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
Exactly. Netflix makes sense. Pandora makes sense. Etc. Subscriptions to each series or artist would be unmanageable.
That would not work for me as I assume it would have to be too high for me to justify. Maybe I would subscribe to some suite of apps but it would have to be pretty broad so that I only had a few subscriptions to bother with. Unlikely, but possible if the offering was attractive enough.
I just want to point out that that business insider article being posted around requires a subscription to read lol
I’m not sure there’s an equivalence there. Those expensive online media streaming services mentioned here are a bit like a library, where if you are a member you can access the books equally. With us, here, what we’d be describing is the mobile computing equivalent of a hardware shop or tool shop – where if you’re a member, you can walk in and borrow a tool whenever you require it. That doesn’t really exist in real life (although at the pro end, tool hire facilities certainly do), hence everyone has a tool box or tool cupboard or tool shed, for any imagineable eventuality. Maybe if there were tool libraries, we’d have more space in our houses.
I haven't used Android in over a year, so I admit to not having current knowledge of the Play Store situation. I still occasionally pull out the Windows machine when I want to muck about in there, and no, I need no subscriptions to use the software in there. If I WERE to use a subscription on the PC, it'd probably be Roland Cloud ($20/month, and once every 12 months you pick a plugin to own forever, essentially making it a rent-to-own loyalty program). Also the Serum rent-to-own. However, nobody'd be forcing my hand to nab those/update anything. I have the CHOICE.
This "hating on apple" isn't some "let's be like the hippie cool kids and hate giant corporations" nonsense. It's the fact that most of us hate UNREASONABLE subscriptions, and the fact Apple feels they can...here we go...TAKE AWAY OUR CHOICE by trying to badger many developers to adopt a payment model that makes no sense if services are not offered (multiplatform cloud storage, a library of constantly updated assets, rent-to-own payment models, etc).
Right, so Apple are basically telling us that apps ARE the service? So, in other words, Apple thinks my using Korvpressor in AUM wouldn't be a tool for me to use to make things but rather two services graciously bestowed upon me for the right price.
Also, check out what @Dawdles wrote. I agree that hating Apple may be pointless in the end after all, but it doesn't stop me from becoming distressed that my line of work may be compromised by Apple's constant stream of shitty decisions forcing me into finding constant workarounds and solutions to the point it may jolly well force me back to Windows. While Windows is a pain, slowly but surely it's starting to look like the better option after all these years. That's saying something.
That's why Safari has "reader view".
Yeah? Well, that's funny! How about this?
https://www.google.com/search?q=apple+secret+meeting+developers+new+york+subscriptions
Just search for same terms and you would find a plethora of similar articles for FREE. I did not pay BI to read it and BI obviously did not understand what works in the market and what doesn't. If they try to force a user into something, there are free alternatives. Not to mention - when most users quickly quit their site after seeing the subscription popups (without spending any time whatsoever on their site!), it is really, really BAD for their website's SEO as it adds to their Bounce Rate in their analytics!! Which part of that wasn't clear to their webmaster? The customer always wins. They could offer more optimal alternatives instead like store-wide access to apps on subscription or IAPs or Patreon or a combination of these and others.
If this becomes a realty, I'll just keep Cubasis and SynthMaster One - but I don't think these 2 businesses need to force subscriptions on their users with their established business models and success with their software and hardware. And there is free GarageBand, Music Memos, etc. Not every app would go that route for various reasons (eg: the dev doesn't want to go through the pains of providing frequent updates/features) - and there will always be alternative apps / options. I don't think FL Studio Mobile would go subscription looking at their forever license of their desktop DAW that offers all future major versions to users for free for life. Some devs may get more sales by choosing to keep their apps as one-off purchases from users who shy away from subscriptions.
Subscription - What model would work for music production. Espe> @Dawdles said:
I was going to invest in a Pro 12.9 very soon, with these decisions by Apple, that 12.9 has become not very soon.
It is worth reminding people that hardware is effectively rental too. If you buy a studiosworth of hardware synths, a few decades later you can probably sell it for what you paid for it, minus the cost of living gradient, but plus you get the usage in the meantime. If you’re lucky, you can sell some of it for more than you paid for it (and conversely, sell others for less, etc).
If you do this much quicker, for example, a year, 18 months, two year cycles, then you’re buying a new synth, using it for a project or more, then selling it in part exchange for a new one (or even better, a not quite new one). That way, the difference is your rental cost.
I just want to interject a bit and say, app development and maintenance has a cost and in many cases, exceeding that of content creation. How many one-off paid apps decided not to upgrade from 32-bit to 64 and were cut off with iOS 11? The app developers that release a subscription without providing constant value, either through evolving tools or updated content libraries shouldn't go subscription.
But this thread really speaks to a larger issue: we as a society have decided to devalue features and software, because so much of it is given for "free" (think Open Source, FireFox, Facebook, Google Drive, and even free-to-play games). Services and content haven't had the same devaluation as software, on a consumer level. That's tough if you're just building a tool (like a consumer level photo editing app).
As to Apple's incentives: I don't speak for them, but my belief is, subscriptions isn't about a short term gain ("we'll get more monies with more expensive apps.. hahahah..."). It's that apps have been seriously devalued over the last decade and that's killing their app ecosystem that keeps people tied to their devices (it's Apple's ecosystem, and lack there of from Google, that effectively killed the Android tablet).
Good one.
That 'protection' was quite easy to 'by pass' by using the read mode in Safari
I like to just leave it as a fun joke.
+1
I've actually stopped reading online magazines with 'pay walls'
I used to buy tons of physical magazines in the late eighties / early nineties to get info on my hobbies. Given that, I could say that this free forum has likely 'saved me' thousands of dollars.
How many people would subscribe to this forum? How much would they pay?
Next time someone asks me who my spirit animal is, I'm gonna say @wim.
Agreed, great points.
I'm just gonna put this out there as fodder: maybe software synths are services? Or, more specifically, the maintenance of software synths is a service. We pay to have our furnaces, cars, gutters, etc serviced/maintained and we have come to expect that our software will be maintained. Maybe we should consider looking at software maintenance as a service? No strong opinion here, just fodder.
I actually dig the https://www.sketchapp.com/ subscription model. It's a reasonably priced annual subscription and if you don't re-up your subscription you can keep using the last version you had (they update almost monthly). This is a critical difference between their model and Adobe's or Microsoft's. You don't get feature updates but older versions still get security and bug fix updates. When a new feature comes along that you just have to have, you can re-up your subscription and you get a year of updates from that point.
'Space', 'service', 'product' etc... I don't have a strong feeling for labeling these things at all. I just want to throw a dev I like/trust more money if it means the updates happen quicker and with a bigger bang. Not a problem. If I see a major exciting pattern of updates and an even vague roadmap/wishlist and they engage in cool user interaction, sweet, sold etc. If at some point I feel the poor pooch is getting screwed, I'll bail. Do I want a hundred apps? Nope. I would happily boil things down to a small suite of tools (like I do on desktop) if they kicked major ass. Right now I am workflow jerry rigging tons of apps but not because it is my passion, heh.
(Jerk(ier) mode engaged...) If iOS getting a more professional level of quality for apps means that the old 'one timer purchase' hoarder crowd leaves and is replaced by a maybe even potentially smaller (unlikely given the quality boost imao) but more committed subscriber base, then so be it. Whatever works. I look forward to apps getting out of the toy aisle. Practically giving them away for peanuts on the dollar, won't make that happen.
Yes! +perfect (for me)
Are you sure about that?
It really is a great subscription model, but I don't think it'll ever be possible on iOS. I liked this model so much, I spent months over how to bring it to iOS, and here's what I found:
1) This works for Sketch because it's a yearly plan, and for consumer tools, $99/year is a high price to pay. A monthly option, which would reduce the cost to entry, would be hard to do (pay for single month and get the entire software for free doesn't seem right). There is also no contractual subscriptions with Apple, if you are paying month-to-month, you can cancel anytime; so that's out too.
2) You can try implementing rent-to-own from scratch to create a workable monthly subscription. Similar to how Splice did it with Serum. But... because Serum is "owned" afterwards, while Sketch is you stop receiving updates, it can cause a lot of confusion (esp. if you mix content and features). Do you own everything after subscribing for 1 month? If so, that means, the price will be high. What do you lose access to if you unsubscribe? If I cancel and resubscribe before I own, is there a period where my prior monthly payments no longer count? Etc. etc. etc.
3) You can't stop someone from downloading an update from the App Store. Sketch isn't on the Mac App Store for this reason... But what this ultimately means is, you have to gate every feature and content release. Content releases aren't terrible, as you can diff against a date of release versus the subscription end period (if the individual owns the app). However, features is a whole other beast. Sure you can put a date in front of each feature, but what happens if you update that feature or completely redesign it? Do you maintain 2 versions of the feature? Maybe 3, 4, etc. in the future? What's the incentive between adding a new feature that will draw new users versus refining one that already exists? From my estimates, the challenge to create the framework to gate features, and future maintenance would have doubled our current overhead, and get worse overtime. In other words, to make up for that difference in productivity, we'll have to get double the sales with this Sketch-esq model than with a traditional rent subscription model; which I don't believe is possible.
4) Why doesn't Apple do this - allow an app, after a period of time, to stop issuing updates if a user didn't pay, but still had access to it? Because apps break, and Apple wants to stop that from happening as much as possible. This isn't only when someone updates the OS, but when they get a new device. This is why new updates and apps have to conform for iPhone X, 64 bit, and new technologies as time goes on. It goes from being optional to a requirement. Even developers that released apps as V1, V2, etc. eventually remove their old versions from the App Store and drop support, and eventually an OS update or new device comes and breaks it.
5) Lastly, even if Apple would allow apps to stop issuing updates, there is currently no way of issuing bug fixes for prior versions. This is something as a developer, I really wish I had. Particularly so I can drop support for older versions of iOS earlier. We'll sometimes push off an update that's the new OS only, just so we can push out bug fixes for everyone. I would love to be able to issue updates from the point where we bumped up our minimum supported OS. In regards to Sketch, every version ever released may have to be updated for a critical bug fix. This model hasn't been around long enough, but I suspect, after a certain period, they may not issue full support to those older versions. And for me and others I know, we just mentally treat it as a normal subscription.
Fantastic breakdown @baldajan. @GospelMusicians, get that man a promo code!
Yes, very cool getting the skinny on the state of subscriptions in general.
Probably because it’s hard to do? and even if the Android devs decide to do the hard work, a thread like this will be all the thanks they get 😂