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
Xequence has great layout for phones, so adding audio functionality would result in first DAW for phones with good UX.
+1, I wish @SevenSystems would consider making an Xequence auv3 pianoroll editor with timeline.
Well, PolyPressure (Polyphonic Aftertouch) and MPE are really similar, i.e. they represent one controller value per note. Just that PolyPressure does it in a sensible, clean way, and MPE does it in a hackish, destructive, roundabout way. But that's a different story
Always happy to make the world and warmer and fuzzier place!
If that's the case, then it was by accident...
but it does make sense in a way. Xequence stops its transport when loading a new project because of technical reasons... but I agree those have nothing to do with other Link peers so it makes sense not to send Link Stop in that case. I'll check the code again to make that change "official", if it was accidental 
You can disable start/stop in the settings screen -> "Link" menu.
Interestingly, those who vote for it don't post a lot in this thread. Most posts are about NOT adding AUv3 hosting.
Haha. I already get quite a lot of feature requests, and any that are not completely ridiculous get neatly added to the roadmap at the appropriate place (i.e., with the appropriate priority!
). And regarding "USELESS": I will continue to phrase the app description in the most exact way possible given the character limit in the textbox, and if anyone complains about a "missing" feature that they "paid" for but which isn't clearly listed in the app description, then I'm very talented at ignoring that 
granted, they can leave a one-star review, but I've learned to ignore those as well...
Yes that would be the case. The instruments on the instruments screen would probably be vertical again (like in Xequence 1) because audio instruments would then need a fader etc. (MIDI instruments would just have an empty channel strip). But I could even make that optional, so that if a project exclusively contains MIDI instruments, the current "boxes" layout is preserved.
One thing that bothers me with making more AUv3 plugins from Xequence's functionality is that so far, the existing plugins (Keys & Pads) together amount for monthly sales in the 2-digits (EUR)... that's not an amazing return on investment!
That's why I like the idea of going more "mainstream". It will bring more complaints and one-star reviews, but probably still higher sales than now...
These features will be available as an update to Xequence 2. Depending on the feature, they might be an In-App Purchase though (for example, the mixer/AUv3 engine).
Yes, that's the main point, streamlining the whole process for SIMPLE, QUICK production. The whole modular approach with AUM etc. would still be perfectly valid and possible without any negatives.
And yeah, of course a full mixdown and stems export features would be included.
I could probably -- as nice a person as I am
-- take that opportunity to publish a "AUv3 plugin blacklist" on the Xequence page that lists badly behaved plugins so people can avoid them. A good opportunity for the devs to get their act together 
@SevenSystems : I will be more than happy to buy the updates as IAP. Consider me a presold purchaser!
I voted for chord pads, but my reasoning is generally to keep Xequence midi only, but support MIDI AU. With all the AU sequencers on market now, I'd like a light and efficient way to arrange and record midi AUs. This would live on the one iPad and audio AUs would hosted on another iPad in AUM.
This approach basically turns Xequence into a hardware midi sequencer and arranger.
Mixer then MPE. Ultimately, must keep parity with and exceed BM3. But you know that
I would hate to see Xequence become bloated with new features. It’s so good at what it does now, and frankly AUM is so good at what it does, I don’t see a strong reason make another DAW
@SevenSystems I believe in you! :-)
That was exactly my point. AUM for AUv3, Xequence for Xequencing
Great
Problem is I'm using start/stop to start all X2 instances at the same time, that's super cool...
I guess if there's a midi clock slave at some point, that would not be necessary...
But does that mean I'll be able to stop a X2 midi slaved individually, then getting him back catching the master clock by pressing play on this instance ? The play would act as a continue and not as a start ? If that would catch also the next cycle of Link, I guess it would be perfect (for this kind of usage...)
Maybe some different settings for this possible master/slave clock would open and solve lots of use case.
If all you guys like xequence the way it is, don’t upgrade. Otherwise, full steam ahead!
Or, obviously, as other people have said, fork it and create a new product. Otherwise you’ll always be the nicest fish in a very very small pond.
Well, it isn't about that. It is about being focused. Creating "the most competent midi sequencer on iOS" isn't a bad target I think, and Xequence has by-and-large already achieved that. As you can see from the list of poll options above though there is only one option that is about audio/mixing. The rest are improvements for "the best midi sequencer", making it even more competent and usable for even more people, without adding audio (which most of us have a plethora of apps that we are happily using today).
I personally think adding audio is not trivial. If it was NanoStudio 2 would have released it already. A wild guess would be that NS2 still will update with Audio before Xequence will be able to add it. Therefore, when Xequence adds it, it'll be a "lesser" version of NS2 (which already competes in the "best iOS piano roll" with Xequence), only Xequence would be without the monster synth Obsidian and the capable sample handler Slate. That could make sense if there is a major price difference too. Currently there is not.
Quite an uphill comparison, and still Xequence would, and will (looking by the poll), also be compared to AB/AUM/Apematrix, all stable and extremely competent apps in their segment. Only, it has already been stated that not all functionality will be there to start with. So it will be a "lesser" version of those too, when it comes to hosting AU's etc. Not a great market outset IMHO. No great USP (again, IMHO).
We have also learnt (in another thread) that adding slave sync to an app that also handles audio is by a magnitude much more difficult than it is adding sync to an app that "only" handles midi (like Xequence does today). Therefore, adding audio pretty much removes my hope of Xequence ever being able to add slave sync. It'll quite likely be too complex. So we'll have another DAW that doesn't really do it all.
Admittedly, if that is the path 7S wish to take it has to be started at some point though, and I respect that, and now is apparently that time. Meanwhile, we are still not having a midi sequencer that fills all the gaps we currently have on iOS when it comes to midi sequencing. I think that is a shame. That is why I am trying to influence it as best as I can. I also will respect 7S decision and the will of the people. I'm obviously/apparently a "remainer" in a "leave" world.
Also, I don't think we can "just fork it"...? Or is Xequence Open Source? Even if it was I wouldn't be able to do any of the things on the list as I'm not a developer any more, and never was for mobile apps.
Finally, I'm sharing this video again then. It is the first 1:35 that are of relevance to hit home my point.
I like this. If something is not going to play well, just let me know and I have tons of alternatives to drop in and save my time.
Combining Ableton Link and MIDI sync slaving sounds like a recipe for disaster. Does any current host / DAW on iOS support that in any sort of reliable way?
Although it sounds adventurous, as long as the host dictates the LINK tempo and you don't touch the bpm setting in connected apps, it can work.
Midi Link Sync does that for example.
I beg you. Keep xequence 2 midi only.
I'd like to speculate about why the poll results are so favorable to adding AUv3 instrument support.
I think a good majority of individuals who view this forum are probably not "power users" or music professionals. But rather just regular people who enjoy making music for their own personal enjoyment. They are not at a music production level where they are looking for complex, difficult to understand features.
Many may not even know what they are looking for, as they are just beginning to explore the basics of iOS music production.
In my opinion, the poll reflects the wants of those beginner users. They may already own X2, but find task of assigning "sound" to the tracks, to be a distraction from "the fun".
I think the beginner users would enjoy the having the ability to easily assign an Audio Unit instrument to a track, Because (IMO), the X2 working environment is one of the most user friendly and uncluttered of all the DAWS.
If the ability to host AUv3 instruments can be accomplished in a way that fits neatly into the existing X2 paradigm. Than why not?
I'd imagine that from a marketing perspective, there are probably far more casual music creators that are prospective customers, than there are power users. And because most are aware that AUv3 is the way of the future, being able to include AUv3 instrument hosting in the X2 feature list might make the App more attractive to casual music creators, and provide them with a much more enjoyable App that they can quickly set up and begin to use.
@horsetrainer, you got it! That's exactly my thinking. I somehow have to find a way to make Xequence development more sustainable, and simplifying the whole process for a simple all-in-one solution would probably help. It would in a way be similar to Gadget (which also doesn't offer anything "fancy"), just with external synths (so, more flexible), a comprehensive linear timeline, and a better mixer.
I might be totally wrong. But many "voters" seem to agree (and to be honest, it isn't that important what kind of audience they come from -- I would want to see the WHOLE, unbiased picture anyway!).
I can only repeat that no excessive amount of time will be spent on the AUv3 integration. If it is too much hassle, I'll remove it again. But as I said, it will be very basic. AUv3 synths can be loaded as a source for an instrument (which then converts into a channel strip), any number of AUv3 effects can be loaded as inserts, there'll be a fixed number (probably 6, ShouldBeEnoughForEveryoneTM) of dedicated send channels (which are just normal channels, so they can be routed like any other channel, including sending to other sends or to themselves), and probably group channels (which again will be like any other channel).
And then, a global or stem mixdown, and a buffer size selector. That's it.
Nothing fancy. KISS!
I voted for the all-in-one approach.
Despite my initial enthusiasm of having a 'modular daw', it hasn't worked out for me.
All I really need is easy access to a sequencer, a mixer and a handful of plugins.
It's the reason I often reach for Groovebox or KEW over other options.
Those apps are not without their shortcomings... which I think an AIO Xequence could fix.
That said, I wouldn't mind chord pads while I wait.
Not to keep pushing on the AU Piano Roll / Sequencer idea, but in response to @SevenSystems comment about it not looking like a good return on investment based on the performance of AU Keys and Pads...
Those two apps have competition from a) The built-in keyboard in every host, which for basic things is simply more convenient to use (therefore not apparent to many why Keys/Pads is beneficial), b) A very similar competing app with (some) more features by a well known and respected developer, and c) Several alternatives with specialized purposes such as chord pads, scales, etc.
I far prefer your Keys and Pads to the similar competing app mentioned above, but it seems like it gets overshadowed by the other app.
A sequencer app would have only one competitor at this stage, no competition from sequencers in non-DAW hosts, and only tangentially similar apps. The one existing direct competitor is lacking key features and seemingly stalled indefinitely in development. Every non-DAW host needs a sequencer, unlike the need for a keyboard. And, even though there's a competing Piano Roll app, there's no midi clip timeline app as an AU.
Lastly, you have GREAT brand recognition in the piano roll / timeline / midi space. You would stand out, where Keys and Pads don't so much.
But ... I know it sounds like I'm pushing this. I'm not. I just think you may have overlooked the chance of success based on your experience with Keys and Pads. I'm just offering an outside perspective. I could be (and probably am) totally wrong though! So take it for what it's worth.
@wim, no, you could actually be totally right! It is very much still under consideration. The amount of work would be significantly greater though than for Keys & Pads, as MIDI input would also have to be handled, and a huge amount of thought has to be put into it to get it right. Also, the whole host synchronisation thing comes into play, which I have close to no experience with. That's why I hesitate, but yeah, the demand for it would certainly be greater than for keys & pads.
Still sorting priorities in general
Thanks for the great and broad feedback in this thread to everyone by the way -- I really only wanted to conduct a simple poll, and now this...
Thanks for listening to us all! It's fun to pretend we know what we're talking about.
@SevenSystems
Short version:
1.I'd like MMC recognition into X2
2.Midi clock slave for X2
3.Then, real time tempo change based on Midi into X2...
4.Time signature
5.An instrument Midi to Link converter into X2. (what Midi Link Sync app does, but into a real midi sequencer
6.Then a midi learn timeline with loops that ... OUCH...
(very) Long version: (sorry)
Modstep does this AFAIR. And no, it used to work quite good
In my previous setup, the 3 Modstep instances where running independently.
In fact a MMC (send from a real midi controller, the Arturia Beatstep) is sending a start/stop to AUM ( a real AUv3 host) that starts Link.
As Modstep does not recognize Link start/stop, and also does not recognize MMC I'm using StreamByter App (hosted by AUM) to convert a MMC to a CC, and, as Modstep recognize midi learn, I just assign this CC to play/stop into Modstep.
Doing this MMC-to-CC translation on the 3 instances , all Modstep are starting on time.
I also have 1 instance of Modstep sending a clock to some external devices (MiniNova, Arturia Drum Beat Impact)
Then I can change tempo on any Link app and that also change the midi clock send to synths and bar. (as Modstep is connected to Link, it is sending the correct clock to slave gears)
So what I realize is that what I'd need more first than midi slave is MMC support into X2 !!!!
Then, if that dream comes true, I'd have 3 options:
1.Keep this as it is, so three X2 as master, starting with MMC, and in each X2, Link not reacting on start/stop.
2.Same configuration as above, but one X2 as master clock, sending a clock to the 2 others instances of X2 (so they're slave and here MMC would not be activated for those 2 instances, I guess)
The two other X2 instances could be stoped to load an other song, then pressing play would catch the clock (so a continue message I guess, and ideally with a defined countdown, or catching the next Link cycle ?)
OR, ideally, but not fully tested yet (as the devs, pushed by uncultivated users of the true midi power, are a bit slow to produce REAL midi apps, a mysterious standard used for 40 years now
)
3.My Arturia Drum Beat Impact would be the master clock sending to all X2 in slaves, (the Arturia Drum Beat Impact can send midi clock and/or MMC messages as they're proper professional designed midi instruments, and as it's a BAR, well... I expect to use conceitedly his clock...)
Link would not being activated at all into any X2 instances, as AUM handles MMC and Link perfectly ( BTW it's totally normal that the host is hosting stuffs, as midi sequencer handles midi stuffs) , the cherish on the cake would be that as a master clock on my BAR I could simply, very ergonomically, change the tempo of all set with the dedicated tempo knob on the Arturia Drum Brute Impact.
To achieve that, I'm actually using the app "Midi Link Sync" and it works perfectly. (but I have to set the incoming midi source manually each time...)
So IDEALLY, into X2 having a special instrument that could convert Midi to Link where you could set once for all where the midi clock comes from would be awesome.
Even if "Midi Link Sync" seems to work fine ATM, what's amazed me is that NO OTHER midi IOS sequencer app include this concept of Midi 2 Link translation.
It's like Link and Midi were 2 different worlds and no worthy sequencer condescends to plug them for real with the accuracy of X2 does with midi messages...
Real live use case;
Actually, I have my Arturia Drum Brute Impact that is sending a MMC to start AUM (so it starts/stop Link perfectly) then I also run Midi Link Sync that translate my midi clock to Link.
I can play with my knob of my Arturia DBI from 30 to 300 bpm smoothly, AUM moving Link perfectly.
The only one missing part is a decent midi sequencer that implements full midi specs. (and also absorb and plug Link technology to it)
Bisous
PS : @rs2000 yes Midi Link Sync does that, thanks for the reminder
and what's completely crazy is that it's the only one app in all the app store that allows that...
@hellquist +1 billion on your last post.
RE: the portions of your post that I've bolded...
Sounds like a logical return on investment argument to me.
Other new features could come later.
...
I also like chord pads that can be programed with user assigned notes.
Which makes me think about the idea of chord pads that have both user assigned notes... AND the ability to assign "different user programmed arpeggios" to each chord pad individually.... What about chord pads where each pad can pull up it's own limited length piano roll editor where a user a can program in anything they want the chord pad to play, from chords to arpeggios, when each individual pad is pressed?
But that's the problem with having too many features, it can make an App difficult to understand and use. So the benefits of the inclusion of any one, needs to be weighed against the effect that each new feature inclusion may have on the usability of the entire App.
And it is apparently the reason why I never use many of the DAWS I already own... Because they are so bloated with features that they just get too hard for me to figure them out out, and use them.
Well, to me this poll tells that 60% of users wants more midi integration...
So true! I have all the big DAWs, and I have all the little modules...but I get the most done (and have the most fun) with apps that hit a “sweet spot” between complexity and simplicity, such as Nanostudio 2 and Gadget. They give you just enough, and then get out of your way. I want more such apps, and I think a Xequence with AU would be a great one—an instant classic if done right.
@crony, thanks for the detailed write-up. All good ideas... for "Xequence Live" sometime in the future
(sorry I have to concentrate on a certain vision of the app with the limited development time available).
I think this forum draws the more tech savvy user. I don't know sales, but a typical prospective user probably is attracted to a music app that looks fun and slick, and doesn't require complicated connections. I'm happy with X2 as is, but would be happier with more tempo and time flexibility. A basic DAW with the Xequence look and feel is a pleasant thought. It could serve as either an all-in-one or modular sequencer depending on the need or desire of the moment.
Ultimately, like making music, I think it's best to make the app that you really want to make.