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 subscription is another monthly bill to keep track of. I got enough of those. No really, I got enough of those. Indie devs: Code your shit properly and, you won't need to "maintain it". When the next super amazingest awesomest update hits, people need to pay if they want it (nothing new there). Big company code monkeys: Read above. Oh and adjust to the markets, living in lala land for too long today and, things might go south. Or north. East? Hm..
I totally respect their business decision,
and will never be subscribing.
>
Sure thing, JG. But that isn’t the point, or at least what I And some others here see as the point, judging from their comments.
As has been shown numerous times, there are basically three kinds of developers.
Korg, Steinberg, Fab Filters, Novation, Moog, etc.
Skram. Intermorphics. Auxy.
Brambos apps, Refraktions, AUM, AudioBus, Fugue Machine, etc, etc.
I submit that groups 1 and 3 are eminently worthy of our support, vocally and financially. While group 2 demonstrate that, while their ideas may be interesting, their execution leaves much to be desired.
Like any transaction, it lives or dies on the value that is being offered to the customer.
Totally, but I don’t think it will work for them.
I mean, 5€ every months (or 50€ for year) for a cute toy is a luxury imo.
If you’re young as Auxy users seems to be you’re probably a student, in this case you can buy an Ableton educational license for a one time price of 220€.
You can have a pro software, where you’re not forced to upgrade if you don’t want to.
The life circle of the software with consistent free upgrades (5 years in the case of Live 9) make it a better investment in the long run without any doubt.
If you’re young, you don’t have a work and don’t have money you better download a cracked Ableton’s copy than pay a monthly subscription
I’m 37 so I obviously pay for the software I use, but if I was 17 it would be another story.
I’m fine with the “attitude,” but probably not interested in the subscription. I appreciate the honesty of a dev just saying, hey, we’re trying to make this a viable business to survive, rather than runarounds, excuse making and ass kissing. Considering what they appear to get for their work, it wouldn’t surprise me if they just hung it up altogether. It’s good they’re still fighting. They’re competing with so many powerful but inexpensive tools for iOS musicians. I just haven’t had the time to get into Auxy, but I’ll eventually have to check it out again to see what’s being offered.
>
I must’ve read a different comment. The one I saw said, “We knew that this would upset some people and that’s something we’ve decided to live with.”
That looks like honesty on their part. You think they want to upset people for the fun of it, or are they saying they’re trying to make this a viable business to survive?
Let them make their own business decisions - just like all of us do when we purchase anything to create with.
You either go with them - or not.
Lets not bag them out
Or imply that they do not care about their users.
>
No, of course they don’t want to upset people for fun, but the inference I take is that those who aren’t happy can whistle.
I was on the side of these guys, wanting to buy their IAP’s and anticipating a souped up app, perhaps even a new version. If that new Auxy had innovative features, I’d likely have bought that, too!
Instead, all I see is an option to rent something that does less, by design, thanks to the removal of previously free stuff, is harder to use, again by design intended to funnel people into thier new model.
Their choice, and at the end of the day while interested to discuss it here for a day or two, Auxy’s future or lack of won’t keep me awake at night.
I am fortunate to have many other apps from great developers, who have a business model that suits me well.
BTW, as an aside to this discussion, I spent a couple of hours this morning testing out logo creation apps. Some were impossible to evaluate due to adverts springing up every few seconds, and so were deleted. Others, pretended to be free, but actually went into an expensive auto subscription model after a few days, also deleted. I ended up buying the one that had a decent range of features, for a one-off payment. If they add useful IAP or paid content, I’ll likely buy that, too. The also rans are apps I wouldn’t bother looking at again.
The Auxy devs are free to make whatever business decisions they want. We are equally free to say how much those decisions seem to obviously suck for a number of reasons.
There’s probably a world where they could have offered a subscription, kept the free folk happy and also made us consider subscribing. This could have been done by adding much more functionality than they had before (including the stuff we’ve asked for repeatedly - not that they have to include this, but we’d be much more interested in using the app a lot if they did), and not locking off anything that was previously free. That’s the major problem in terms of messaging - they’ve taken away stuff from users as well as adding, which is unusual in this space. Though they have form with this when you think about what the initial version of Auxy had...
I don’t think this subscription will work, given that we’re not interested and their user base is predominately of an age that doesn’t have much disposable income and has been brought up to expect stuff to be available for free.
I didn’t mean to pos my own post, btw!
Should add (as a contribution to the study of human/consumer behavior) that since I now have the subscription I have also been thinking of alternatives and was fiddling with Gadget this morning (which I have certainly paid a lot of money for in one time purchases over time) and couldn't help thinking 'what do I need Auxy for?' Yes, it's another way to skin the apple, but as an ongoing purchase option ("Hey, new sound pack, let's give it a try...") it feels very different psychologically to the sub model, where it's almost weighing on my febrile mind already (and the first two months, tick, tick, are free for me...). I'll keep letting it nag away at me, keep playing with it for at least half an hour every day for the next few weeks, but I'm pretty sure it's going to get binned. As much for clarity of mind as anything. Oddly I don't feel that about my Adobe sub., but then that's a 'business expense' AND I use it many times a day (in different guises) and get paid -in a roundabout way- for doing so....
Here’s what I saw...
“Yes! Yes! Yes! And I’m trying to get across that this is an intentional strategy to push more free users into paying us in an attempt to keep the app alive. We knew that this would upset some people and that’s something we’ve decided to live with.”
Here’s another quote I saw Lenberg make in the forum...
“Yeah just want to be clear that we’re not building this app to make a huge profit. We actually want to make something awesome for the sake of it (believe it or not).”
And this...
The thing is, they shouldn’t have hidden previously free content behind a paywall. That’s a majorly dick move right there and makes them come off as a couple of greedy pigs. However, while many indie developers have day jobs and code on the side, the two guys behind Auxy want this to be their day job forever and ever. It’s pretty sad that they didn’t simply keep what was already free as free and let users decide if they wanted the extended content and user sample import or not.
I signed onto the subscription train and already dropped them the first $4.99 with good faith that they’ll listen to us customers more and also keep putting out excellent sound content. I also played matchmaker between Auxy and DSKMusic with hopes of getting Victor’s sounds into Auxy. (Victor has developed numerous free VSTs over the years under the DSKMusic monicker, and his VSTs feature a lot of realistic-sounding instruments.) I hope Auxy does the right thing and uses his sounds for melodic presets.
Will be interesting to see if they actually do any more melodic presets, or if it's just going to be instrument samples from here out.
It’s like sleight of hand by a street hustler, Jwm. Something they must know would likely bust the projects of people who were using that content. There’s the free stuff, oh no, now it’s vanished.
Then building a following is paramount. Not just from among kids needing the grown ups to pay, but from adults seriously into music making who could help them develop and promote the app. Alas, it was not to be.
I wouldn’t say street hustler slight of hand. Auxy’s devs would have to be far more clever and less transparent to pull that off.
As I said though, dick move on their part.
Well I’m one adult who signed on for the explicit purpose of directing them along. Getting Auxy and DSK together was just one of a multitude of steps of my helping make Auxy better. Having realistic-sounding instruments instead of everything being a f-cking synth is paramount to attracting more people to their subscription model, and I told Lenberg as much. If I’m not thoroughly satisfied with the new sounds they release in February and March, then I’ll cut my simple $10 of losses and unsubscribe.
>
Good luck to each and every one of them, especially you.
As for realistic instruments, as you know, several great apps offer those now. Buy the app, buy the pack, and Bob’s your father’s brother....
....and if I don’t use my purchase for a couple of months, it doesn’t cost me any more. To quote Macca “Great.” FX thumbs up.
" They said the IAP soundpacks took way too much of their focus since they felt pressured to make them really good each time"
It's called market economy.
Funny thing: this new update makes so much waves that I considered to finally drop some $$$ to get an iAP - but subscription...? That will never gonna happen
I’m gonna drop the app completely if there’s not a playing surface w/live recording either announced or completed by the end of the year. We’ll see how the sound packs go, but there’s bigger fish to fry. The app just feels clunky to compose in, but you’re enticed back because the sound engine and ease of mixing.
When the devs released the first incarnation of Auxy I had a discussion with them regarding user sample import, velocity support and MIDI Sync. The only thing they've added is a "soft" note mode, i.e. two velocity levels.
From today's perspective, they might have done better in doing so and probably make an IAP for the sampling module.
Nonetheless it's still the only version I'm actually using, because of its unbeatable immediacy and simplicity.
I didn't read it that way, but maybe I'm not cynical enough. What I saw is that, like any sane seller, they'd prefer their customers be happy. It's just better for business that way. So after making that assumption, it followed for me that they were saying the decision they went with was a difficult one. They don't want to upset anyone, but they just haven't been able to make money the way they've been doing it. Making a living at it is critical for them, no different than any of us who have sold our services as musicians. I give them more of a pass because they're dealing with a crazy iOS/App Store market that often doesn't make much sense from the developer's perspective. I don't know if they're going about it the right way, but the market will decide.
I subscribe to services that give me vast access to rich content. Not to single function applications with closed and limited content. As I see it, this is and always has been the correct subscription model. Newspapers, radio, TV, or VPN services. I struggled a bit with both Apple Music and Spotify but then went with it because I realised my listening habits gave me more for less. Not less for more. One makes the sane decision when choosing cable package.
Adobe introduced subscription models and has been successful only because of a practical monopoly on design tools. Use it or lose it. Some pro studio tools are following. There are no practical competitors and if you want access you must pay.
Even when there is competition as in the music streaming or cable TV or ISP businesses, content access is equivalent and we evaluate it based on customer service, user experience and personal tastes in content variances.
iPad subscription model for synth and beatbox apps? All of which are great and also ask of which are similar. Auxy has no monopoly. Nobody needs it as a professional tool to make their own living.
It should be obvious for anyone in this world (and quickly evident if they are not simply by reading this forum) that a majority of us are seeking variety, quantity, and novelty that pushes the platform forward. Will a subscription to Auxy give me access to the IOS APP store music category? I think not. Not even Korg 's or brambos apps provide enough content to justify a subscription model.
I have 400 apps. If I wanted to maintain each one for 50 cents in a subscription model I would have to shell out 200 bucks a year - or dramatically narrow down my apps to a handful.
Do the Devs not get that forcing narrow choices is not why we are here? Better to make me pay more per app and allow me to enviously build my expensive collectuon over the years, binding me tighter to the platform. Why are iOS musicians forcing me to limit and whittle away my apologies collection.
Auxy : deleted. I predict they will disappear or return to the one time payment model. The software development industry survived 60 years without subscription models (and the only one that tried it in the 80s went bus) so it's hogwash they need it to pay for features. Set the right price and deliver value and the market will grow.
>
Indeed. It should be equally obvious that developers providing this get a loyal following, keen to buy new stuff and help keep the ball rolling with IAP’s for established apps.
I agree. If the market went entirely subscription based, I would end up with half a dozen key apps, or never bother updating.
>
Apparently not in Auxy land.
>
Ah, but their business model must at least suggest that subscription is the way. Only when this fails to materialise will what they’ve done dawn on them, and by then it will be too late. Like Skram and the lost Intermorphics apps, all that will be left is a bad memory.
Hey, but in the case Auxy is the only music production app you use:
In this case the new subscription model is fair and balanced!
(...oh, and in case Auxy is the only iOS music production software that exists: i would sell my iPad - immediately)
All other monetisation methods have failed. Not just for Auxy but mostly for almost all of the rest of music apps as well. Auxy will either become viable or it won't. I for one am following its standings on the top grossing charts. So far they're looking promising. It's almost where it was before the change to subscriptions, only with subscriptions revenues will be recurring every month.
It's a fair model that is in the interest of heavy users - and those who aren't, because they don't have to pay anything at all.
Most (music) apps that can be purchased by a one-time payment have retention rates in the single digits, which means less than 10 out of 100 customers actually use them after a month. So that model is really just interesting for collectors of apps, not musicians who just want an app that works and that they spend most of their time with when making music.
I applaud the Auxy team for having the guts to do this. It was the right thing to try and if they can make it work they deserve their success.
Auxy has millions of downloads, the app has won an Apple Design award. They're doing exactly what Apple suggests professional apps should do to monetise - a subscription that subscribers get new content for every now and then. If they can't make it work it says a lot about the viability of the mobile music app market.
If they can't make it work it says a lot about the viability of the mobile music app market.
>
If they can’t make it work, then what it says is that people do not want subscription based software.
It has only worked on the desktop for Adobe, because they have a virtual monopoly.
I would not mind an increase in IOS app base costs, if that would help. Even though this would likely stifle more one man band developers, and discourage punters from taking a chance on apps.
If the move you applaud were to become standard, I would likely give up music making on this platform. If I did that, and I don’t think I’d be alone, then I would also have very little incentive to buy more powerful iterations of the iPad, or other hardware to use with it. Apple wouldn’t care about that, ‘cause all they care about these days is the iPhone.
So maybe you are right, the golden age is coming to a close and this is the rather depressing future. But I hope not. I hope another way can be found, and creativity - both from music makers and music app developers - is not strangled by economics.
OK, then we maybe should discuss a developer income guarantee, financed by an user flatrate model. 100 Dollar per month, payed by every user or such. Not depending on your app usage or such.
This would directly translate into: 11 (!!) apps like Auxy can get financed - and their developers would earn the money they deserve.
>
I can’t make up my mind if you are having a laugh, or genuinely believe that people can and would afford that much every month. One hundred dollars!
If it came to pass, then music making would be one huge step backwards, toward being the province of those who could afford it.
The rest of us - includung those too young to earn an income - would effectively be told we were not wealthy enough to join that elite, and music making would return to the sheer boredom of those with money but no imagination.