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
This :-)
Actually, it IS :-)) At least internally on low level. It's just nice UI build as layer over old good plain UNIX. Same MacOS.
I literally LOVE editing audio files with fingers on touchscreen. Super intuitive. Super precise.
This exactly ! As i already mentioned, biggest investment in terms of improving processors in last 2-3 years is visible in GPU a ML area ... not that much in CPU area (at least not in high performance cores). 3D graphics and AI/ML is obviously main Apple interest. And what uses together both those two areas ? Games. It's obvious.
Which is not good news for us, musicians
I wouldn’t be too pessimistic yet. The iPads have very good single core performance compared to any intel Mac. The iPad pro is faster than a Mac Pro per single core.
A future Mac could have many more cores than the current laptops. The Mac Pro’s performance comes from having lots of cores. And audio software in the Mac is very good at using multiple cores — unlike in iOS. This is good for us musicians. I’m sure.
There’s no reason why an A chip couldn’t scale to have lots of high performance cores.
The iPad Pro is fast enough as it is for nearly everybody. Apple don’t need to make it faster. Yet.
I am optimistic that the first arm Macs will outperform the equivalent intel macs in CPU and GPU performance.
Mind you I wouldn’t be surprised if the first Apple SOC ARM Mac is a low end MacBook or MacBook Air. That’s an easy target for the arm processor to completely blow intel out of the water.
I see no reasons to be pessimistic. Everything is looking good. :-)
I have been a Mac user for so long I’ve lived through every one of the major transitions. I’m not worried about the next one. I’m looking forward to it.
Having said that. There will be casualties along the way no doubt. But from what I’ve read even plug-ins will work with Rosetta. They get recompiled at source so are not translated on the fly. There will be a performance hit compared to a fully optimised native app and some will undoubtedly fail to work.
One thing I remember from the last transition. Rosetta was incredible. I could use non-audio power pc software at similar speeds to my previous power macs on an entry level Intel MacBook.
So yeah. The world is going to hell in a handcart. It’s nice to have something to look forward to
The only problem is the economy is taking such a pounding it might be a long time before I can spend any money on any shiny new Apple products!
Hm.. ok that's true.. just problem is there are just 2 HP cores in current A* processors .. intel chips do have 4 or even 8 cores in notebooks .. that's big difference ..
Oh, now i remembered something ... recently i watched very interesing video about possible multicore usage in iOS apps ... i added it here to not create offtopic in this thread
https://forum.audiob.us/discussion/34737/still-no-multi-core-support-for-audio-processing-on-ios
Here’s the full list of macOS Big Sur compatible Macs:
2015 and later MacBook
2013 and later MacBook Air
2013 and later MacBook Pro
2014 and later Mac mini
2014 and later iMac
2017 and later iMac Pro
2013 and later Mac Pro
Interesting to note the the by far most populair and affordable 2012 Mac Mini (because of it's upgrade possibilities) isn't compatible anymore with Big Sur. Besides that 2012 Mac that were compatible with Catalina also are out.
Yeah, wonder why they've cut those out? Not an issue for me, I'm running High Sierra on my 2012 MBP, and perfectly happy to keep it that way.
current A* processors :-)
I'm definitely much quicker at this on my mac than on iPad. The iPad is far more direct, and probably more fun for many things, but you can't beat knowing a gazillion keyboard shortcuts and the precision of a mouse with modifier keys to get stuff done instantly.
I mentioned the GB remix fx earlier; This is an area where touch is obviously much better. The logic version is only useful when you use an iPad or iPhone as a controller. Using one click at a time sucks all the fun out of it.
Whilst I don't want a Mac to be a touch screen first device, it would be very cool to be able to use apps like Samplr on the Mac with actual fingers.
Using a Mac (in their current form factors!) with just touch would be a pain in the arse. Being able to touch the odd thing here and there could be very useful though. But I hope and expect Macs to continue to be Mouse/trackpad+keyboard devices in the future. Adding touch to that might be nice though.
Whatever they're planning, you can't look at the way that Apple UIs are going and not notice that the Mac is going to be far more touch friendly in the future than it is today.
This thread shows the UI of Ultrabeat compared to the new Drum synth in Logic 10.5 here.
Drum Synth look like an iPad UI. Perhaps it is, and is taken from a future iPad app (GB Pro/Logic for iPad)? But it could just be opening the door for touch enabled Macs too? I'm just having a bit of fun speculating :-D
Yeah, I'm very disappointed by this move
Well, I guess it's time to upgrade.
I wish they've told us when to expect an ARM-based Mac Mini. I'm not a big fan of laptops. I don't travel much anymore, so a desktop computer and an iPad work better for me. But if I have to wait 2 years I might just buy a new MacBook Pro. Life's too short.
Besides, I may need to use Windows for work, so an "Intel inside" machine might be very handy to have. Kinda expensive though
The 2012 models have HD Graphics 4000. The 2013 models have a HD Graphics 5000. Probably that's the reason. But looking at specs of both Graphics there's hardly any difference in speed and graphic support. Get the impression Apple just wants to just phase out the 2012 models because it will get them more money.
I was just mulling over the price of the new 16” I bought.
My previous MBP in 2012, cost £1750. It had 4gb RAM, 15” non-retina screen, and a 500gb standard HD.
The 16” cost £850 more. But for that I get 16gb RAM - quadruple the amount, a 500gb SSD, and a bigger, retina screen. Plus all the new stuff like the touchbar, bigger trackpad, better CPU and GPU etc.
So yeah, not cheap, but with the additional upgrades it has, probably similar value to the one I bought 8 years ago )and still going strong).
hope 5hey have better build quality than 2015 pro's - mine is literally bended so much that i can't completely close it ... nothing significant happened, i normally used it .. i'm very disappointed with build quality, it looks like this after 2 years of using ... my old 2010 17" pro is much better in terms of build quality ...
Blimey, I guess you had some significant heat going on there to warp it like that. I tend to rest mine on a couple of pencils, to allow heat to escape from the bottom. Saying that though mines been pretty cool so far. I guess that’s the payback with their obsession with making everything thinner.
My 2012 is built like a tank - it’s probably twice the weight of the new one. I’ve always been concerned about the hinge though - the plastic cracked the first month I had it, fortunately it didn’t get any worse.
Nope. I use it jut for coding, so processor or gpu goes warm just rarely. In most case fans are silent.
I don't think that is normal @dendy
My last work Mac must have been a 2015 and it never showed any signs of warping.
When we are using IntelliJ, you could cook an egg on that, it gave off so much heat.
Interesting, i'm using PhpStorm all the day (another JetBrains IDE) and fan is quiet most of time ...
>
+1. They’re made of thick aluminium, not plastic, or raspberry Magnums. It’d take serious heat to make it warp like that.
@klownshed
We're talking about two different things. You're conflating all computers as if they're basically the same thing. They're not - there is the world of high powered computers:
And there is everybody else. For most people computers have been powerful enough for nearly 10 years now. If you can do your work on a laptop without any issues, the new ARM chips will probably be fine. Like I've said elsewhere on this thread - this makes a lot of sense for laptops and iMacs.
However, there are still people who use Macs for which this isn't particularly true. They need performance, and so far there's no evidence that Apple are at all competitive in this notoriously difficult field that even experienced engineers screw up in. Apple don't have experience of making high end silicon - for them to get the skills required will be very difficult and expensive.
Currently my guess is that Apple are hedging their bets by hanging onto Intel for desktop (desktop by the way does not include the iMac - iMacs are essentially laptops encased in a big screen) for the moment. If they succeed at making high performance silicon in house (which is more than just the CPU btw), then they will transition. If they do not succeed then they may simply cut their losses and focus on laptops and consumer/low-end pro PCs (iMacs and iMinis). Which for most people probably will mean very little, but it could mean that Macs stop being competitive in high end audio work.
Even today, anyone buying a Mac for performance purposes is a fool. My friend recently bought a gaming computer for her son for around $1300 that outperforms Mac pros that are multiples of its price. I don't see that changing. High end computing is a small market for Apple. I can see them being willing to lose it if it means big wins, and reduced costs, in the consumer/low end pro markets.
And these computers will not be bought by gamers. If you want a console, you buy a console. Games computers are bought for a different type of gaming experience and Macs are insanely overpriced for that. Casual gaming is a phone thing, and Apple may be able to make inroads with Apple TV I guess. But very few people will buy a Mac to play games.
To be fair IntelliJ is much better than it was. But it's mostly when we have to compile and run our big Java app servers that things get toasty.
Ah, the magnum put paid to my own mac, not the work one. Saying that, I bounced my own 2008 MBP off a concrete floor once time, and apart from a dent in the corner of the lid, it survived fro many years until "the event".
Nothing on the iPad compares to Reaper.
I had a Macbook Pro made of aluminium warp. It was the battery though.
@klownshed
This simply isn't true. It's fast enough for a subset of people, but it isn't fast enough for high end stuff.
Sigh. There are lots of reasons. This might be possible, and this might result in good performance. But neither are a given. Scaling things up is a hard engineering problem. There's all kinds of tech in AMD and Intel chips to do this, and there are always performance losses from the scaling up. It's like saying, there's no reason a brick house can't be scaled up to be a skyscraper...
A big reason for that was that the Intel chips of the time were a LOT more powerful than the equivalent PowerPC chips. So the emulation tax was more than compensated for by the new CPUs. Also the work that you do to make software run fast on an Intel machine will not work for ARM hardware, and may indeed may it perform slower. So naively ported software, which has not been optimized, may well perform quite poorly on ARM hardware.
All to say, this stuff is more complicated than you seem to assume and a lot more difficult to make work. If you use your computer for browsing, light computing work and the like - you will not notice a difference. If you want to run the latest Rob Papen plugin - your probably will.
Oh that’s interesting. Where did you find that info?
Nice I actually moved from 44 to 48khz because of this amazing Fabfilter (Dan Worral) video:
Highly recommended!
Hilarious
@cian
Apple need to make processors that can power the MacBook Air all the way to the Mac Pro.
Do you not think they'll make a chip that can compete with the Xeons in the Mac Pro? If they can't the lineup post transition will look a little thin at the top. They said they are making a "family of SoCs" for Mac. I would like to hope that includes the Mac Pro. Even though I'll never be able to buy one.
I'm going to continue to be optimistic until there's any real evidence to the contrary. Apple appear to think they can do it. I see no reason to doubt them yet.
Oh, and I'm fairly optimistic that Man U will beat Sheffield Utd tonight. Not massively optimistic, but I can hope. I'm not going to check back here before kick-off, so if you want to piss on that particular parade you're out of time
@klownshed
A Xeon processor is to a mobile CPU, like a VW Golf is to a Naval destroyer. It's not that VW can't build the destroyer, it's just that your existing experience and engineering talents isn't going to be super helpful, it's going to take time and there's a reasonably high chance of failure. Prior experience is no guarantee of success here.
This is exactly my point. There is a non-trivial chance that exactly this will come to pass. And as a company Apple will be fine, because a tiny proportion of their profits come from XEON class computers. However if you're someone who needs that power (which most Apple users are not), you could be in trouble. Or maybe Apple will keep supporting Intel/AMD for several more years. Or maybe they'll decide that the cost of supporting anything above an iMac just isn't worth it.
Apple have thought a lot of things over the years. They've been right about some, wrong about others. Engineering is hard, failure is common.
Shorter version: producing laptops and iMacs with ARM chips should be fairly trivial for Apple. Apple Pros will be a lot harder, and may prove impossible for them to pull off within budget/time/etc. I certainly don't think we're going to see anything in that class with an ARM processor for a few years. And who knows what AMD/Intel will have by that point. Processor competition is the toughest fight in the world. Intel and AMD have years of experience, far deeper chip talent that Apple and support a far wider range of uses. Only a fool would write them off.
And Apple has money to buy best chip experts and technologies on this planet. Apple has more money than Intel, AMD and Nvidia combined ;-) I wouldn't underestimate this fact :-)