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
They are if the bugs are Apple's. It's all work. And nobody should be expected to work for free.
Why should I? Just stop making baseless assumptions and subsequently use them to support your thesis.
No, it is perfectly valid to expect people not to make grand claims based on no information at all.
iOS is its own thing. If you desperately want it to be a portable flavor of Desktop, you should seriously consider a Surface (because I don't see iOS move into that direction at all). Unless you enjoy trying to hammer a square peg into a round hole, which seems quite frustrating for all parties involved from where I stand.
That's just offensive, and I doubt you can back that claim up with actual facts.
So I'm actually on your side for #1: being able to open YOUR songs and be able to edit them. Since they're your songs. However, the engineering challenge to make that happen is immense and there is no good or easy way of doing it. We looked into this, and spent far too much time on it, but the number of corner cases we encountered was far too great and would result in too many false positives and negatives to provide a good user experience, while maintaining our revenue stream.
For the sake of preserving the good vibes on this forum, I'm out of this discussion.
Let's just say that - as a dev, and as a user - I'm also not a big fan subscriptions, and I have no intention of going that route.
That doesn't change the fact that: (1) working on a completely new feature, rather than making an existing one better will result in higher returns (interests between devs and users don't align) and (2) you not entitled to receive a blank cheque to all of the developer's hard work on updating a feature. Sometimes devs will release a few minor updates that make the quality of life better. But if it's a complete rewrite, just like if you purchased V1 of an app, you wouldn't expect to receive V2 for free (referring to BeatMaker).
The point is, subscriptions are going to happen and more apps will move in that direction as they get bigger, or they'll flop and fail, leaving you, as a consumer with an out of date app that you may have paid for.
No one likes seeing prices go up - but sometimes it's necessary and people tend to get over it (referring to entertainment, food and apps).
How can anyone have an accurate conversation with you about these things if you don't shed some light on what you work as, how much you earn doing that work - and how you spend it?
Unless you provide this information it's absolutely pointless to complain about me claiming that you earn at least 20k a month and shouldn't be a cheapass on those subscriptions!
You can't just say 'no trust me, it's way less' and then expect all the devs to just say 'oh ok, then i'm sure we agree' ..
conversations don't work like that.
what you judge as being poor enough to make your own decision on what you buy might not seem poor enough at all to someone else...
If you improve an app with more features and functionality, or make existing ones better it will appeal to a wider range of customers. I don’t buy music apps that don’t support a good way to get audio in, and out again. Add that and I’ll buy it. Add AU and I’ll buy it. Don’t, and I won’t.
I didn’t say I should, I said I was happy to pay for an IAP, and in the case of a major rewrite as with BM3, buy the new version. Bear in mind I have actually paid for the thing in the first place though.
Arguing you get nothing for keeping an app updated is false. It keeps the app on the Store and keeps sales coming in. And in the long term ensures customer loyalty for future products.
i don't think anyone was complaining about that in here.
Yea I know. Ios has the stability of a paranoid schizophrenic on bath salts
For what it's worth I subscribe to iCloud for more storage and only recently started a subscription with Wotja. They have been in the iOS market for some time and have been trying to come up with a model that works for customers and themselves. They have pissed many people off with changes but above all they have stuck with it. This gets them a little respect from me and I think Wotja is interesting enough that I will stay with them for a while.
Personally I don’t think subscriptions will be a big “thing” As most users will vote with their wallets and choose not to.
They might subscribe to one or two major things that they use to possibly generate income (photoshop for example) however the majority of apps wouldn’t be worth it.
Also I imagine for most users iOS is a secondary avenue for whatever creative purpose they use it for and they probably have a desktop environment or in the case of musicians perhaps hardware to use as a primary tool.
Finally I don’t think comparisons with apps such as Spotify really work as you’re not really paying for the App but for the music it gives access to.
If users want desktop level all in one apps on iOS, I think the following would need to happen:
1. iOS would have to have be a stable environment especially its file structure rather than having yearly upheavals each time iOS is updated.
2. Cross platform development would be viable so developers could get sufficient bang for their investment buck.
3. Developers would need to feel confident the effort needed to invest in an iOS version of their app would be worthwhile.
Apple hasn’t invested enough in basic developer tools and iOS music infrastructure to make it attractive enough to retain and attract more music developers to a niche market like music creation.
If one looks at the pattern of music app developers entering and leaving the market over the years, it’s clear to me it’s not a lucrative market.
I think the most sustainable path is if Apple invested more in developer support though I think this is unlikely as music creation is a niche market and Apple has a significant advantage over their mobile competitors plus other areas such as game apps are much more lucrative.
I anticipate the iOS music app market to remain about the same and there will be no killer DAW developed or coming to iOS in the next couple of years. We’ll likely continue to see a trend towards the development of AU hosts, and AU apps which rely upon a minimal investment by the developer because:
1. iOS is a supplementary revenue source.
2. They can port over existing code.
3. They’re trying to keep a presence on iOS as a gateway to other platforms or hardware.
4. Open Source initiatives such as AudioKit.
5. Commercial development platforms such as JUCE make developing for iOS viable.
6. Hobbyist developers who create apps to pursue their own interest in iOS for music.
7. There’s been minimal development arising from crowd funding via social media.
8. There has been no sea change in the pricing for iOS music apps.
In the title, “onions” is spelled incorrectly.
new strain ...opions are half poppy half onion ... tasty, but knock you out!
Corrected
And Sunrizer did not charge existing users for AU
Hmmm, pretty heated thing going on here. My standpoint is: NO subscriptions, ever! I also stopped using Noatikl/Wotja, after they not only introduced subscriptions (with an option for a full yearly version, which I bought), but later watered down the actual worth of the full version in a not so open way (I only noticed it while using their software, and, thinking it is a new bug, reached out to them on their forum). They had changed the behavior silently across versions, and in my eyes, the product I had payed for was no „full“ version anymore. Nobody cared, and thus I threw the software out, filed the whole thing under „experiences“. What I need luckily can be done nicely with other things, too. I guess we will see how the whole thing plays out, I for myself am old enough to not have to worry about it too much (I hope...). I managed to steer clear of subscriptions this far, and I am confident I can keep it up. Should everything go subs next year, I‘ll just find me a new playing field.
Oh, and by the way, I know, it‘s just me, and every dev is welcome to do as he/she pleases, just my personal decision.
With major iOS updates every year, do you have any figures to show how many people are really going through the hassle of jailbreaking their devices these days?
How is the model to get paid every month from users who may not use the apps for months or apps with no updates for months realistic? Even Photoshop may not have monthly updates that are noticeable.
The donation feature idea if added by Apple is a cool idea - those who wish to pay the dev something more could do and this would solve the problem to a large extent (Patreon works for a reason).
Unlike desktop O/S and apps that are mature enough, iOS is in a turmoil with MAJOR changes and updates every year - Apple needs to rush to crush the market or else the competition/copycats will eat their lunch! These major innovations and technological breakthroughs (like Animojis and Tongue Detection
) will continue for the foreseeable future because mobile devices are a new category after computers. An iPad runs for 10 hours on a charge while a MacBook runs for 3 (when new) but the Mac outlives an iPad by 2X lifetime even though an iPad should last twice as much or more as a Mac! That's the reality of getting obsolete.
iOS offers devs a beautiful canvas to just paint, a marketing platform to host and sell apps with eCommerce, payment gateway, SEO, ratings, reviews and everything so simplified that devs could just focus on their work and content. If the app is great, it would shine in the AppStore with not much effort. It is like hosting a course on Udemy. You don’t even need a website.
Steve Jobs was right about quality - when the first Apple computer was released, it did not do much at all - it was considered as just a high quality and expensive toy! The app needs to be high-quality and fun to use and it will sell itself like a hot cake. There are high-quality apps that have just a single version with no subscription and release periodic IAPs and what they are doing is not incorrect.
I feel like weeping when I see poor-quality apps that do not look like apps and don't belong or qualify to exist on the iOS AppStore - they look like half-ass attempts. But some of the apps that have a mediocre UI have managed to nail the UX aspects with great content and sustained (Guitarism, ThumbJam, Heavy Brass, etc). No user is going to look at how beautiful the code is behind the scenes - nail the UI first, make it kick-ass, make it beautiful and see for yourself why it will not sell.
Your notion about IAPs is incorrect - not everyone has purchased Fab Filters or Waves plugins or Bilbao and that is optimal for devs and users.
There are enough high quality one-time-purchase apps on the store that are adequate to produce music and they are not going anywhere. No one can stop devs who want to go subscription model. But it will be on them to come up with updated content, features and/or service to sustain that model and not many devs are cut out for that kind of pressure and stress. If they fail to deliver/impress constantly, they'll lose their subscribers.
(duplicate comment posted)
Best way to go IMO is the original shareware model. Let people download the app for free rather than charge some arbitrary price that you think the customer would pay. Tonnes of apps out there charge for about $12 and some are over charging while others are undercharging for the quality of the software. Anyway the model that makes the most sense to me is to charge a monthly subscription of no more than a couple of dollars, a yearly subscription of no more than $20 or $19.99 and a lifetime subscription (i.e. a sale) for whatever the app is actually worth (e.g. $30-50). I recently downloaded an app on a monthly subscription. Shortly after I did so the app sent me a message that the lifetime subscription (advertised on the appstore for an exhorbitantly high price) would be sold to me as a subscriber for 50% off which I obliged do pay for. It was a psychological ploy but in actuality the asking price after the "sale" was within my price range and willingness to pay. Anyway the subscription model is viable provided that there is a lifetime purchase option. I won't get any app that doesn't let me own it and I've been burned a lot of times on apps that didn't live up to their price tag, and therefore I'm very reluctant to purchase anything from developers that I don't have any loyalty towards. TLDR offer an LE version, offer a few price scales, charge the maximum amount to the people who actually want to fund the development and charge anywhere between $10-20 for casual users on an annual basis.
I found it offensive and I’m not even a developer. You make up facts then challenge your target to disprove them. If they decline to play you game then your point is proved and now you have license to claim the high ground? That may work in politics, but it’s no way to have a constructive conversation.
You pushed away @brambos, one of the most thoughtful and articulate developers around. Thanks a bunch. Kudos to him for his restraint.
Sorry, I probably shouldn’t have said this, but felt I needed to.
I don't have en exact number on me, but from some 1-2 year old articles/posts, finding it varies between 2-3%. But at even 1% of all iOS device market share, the absolute population size is huge and something devs have to account for.
If you don't use a service or app - you can cancel anytime and resubscribe when you're ready to pick the app up again (on iOS). Unlike Adobe, these aren't long term commitments unless you pay for a year up front (at which point you typically get a discount).
Those apps then shouldn't use subscriptions, but instead focus on IAPs.
I fail to see the difference between what you've mentioned and IAPs and subscriptions... a dev could certainly implement it this way. Paper by 53 originally introduced Paper Pro as Paper Patron, to give for the sake of giving. It failed spectacularly.
I'm sorry - but you clearly never worked on marketing and publishing an app or major update. There is an insane amount of work that goes in the background to release an app, and a ton more to maintain and support customers. From marketing text, marketing assets (videos and images and screenshots), localizations, ASO, etc. etc. etc. There are literally businesses built to better help developers navigate the App Store. The saying, "build it and they will come" never happens. There is usually an immense amount of work you don't see behind the scenes to make an app successful.
Subscriptions are still new. From my experience, as developers keep adding IAPs, they'll soon find consumer confusion increases and will find their revenue stagnate or dip as they add more IAPs, not increase.
I'm confused - what notion are you speaking of exactly?
Absolutely! As I said in my initial thoughts, not all apps should have subscriptions.
2 words.
Market Forces.
3 more words.
Not my business
(as for what devs do and make, hope it is tons and tons of money.)
=================================================
Attacking devs in any way is illogical and naive.
No one is making anyone use iOS music apps or software.
Inflated and misinformed microeconomics and personal aspersions are really self defeating for the greater good of this topic.
The idea is more apps improving at a faster rate doing even new and better things. No?
Cost is not the prohibitive facet of music production. At least not for me.
$1000 dollar iOS devices and $2200 laptops with thousands on interfaces, midi gear, and accessories..............
................ make debating $5 vs. $20 is bottom feeder shit.
Sorry if I offended anyone.