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
Definitions of the metre since 1798[66]
Basis of definition Date Absolute
uncertainty Relative
uncertainty
1⁄10,000,000 part of one half of a meridian, measurement by Delambre and Méchain 1798 0.5–0.1 mm 10−4
First prototype Mètre des Archives platinum bar standard 1799 0.05–0.01 mm 10−5
Platinum-iridium bar at melting point of ice (1st CGPM) 1889 0.2–0.1 μm 10−7
Platinum-iridium bar at melting point of ice, atmospheric pressure, supported by two rollers (7th CGPM) 1927 n.a. n.a.
1,650,763.73 wavelengths of light from a specified transition in krypton-86 (11th CGPM) 1960 0.01–0.005 μm 10−8
Length of the path travelled by light in a vacuum in 1⁄299,792,458 of a second (17th CGPM) 1983 0.1 nm
Source
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_metre
Just because you’re still using ‘prototype meters’
These may be small differences. But as a matter of fact they are different. And your assertion that it had never been changed and that my education was faulty were both incorrect.
The metric system is entirely based on the time that elapses during 9,192,631,770 (9.192631770 x 10 9 ) cycles of the radiation produced by the transition between two levels of the cesium 133 atom.
And if you think that is logical ....
China also uses new and old junk.
This was the way it was taught when I went to school also, what was in the parentheses was done first so it’d be ⭕️() as @Max23 detailed above and without the parentheses having precedence it’d be 🚫().
These differences are not significant provided the people or programs evaluating the expressions agree on the same set of criteria for evaluating them. It’s an issue of agreeing upon a shared convention not the measure of intelligence or who is right or wrong.
It’s not a matter of no one can agree it’s that they insist upon a particular convention and are unwilling to agree to a different one. The mathematics is the same, people decide how they want to define the rules for describing it. Perhaps for some applications one system makes more sense, for example suppose a computer had a system where it does every operation as it comes in for maximum throughput.
6/2(1+2)
3(1+2)
3+2
5
It’d be up to the humans to enter the expressions into the computer correctly so they get the results they were expecting. If they were expecting to get a 9 or a 1, they’d get blamed for the plane falling out of the sky because they entered the wrong expression into the computer.
Reverse Polish Notation is an example of this type of system used by HP calculators way back when.
Meters are not all equal.
Usually they are 4/4, but can also be 3/4, 6/8, 5/4, 7/8, etc.
I think he got 5 by multiplying the 3 with the 1 inside the parenthesis? I could be wrong though...
No he only multiplied the three and the one, then its (3+2)
I've had no idea why if that’s the case but I don't understand anything after all I've heard so far. 😂
OK, math nerds. Do the 2 answers for 6/2(1+2) based on operator precedence rules
change in:
Octal (Base 8 - Love those Nibbles)
Dodecatal (Base 12)
Hexadecimal (Base 16)
For extra credit convert 6/2(1+2) to Binary (Base 2).
My calculator just said “huh?”
Here’s an article about it https://wiki.audiob.us/rpn_to_apple
Just got back to this thread and man this got out of hand!
P.S.: yes to metric everywhere / no to English everywhere
P.S. 2: what's inside the parentheses is done first, 6/2·(1+2) (i.e. with explicit multiplication) is 9
@Max23 Yes it’s a very interesting video.
Here is my smart friends response:
I say 9; the question being whether the denominator is 2, or 2(1+2). In the latter case, one makes it explicit by either placing the 6 above a long divisor line over 2(1+2), or parenthesizing it as 6/(2(1+2)). Since neither has been done, we must take it as (6/2)(1+2) = 3 * 3 = 9
Yes. What he said.
Maybe it requires a computer design nerd to know where to start since it's probably not considered in math courses and every teaches hex to programmer's.
Still, a valid puzzle for anyone that gets Base Number Systems.
I got 1 because where I grew up the 6 % 2 was interpreted in context differently than 6/2 (the former an operation, the latter a ‘standalone’ fraction, something immediately reduce-able to 3 no matter the ooo). Whatever, all that matters to me is I learned the way the SAT/ACT wanted and got a free ride to college because of it.
Lol math
My SAT score got me a free remedial math course!