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.
HigherSynth
It’s an idea I’ve been kicking around for a while, some of you might even remember me voicing something similar on here many many years ago, but it occurred to me that it’s possible and we should actually do it. So, I just wrote this – effectively the manifesto. Join in if you wish. Somehow. I’m not expert on this gitlab/github type of thing.
Comments
Says 'page not found' when visiting the link.
Was this the idea about a giant net of synth parameters to be manipulated in 3d space?
Can you explain a bit? It wants me to log in or sign up. Not ready for that level of commitment.
The problem is that most people don‘t realize that there is no problem. OM
Succinctly put: a way for similarly structured subtractive synths to share patches.
I've had similar thoughts in past but there are some business, practical, and philosophical issues that would likely keep this from happening. Though maybe AI would solve this.
Companies would need to adopt a universal preset system that would allow this to work. Each company wants to sell their synths, even though let's say two synths are both dual VCO synths. There is no way they would support this directly. Right now MIDI CC 21 (picking a random value) is different from one synth to the next. There would need to be a translation system of such values between synths.
On the practical side, oscillators, filters, differ from one synth to another, analog or digital. Even if a patch is similar, it would sound different, so would we really need / want this?
Thank you @auxmux , I think this is a great idea and I hope the idea gets some support.
Well, these are only meta-patches. You’d print out a patch sheet [1] and see a] how to patch your synth with a ‘well-known’ patch from not necessarily that synth, and b] see the origin of that patch and which synths it was ‘famous’ from, and what it was called on those synths. I think a lot of people wouldn’t realise that they were in fact the same patch.
[1] or someone could take it further and develop some sort of meta-patch to ‘specific-synth’-midi-format patch layer, for those synths that can have patches supplied to it over midi.
My point of view currently is that manufacturers such as Behringer and others are currenly pumping out an array of different synth models that emulate various vintage synths. However, most of those are 2VCO synths that are about 90% the same as each other. They can’t be that different. Each one is ‘just another 2VCO subtractive synth’ same as all the others.
This is true. Most of Behringer synths use same oscillators but filters differ here and there, which make a difference in sound. Filters are the most important part of all synths.
IMO while many synths may have much in common, the end results of similar component use can vary wildly. Even a simple thing like signal flow makes one synth sound using the standard components totally different from another.
Half the fun of a new synth is attempting to emulate that which it is not, while the other half is pushing it to new places. I’m not sure that aiming for more conformity even in small areas of synthesis is a good thing - personally, I would like to see manufacturers going wild with synthesis and design.
So does that mean for instance their Roland Cloud Jupiter 8 is going to sound the same as the Jupiter 8 patches on the Jupiter X? Do you know if the Cloud Synths are considered Zen Core now?
Which is a step backwards from actual ICs and transistors
That's definitely true. Many synths have a lot of potential overlap sound-wise.
If you only use their most basic structural elements, that is...
Does anyone want to work with patch sheets anymore?
Yes, and that's a tremendous amount of work.
A good starting point could be Edisyn:
https://github.com/eclab/edisyn
Someone would have to introduce a new set of parameters that helps in mapping control values to perceived sound, in order to approximate parameters to actual sound, and then someone would have to do the hard work of going through all the parameters for every supported synth. Who will do it??
In my opinion, that looks like a tremendous amount of work for probably only a small group of people who will eventually be disappointed about the limited actual sonic similarity in the end due to overall sound difference and different feature limitations in the supported synths.
I”m definitely with you on this. I’d rather spend my energy exploring the uniqueness of each synth rather than trying to standardise. It seems like a great deal of work for an outcome whose ultimate purpose I’m not convinced about.
As @Max23 said earlier, I’m not sure what problem this is trying to solve. It sounds more like a fun technical idea whose greater purpose is uncertain. If you build it, who will come?
Also, how much time and energy would it consume? To build the engine? To populate it with data?
Personally I’d much rather spend time making tunes, diving deep into each synth’s uniqueness ...
@u0421793 But ultimately I’m not wanting to pour cold water on other people’s creative ideas, and I hope you get it working if you go ahead, but I guess it is important to discern whether you’d be content building it as a proof of concept for your own satisfaction, or whether you would only be fulfilled if it became widely used.