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
Trying using Circuit with Patch Base, it becomes a true bi-timbral synth once you can explore patches more easily. For microfreak substitute, I'm very happy with Spectrum mutable instruments port. For $300, I could get a Roli and hopefully soon Spectrum will have MPE support.
Do you really want to program an 8-OP FM synth?
Or is it about its great presets?
These could be packed into wavetables for your favorite WT synth.
I absolutely want to program an 8 operator RCM advanced FM synth with formant control, of course. The day I use someone else's preset in a synth is, well, the day I might as well give up being a synthesist.
(not counting the occasional time I’ve used an existing preset in the album I’m on at the moment, but that’s probably less than 5% of the time, for basic bread&butter sounds).
It’s my opinion that wavetables shouldn’t be samples of something else, as if the wavetable synth is some kind of rompler, but that wavetables should represent harmonic transitions and excursions which you would have had to use complicated means to arrive at. A wavetable running from low harmonic content to high harmonic content, if swept with an envelope, is a viable substitute for a filter, and thus you probably don’t need any kind of filter after that. Take that further and offer harmonic evolutions which alleviate having to have wavefolders and rectifiers in or after the oscillator, and you’re on the path to quite a simple synth architecture which is nevertheless capable of some rather odd and quirky harmonic adventures normally requiring a big expensive dusty modular synth obscured by infuriating patch leads. Consequently, wavetables for me are fairly scientific affairs, not very much related to any real-life samples out in the wild.
I dare to say that you might be one of a very rare species taking the time and patience.
Like with so many synth architectures, it's all up to what you make of it.
I've experimented a lot with additive, fm and wavetable synthesis including Wolfgang Palm's TCS variant (which behaves somewhat in-between a wavetable and a sample oscillator) and in most cases, wavetables are very capable of reproducing any short-cyclic waveform, not so much inharmonic transients of course. The harmonic evolutions you talk about are exactly what any number of FM operators in any configuration with their individual envelopes produce. Agreed, you are limited to a selected set of snapshots inside this evolution to bake into a wave table, but most FM sounds can be reproduced this way and by witty WT design, a lot can be done to morph between all kinds of sounds, even though the WT is one-dimensional.
If it's for the sake of FM synthesis then yes, you can hope for a developer finding the idea of programming such a beast as exciting as you do, but I doubt that's going to happen soon.
I disagree with the (often-expressed) notion that wavetables are a reasonable substitute for FM. This is only true if one is talking about fairly static FM patches (in which I would include FM patches where the modulation is repeated the same with every note). If one programs FM patches to be expressive and/or with non-repetitive changes in modulation or responsive to modulation changes, those patches won't be reprodible with other forms of synthesis.
I realize that most people don't bother to program such sounds but that is a shame.
All of these synthesis methods are capable of creating unique sound spaces. But I think there are more keyboard players than synthesists.
Oh yes, they are!
Sorry, that's was what I've silently assumed: Modulating wavetables to get exactly the effect you've mentioned.
I do!
Modulating wavetables can take you to very interesting places . I don't dispute that. They are different places however than an interestingly modulated FM setup. It is in the nature of the architectures. There can be overlap but there are huge areas that don't intersect.
Still kinda torn if I should get the MicroFreak or not...
...now if they baked in all the Mutable modules it would have been a no-brainer...
(Who knows maybe this can be done via a firmware update or something with added user-wavetables etc. etc.).
Currently its a closed garden but they could open it up via firmware I believe, some type of editor would be required i guess. Will it happen? I don’t know but I love it if the doors were open. I do expect Arturia to release new Wavetables/oscillators themselves at some point.
With all your experience and knowledge, I guess you'd have more fun with VCV Rack.
At least I did.
The more you dive in, the less the hardware vs software thing makes any difference.
VCVrack is cool but also check out Automatonism:
http://www.automatonism.com/the-software
I'm using Spectrum in apeMatrix or AUM and when needed add a filter into the effects chain.
The thing I do NOT like about Spectrum at the moment is that some knobs don't show any values when changing them making precise editing a real pita especially when precise control modulation depth is needed. (As an example the 'pwm' range in Spectrum is 0.750-1.000 and in order to modulate it properly the 'mod depth' is +/- 1.0 meaning in order to add a sweep at between 0-0.250 starting at 0.750 without even an option for uni-polar modulation it's like WTF town).
At least the Microfreak solves this by giving numerical feedback on mod-depth but as far as I've read it's LFO's do not have Uni-Polar option forcing the use of the mod-envelope with loop on...
Yeah, this is a bit of rant-town but at least LFO's should in general always allow both bi/uni-polar operation and control over start-phase. Why these 'basic' features are often forgotten or omitted is beyond my understanding.
Maybe I'm too geeky and focused on absolutely precise control...
I've rarely needed numbers except for pitch. There's no uniform scale amongst different synths anyway. Best scale of all: My ears
All I can say is I can’t wait for the MiniFreak, hoping for a four octave version of Micros touchKeys.
True, for pitch the uni/bi-polar switch is even more important
Bi-Polar to 'wobble around' a frequency and Uni-Polar to 'wobble between root and another value'.
Perfect example of this would be to modulate pitch with a square LFO, with Bi-Polar LFO it's impossible to keep things in tune as not a single note will be on the 'root note' while with Uni-Polar it's piece of cake, just set the depth in semitones and it wobbles between root and the set note. Same with PulseWidth, Filter etc. etc.
Bi-Polar LFOs are Eeeeevil when modulation depth increases more than 2 semitone
(Perfect 5th is either +7 or -5 semitones away from the root).
Very great. I dunno why he hasn't made a playlist yet but in case folks missed 'series' in JFB's comment, he's got 8 microfreak videos up here: https://www.youtube.com/user/AutomaticGainsay/videos?view=0&sort=dd&shelf_id=4
I think there will be a playlist once all the episodes are done.
(Just like for the other synths He's covered).
With a wavetable you’d think you’re limited to one axis of traversal which would equal one tonal variation, but in practice the tonal evolution is often manifold and complex, although you’re only indexing into the wavetable of it along one modulation axis.
To effectively handle something like the complex performance variability of an RCM FM algorithm you’d need the wavetable to be multi-dimensional, so that you can (eg) go up-down, left-right as well as back-forth, tied in with some form of performance such as pitch, velocity, polyaftertouch or some such way of putting the variations into effect.
In practice, there aren’t really multidimensional wavetables in and of themselves. Synths such as Nave have a parameter to index into the wavetable, and other parameters such as ‘spectrum’ to shift the result of the wavetable readout. It also, quite importantly, has a pair of wavetables between which a lot of variation may be put into play.
However, in the original context of wavetables, one simple way of making it seem like there’s more than one axis of indexing through the table is to split the wavetable up into smaller chunks, and instead of smoothly transitioning from one to the next, the idea is to index directly into these ‘jump’ points and start from there, only going a small way otherwise you’ll hit the next piece of table with a jarring transition. This must be avoided at all costs.
…Until the wavestation came along and made a big feature of the effect of jumping from one sub-table straight through into the next by having a lot of small wavetables (and oddly, a lot of large audio samples acting as wavetables) so that you could just run straight through a bunch of them and be Peter Gabriel.
This video doesn't make resisting the urge to get a Microfreak any easier...
Thankfully Spectrum got an update that makes me cool down a bit
Spectrum is like having four or five these.
I know, but it's quite tricky to pair if with another filter AUv3.
Need to add some CC midi-envelope stuff to control another AUv3 filter.
Spectrum is nice but it's still got plenty of potential and room for improvements...
(Numerical feedback for mod-depths, additional LFOs with Uni/Bi-Polar switch for the waveform and loopable Mod Envelopes with slope-control etc. etc.). I would also like to have the option to manually type in values for super accurate editing.
Also need to pair it with a step-sequencer with parameter automation so the combination of all these tools in one box with easy access is still pretty tempting
@Samu For filter automation, what about using Rozeta LFO instead of the built in one? JAF collection filters adds oomph to all my tracks now.
My solution for step automation is using StepBud. Now with midi cc support in Spectrum, you can map anything and have as many as you want.
There's some Midi ADSR scripts for Mozaic that I might need to check out.
I can automate filter without problems but to make the filters behave lite integral part of Spectrum with note-on triggering takes some tweaking
That works too, I can also use BeatHawk for that with easy access to all 127 CC's without having to manually add CC lanes and it's got a 'line draw' tool too
I like Spectrums built-in LFO now that it's got control over start-phase with optional key-sync.
Also the LFO waveforms are quite nice and tweak-able with only uni-polar option for the waveforms is missing(ie. 0--1 in addition to the bipolar -1 -- +1).
@Samu Good point re: on note triggering. Hmmm, I didn't know Beathawk could do that. Thx for the tip. Need to pull that out of the pantry and give it a whirl.
Only problem with BeatHawk is that the Midi only plays back from the sequencer so using the pads/keys to play midi only is no-go but draw notes and CC works fine.
Spectrum? Drawing a blank.
Spectrum Synthesizer Bundle for ios by Thomas Burns
Mega-thread: https://forum.audiob.us/discussion/33195/free-auv3-ports-of-mutable-instruments-eurorack-modules
Ah thanks to you both. Another megathread for bed time reading.
Skip and just download. It's free!