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
Thanks for the link @mgmg4871. I've posted my thoughts directly to Retronyms on that page. :-) I don't know if I'll get any comments back, but at least I know that all of this has his attention. :-)
Yep I think Jeremy's comment on their page was really strong and probably what tipped them over the edge. It was focused, firm and concise. No beating about the bush
Glad to know they're changing their wording. I do think that they'll continue to try to take market share away from AudioShare, but perhaps they'll do so in a more subtle way.
Unlike many of the comments posted on here (and elsewhere) I don't think open source or free are necessary conditions for making something a standard. Audiobus is neither open source nor free, and it is the standard despite JACK and now IAA. I agree that being first was a benefit for them but honestly if JACK had come out first, AB would still have risen to the top.
The "ACP" space is a bit different than the AB/JACK/IAA space and I don't claim to know how to establish AudioShare as "the" standard but it feels like there should be a way, without making it free. Perhaps the discussion in this thread will yield a strategy
Or perhaps we can all agree that it is already the standard and nothing more needs to be done..?
My main hope is that none of AudioShare's functions will be crippled by a closed standard. Other than that issue I don't think that this can hurt much of anything. In the past I frequently copied from various apps into auria without going through AudioShare anyway so that doesn't change.
My main uses for AudioShare are to record from audiobus and play into audiobus. I also use it to send and receive emailed clips between collaborators on various songs. Maybe most people use AudioShare differently. For me nothing has changed and I would still buy it without a second of hesitation if I didn't already have it.
Hi Guys,
This is Dan Walton from Retronyms.
I thought I'd try to answer some questions here.
First a some history:
Sonoma and Retronyms created AudioCopy as a way to share audio between apps years ago. Sonoma worked very hard to maintain the standard. They helped developers to integrate and promoted their apps. When iOS7 came along, a pasteboard history (that stored 11 most recent audio clips. Sonoma goes to 11!) stopped working.
We asked Sonoma if we could take over the standard to fix this issue and they agreed to help pass the responsibility. The only way we could imagine a pasteboard history working in iOS7 was to add a free app that stores and serves the sounds to the other apps. So we went to build this solution. Along the way we fixed many other little issues that needed improvement in AudioCopy.
Yesterday we released the free AudioCopy App. You can check out a video of how it works here:
We have had a technical discussion with Jonatan from AudioShare (and other fantastic developers!). It's possible there are some things we can do to make AudioShare and AudioCopy work even better together. We are a small company with very limited resources but I'm hoping we can make some of these improvements. Jonatan also asked us to change the phrasing on our website. He didn't like the quote, "AudioCopy is the missing filebrowser for iOS" so we changed it when we released the stand alone app. We did this because he seems like a nice guy with a cool app and some helpful feedback.
We were pretty shocked to receive some really negative feedback around this release. I think it would help if we found a way to participate on these forums a bit. When a misunderstanding occurs people can write some really nasty reviews.
In general it might be helpful is Retronyms was in the discussion a bit more.
I'll try to be on the forums today to answer any specific questions you guys might have.
Thanks everyone,
Dan
@Rhism To make something a standard, all is needed is for app developers to support it in their own apps, and for consumers to use it and prefer it over other options. The real questions is how to make these two things happen...
The low blow on Audioshare etc aside...The app is solid, it works well (few kinks but nothing major). It's simple to use (as it doesn't actually really require any "usage", if that makes sense). The Retronyms ads/news only loads if opening that section, it doesn't seem to use any resources whatsoever until it's activated so to speak. I want the compatible apps list moved away into a sub menu, it's bloating/overcrowding the main ACP interface. All in all I'm happy with it so far. I'll use it just as I've been using the old Sonoma, and I'll keep using Audioshare as the central audio hub/manager as nothing comes close to it in terms of actually managing audio files.
@DanWalton First, thank you for hanging out with us for today to listen to us. I appreciate that token of your desire to open communications a little more. I think being available and open with communications would have gone a LONG way to improving relations and feelings about Retronyms as a company if Retronyms had started doing this a LONG time ago. Nevertheless, a start is a start, and it is appreciated.
There have been long standing criticisms and concerns that many of us have felt have gone ignored for a long time, and this ACP 2.0 release just seemed to be the final straw. In other words, ACP 2.0 is probably not the only thing that really needs to be discussed.....there are a LOT of issues regarding other apps that have been released and then mostly ignored. Audiobus implementation of Retronyms products and iMPC concerns comes first and foremost to mind.
I think it would be beneficial for Retronyms to not just show up for a day and then disappear when things seem to be smoothed over; continued open dialogue is much preferable. Be honest with us and don't talk down to us, and you'll find that we are a pretty decent bunch. :-)
+1 For what Audiojunkie said. Thanks
@DanWalton By the way, you stated: It's possible there are some things we can do to make AudioShare and AudioCopy work even better together. We are a small company with very limited resources but I'm hoping we can make some of these improvements.
This sounds very, very good! :-)
+2 for what Sean said.
Don't mess with him Dan.he knows his shit:)
Btw @Dan excuse my manners. Welcome to the forum.
@commonstookie LOL! ;-)
Sorry who is Sean?
Saw some questions back in the thread...
"Did developers have to pay Sonoma for using ACP?"
Nope. It's always been a free labor of love.
"Why did Retronyns decide to take over and build ACP 2.0?"
Because we thought it would be a good idea to fix issues that were caused by iOS7 and make other improvements.
"Why did Sonoma not build their own ACP 2.0?"
I'm not 100% sure. I can say that it's expensive, takes tons of time and doesn't pay well. Add to that some rage from the people you build it for and I could take some guesses why they didn't do it.
"Will Retronyms keep ACP 2.0 free?"
Yes. That is the plan.
Perhaps you missed this one, Dan:
Why is the new SDK not open-source?
I have no idea what that all means, but it seems like this is a big beef people have with the new ACP, and it seems like it would make things much easier to integrate function with more apps.
Welcome @danwalton
@DanWalton @commonstookie was just joking. I'm Sean. :-) Welcome to the Audiobus forum, and thanks for talking with us and answering our questions! :-) How about the biggest question? Why has the Audiobus technology been ignored in all Retronyms products for the past year?
@DanWalton I noticed on your FB and the reviews on the AppStore that a lot of people thinks Retronyms stepped in and suddenly took away the old Sonoma pasteboard in some evil move. Perhaps adding things from what you told in the first post to your FB and perhaps even the app info (for a while) will remove some of all that unwarranted negative outbursts (I'm not laying anything on you here, just a suggestion as it seems people's ignorance are causing part of this waaay overblown thing that's goin on).
Edit: And regarding iMini and iMPC updates with new features and Audiobus etc. I believe Akai and Arturia hired Retronyms to do the ports/apps, and I'm guessing those companies calls the shots on what needs to be done with their apps. You guys get a lot of negative feedback on that too. Or am I wrong?
@Dan, it appears that on this forum and the Retronym FB page, you guys keep dancing around the Audiobus question. Coming to this forum in an attempt to be more open, I think that question should be addressed.
@Hmtx
First of all I really love open-source.
We made open source contributions to WiST, Cloudseeder and AudioCopy1. We did this because we like open source and thought it would be cool to have people contribute.
We decided to release the AudioCopy2 sdk as a binary framework for a few reasons.
1) A binary framework drops right in for developers. They can be extremely easy to integrate.
2) The SDK uses some iOS7 features that were 'classified' when we released it. Our licensing agreement with Apple prevented us.
3) It can take more work to release and support open-source. It's not a huge issue here, but it takes some time to package up, remove curse words from comments, etc.
That said, going forward we might release the source to the SDK. This depends on a few factors. We just have to feel the benefits outweigh the effort. For instance if we feel the community would add features, improve bugs and improve integration this would help tip the scale for us.
@DanWalton And regarding Audiobus?
+1 @Audiojunkie what does @DanWalton think of Audiobus ?
@j_liljedahl I'm a huge supporter of Audioshare and the AUFX series. Very glad to hear that Retronyms has removed the offending language from their App Store description.
There is definitely a use case for ACP and for Audioshare; at the moment, I don't see how Audioshare could be threatened by Retronyms' new version.
Audioshare has a UI and feature set that uniquely set it up to be THE central depot for iOS music files. The fact that it supports resolutions over 16/44.1 (something I hope to see upgraded within Audiobus ASAP) is a boon to me, and it makes my Mac-iPad-iPhone workflow move much more smoothly.
Jonathan, if I were you, I would consider adding some more 'regular music player' features to Audioshare, as well. I've found myself using it instead of the built-in Apple music app because I prefer file sharing to iTunes drag-and-drop, and because it supports high res formats.
If Audioshare could support playlists and FLAC, I would probably never use the built-in music app.
Also, I can't wait for the new version of Audioshare with inter-app audio. It looks like it is going to continue to be a unique app for iOS users, and I'm glad to see that so many of us support Kymatica!
Retronyms has put out some good products, and audiocopy is certainly going to be well-supported by them.
I think some of the community disdain towards Retronyms is related to the historically closed ecosystem of Tabletop, etc, but since they started supporting Audiobus and other standards, I have found more use for their products.
Hopefully, Retronyms will continue to act in good faith, and will not try to push Kymatica out of the "all-in-one hub" position for iOS devices.
As for Kymatica, we all love your work and you have some die-hard supporters in this community. Count me as one more of those supporters, and keep up the great work.
@mgmg4871
I don't think we dance around the request. We haven't said yes or no, but we have shared lots of thoughts and really love the discussion here.
We have said that we think Audiobus is a cool technology. We have released source that shows Audiobus and InterApp audio working together. We have discussed different ways to integrating Audiobus into Tabletop with the Audiobus guys. We have also have directly said that we can't discuss future plans because plans change.
Audiobus is not a switch that we just simply turn on. Just like InterApp audio it requires work and effort. Now that we have the MasterMind and Zignal devices in Tabletop it's possible that integration will be easier. On the other hand, depending on how Audiobus integrates with InterApp audio it's possible you are already able to use Audiobus with Tabletop and even iMPC. I'll have to look into the latest here.
Can you use Audiobus to bridge Audiobus apps and interapp apps? That would be cool.
@Dan thank you for your response. The Audiobus team is currently working on AB intergration with IAA as you mentioned. So I guess we'll see soon enough how AB bridges apps with IAA.
Perfect! That is going to be awesome and I think technically the best way forward. I'll have to hang around on these forums and discuss with the Audiobus guys to make sure.
@DanWalton Please do hang around and discuss. We want you to feel welcome and to be open with us! :-) I appreciate your answers, and hope for a more open Retronyms from now on. :-)
And now I'm going to redownloaded TT on my ipad Lol. Oh, and update my review of Audiocopy. I was a little ticked when I wrote it. Maybe I should have waited a day or so..
@DanWalton said "We have released source that shows Audiobus and InterApp audio working together" I would like to see this,is it available for public viewing ?
Here on our blog:
http://blog.retronyms.com/2013/09/ios7-remoteio-inter-app-audiobus-and-you.html
Thanks @DanWalton your presence here is definitely appreciated.