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 Store

Loopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.

Are random attributes taking over your work?

2»

Comments

  • Two things:
    When I was a kid I had a Gilbert chemistry set. About fifty little jars of stuff. I loved the zinc, so shiny. I loved/ hated the sulphur, so yellow cakey and smelly. Copper sulfate... Blue! I rarely used the instructions. Just mixed stuff together with large helpings of baking powder from my mom's cupboard. Fizz! Burn! Smoke! Stink! Dare I hope for a real explosion? It was magic and fun to concoct concoctions!

    Secondly, I have spent my musical life after age twenty five trying first, and then succeeding in finding a different source for musical "ideas" beyond my mind's logical abilities. I had to put my judging mind aside in order to access a simpler, more connected and more magical source. I won't name it... As in the Tao that can be named is not the Tao. But it is not thought out structures, random ideas, or reconstitutions of previous material. Yes, I have a vocabulary but it is capable of new leaps of faith and risk. What is the best fun for me is certainly not right for everyone. But, for those who are attracted to such a way, it can be surprising, satisfying in depth and mystifying.

  • I don't use it at all. I absolutely appreciate the use. I have even agreed and +1d things in threads/betas supporting other people's wishes regarding it.

    I just hardly ever write that way. If I want something that seems somewhat random, I'll instead have something on a long odd measured cycle because I really want to control frequency and placement.

  • Kinda the whole point of writing in the first place is that you get to be surprised by the stuff that somehow bubbles up from inside you. It seems a shame to miss out on that because of an algorithm...

  • As a child, i would often ask relatives to draw a squiggle on a piece of paper.

    i would then take this squiggle and turn it into ... something (often a space scene or wild creature or ...)

    And i got so much enjoyment from this. The blank page seemed to offer TOO MUCH possibility, and brought about - in me - a kind of 'shut-down' - as if i was overwhelmed by choice.

    This is how i feel about the random seeds the great apps produce - they are my squiggles - my start points, and that adding "chance" into my creative process, allows for a little outside light to shine on my own inner workings.

    That said, i find i also crave structure!

    And so, for me, my ideal is a kind of "structured hapenstance" - rules and games i can use for my own particular use of the seeds produced :)

    i should also say i Love the I Ching and the work of John Cage ;))

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Cage#Chance

  • edited October 2018

    I love to play my midi notes, melodies etc. live but i also love to add some random midi FX to it for velocity f.e. So it sounds almost like it could actually play a keyboard :)
    I especially like to use arps which offer also slightly random velocity (which control the cutoff f.e.) and other values. Can bring so much life into a sound.
    Even more important for iOS apps since it´s close to impossible to play expressive on a touch screen without some random values and/or probabilities.

  • edited October 2018

    @rs2000 said:
    One great example of randomization is Oscilab.
    Being able to force the random gibberish that @AndyPlankton described quite accurately into something musically useful by restricting the output to specified rhythm and scale makes it so much more useful.

    Hold it, stop everyone, what has Oscilab to do with randomisation? There’s only one thing in the whole of Oscilab that offers randomness, and that is the choice of a random gating pattern (which once chosen remains that way). I’m not counting the noise waveform in the oscillators (which is shaped exactly like a sawtooth, for some reason) as nobody would look at the noise generator of this synth and call that alone randomisation. I can’t see anything that would make Oscilab a “great example” of randomisation at all, and if it’s just down to that random gating pattern choosing thing, that’s hardly a great example at all.

  • edited October 2018

    @u0421793 said:

    @rs2000 said:
    One great example of randomization is Oscilab.
    Being able to force the random gibberish that @AndyPlankton described quite accurately into something musically useful by restricting the output to specified rhythm and scale makes it so much more useful.

    Hold it, stop everyone, what has Oscilab to do with randomisation? There’s only one thing in the whole of Oscilab that offers randomness, and that is the choice of a random gating pattern (which once chosen remains that way). I’m not counting the noise waveform in the oscillators (which is shaped exactly like a sawtooth, for some reason) as nobody would look at the noise generator of this synth and call that alone randomisation. I can’t see anything that would make Oscilab a “great example” of randomisation at all, and if it’s just down to that random gating pattern choosing thing, that’s hardly a great example at all.

    That's not how I'm using it.
    I prefer to set the rhythm beforehand and let the three frequency modulation LFOs go wild, then let the pitch be quantized to the temporal events.
    This is similar to how most random number generators work on digital systems without an analog noise source + ADC: Sample a rapidly incrementing counter at a rate much lower than the counting rate to get pseudo-random values.
    And yes, this is completely deterministic and does not even deserve the name "random", but it sounds like it was and that's the point.
    In Oscilab, you can additionally shape the melody line by drawing a pitch curve if you like.

  • edited October 2018

    I enjoy playing with generative apps like Gestrument/Gestrument Pro, Senode, Xynthesizr, Roseta, etc. I look forward to playing with the generative stuff built into Sunvox (mostly the "effects").

    midisequencer/Tony's AU MIDI recorder project is exciting to me because it opens up the possibility of recording the MIDI events generated by these generative apps, so that I can later edit the recorded MIDI, keep the parts I like, and then progress to making finished pieces of music out of that. I was going to explore something similar with Beatmaker 2 recording Gestrument MIDI, but Tony's new thing combined with an AU framework looks to be more flexible, with easier workflow.

  • Random generators are pretty good starting points for me. But I usually print the midi and curate it into something I actually like. So never is it 100% random in my case.

  • The more I think about this, I come to the conclusion that I am more concerned about my work taking over my random attributes.

  • Using randomization just gives you a new instrument in your orchestra. Oh look, someone just showed up with a squonkpipe! Let’s make them the lead.

  • Sigh view am high neat half to what. Sent late held than set why wife our. If an blessing building steepest. Agreement distrusts mrs six affection satisfied. Day blushes visitor end company old prevent chapter. Consider declared out expenses her concerns. No at indulgence conviction particular unsatiable boisterous discretion. Direct enough off others say eldest may exeter she. Possible all ignorant supplied get settling marriage recurred.

    At distant inhabit amongst by. Appetite welcomed interest the goodness boy not. Estimable education for disposing pronounce her. John size good gay plan sent old roof own. Inquietude saw understood his friendship frequently yet. Nature his marked ham wished.

    Not far stuff she think the jokes. Going as by do known noise he wrote round leave. Warmly put branch people narrow see. Winding its waiting yet parlors married own feeling. Marry fruit do spite jokes an times. Whether at it unknown warrant herself winding if. Him same none name sake had post love. An busy feel form hand am up help. Parties it brother amongst an fortune of. Twenty behind wicket why age now itself ten.

  • @simonnowis said:
    As a child, i would often ask relatives to draw a squiggle on a piece of paper.

    i would then take this squiggle and turn it into ... something (often a space scene or wild creature or ...)

    And i got so much enjoyment from this. The blank page seemed to offer TOO MUCH possibility, and brought about - in me - a kind of 'shut-down' - as if i was overwhelmed by choice.

    This is how i feel about the random seeds the great apps produce - they are my squiggles - my start points, and that adding "chance" into my creative process, allows for a little outside light to shine on my own inner workings.

    That said, i find i also crave structure!

    And so, for me, my ideal is a kind of "structured hapenstance" - rules and games i can use for my own particular use of the seeds produced :)

    i should also say i Love the I Ching and the work of John Cage ;))

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Cage#Chance

    I love this post!

    I’m currently getting my “squiggles” from Xequence’s PolyHymnia IAP.

    I overlay these onto a 4 bar chord progression and then tweak/nurture them into something more beautiful. :)

  • If it’s good enough for literature, it’s good enough for music making🤪 damn you mister James joyce and your complicated finnegan’s wake which has broken minds to this day🤯

    “ What clashes here of wills gen wonts, oystrygods gaggin fishy-
    gods! Brékkek Kékkek Kékkek Kékkek! Kóax Kóax Kóax! Ualu
    Ualu Ualu! Quaouauh! Where the Baddelaries partisans are still
    out to mathmaster Malachus Micgranes and the Verdons cata-
    pelting the camibalistics out of the Whoyteboyce of Hoodie
    Head. Assiegates and boomeringstroms. Sod's brood, be me fear!
    Sanglorians, save! Arms apeal with larms, appalling. Killykill-
    killy: a toll, a toll. What chance cuddleys, what cashels aired
    and ventilated! What bidimetoloves sinduced by what tegotetab-
    solvers! What true feeling for their's hayair with what strawng
    voice of false jiccup! O here here how hoth sprowled met the
    duskt the father of fornicationists but, (O my shining stars and
    body!) how hath fanespanned most high heaven the skysign of
    soft advertisement! But was iz? Iseut? Ere were sewers? The oaks
    of ald now they lie in peat yet elms leap where askes lay. Phall if
    you but will, rise you must: and none so soon either shall the
    pharce for the nunce come to a setdown secular phoenish.”

  • No. Random generators just make me angry that they don’t make the same choices I would myself. All my stuff I record via touch screen keys/interfaces

  • @wim said:
    Twenty behind wicket
    why age now itself ten.

    There's the start of a whole Genesis album right here...

  • edited October 2018

    @LinearLineman said:
    Two things:
    When I was a kid I had a Gilbert chemistry set. About fifty little jars of stuff. I loved the zinc, so shiny. I loved/ hated the sulphur, so yellow cakey and smelly. Copper sulfate... Blue! I rarely used the instructions. Just mixed stuff together with large helpings of baking powder from my mom's cupboard. Fizz! Burn! Smoke! Stink! Dare I hope for a real explosion? It was magic and fun to concoct concoctions!

    Secondly, I have spent my musical life after age twenty five trying first, and then succeeding in finding a different source for musical "ideas" beyond my mind's logical abilities. I had to put my judging mind aside in order to access a simpler, more connected and more magical source. I won't name it... As in the Tao that can be named is not the Tao. But it is not thought out structures, random ideas, or reconstitutions of previous material. Yes, I have a vocabulary but it is capable of new leaps of faith and risk. What is the best fun for me is certainly not right for everyone. But, for those who are attracted to such a way, it can be surprising, satisfying in depth and mystifying.

    Me & my little brother got chemistry sets for Christmas in 1972.
    I was poisoned and fainted by something I mixed, and my brothers set blew up the night before Christmas Day, after he mixed something on Christmas Eve. We found the top of the cardboard box stuck to the roof :smile:

    Kids are raised to be safe these days, not to be alchemists. It’s clearly audible in formatted pop music.
    Back in the day musicians took risks, Mike Oldfield obviously didn’t care about radio air time... but he got it anyway because of his risk-taking. Thank you Richard Branson.

  • @Kühl said:

    @LinearLineman said:
    Two things:
    When I was a kid I had a Gilbert chemistry set. About fifty little jars of stuff. I loved the zinc, so shiny. I loved/ hated the sulphur, so yellow cakey and smelly. Copper sulfate... Blue! I rarely used the instructions. Just mixed stuff together with large helpings of baking powder from my mom's cupboard. Fizz! Burn! Smoke! Stink! Dare I hope for a real explosion? It was magic and fun to concoct concoctions!

    Secondly, I have spent my musical life after age twenty five trying first, and then succeeding in finding a different source for musical "ideas" beyond my mind's logical abilities. I had to put my judging mind aside in order to access a simpler, more connected and more magical source. I won't name it... As in the Tao that can be named is not the Tao. But it is not thought out structures, random ideas, or reconstitutions of previous material. Yes, I have a vocabulary but it is capable of new leaps of faith and risk. What is the best fun for me is certainly not right for everyone. But, for those who are attracted to such a way, it can be surprising, satisfying in depth and mystifying.

    Me & my little brother got chemistry sets for Christmas in 1972.
    I was poisoned and fainted by something I mixed, and my brothers set blew up the night before Christmas Day, after he mixed something on Christmas Eve. We found the top of the cardboard box stuck to the roof :smile:

    Kids are raised to be safe these days, not to be alchemists. It’s clearly audible in formatted pop music.
    Back in the day musicians took risks, Mike Oldfield obviously didn’t care about radio air time... but he got it anyway because of his risk-taking. Thank you Richard Branson.

    Hah! You'll never forget these lessons learned :D
    Good to see you're still alive.

  • @richardyot said:
    Kinda the whole point of writing in the first place is that you get to be surprised by the stuff that somehow bubbles up from inside you. It seems a shame to miss out on that because of an algorithm...

    Agree emphatically with your premise but... We jam with other people to be inspired by what bubbles up in them, yes? To me, a good random implementation approximates jamming with someone else.

  • @gusgranite said:
    No. More random. :wink:

    Shouldn't that be "None more Random" as in Spinal Tap? :D

  • @lukesleepwalker said:

    @richardyot said:
    Kinda the whole point of writing in the first place is that you get to be surprised by the stuff that somehow bubbles up from inside you. It seems a shame to miss out on that because of an algorithm...

    Agree emphatically with your premise but... We jam with other people to be inspired by what bubbles up in them, yes? To me, a good random implementation approximates jamming with someone else.

    Haha, I'm a misanthrope though, I always have issues with any kind of collaboration, either human or computer-aided. Except for the Drummers in GarageBand, I have no creative differences with them, they play what I tell them to.

  • @richardyot said:

    @lukesleepwalker said:

    @richardyot said:
    Kinda the whole point of writing in the first place is that you get to be surprised by the stuff that somehow bubbles up from inside you. It seems a shame to miss out on that because of an algorithm...

    Agree emphatically with your premise but... We jam with other people to be inspired by what bubbles up in them, yes? To me, a good random implementation approximates jamming with someone else.

    Haha, I'm a misanthrope though, I always have issues with any kind of collaboration, either human or computer-aided. Except for the Drummers in GarageBand, I have no creative differences with them, they play what I tell them to.

    LOL. Then, they aren't really drummers but cleverly disguised guitar players. ;)

  • @lukesleepwalker said:

    @richardyot said:

    @lukesleepwalker said:

    @richardyot said:
    Kinda the whole point of writing in the first place is that you get to be surprised by the stuff that somehow bubbles up from inside you. It seems a shame to miss out on that because of an algorithm...

    Agree emphatically with your premise but... We jam with other people to be inspired by what bubbles up in them, yes? To me, a good random implementation approximates jamming with someone else.

    Haha, I'm a misanthrope though, I always have issues with any kind of collaboration, either human or computer-aided. Except for the Drummers in GarageBand, I have no creative differences with them, they play what I tell them to.

    LOL. Then, they aren't really drummers but cleverly disguised guitar players. ;)

    If only! Guitar players always have a mind of their own, it's unbearable.

  • @richardyot said:

    @lukesleepwalker said:

    @richardyot said:

    @lukesleepwalker said:

    @richardyot said:
    Kinda the whole point of writing in the first place is that you get to be surprised by the stuff that somehow bubbles up from inside you. It seems a shame to miss out on that because of an algorithm...

    Agree emphatically with your premise but... We jam with other people to be inspired by what bubbles up in them, yes? To me, a good random implementation approximates jamming with someone else.

    Haha, I'm a misanthrope though, I always have issues with any kind of collaboration, either human or computer-aided. Except for the Drummers in GarageBand, I have no creative differences with them, they play what I tell them to.

    LOL. Then, they aren't really drummers but cleverly disguised guitar players. ;)

    If only! Guitar players always have a mind of their own, it's unbearable.

    Tell me something. And we're not yet talking about former guitar players now playing the bass. >:)

Sign In or Register to comment.