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
As long as I don't have any current IAP skin in the game, I'm happy either way though I think IAP is a little cleaner. When you get a new device and download your apps, AB1 would still be downloaded even if it was essentially a dead app.
Once I buy an IAP, I definitely prefer to stay IAP since there is no way to transfer IAPs to a new app. If Auria, as an example, were to someday offer Auria 2 there would be no way to transfer your $100+ in 3rd party plugin IAPs.
As far as I'm concerned, AB1 is feature complete. Does what it promised to do and does it really really well. As OSes update, I would definitely appreciate it keeping up with it but other than that I wouldn't feel the tiniest bit like it was 'abandoned'. Absolutely ready to pay for continued development.
Yes. I would gladly pay $10 for Audiobus 2 with advanced features. Audiobus 1 really is very stable and does what it says on the tin; Audiobus 2 could feature the "next generation" technologies.
@Washboy Agreed that ideally there are more ways to price things. But I suspect Apple doesn't allow this not because of potential loss of revenue, but because they want to keep things simple. Too many if-but-then-else conditions can lead to lots of user confusion and support requests etc.
@syrupcore IAP transfer is technically possible (SoundPrism does that with SP Pro) but not a standard iOS thing which means most people expect it to not be possible. So an app that has IAPs should not do a new version unless it can do IAP transfer and effectively convey that information to all its existing users.
A plus for a new app: AB1 is solid. A new app could experiment and if things went wonky, AB1 would still have your back.
A minus for a new app, in AB's case anyway: Loss of all those glowing reviews and ratings on the app store.
@rhism, I didn't realize that. Very interesting.
@washboy I actually think Apple sees app pricing differently. They would actually like to keep app prices low, even if it means less app store revenue for them. If great apps continue to be cheap it makes the hardware/platform much more attractive. Best for Apple for apps to become commodities.
How about adding a simple donate button to get things financed? May be worth a try.
@syrupcore 100% agreed on commoditization of apps being ideal for the platform holder.
So far the main anti-IAP arguments are: (1) potential de-stabilization of the AB1 functionality, (2) inconvenience of having to do a restore purchases on re-download, and (3) user base fragmentation.
Personally I'm willing to bet that if both options were available on the App Store and you saw an AB1 app with an "Audiobus 2" IAP and a separate Audiobus 2 app with a shiny new icon and a black chrome, more people would buy the separate app. I would
It'd just be way more satisfying.
That said, for all I know it may be even more profitable for the AB team to create AB2 as a "AB Pro" IAP inside AB1 and then make AB1 free.
The real money is in the forum! You know we are all addicts. Start charging audiobucks for viewing/ posting.
100 comment views for $1. 1000 views for $5.
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
Ok, bad joke, please don't! :-b
If IAPs can legitimately be transferred to another app (a la SoundPrism), v1 of an app could have an "upgrade to v2" IAP added latterly (at whatever price the dev considered appropriate). V2 would need to be free to download but with an 'unlock' IAP, which would be at the "new user" price. The existence of a transferred 'upgrade to v2' IAP would be interpreted by the v2 app as equivalent to the 'unlock' IAP. Any other v1 IAPs could be transferred to v2 as well.
Far from ideal, I know, but is it technically feasible?
BTW @Sebastian you mentioned earlier about trying to attract a new set of users. I don't know what you guys are planning wrt this but if you're thinking of a more casual audience I'd say that path is likely fraught with peril. We haven't yet seen what an IAA-enabled version of Garageband looks like but it'd likely gobble up that market.
More interesting might be to go in the other direction and make something even more high-end for people willing to spend more. E.g. an Audiobus app for Windows/Mac that allows live audio streaming to/from iOS and desktop VSTs, and easy transfer of multitrack audio/MIDI from iOS projects to desktop DAWs.
In any case you guys know what you're doing, I just like rambling here out in public
@Washboy technically possible, yes
Though if V2 is free to download, Apple would require that it has some useful functionality on its own before requiring the unlock IAP. Free apps are not allowed to be completely useless, despite what many free apps may lead us all to believe 
@Washboy Also the transfer IAP thing requires you to keep the original app around because the transfer happens "out-of-band" from Apple's system. Along those lines what could be done is that AB2 is a $10 IAP inside AB1 but a $15 new app (since AB1 is $5). That said, I think all these options create confusion. I much prefer the simpler model of either a new app with a single price, or an IAP with a single price.
Very interesting discussion!
I agree with most here, apparently, about not wanting the subscription model.
Busker already presented very solid arguments against it. Subscriptions are scary for those on marginal or variable incomes (like many musicians, no doubt!). They'd also be a continual hassle to manage for users and probably devs too, having to remember to switch off or on during holidays or busy periods or whatever, and they'd stifle impulse buys because instead of a simple buy you'd be making a longer-term commitment; again, something that those on a tight or variable budget would want to avoid.
Rhisms 'rental' idea is nice and I would welcome something like that but it sounds much like a 'trial' which Apple doesn't seem to allow (?).
The great thing about the smartphone-and-tablet app market is that computing has, once again, become affordable for mainstream users and hobbyists, some of whom might become major artists in their own right-some kid learning to play on an iPad instead of an old beat-up guitar ;-).
I'm old enough to remember that it was much the same in the early days of personal computing...only once the fledgling software companies turned into megacorp behemoths like Microsoft and Adobe and Electronic Arts, and, yes, Apple too, prices have soared skyhigh. It could go the same way for the mobile apps market eventually of course (I shudder to think...masses of lawyers fighting the great Audiobus vs Apple patent war!)
The beauty, and very likely the success of the 'phone and tablet ecosystem is the fact that is a very capable AND affordable platform that allows users to, once again, enjoy high quality apps that otherwise would be limited to high-level professionals. The great thing for developers is the abilty to reach a much wider audience since these devices are being much more widely used and appreciated than traditional desktops and laptops.
On the other hand, it's more difficult to make money for developers because of the low price level. The lack of a paid update mechanism makes it more difficult for them to keep making money with the same app. IAPs are the best way forward I think. Low pricing to encourage volume buying, or bundle discounts. A brand-new version (and new purchase!) every two or three years or so wouldn't hurt either I reckon.
About the IAP vs new App AB2 debate:
one also would need to think about how other devs would have to support this in their apps. If it becomes too convoluted, they might abandon AB as too difficult to maintain...not being a developer, I don't know about the impact of the choice (IAP/new App) on the implementation details for Audiobus client apps.
@Rhism (fragmentation) - AB takes some time for a newbie to wrap their head around (midi, signal flow). By offering more choices via various IAP's would make that more difficult for a new user. Which is counter to the benefit of AB, I would think - simplifying processes. Keep it simple and in one product, and don't look back... Is anyone still using BM1 these days?
I'll put in my 2c for AB2, though I have reservations about the bloat that preserving backwards compatibility seems to always engender.
I loathe subscription models. Not only for the delight factor @busker so eloquently described, but aso as a system to have to rely on for the tools of my trade. I have several behemoths in my attic now with high value IP on them that are in-accessible to me because the vendors folded or discontinued the product, or because my enterprise folded. I can barely even make a use case for subs models for a Fortune 500 IT dept.
Another possibilty for revenue: courseware. Especially if done to a level suitable for college music classes. Just a thought though, that's a tough nut to crack. The blogs and YouTube reviews and tutorials are an essential part of my on-going purchase decisions, yet I do not relish the process of hunting for the details that make a difference to me (being as in other things a bit, shall we say, different there:). Except traditionally that seems to be a third party authoring market more than the original developers domain.
@AlleycatLA Interesting thoughts on fragmentation - I think you may be right but it can go both ways. It's true that an app that appends IAPs after the fact can look clunky and disjointed. But a well-designed UX that incorporates IAPs intelligently can actually be easier to understand and simpler to use than a one-size-fits-all UX that throws everything at you right from the start.
?
Sebastian, Jonatan - one of my favorite games (PunchQuest) has an IAP that is called "Donate a Buck". It's 99¢, and I for one was happy to buy it. You get nothing for it...so yes, you can enable donations as IAPs.
@Lazerkatrecords Yeah, that's a nice idea. An IAP for MIDI maybe, but rather not a new app, I'd say.
@Rhism - Yes, it boils down to good design, something that's not an issue with AB1 :-)... Besides, I have no idea whats coming. So it's hard to say...
I think a separate new app for an Audiobus 2 would be just fine. :-) I don't like the idea of shelling out $50 for a Cubasis 2 after only a year of updates though.... so there has to be limits...
Absolutely no subscriptions for me. I don't even look twice at apps that follow that model. I'm an owner type personality, not a renter. But I would consider IAP for additional features. I've bought amp/effect models and MIDI implementation features in the past and that works for me. FWIW, I usually max out my IAP for apps that I use regularly and enjoy, sometimes even when I don't need the feature.
And while I don't have an issue donating to charities or people in need, I don't and wouldn't donate money to app developers. Charge a reasonable amount for the app and charge for IAPs as necessary. Continuing to develop and work on the app will trigger new sales = additional income.
Also wanted to say that I am not afraid to shamelessly promote and recommend my fav apps in forums and by word of mouth. So if the app is great and genuinely useful, I believe it will receive the recognition and success that it deserves.
Hey everybody! I just wanted to thank you for your very informative replies. Having this kind of feedback is super helpful for us! Thank you!
Wow, you guys are brilliant. This was a great read
Whatever you do, just don't go the IKMultimedia route and annoy us with a popup every time we start AB.
I still wonder what the level of penetration is for musicians, or potential musicians, knowing about ios music. I assume there are still a lot who aren't familiar with it. I'm sure that the more that learn of it, the potential for AB will increase as well. In other words...is there more that could be done to get the word out? I share what I've learned with several friends, and that has resulted in some uptake, but I imagine it's been primarily through word of mouth.
I think apps like Fingertip Maestro will reach a large audience. They seem to be pushing Audiobus now. They seem to have a wide range marketing plan. I was thinking if the AB Devs could come up with some simplified tutorials for a young audience it might be helpful to pass this on to the Fingertip Maestro Devs. I wonder how many music educators have knowledge of Audiobus. There are so many ways AB can be used in music education.
Another app I think is really going to take off is Shapes. This one will become very popular with teenagers. AB compatibility would really extend its capability.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/shapes-music/id617475856?mt=8