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
@jn2002dk
I agree whole heartedly, something needs to change. I just see subscriptions as so far from the answer it's unreal
We obviously make presumptions, as both of us admit we do not know exactly the costs involved. I can then only base my observations regarding the current state of the store economy on what I've been told and then base my thoughts on what I would willingly consider an option for paying. Having thought about subscriptions long and hard, I know I would take my music making money elsewhere based on problems I am aware of first hand alone:
Not being able to use lapsed subscriptions until able to access the Internet.
Finding the most need for the software when I don't have the subscription.
Having to keep track of my finances more accurately and making sure some other parties don't
Those are personal issues with subscriptions, yet there are so many more that a large enough movement towards that model would mean myself having to rethink iOS as a suitable platform.
That's fair and i get the reservations. At it's core, renting software sucks and if someone can come up with another solution i'm all ears
In affect we are only leasing our software in reality, yet we have options to freeze our current set up if we want to. I am realistic that I've not paid for my apps to work forever. We both are in agreement though, that something needs to give for iOS music to continue forward
Indeed
Well, I think most of us will agree that today's Appstore is for the most part a dysfunctional economy. From the developer's perspective iOS is like a beautiful city, but if you want to start a business there you quickly find out that none of its residents are willing to pay for bread, groceries or any other goods that are essentially vital to sustain life there. So the entire city is living off a few people willing to work for free*. That's simply not sustainable in the long term.
As I mentioned in another thread: there should be a Pro-Appstore (also to justify the existence of pro-level iOS devices) where a professional tier of iOS software (aimed at musicians, photographers, designers, video editors, illustrators, etc.) is sold at reasonable prices: a balance between what software is really worth to people and what makes life possible for serious developers - rather than just philantropists and a few gold-diggers hoping to create the next Flappy Bird..
*) free, or minimal remuneration for the invested efforts
Here's an idea I would be happy with:
I pay a one off price for an app with a guarantee of free updates for the period of one year. I can then decide at the time if the asked price is what I would consider reasonable. If I want to extend my updates after that first year, I have to pay again or stick with the version I have.
Pros:
I have control of my rig without the problems of it needing to check for subscriptions online.
I can choose what I can afford at the time with knowledge of how long I can expect updates.
No monthly outgoings that will upset my wife
Might help lessen those sales of apps that have little time left
Cons:
Prices may need to rise.
Sales as always will piss as many off as they please.
Devs are entering into a contract of sorts, that they may find difficult to adhere to timely updates.
Yes it has holes, but still some things to ponder.
Also, for fear of hijacking this thread:
I believe we really need to be looking at how best we can all better promote and grow the iOS music making market. Currently the market is very much in advertising and promotion infancy. Yes, we can say it's due to lack of money, but I think thats not the only problem.
I think, devs should start using the free resources available in places like the AudioBus Forums to a greater degree. You have people here willing to give a lot of time and effort. People with good ideas and even some with sound knowledge of markets and finances.
We need to all start thinking outside the box to help maintain, expand and make the future rosey for iOS music making
I've mentioned it a couple times, and someone just eluded to it again in this thread.
I think a separate "Pro-Store" that had the best heavy-hitters in it, and charge a subscription to get access to the pool of apps, like you do with Netflix.
No idea how that could be worked to be usable offline, but Adobe seems to have figured the technical part of that out. And I have no idea how the commissions would be split among the developers fairly. Obviously, some apps are more complex and would require more maintenance, than some easier to maintain FX apps with less complexity. And some more utility apps in the package would be used more, and some apps would be more popular than others, so deciding how to split the pie would be problematic.
However, Netflix seems to have worked it out, ie. I'm sure indie films don't get the same payouts as blockbusters.
With a separate subscription store, the devs could still sell their apps as stand-alone product outside of the subscription package eco-system.
That's about the only way I personally would ever consider any subscription model.
I like the idea of a Pro Store (with a few minor reservations).
Basing any model on Netflix though would need many adjustments for differences, as the products, product maintenance and markets have many areas where they don't correspond at all. For example:
Films have many other areas of income for their makers.
Films do not require the same level of maintenance by individuals.
Netflix is already mass market and while it had to grow, I doubt iOS apps can ever reach that level.
A films worth to Netflix is far easier to work out than a music apps worth (imo).
Apple already takes quite a large percentage. To be interested in this idea, they would want to see more dollar signs
Like it or not it will be with us sooner or later. It's already happening on desktop too Avid Protools and Cakewalks sonar are already on a subscription model.
In the end it may even be a good thing. I will end up with only one or two apps and have to concentrate on getting value out of those compared to the present where I have a dabble in nearly everything but end up getting almost nothing done.
I did notice that this app enumerates some free built-in AU effects that are made by Apple.
I don't like this idea, but.... I do understand the need to go this route. I guess, if this allows me to use Bias FX and a few others for the long run...it would be a good thing. But..........I have so many stinkin apps, it'd be a shame to lay them all to rest.
Good reservations. This is also the path to "tiered services" i.e. non-net neutrality. Cost of entry would be heavier for developers, management of the ecosystem. Also - subscription models imply some customer support, no? Who do I call when something doesn't work correctly with my subscription synth? Would Apple, or the dev be responsible when an update causes an issue and my subscription is down for some time? Cost of overhead... store development - all passed to end-user? Subscription comes with contractual obligations - service agreement, EULA management on global basis etc.
One idea that would work for me - pay for apps as normal, but offer subscription bundles: maybe 10 bucks a month allows me to choose any 10 apps on the store and use them for a month with opportunity to change them up once a each month, and then still be able to purchase them if I want a more "permanent" use.
I like this... but I'd be more "app'd"
to go for a $5/mo for 5 apps rented. But I could see something like this working, especially with the option to buy it outright for as a "permanent" option. Perhaps with a little discount after having essentially already rented it for awhile.
Well, all of this is true today in the realms of pretty much all electronically delivered product. Pop stars are not getting a worthwhile return for their work, book authors also, video and film makers, educators, and so on. If they all merely become vehicles for advertising, what is there left to advertise, if everything goes into the software domain?
I like this idea. You can buy, but still rent 'app packs'. Now if Apple could sort out a fair payment system, the larger app sectors could be leveraged to make it a win win for devs and users alike. I would certainly pay to hire a few apps for a month to try them if cheap enough and then buy what I really like.
meh
1.99 per month? I've got Auria pro!
http://blogs-images.forbes.com/rodgerdeanduncan/files/2014/12/Laughter-2-e1418092384877.png
@Telstar5 At $1.99 a month, you could use it for two years before it cost the same as Auria Pro. Presuming you didn't turn the subscription off at any time because you weren't using it.
The base version is essentially $12/year. Not remotely terrible if it's an app you'll use and if it means the dev has a revenue stream to keep it alive. 2 years... $24. 3... $36. These are totally reasonable numbers in a world where we don't all have 8000 apps. The cool thing, to me, about this model is that it's one of the very few App Store compatible models that will let users try it out for a buck. There's no way to do that with something like Auria (not picking on WML!).
The main thing I'd be concerned about is if the developer end-of-life's the app. I'd feel more comfortable if there was some sort of guarantee that the app would be fully unlocked if they decided to close the doors.
I use the #iosMusic hashtag on Twitter. With some form of unity, as yet residing in The Undiscovered Country, I think we can raise the visibility of our little "market" - maybe not to Corey Feldman levels of visibility, but, hey
I am not against a subscriptions model - I am against a subscription-only model. If they sell a subscription but also offer the option of a single payment for perpetual license, I'm cool with it - is it the case?
Because, if they went Avid/Adobe and only rent their app instead of selling, that's bad, really bad... for themselves! Look at what it did to Avid, for example. And what it's slowly doing with Adobe's market share.
So there is free, .99 and 1.99 versions. But why limit the free version's features if you can't save anyway?
If this dev had a history of caring for/about/updating every app regularly, or even posting version notes about this or that app receiving no further updates, I'd happily consider joining their subscription model. Years ago I bought the n-Track Tuner Pro app to support their excellent free tuner app. But other apps just languished untouched for years without a word.
That dev's tuner app history encouraged me to download this new app, and abandonware history encouraged me to avoid the subscription and choose deletion instead.
Subscription models could be a part of their decline but I reckon it has more to do with inflated pricing models to begin with and bloated software stuck in old ways of doing things. That Sketch, FCP and Logic all come in at a price well below the cost of the avid/adobe alternatives certainly doesn't help.
I actually think that Adobe Creative Cloud (with my employer paying for it!) helped warm me up to some of the supposed benefits of the subscription model. I got fairly consistent updates to all of the apps. Some of those had big features in them that otherwise would have been held off from release until the next major update for marketing/uptake purposes. The update process was totally painless and there was never a 'is it worth it?' question with regard to upgrading. I think I had a total of one bum update that borked something or other important to my workflow and I only had to click a button to roll back to the previous version. My employer had a fixed line item in the budget that made software accounting a lot easier as well. I've a pretty strong dislike of Adobe dating back to the mid-90s for a ton of reasons but I'd be lying if I said that my three or so years of Creative Cloud experience was anything but very positive.
That said... started a new job this summer and I was offered my choice of software. I don't do any print stuff so Sketch all the way.
And, of course, Adobe and N-Track aren't all the same entities. Who knows how this'll work out.
@Fruitbat1919 said: I pay a one off price for an app with a guarantee of free updates for the period of one year. I can then decide at the time if the asked price is what I would consider reasonable. If I want to extend my updates after that first year, I have to pay again or stick with the version I have.
This, as one of the many interesting ideas in this thread, made me think of the Noatikl/Mixtikl-model of pricing (which is kind of like that, isn't it?), and this is still enraging forum members, it seems. There seems to be some kind of special psychology to the pricing- (and sustainability- ) debate... .
I am intrigued by the way human minds are at work, and very interested in this debate.
I am also not sure, it is on us (the consumers), to make "the system" work, or even be able to... .
AND: I don't like subscriptions. At all (will listen to further brainstorming, though).
Cheers, twobeers
Yes very interesting psychology at work. There are subtle differences with a new app every so often that's not quite the same. I'm not against new apps in some ways. Often depends how they are presented, how often and many other finite details. As they say, 'it's all in the details'.
A lot comes down to agreement and transparency. To know what you are paying, for how long you have access to the software (not all software is actually usable over the whole of its lifetime). So, total cost over its lifetime is important. Knowing what your software can and can't do. Not making promises that are never kept.
Then again some will moan whatever they get
Anyway the good news is I didn't like the free version so don't need to wrestle with the bank manager about paying a subscription:)
Indeed!!! And same
Gave up on it, I couldn't zoom in on some MIDI I recorded and it just doesn't give enough to show what it can do (as a free app). The nag screen was annoying too.
However, I was interested in the Apple AU effects, are they used in any other apps currently ?
Jep The Same here, And Vera good alternatives without this Price structure.
I Think its good Not Support this.
Maybe in One Year. We must pay for One hour iPad Music Making