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
I will check it but I’m not huge fan of mpc workflow...
Maybe a subscription model like spotify would work. You subscribe to the apple app store and can download all apps. The author of the app gets paid for the amount of time users use their app.
Just a crazy idea.
How much would you be prepared to pay for that?
I don’t know but maybe around 10€-30€.
Maybe 10€ for x apps 20€ for y apps and 30€ for unlimited apps
Since I might seem to be in the same corner as Dawdless, I feel the need to separate myself from the needless arrogant and aggressive ways, he/she is acting out on here.
Please refrain from hateful answers to this post, I am only expressing my personal opinion, and wish to go on politely. Thus, I will not react to any kind of insult that might result as a reaction to this post. Thank you!
One way would be something like $9.99-$19.99/month per 'app category'(Music, Games, Utilities, Photo & Video)?
As a recovering 'app-o-holic' my current spending rate is around ~$40 per month sometimes less sometimes more.
I avoid using a credit card on the AppStore since it makes it a bit easier to keep the 'bad habits' under control.
(I can't even do 'subscription', store-credits are only good for iCloud Drive, Apple Music and Video rentals the rest require a credit-card last time I checked).
I suspect we'd get into the same dilemma as Spotify meaning the more content providers there are in the 'content pool' the lower the pay-out per content provider will be...
I'm probably wasting time saying this because you are obviously blind to your own faults, but your tone is arrogant and toxic. People like you make the forum a lot less pleasant to hang out it.
@Samu Each app gets paid for the amount of usage. I mean apple already register everything we do on our devices I guess the OS already supports registering the amount of running time per app. Then there’s no need for category. Categories can be tricky because some apps can be in several categories.
I don’t actually mind the idea of subscription and I do ultimately see it as the terminus of how software things get sold and maintained.
The big difference is that instead of having an iPad filled with more music-creating apps than I can even remember buying, most of which aren’t being used for years at a time, and when they do it’ll be for a quick bout of re-discovery – instead of that scenario, I’d have about one app. Perhaps two, but I doubt I’d push the boat out that far.
I’d subscribe to approximately one app, ever, and only during times of employment (such as at the moment) and abandon the subscription during times of no employment (such as the past four years). This is fairly obvious. I can’t do more than one. It’d be like having two phone contracts – most people have one, and if they can’t get out of it and have to wait for the contract time to expire they grumble and wait for the remainder of the year or 18 months and then move with relief. What they don’t do is simply get another more desirable phone contract on top of the existing one. A rich person (ie, employed with future prospects in a conventional western-world / European style society) almost certainly could support two phone contracts without financial harm, but it is seen as absurd, so people don’t. Similarly, I’d subscribe to one app, not two, and never even entertain buying random apps in the interim. And when I’m not working, that subscription would be the first luxury to go.
In terms of hardware, I’ve always had hardware (bought or built) but in reality there’s other alternatives these days, plus a twist.
A lot of hardware is actually hardware which supports software. Think of all the hardware synths that have OS updates which give new features – the Roland Airas, the Circuit, etc.
A lot of software is open source, and on Linux, represents a good usable studio’s worth of gear. I use Linux as much as macOS as my two main non-mobile OSs, and although Linux software is ugly as fuck and badly documented, it works as a tool or as an appliance, and I’d go back to using open source of course, if I want more than one luxury subscription iOS app as part of the studio. I’d be more likely to have the hands-on synth as a luxury subscription iOS app, and the rest of the studio, for mixing and mastering, would be on Linux and open source.
To sum up, the big difference is that I would never have bought most of the apps on my iPad. Arguably I shouldn’t have anyway. But, for the one that I would have bought, I’d pay close attention to it and use it a lot, as I’m paying a regular subscription for it (it’d be something quite all-encompassing, such as Audulus, I’d estimate).
To add my two cents; I have no problem paying subscriptions for apps that I (a) use for work and therefore make money from my continued investment, or (b) use on a daily basis.. such as entertainment or productivity apps. Making music is just a hobby for me and IOS as a platform has allowed me (and I’m sure a lot of others) to indulge in a wide variety of music apps that I wouldn’t have otherwise experienced on the desktop. To me the fact that iOS is not a desktop ecosystem is what makes it so great.
At least five people have called you out in this thread alone, but instead of tacking stock and thinking that maybe there's something wrong in the way you're communicating, you double-down.
You're heading for a ban, because you're not capable of civil discourse. I won't miss you when you're gone
I think people need to remember that only @michael has the authority to ban anyone so if he’s okay with how @Dawdles has conducted himself in this thread, who are we to criticize his approaches? Clearly this is a free speech zone and a certain amount of behavior many of us might not approve of will be tolerated.
Personally I think there have been too many ad hominem attacks in the thread. If there’s something you don’t like, it’s probably not a good idea to try a similar approach yourself.
Caution! Unreasonably flagging others (or each other) can backfire as a matter of forum etiquette as they are reviewed by a human being.
At starter of this thread I was curious about thoughts of the subscription model and never thought that there would be extreme responses. It's a pity that @brambos, one of the most engaging devs also very active on this forum, dropped out... Anyway I learned some interesting things from devs and users and views. Never thought of the unique state of iOS vs real platforms like Windows and MacOS as mentioned by @RUST( i )K. iOS is I think a platform the is still in development by Apple. The heavy yearly and sometimes smaller updates updates that continually can "break" old apps + the not all to clear development guidelines and undocumented stuff especially for audio apps makes that devs can have their handfull on keeping on par with the latest iOS version.
Als Apple's role is somehow to rigid in my eyes. The discontinuation of 32 bits apps was in my eyes totally not necessary. On a platform as Windows you still can run nearly all 32 bit audio software and VST plugins.
I started this thread especially because more and more of my photo and editing software on iOS went subscription based. I personally find this annoying because devs just drop the old version. Come up with a new one that is crippled and for uncrippling you start to pay weekly, montly or yearly.
I personally think the future is like wat we saw on Windows and MacOS that there will be a few big DAWs and devs that develop AU plugins. Also I think we will see a decline in more creative and standalone apps.
I can't help it if I don't make sense to you.
The market will decide if the subscription model is the only model that works for all developers. Other than baseless paranoia, I have no idea why someone would believe that's going to happen but, if it did, then that's how the free market works. If you don't want to support the only way producers think they can make money, then you can CHOOSE not to buy.
If enough people choose not to subscribe to apps, other producers will look to that market as an alternative. Look at what Affinity is doing to capture the market Adobe left behind. Like right now, iOS music-making devs are apparently struggling, but they have a CHOICE to produce for iOS or not. No one is forced to do anything. You don't like the options, find another way. But considering how much is available today for free or almost nothing, there's no evidence whatsoever to suggest that these kinds of devs are going to all start charging subscriptions. There almost certainly will always be other options to subscriptions, but maybe at some point iOS musicians won't have the upper hand and get everything they want. It can be a tough life.
I do want to clarify: I do indeed think that the goal of all (paid or freemium) apps should go subscription, but that doesn't mean I think all of those apps will go subscription. I also don't think all app subscriptions should cost $5+/mo - some should have a charge of $1-10/year to help pay for the app's continued support. Some may decide to use subscriptions as a donation platform for their app (as some have suggested). Subscriptions are still new to the software world, and they take the place of apps that released a major version every year or two.
In regards to Affinity, I haven't seen anything that suggests they captured a market that Adobe left behind in regards to subscriptions. I mean, we own and use Affinity Designer, but also subscribe to Adobe CC.
But this also reminds me of Sketch, where a little over 2 years ago, they went to "subscription", but with a twist (that unfortunately isn't possible on iOS or the Mac App Store). I highly encourage you to read up on their post. But if you don't read the whole post, take a read at the most highlighted bit:
Though it technically isn't a subscription, given that they have a thriving community of Sketch files you can download and use, not having the latest version is almost certainly going to slow you down. It's a really interesting model that unfortunately isn't possible under Apple.
Thanks. I'll check it out.
Regarding Affinity, I only go by appearances, and I haven't made a close study of it. Adobe went to subscriptions, and many people complained bitterly, many refusing to subscribe. I don't know the numbers. Then Serif comes out with Affinity Photo, and seemingly everyone hyping and promoting it as a Photoshop non-subscription alternative. AP is designed after PS, and now we have Designer as an alternative to Illustrator, and Publisher coming to provide a suite to rival an Adobe package.
I heard Affinity has sold over a million and growing. Where would these apps be if Adobe hadn't gone subscription? My guess is that many more Adobe users would have remained with the comfort, familiarity, and reliability of what they knew, and assuming Affinity as we know it was still a viable project, it would have had a much tougher time getting attention. Adobe must have known they would lose some number of customers, especially non-pros, and with that knowledge made what they thought was the best business decision. I'm sure Affinity attracts users who never even used Adobe products, but it appears the apps also helped fill the demand Adobe left behind.
One developer offering an opinion is just that. Why attack the idea as a universal threat? Bram Bos is a major iOS developer for this market and, in this very thread, said he doesn't like and is not planning on going the subscription route. Did some people miss or ignore that?
Because it kind of suggests that, despite subscriptions being the way to go for some developers, it's not for everyone.