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 agree, as near as I can tell it’s a case of the VCV Rack developer regretting his initial VCV Rack licensing decision and then expecting other developers to not use that license because it doesn’t fit in with the current license and his plans for how to expand VCV.
Making your problems someone else’s problems and expecting them to solve it for you so you get the resolution you’re looking for requires cooperation. Getting upset with them when they don’t go along with your plans might be a natural response but it’s not a productive one. Part of life involves accepting the fact that you won’t always make the right choices (in hindsight) and projecting those decisions onto other people rather than take responsibility for your own choices seems like a bad idea to me.
Hopefully the larger VCV Rack community will see the value of what @mifki has done with the code on iOS and support his efforts rather than see it as a money grab as @Vortico has characterized it. I also hope that with time @Vortico can put this experience in perspective and focus on the VCV Rack mission which is to provide a free modular software experience to users using the funding provided by paid modules. His degradation of miRack on this forum without discussing any plans to bring VCV Rack to iOS seems inconsistent with the VCV Rack mission.
The thing is, an "official" VCV Rack for iOS does not mean that all modules will automatically become available on this platform, nor that it will ever happen. As I said many times, plugin developers are not opposed to having their plugins in miRack, including some developers of closed-source and commercial plugins who offered their plugins. On the other hand, there's still quite a few plugins not updated to 1.0 API (meaning the developers may be unavailable); some developers said they are just not interested in working on supporting another platform; some modules use SIMD code that needs to be rewritten for ARM; some plugins are GPL-licensed, so a permission would need to be obtained from devs anyway. So either official VCV Rack for iOS won't have all the modules either (at least at first), or it won't exist (if having all modules is a requirement). Andrew has an advantage of being able to inform more developers easily about something, and having access to user libraries and purchases info - but that's it.
Thank you for sharing this information. At some point will there be a way to create new modules for using in miRack?
What do you mean? You can not upload additional modules to iOS app yourself due to platform restrictions, but I have no problems adding anyone's modules to miRack releases should they want it - whether existing or new, open- or closed-source.
I have no idea how modules are created, is there some reference for how to do so? What sorts of specifications are needed to be used so you can add them to miRack?
Modules are coded in C++ and panel graphics is SVG. Basically there are two C++ classes for each module - one defines inputs/outputs/parameters and a function to be called for each sample, and another class in the simplest case just creates controls and assigns to module parameters. I can provide an actual plugin template is anyone's interested.
I actually don’t need every VCV module. It actually becomes a bit paralyzing seeing every module added. Luckily you can add or delete as you wish on desktop. But would that be possible on iOS?
Sure. On iOS, modules are loaded from separate plugin files just like on desktop, so it's possible (and planned in miRack) to allow users to choose what plugins they want to hide and not load on startup. The only real difference is that all the binaries must be included with the app, but after that, they can be loaded/unloaded or enabled/disabled (based on in-app purchase, for example) freely.
If you could post a link to a plugin template, I’d be interested in looking at it.
Nice!
I'll need to make one or find a very simple existing plugin to use as an example. I'll let you know.
nvm-too late to make sense.
I wonder whether misunderstandings due to differences in online forum styles/cultures have played an important role in people’s perspectives on the miRack/VCV issue.
I participate here and on the VCV forums because I appreciate both. To me, there is a significant difference in etiquette on both forums, which each reflect differences in what the two forums are for.
The VCV forum (+ facebook group, + github, etc.) etiquette is largely informed by the environment needed for open source projects to thrive. That requires, for instance, minimum distraction from cooperation.
By contrast, one of the important roles of the audiobus forum is to help participants navigate the swarm of no-demo, paid music apps on iOS. For that to succeed, for instance, it’s important to keep as much room for criticism as possible. That does mean that a lot of threads here involve extensive, sometimes heated disagreements.
I appreciate the strong desire people on here have for sharing their perspectives on the VCV/miRack dispute. But I also fully appreciate how @Vortico ’s approach to this issue has been informed by the kind of high collaboration, low disruption environment an open-source project like VCV needs.
@ohwell : that is a very generous interpretation but doesn't explain why Andrew came in and asserted as fact something that was his speculation (and seems unlikely to be true--and he doubled down in it when it was questioned before finally backing off) and has made intentionally misleading statements about the source code use.
While I can understand his irritation about what has transpired, he has chosen a path that has involved his making exaggerated and sometimes plain false claims -- largely the fruit of his having published software with a license more permissive than he realized.
To me a difference in online culture doesn't excuse that behavior -- completely independent of Vitaly's communication style. Andrew's words on the matter are sometimes at odds with themselves. Rather than try to make the situation better, he seems to be missing no opportunity to increase the hostility.
As my mother used to say: "I don't care what your brother said or did, you still have to try to make the situation better."
@espiegel123 Reading back, my last post sounds like I am taking sides in a way that I didn't intend. I didn't mean to suggest differences in online culture as something that excuses behavior here. Rather, I find it especially helpful in understanding and empathizing with the different viewpoints, and in expanding my own.
For what it's worth, in my book, Vitaly's post on medium.com, which I read when he posted a link to it on the vcvrack forum (back on oct 15), was the nuclear move that can't really be undone. I'm not interested in condemning Vitaly. But I do think he threw away the possibility of trust and collaboration between him and the VCV team by burning bridges so publicly.
@ohwell I appreciate your opinion on the differences - I've never participated on the VCV forums (mostly because they didn't exist when I started miRack and I'm not a fan on Facebook groups), so I know little about them. However as @espiegel123 said, both Andrew and Wes make a lot of false statements, that contradict simple verifiable facts.
It's well-known miRack started in 2018, yet Andrew writes "includes no development progress after 2017"; I wrote to Wes "having a similar appearance is not a goal, and I will consider changing it, should that be required", then in App Store complain he writes "similarity acknowledged in the App Store description" and "refuses to make changes"; my changes to Rack code that were back then and still are solving major Rack issues have always been public, yet Andrew writes "not giving back"; he writes "Vitaly was fully aware of my intentions behind licensing the first “stable” release of Rack under the GPL" while I stopped miRack development at that time and did not follow at all. And so on and so on, there's much more. Oh, I forgot about Andrew's claims he had special permissions from three hardware module manufacturers, two of which apparently didn't know about it.
They are spreading falsehood about me and miRack on his quite popular forums and blocking me from responding, and also to Apple officials. I don't see what kind of "environment" can justify this.
I'm not happy I had to do it either, but this conflict had continued for weeks before I did it, with all these false claims and statements happened BEFORE that, so there was not much trust anyway. Based on my communication with Wes, I lost any hope for resolving the matter directly with him, so saw that as my only choice, unfortunately.
True. And it should be remembered that by this time they had closed the public discussion, banned him from their forums**, and Wes had stated that he would not continue to dialog privately to try to resolve the issue. It's pretty hard, and possibly not even right, to allow accusations that you feel are wrong be the final word ... whether there's any hope of that improving the situation or not.
(For the record, I take no side in the actual matter.)
[edit] oops ... sorry @gusgranite. I know you want to keep this topic about VCV Rack. I shouldn't be commenting about the drama here.
[edit] **corrected, from posts below, not banned. Just told to piss off. Sorry for the inaccuracy.
I definitely saw Vitaly's post on the vcvrack forum sharing the link to the medium.com article last week. AFAIK he was banned as a result.
Yes, I wanted to correct this myself, but wasn't sure which time "by this time" meant. Yep, I wasn't banned until the Medium post, but Andrew closed the iOS thread and said he'd delete any future mentions of miRack.
I doubt Apple will do much in the absence of a valid legal case. They get revenue from miRack sales and eff all from Greyscale (aside from earache).
Haha. No worries.
This forum ebbs and flows to physics far greater than I will ever try to comprehend.
“Wipe your hand across your mouth, and laugh” as TS Eliot said.
😉