVlaeminckDeVlaeminck

    @brambos said:

    Soon.

    Looks very cool indeed. Looking forward to this.

  • gleandibsongleandibson

    @brambos said:

    Soon.

    This news made my day.

  • wimwim

    :) :) :) :)

    @brambos = o:)

  • johnfromberkeleyjohnfromberkeley

    @brambos said:

    Soon.

    are you on twitter?

  • brambosbrambos

    @johnfromberkeley said:

    Soon.

    are you on twitter?

    I have an account, but I tend to forget about it until I see the red notification bubble on the app's icon. So I'm not particularly active there.

  • johnfromberkeleyjohnfromberkeley

    @brambos said:

    @johnfromberkeley said:

    Soon.

    are you on twitter?

    I have an account, but I tend to forget about it until I see the red notification bubble on the app's icon. So I'm not particularly active there.

    It's hard to say if it would be worth your time. I really like the iOS music ecosystem on twitter, there are a lot of interesting developers, and it is very direct, peer-to-peer communication.

    I'm ~not~ on facebook, so I don't really know the scene there.

    And of course, thanks so much for Phasemaker. I really don't want to get into the esoterics of FM vs PM, but I was curious how you thought about that as you developed PhaseMaker. Louis Gorenfeld and I have talked a good bit about phase modulation in the context of Phase 84 (Digits VST).

    I would be so interested in how you conceived the sound engine and some of the inner workings.

  • brambosbrambos

    @johnfromberkeley said:
    I really don't want to get into the esoterics of FM vs PM, but I was curious how you thought about that as you developed PhaseMaker. Louis Gorenfeld and I have talked a good bit about phase modulation in the context of Phase 84 (Digits VST).

    I would be so interested in how you conceived the sound engine and some of the inner workings.

    Happy to answer any specific questions you have!

    Regarding FM vs. PM. I dabbled with true FM while making Ruismaker FM, which does actual genuine FM synthesis. Phasemaker does Phase Modulation, for a number of reasons:

    • Operator feedback is tricky to implement with FM synthesis
    • With FM, very low frequencies (below the hearing threshold) can still have a huge impact when used as modulators. Even a 0Hz signal (which could appear in a sideband) should be inaudible but will introduce wonky DC shifts, etc.
    • I wanted the behavior of the engine to be similar to what people are used to from the famous FM synths. Predicting how an algorithm will sound is already difficult enough.

    In my opinion true FM synthesis is interesting from a mathematical perspective, but much harder to tame for practical synthesis purposes. And since Phasemaker is an iOS synth and not an academic dissertation I opted for the common PM method.

    In the end it's just a really tiny twist in the basic formulae. Changing my synth engine from PM to FM would be a matter of seconds ;-)

  • SamuSamu

    @brambos said:

    In the end it's just a really tiny twist in the basic formulae. Changing my synth engine from PM to FM would be a matter of seconds ;-)

    Leaking out things like that makes me wish there would be some 'tweak' settings in the preference panel :)

    FM/PM switch, control over 'modulation depth' for wild stuff (I love Stroke Machines 'extreme' settings where the depth is the full audio spectrum or more (Lowest modulation frequency is 0.0319hz and highest 32516hz). Then again I've laltely grown attached to Stroke Machine :D

  • johnfromberkeleyjohnfromberkeley

    @brambos said:

    @johnfromberkeley said:
    I really don't want to get into the esoterics of FM vs PM, but I was curious how you thought about that as you developed PhaseMaker. Louis Gorenfeld and I have talked a good bit about phase modulation in the context of Phase 84 (Digits VST).

    I would be so interested in how you conceived the sound engine and some of the inner workings.

    Happy to answer any specific questions you have!

    Regarding FM vs. PM. I dabbled with true FM while making Ruismaker FM, which does actual genuine FM synthesis. Phasemaker does Phase Modulation, for a number of reasons:

    • Operator feedback is tricky to implement with FM synthesis
    • With FM, very low frequencies (below the hearing threshold) can still have a huge impact when used as modulators. Even a 0Hz signal (which could appear in a sideband) should be inaudible but will introduce wonky DC shifts, etc.
    • I wanted the behavior of the engine to be similar to what people are used to from the famous FM synths. Predicting how an algorithm will sound is already difficult enough.

    In my opinion true FM synthesis is interesting from a mathematical perspective, but much harder to tame for practical synthesis purposes. And since Phasemaker is an iOS synth and not an academic dissertation I opted for the common PM method.

    In the end it's just a really tiny twist in the basic formulae. Changing my synth engine from PM to FM would be a matter of seconds ;-)

    Thanks, that was an awesome explanation.

  • srcersrcer

    @brambos said:

    Soon.

    Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!! :)
    I was hoping your steel reserve on the matter was a signal of a strong hand ;)

  • drelbs23drelbs23

    Nice!

    It always make me happy to see more of these apps supported on iPhone.

  • Matt_Fletcher_2000Matt_Fletcher_2000

    @srcer said:

    @brambos said:

    Soon.

    Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!! :)
    I was hoping your steel reserve on the matter was a signal of a strong hand ;)

    Nice.

    Which host is that running in?

  • gonekrazy3000gonekrazy3000

    @Matt_Fletcher_2000 said:

    @srcer said:

    @brambos said:

    Soon.

    Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!! :)
    I was hoping your steel reserve on the matter was a signal of a strong hand ;)

    Nice.

    Which host is that running in?

    Pretty sure it's the standalone wrapper. Not any host.

  • TarekithTarekith

    I am now very interested in this. Can't wait for the iPhone version. :)

  • brambosbrambos

    @gonekrazy3000 said:

    @Matt_Fletcher_2000 said:
    Which host is that running in?

    Pretty sure it's the standalone wrapper. Not any host.

    It's the standalone wrapper, which is a miniature AU host, so technically you're both correct ;)

Sign In or Register to comment.