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
Yeah, and draw waveforms by hand using a slider
That was indeed a cool feature.
One of the reasons I want a real '8-bit Finger Paint Oscillator'(256 8-bit samples) for Drambo
Imagine using that as a modulation source, step-sequencer and other cool stuff hehe...
(I'll always have SunVox until that happens).
Now that you've mentioned slider painting, Drambo is almost there but Flexi needs a larger pitch range:
Edit: We could re-sample that curve of course 😅
Edit 2: Resampling works great! Resampling the highest pitch once is enough to get playable tones 😊
Yes, imagine running Flexi at so slow rates that one sample is around 1ms or why not 1 sample = anything from 1 bar to 1/128 or advance one sample on gate input.
But I still think a proper 8-bit 256 sample oscillator is easier to manage, add the oscillator, tap on the screen and paint.
(In full-screen edit mode it would be easy to pinpoint any of the pixels for added accuracy).
While many love the Graphical Shaper in Drambo it doesn't output anything on its own and its frequency can not be controlled.
(At best it just produces some cracking noises when moving the points).
Things will get there eventually, I know I'm not alone pushing for more 'noise types', with bit-shift noise being my particular favourite
We'll get there sooner or later I just know hehe.
Take iM1 as it stands, allow an extra feature whereby you can modulate the output of OSC1 onto the pitch envelope of OSC2, and vice versa OSC2 into the pitch env of OSC1. Maybe you’d also need another copy of envelopes to govern how much OSC mod gets fed onto the opposing envelopes, but that could be squirrelled away into the control page, etc. While you’re at it, do the same to hard sync amount. Then you’ve basically got something that’d embarrass a Mono/Poly instead of being a bland rompler.
Yepp, it's all certainly doable but will Korg ever do it?
Here's an in-depth video on the Korg 01W's 'wave shaping' a feature that is only available on that synth from Korg.
I wonder why they removed the feature as it's not even present on their current flagship Kronos!.
(I'd take the iO1W as an app any day as it goes way beyond the basic rompler due to its waveshaping feature).
Not true. I've used it several times as an oscillator with freely drawable waveforms, fed by a sawtooth oscillator.
I've asked @giku_beepstreet to include a non-antialiased sawtooth version in the oscillator long ago, specifically for that purpose and now we have it.
BTW, bit shifting noise can already be produced in several ways.
Check this out for a "poor man's wavetable synth":
https://patchstorage.com/instant-meditation/
It's just annoying that they are marketing Modwave as an updated DW8000. I got really excited at first thinking it will include the analogue filters only to see there all digital. I understand 32 voices would make including analogue filters way to expensive but I personally would be happy with 8 notes like the original. It appears the Modwave is only mono trimbral so does it need so many voices?
On a positive note the specs look really good with near endless modulation possibilities! Some of the effects have interesting names. Look forward to someone doing an in depth review soon.
On other forums, the 32-voice polyphony, wide range of modeled filter choices (MS-20, PolySix, etc.), etc. seems to outweigh the lack of true analog filters for a number of potential customers.
My Korg M3 with EXB-RADIAS has DWGS stuff - I remember RADIAS and EXB-RADIAS adverts invoking the DW8000 legacy. I haven't gotten around though to really digging into the DWGS corner of my M3, though the filter sounds pretty decent to my ears.
Of course everyone is free to vote with their wallet.
Sure it is. Take a look at the MOD-7 engine in the Kronos. Up to 6 waveshapers simultaneously, if you like.
True but MOD-7 engine is a pain in the a to program when the wave shaping could been easily implemented in the HD-1 engine for more 'hands on'. I admit I don't own a Kornos but I've spent quite a bit of time with one...
The older I've grown the less interested in hardware synths I've become as I see most DSP synths as 'Apps' or 'Plug-Ins' that can be played using a controller.
Apps such as Module & Gadget (with all the supporting apps) give us a load of classic sounds that we can carry around with us everywhere and that is a huge advantage.
I am quite impressed by the NTS-1 which I really love but even that little box...
...would be more even usable as a polyphonic AUv3/VST Plug-In that is able to load the custom oscillators and effects.
Even though I try to read thru the manuals for most instruments that spark my interest I can sometimes miss or forget a feature or two
Take Care,
Not in my opinion, but YMMV. Like anything powerful, you need to learn how to use it! But, the control surface gives you fast, hands-on FM control, and the big screen means that you can see a lot at once.
I think you might want to reconsider "easily implemented." :-)
@danatkorg Hello Dan, I assume your last name is Phillips?
Welcome to this forum! Does this mean Korg R&D is also working on something iOS?
Yeah, I get it. Most fo the time I think more like 'I want this module here and that module there'.
Considering my entry to music is based on Trackers from C64 to Amiga w. Sampling it has heavily influenced my 'mindset'.
I still enjoy Trackers with SunVox and Renoise getting plenty of use and the iPad acting as a 'mega sound module' that I can create sampler fodder with. LogicPro is my main DAW.
I've had my dip in to hardware as well but really do prefer to do it 'inside the box' a controller.
Needless to say the nanoKey Studio is my favorite controller as they keys give me that nice clunky 'Amiga Nostalgia' vibe
Cheers & Welcome 2 The Forum!
/Samuel
Will take a look thanks...unlikely in U.K....Korg is king....
VAST is a nightmare and how many GB of sounds was it?
Come on Kurzweil....
I took at look at what Korg's traditional competitors Yamaha and Roland have been up to. Yamaha appears to have abandoned the Motif workstation line. Roland still makes the Fantom workstation but hasn't updated it in years.
Looks like high-end workstations are being phased out. Korg and Roland appear to be focusing more on "affordable" workstations - whatever "affordable" means. Yamaha appears to want you to buy Cubase and use that and your computer as your workstation instead - Yamaha has owned Steinberg for a while now.
Good luck in your workstation search.
The more I think about it, the more I’m a bit disturbed by the Modwave, not so much the item itself, which of course there’s little evidence of, but the marketing. It seems to attempt to rewrite history, painting the DW-8000 as a wavetable synth when in actual fact it used what we would now term as single cycle waveforms – written into ROM in the form of a lookup table.
The point of this was to be able to generate harmonically interesting source oscillator waveforms beyond the basic sine/saw/tri/square set of an analogue VCO. Going back to the Poly800 (which I refer to in my WTFKnobs video on the iM1 DWGS set) if you imagine the predecessors to this only able to offer the aforementioned four analogue waveforms, but the Poly800 able to offer more complex harmonic combinations in a fairly simple additive way (presence or a absence of four signals, mixed). The result was a more interesting set of starting waveforms, but only really a small handful of combinations.
The next step would have been to realise that as these additive combinations were digitally generated, then therefore they could be identically substituted by reading the same values out of a lookup table. Hence, burned into ROM in the case of the DW-6000 rather than use a chip to generate the voicing as in the Poly800. The result would be identical, but reading a cycling loop of data from a ROM is cheaper. The DW-8000 expanded the range of waveforms (16 instead of 8), but essentially it’s the same idea.
Now, none of these technologies so far allow any form of complex evolution of the waveform itself, it just gets scanned out of the lookup table at the oscillator frequency, only altering if you select a different wave.
In parallel, and independently, moves were afoot to digitally solve a different problem in synthesis – not having to rely on expensive analogue VCFs (expensive if you want poly). What does a filter do? It varies the amount of harmonic content in a signal passing through. If it starts with some amount of complexity the filter can vary that from full to a different amount (lower, or in different places) and with the resonance or Q different amounts and widths of emphasis can take effect (sometimes increasing the complexity). Let’s say you set the resonance somewhere and leave it there, but vary the cF, this is predictable and digitisable, simply have a single-cycle wave mimicking the cF at minimum, another single-cycle wave representing the cF nudged up a tiny bit, another single-cycle wave being scanned out of a lookup table corresponding to the values of the cF nudged up a tiny bit more, and so on until you’ve got a big two-dimensional table of waves.
If you scan through this table of tables, you effectively get the same sound as a filter sweep. Which means you don’t need the filter. Now you’ve replaced the oscillator with scanning a digital lookup table at audio frequency, and you’ve replaced the filter by scanning across several consecutive lookup tables. This is cheap, stable, digital and more importantly affords the possibility of adequate polyphony at an affordable price. Wavetables were implemented in this way in (at the time) biggish computer-based installations such as the PPG Wave and their like. It worked, and also afforded an interesting hack - what if you didn’t simply pile up an evolving stack of consecutive look-up tables? What if you made them discontinuous and even unrelated? Well, you can, so they did.
But the DW-8000 isn’t that sort of synth. It’s not a ‘wavetable’ in that sense. It’s simply a ‘wavetable’ in the sense that it is a lookup table which if read out at an audio rate gives you a wave. One wave. One wave per table. Then if you switch tables, you get another, in the same way that if you switch a VCO from saw to square.
The Modwave marketing seems to make the DW-8000 appear to be something it wasn’t. It didn’t go into the two-dimensional wavetables that we contemporaneously consider to be called wavetables, it didn’t need to, it had an analogue filter already. All it was was a single-cycle wave scanning oscillator (well, two such oscillators, and polyphonic (paraphonic due to only one filter though)) synth, which couldn’t traverse through the available single cycle lookup tables as a variable parameter - you had to switch to different tables intentionally. Anyone reading the Modwave promo page would get the impression the DW-8000 was something akin to the PPG Wave. It wasn’t. It solved a different problem altogether.
@u0421793 you are quite right that the Modwave isn’t really like the DW-8000 at all, it’s just marketing hype. I think because the WaveState is a development of the WaveStation, and the OpSix is a development of the DX7, they were casting around for something to relate the Modwave to, preferably a Korg keyboard, and that’s the closest they came up with. True wavetable synths are more the domain of soft synths, but they probably didn’t want to say that lest potential buyers think “well, I might as well just get a midi controller and use a soft synth then”.
@u0421793 Good post, I agree.
Who knows, maybe they already got the name and someone from marketing saw ‘modwave’ and thought it was an opportunity too good to mi$$.
That’s not as unlikely as it sounds, if you believe the thing about the Korg 01/W being called that because the next synth to follow the Korg M1 was supposed to be called the Korg M10, but at the meeting they pushed the piece of paper with ‘M10’ written on it across the table but it was read upside down so they thought it was ‘01/W’.
This may be called ‘granular effect / Impact of Granularity’‘ 🙄
Sometimes I think why these powerful hardware synths are not yet used by world renowned pro music composers. Even I don’t find any of them in their studios. But I have seen only during their live performances. Who’s their target audience of such digital hardware synths.
Synth lovers and gear heads, like many of us. Most pros use stock sounds and orchestras and real instruments.
But they keep insisting on adding that useless row of long black and white pegs sticking out the front, on each one. Who wants more of those?
😂😂
This is true, I don't need keys for sure. 😁 Compromise between old school management, product design, and marketing. Dave Smith is putting out both versions, thankfully.
At first I thought you meant pro film composers, but why not, let's roll with that.
Hans Zimmer seems to own every hardware synth ever made. Somebody tried to do an Equipboard for him but I suspect only a tiny percentage of his hardware synths are represented here - there are photos of him in his studio with huge modular stuff in the background
https://equipboard.com/pros/hans_zimmer
Mark Isham is another pro composer/film composer who has some Youtube videos showing his studio with his modular synths and other hardware goodies
I saw some posts from composer Charlie Clouser about Prophet X, Waldorf Quantum, etc. how he uses each, pros and conss, etc.
I think one of the problems is that if they took the keyboard off and make a desktop module in the style of the Minilogue desktops, people would appreciate not having to pay for a keyboard in cost and space, but then think “wait, now all I’ve got is a box of knobs and displays, the software of the synth itself is not really much different to what I have on the iPad etc” (which costs even less). If there was a module form of the Wavestate I’d wonder why buy it instead of iWavestation and a knobby controller. The difference in capability is more than compensated by the difference in cost. Same with modwave, why not be happy with Korg’s Wave app and a controller. Or no controller, just put up with knobs on the screen (which is never satisfactory unless one is on a train or something).
The desire snakes don’t descend the utilitarian ladders like that with actual analogue quite so much.