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 guess it all depends how you define professional. This subject gets very muddy once you dive into it. Is professional something that gives you pro quality results or is it a thing that gives you a broad range of tools to get the task completed? Professional often implies being used to earn money therefore creates a figure of a client who expects a service. If a client has a very specific request that the tool in question can't provide I.e. A reverb with a particular tail etc. then I'm afraid it is not going to fulfill its professional duties therefore it cannot be called professional. This is why Photoshop is widely recognized as a professional tool. Does it mean that you can't obtain professional results on Picasa? No. It just means that a professional will choose photoshop as it guarantees a good workflow and all the tools that may be needed to fulfill a specific request. This is not to say that it is not possible (with gadget) to come up with a decent professionally sounding mix or that it couldn't end up (with a little post processing) being used in a pro broadcast.
There is no question about gadget being a prosumer app. It definitely is. The fact that Gorillaz used garage band to record an album doesn't make it professional. It's just artists often use unorthodox ways to enhance their creative output, often by limiting their options. @Tritonman2 what counts the most for you doesn't necessarily mean is valuable to others. I am not one of them but I wouldn't be surprised if someone brings up the subject of bit rate and what a pro sound is required to sound like right @Stewart? As I said it is a muddy subject. At the end of the day whether your mixes end up on Soundcloud or on the radio or both, if it works for you, let's have it. Too many words have been spilt over arguments such as: windows vs mac, android vs ios vs linux, Cubase vs Logic vs Pro Tools, gadget vs caustic. Ios shows a huge promise in music production terms but since it is comparatively still in its teenage hood we shouldn't get too ahead of ourselves and simply use it to our advantage in whatever way or form tickles our fancy. If it's pro for you, sweet, if not, do what you may. We're all different and come from different angles and have different needs. Hahaha, peace.
Channel EQ would be most welcome!
Here's the next App Jam featuring the Chicago Tube Bass Machine.
Well, it sounds like a few of you are quite satisfied with Gadget as is, and that is great. However, I believe you have missed my actual point, and gotten carried off by the highly quotable "incredibly narrow" phrase. When I say they are narrow, I feel that is an accurate assertion... not to say they are incapable of producing a broad swath in their own right, but more that when held up against something like Nave or Z3TA+ , each gadget individually is indeed very narrow in its abilities, comparatively speaking. It's like comparing a KORG Volca Keys to a DSI Prophet 12... there is simply an undeniably vastly broader range of sounds you can coax from the P12. Both are fantastic machines, but simply due to the nature of them being worlds apart, one is a much more sophisticated and capable sound designing machine.
Perhaps I misspoke when commenting on the Gadget's "pro" status. It would be unfair to imply that music created with it couldn't ever be considered professional... so, I apologize if it came across that way. It's quite true that any device can yield tones usable in professional productions. In fact I was just earlier this evening listening to a reconstruction of Nine Inch Nails "Pretty Hate Machine", recreated in its entirety with nothing more than retro 8-bit devices, and the results were indeed very "pro" and utterly amazing. That said, as you can imagine, the range of sounds was, dare I say... incredibly narrow. Not when taken in their own unique context, and not in terms of where they could be further applied... But in the grand spectrum of possible timbres, they are but a sliver.
There is nothing WRONG with narrow, narrow is great where needed. Razor blades are "incredibly narrow", and are incredibly useful for all sorts of tasks, but sometimes you need a fucking chainsaw, and no matter how much you swing a Bic at that tree, it will never get the job done.
My previous post's point was quite simply that it would be nice if Gadget was capable of hosting more complex tools in the likes of Nave and Z3TA+, or KORG's own iMS-20 & iPolySix, for those of us who need a bit more depth and control in terms of sound shaping. This goes for the FX as well.
@supadom, well said.
@OmnilimbO - Just observing - you mention iMS-20 - one of my all time favorite iPad synths - my first - my often goto workhorse still (I purchased a controller too to play it - with wood side panels too!) - but - it's a recreation of a 2-oscillator semi-modular with a patchbay. In your definition it might seem "incredibly narrow" - or at least narrow compared with Nave or a DSI P 12 or Z3TA+ - but you can coax some very amazing sounds out of it. I'd argue you can get some pretty amazing sounds out of Dublin too ;-) In fact, apart from only having one filter and a more limited patchbay - it's probably based on the MS-20 deliberately by Korg... Seems that way. No - it's not as powerful or flexible as the iMS-20 - and if that's your criterion - then perhaps you are right. Just sayin' ;-)
Say you go to the synth room of your local big box music store, and walk up to this little synth, and you say, "hey, it sounds great, but there is no tweakable effects chain, automation, or mixer. This isn't a "pro" instrument."
So you move on to something else in the room. A few minutes later, a professional keyboardist walks in, heads over to the same exact synth, and spends the next 20 minutes proving you don't have a clue what you're talking about.
I've seen that exact situation happen so many times now.
A "pro" device for me is any instrument or software which makes a high enough quality sound that a "professional" musician can make it sing.
There's no way I would personally define "pro" as "has to do everything for everyone", even non-professional musicians.
And that's really the thing here. This is a collection of instruments suited to composer musicians, not tweakers.
Trying to view something as "pro" depending on whether it would meet the needs of a "client" on its own seems silly to me. It can certainly be part of meeting a clients needs, and you can use any other tool to make that happen along with it.
So, yes, it is professional software, and I'm quite happy to have it in my tool set.
Not that I can't say I wouldn't like a few improvements, as I've already mentioned some in this thread.
But as much as some would want this to become a full-blown DAW, I'm fine with this as a sequencer with stand alone instruments and recordable automation across all of them. As long as I can get the sounds out, I'm good with this collection of instruments.
Korg Gadget is Yamaha DJX equivalent of 2014
After one week of extensive use of Gadget I can say that my favorite synth is WOLFSBURG, I use this for all...
And for lead BERLIN is the best.
At this time I need only one feature: EXPORT AS SEPARATE AUDIO TO AUDIOSHARE for edit my song in Auria.
@AQ808 if we take this argument in that direction then a tablespoon is a professional musical tool too. I was giving a hypothetical business like example of a service delivered to a client because in a professional context this is where the money comes from. I like what @OmnilimbO wrote that he struggles to give the composition his own flavour/style. This hints at possibility to express oneself through a tool. If your style sits nicely within the constrictions of this app then power to you but I bet what you're doing is not hugely original in terms of sonic flavours. I think this discussion inevitably spilled over onto creativity and personal philosophy of who we are musically and how we like to make music and how we define music, original, professional etc. A skillful musician walking into a guitar shop, picking up a shitty guitar and playing it like Django doesn't make that guitar a pro-level instrument. So, you see @AQ808 we can twist this argument in whatever direction depending on how we define (what is our individual opinion on) professional. I wonder what your 'professional keyboardist' would do to a DJX?
Enjoy the fantastic results. All of the semantics will get you no enjoyment. Well perhaps, but not for most of us> If you like it for it's pro-quality then good. If you like it for the fine results of a combination of not so pro-quality but excellent sounds than that is good as well. This thread shows it pretty much comes down to what the user decides no matter what we say in the end.
Just how many angels can we get on the head of this pin anyway? lol.
Nope. If you can actually compose music, you are looking directly at a piano roll and fairly limitless sequencer, if you can understand it that is.
So there is zero limit on originality if you actually know how to compose music.
As mentioned by MusicInclusive, if you don't make your own presets, you are unlikely to get "your sound" out of it, unless you expect "your sound" to come pre-bundled with every app you buy.
I can only assume that those having issues making something original on this are not used to using multiple different synths to make their complete song.
For example, we can make each scene have its own time signature, That opens up a ridiculous amount of possibilities, but you won't know it if you don't know how to do it, or more importantly, why you'd want to do it. You can split any of them down to 64ths. So technically, you can mathematically arrange tempo, time, and the grid to give you whatever you want, but that said, you'd have to know the technicalities of composition to use them.
I can guarantee that if you don't use these advanced functions, you are not going to have a clue about the potential at your fingertips.
And if a tablespoon can make a great sound, then it is a professional music tool.
It's all about sound quality and the place of the sound in the mix.
Luckily, Gadget has sound quality covered.
All the frustration I'm hearing on different forums is that people can't wrap their mind around a nonlinear sequencer.
Ok, that's settled then.
If you keep yourself locked into whichever scale loads when you open an instrument, you aren't going to get your sound either. Every time I open a gadget, I immediately switch it to 12-tone chromatic.
That is, again, another thing which will get you in trouble if you don't know what you're doing.
Say you choose a scale, each gadget you open will also open that scale, but each gadget gives you a different number of tones available in that scale. Some will give you all tones, some will give you a few. You have to set the "scale step" for each instrument by hand to have full access to the scale, or you will be bound to have a harmonic disaster.
So, sadly, I think you have to toss the scale system included, since it's too much of a pain, and set to chromatic, set the scale step to 12, and depend on your own knowledge of harmony to get you through.
I could definitely see people feeling very limited if they used the included scale system rather than this way.
I kind of forgot that most people probably would use it in that severely limited way.
Still, don't understand how can you assume that people just use presets or don't know gadget inside out. Considering its PC predecessors gadget isn't THAT deep to be patronizing others regarding its complexity. Splitting scenes down to 64ths and using different signatures for different scenes? Wow man, you must know a lot about composing. What kind of stuff do you do? And how about the DJX?
@AQ808 said:
I use an external controller keyboard so not too worried about scales. Also mostly use ears instead of knowledge of harmony. I'm sure some prosumer users may find your advice helpful, thanks (no sarcasm intended).
Well hey, set it to chromatic and go to town.
It initializes in C Dorian (Bb Major) for whatever ridiculous reason. It then folds the notes that aren't part of that scale out of the equation, so you won't have visualization of them unless you turn note folding off.
I guarantee that is screwing people up.
I think anyone intending to use this professional instrument collection professionally will enjoy the advice as well, especially those who do have some knowledge of harmony.
@MusicInclusive even though you are choosing to gloss over my actual points once again, and rather aim to be knit picky and contrary... you have actually proven my point. Saying "In fact, apart from only having one filter and a more limited patchbay - it's probably based on the MS-20 deliberately by Korg." is a perfect example of how the Gadget devices are dumbed down, simplified, narrowed in scope. Thanks.
@AQ808 Firstly, your assumptions are misplaced and condescending. You come off sounding a bit like an arrogant composition centric musician who is making arguments that have nothing to do with the current discussion, simply so you can tout your self assumed elite musical knowledge. The reality is that this current discussion is about timbre, sound sculpting, design... none of the compositional devices you mention have anything to do with designing a patch. (Which by the way implies someone is not using a preset). And even still, all those skills you mention are very basic concepts as far as I'm concerned. Contrary to your apparent beliefs, there are those of us here who have also been musically trained and well versed for decades, so please, just stop. But beyond that, you are being terribly narrow by implying that professional work can only be produced by those with all that knowledge of theory and composition. That's crap. I can give you countless examples of artists who's music has zero harmonic content, no definable pitches or scales, etc, but steadily produce and release that music on a professional level. And countless more who have none of that knowledge yet still produce incredibly lush and harmonic music simply by ear.
But like I said, none of that is applicable here. The topic at hand is sound design capabilities and sound shaping tools. I see the reality much the opposite of what you are saying. It is in fact those who are satisfied with Gadget's current abilities who seem to be cool with simply using the presets, or maybe tweaking them a smidge. For most people, I'm sure that's more than
enough, and that is great. As for me and those like me, I have owned and programmed dozens of hardware synths (and twice as many soft synths) over the past couple decades, and one of the first things I do upon buying a new synth is erase all of the presets. Designing my own sounds from zip is key. I find it bewildering that I am getting flamed for voicing a wish for more powerful synthesis capabilities from a synthesizer-centric software, on a synth centric forum.
@OmnilimbO With respect, I was doing no such thing. Gently, I would suggest that is your construction upon my words. I was just observing as I said. I was pointing one example out of a possible use for an instrument in Gadget - is all. No offense intended.
Cheers @OmnilimbO. I'm glad you've wrapped it app so eloquently. I was getting a bit fatigued by the breadth of this discussion.
I won't jump into the pro vs not pro debate. I don't find that a very useful distinction. Lots of great stuff being produced by "non pros" out there. ;-)
I would like to give a shout out to simplicity in design as a virtue. I love Ableton Live, in large part because of its very stripped down workflow that (to me) doesn't get in the way. Devices like simple delay and simpler to some will look like they need more features. But many interesting results can be achieved with these simple tools, especially when they are used in creative, unintended ways.
It seems like the Korg folks may have had a similar aesthetic in mind in designing the gadgets. Support creative workflow by limiting the number of parameters. Some times simpler=better (IMO). Pianos, drums, guitars, wind instruments, etc don't have zillions of "parameters" to tweak yet they have been used to produce some amazing music despite this limitation. ;-)
@supadom said:
What's considered "prosumer" for you doesn't necessarily mean it is to others. Just sayin'.
This whole debate reminds me of when music apps started coming out on the iPad and many people turned their nose up at it (and many still do) saying it's just a "toy" that couldn't possibly be considered as a serious tool by professionals.
I like to thank you all for the help...ios music making is cool as...well you know
Whoa, don't take it personally. I'm just offering a different perspective, just as you are. I don't agree with your opinion on this. In fact, I find it ridiculous. The best I can do is verify that you actually are using it to its full potential by pointing out functionality you may not know about or fully understand.
I think you're being waaaaay too precious with yourself in your complaint to me. What flaming are you getting here? People seem to be making very gentle counterpoints to your arguments. People have other perspectives than yours and might want to share them.
And there are actually multiple conversations going on in this thread.
As far as arguments on timbre and tone, I've seen the argument so many times in the guitar world that I simply can't give it credence anymore.
If you can't make music on an acoustic guitar, could you really expect to make music with the best guitar and amp combination in the world?
And yet I always see these people with no capacity to play a normal acoustic instrument lose their minds pining for the "greatest gear in the world", which once they get, ends up gathering dust somewhere in their house.
I'm sure it sounds condescending, but experience can do that to you. If you can't make it on a simpler instrument, can you really make it any better on a more complex one, or is it just better at washing out your mistakes in an artistic way?
Strikes me as a cop-out, but then again, I am a composer and musician who takes my craft seriously.
This whole discussion is pointless....what difference does it make? It's still the same product, a great product that can used for professionals and hobbyists alike and achieve great results.
Also, I never said that professional work can't be done by people who don't know anything about harmony, what I said is that anything that makes a good sound is a professional instrument. Whether or not you have the capacity to utilize that professional instrument is the question we have to each answer for oursleves.
My message to any casual reader here was, if you can compose, the Korg Gadget is a very professional instrument for you.
@ecamburn
This would be true if we were all doing a beginners course in synthesis. The truth is that if you've used fully featured synths for a while you find it hard to accept a machine with ADSR, envelope and a basic LFO routing. What you are saying may make sense for people who get confused by 'zillions' of knobs. For people who have a brilliant sound sculpting idea in their heads and they're not able to translate it into a sound is quite the opposite of creative, it is frustrating. I guess a good compromise would be to have an 'advanced' button that reveals more controls if required. Of course Korg will not go to trouble if they see all of us happy folk drooling over our gadgets as they currently are. Off topic: I was very pleasantly surprised by the addition of marseille, unfortunately it suffers from 'prosumer' sound quality and even if it had hundreds of tweakery knobbies the sound could not be helped. The fact that people manage to make some amazing music with gadget does not prove it is not lacking in features.
@JMSexton said:
This discussion may be pointless to you. In which case you're welcome not to contribute to it.
I think that it's easy, after a week of this product being released, to forget that in only cost $30. For that you get 15 instruments and endless combinational possibilities. Sure, it doesn't have everything but what does? Speaking as a rank amateur I don't really care about the finer tweakable aspects, only that I am able to use and produce with immediate pleasurable results.
Marseille is PCM, that's to be expected.
My favorite thing is when people sculpt a single tone all day long and then all of a sudden, when put into a song, find out it sounds awful. Maybe focus on song first, tone second?
@shortbus said:
Prosumer in this day and age is not an insult. It is a very capable workstation. This is exactly the reason why I find its limitations frustrating. Gadget is a close environment and whether it gets a full midi implementation it will still be limited by its limited routing etc. The fact that many of us, vastly enthusiasts, are using this app is the proof in point. It is a prosumer product that punches above it's weight. It certainly is not a toy. Unless your name is Robert Moog.