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
Except possibly in Iceland, hydroelectric power generally has other associated environmental costs. Or is this assumption also 5-7 years dated? If not, then to say there is excess capacity is to say that these costs were incurred unnecessarily..
I've been wondering where all the discussion was hiding. Now I found it. Thanks for enlightening me about POS.
Has no one asked whether Drambo can do NFT?
I know. That was my point. It's interesting how important the energy aspect is in arguments against crypto, where it doesn't seem to be in arguments for governmental forcing of accelerated electrical vehicle adoption.
Pure speculation... and not from a vantage point of any level of expertise (to the say the least), but I would venture to say there's something to all this.
At the moment it's the wild west with lots of opportunities to get burned AND profit. Probably many more opportunities to get burned than anything else.
When the dust settles, I think this is going to be here for awhile and a legitimate new marketplace. As I mentioned before, I'm still skeptical, but I'm also pretty intrigued... and dare I say, excited for the potential possibilities.
I absolutely agree @skiphunt. This is leading somewhere beneficial.
People who fear change will dismiss it or will try to drag it back, but there is zero chance they will stop it. People who have the instinct or luck to profit from it will. Others will either bet wrong or miss the boat. But it is definitely going somewhere.
THIS !!!
interesting thread
this comment was started way back near the beginning, but was not posted, as it had nothing to offer but the space and opportunity for me to gather my thought,,, the topic has now wandered and meandered, so it feels ok to modify and share...
for me, bitcoin is another Δ money scheme,,
with processing power, algorithms, and a dark web background at the top,
another attempt at «control»
pushing humankind deeper and deeper into the machine
not something i am yet at peace with, but something i feel is sadly inevitable (all ends are new beginnings)
but how much will silicon need the carbon?
the message drummed home again and again seems to be ... too many footprints? too many carbon?
i feel much of the current noise and story around crypto- and non-fungi- is to get the ball rolling, get the ideas out, and conversations started, the deeper reasons and uses coming later down the line....
and as always i see first the words used ... crypto ... 'covert' , 'hidden',,, is this what our money really needs?
block chains ... an attached trail, ideal for control and tracking (like RFID in bank notes)
many believe these technologies are an alternative to the central globalist banking system, but i see it simply as a further extension of this same «control», the ultimate ends of this same «control»
at the same time the World Economic Forum is telling us "you'll own nothing, and you'll be happy", NFTs seem to be looking to create and maintain ownership and scarcity?
i find this an interesting thread
the issue facing artists and musicians, all of us, in the digital world, in the silicon age, is that "value" has been removed to the point of no longer existing, a "Living" from these occupations has been removed by the machine and all it brings
how much will silicon need carbon?
what right to Life will there be, as increasingly the machines service the «control» class?
is electricity looking to replace fire as the fifth element here on planet earth?
thanks for the space to think and share
No worries @simonnowis - all this will be far simpler once everyone has their identity chip implanted in their forehead.
Just got my own Bill Gates identity chip in the Covid vaccine! Looking forward to the chip firmware upgrade, jacking into the mainframe and taking over the digi-verse.
It’d be useful to view a grid of places to mint NFTs, what media file types they accept, and what blockchain they use.
For example, I’m increasingly a bit interested in releasing a book as a set of chapters, each as an NFT. The book was written in Pages, with a phone-sized page size (a long time ago). Would I be able to just upload a Pages file anywhere? A PDF? An EPUB?
Most places I’ve looked at seem restricted to a tight subset of image formats.
Also, it’d be useful to know that I can or can’t link a wallet of my choosing (and owning)
My thoughts, distilled:
https://richardyot.com/blog/2021/3/14/whats-wrong-with-nft
Here’s a fairly simply tutorial: https://www.benzinga.com/money/how-to-make-your-own-nft/
More information: https://www.coindesk.com/how-to-create-buy-sell-nfts
Incidentally, there are musicians who are making NFT’s work for them. This podcast features a musician known as 3LAU (“Blau”):
https://overcast.fm/+YNeT91BiM
And this is just one site I found where a person can ‘mint’ an NFT (which could be their music, art, video... whatever).: https://mintable.app/
(Please note I’m not endorsing or connected to any of these services.)
found this... really beautifully made, piece of art :-) And what is more important - full of facts. Just read and learn.
https://bitcoinmythology.org/
Are you kidding me. You broadly dismiss what you have called the "mainstream shitstorm" media — like The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times and the BBC — and then you post a link to corporate propaganda from a company that is a shill for Bitcoin?
Wow.
I like to think I'm smart enough to dig into arguments no matter who presents them. To me dismissing arguments solely based on the source without dealing with the assertions themselves is a cop out.
(emphasis on think I'm smart enough. That is probably not the case much of the time.
)
That said ... eh ... "facts" in that article @dendy? Where? I see assertions without anything to back them up. I see a nicely illustrated article, but I find not a shred of meat on them bones. Am I missing cross-references to the facts to back these claims up? Assertions don't become facts just because I agree with them.
I've appreciated the other articles this thread has led me to that at least cite a few things to back up their points, They have largely been persuasive. This one? A bit of a nothing-burger if you ask me.
(I only read the first article. Maybe there's more deeper in, but I didn't go there. It seemed like a waste of time.)
But there's a difference between a good-faith argument and outright advocacy though.
(edit) something I see you've acknowledged in your next post
A couple of warnings about NFT art sales from my own experience. To date, I've accepted offers on 4 pieces of artwork minted as NFTs on the https://makersplace.com platform. I put them there back in 2019 after getting an invite and before they were charging fees.
Well, now that they've "sold", for some reason the sales won't go through. I'm told there's an issue with credit card transactions, but I'm having trouble getting anyone from their support team to actually do anything about it. Meanwhile, I have these buyers contacting me and wanting to know why they aren't going through. It's a mess.
And now that NFTs are "a thing", we're discovering what the real business model is. For example. If I wanted to "mint" another piece of art on one of these platforms that are $ETH-based (Ethereum cryptocurrency) it would cost me approximately $200 in "gas" fees (paid to the ETH blockchain miners). If the work sold, Makersplace would charge me another blockchain gas fee just to accept the offer and then take 15% of the sale. If I then want to take my commission and transfer it somewhere to convert to dollars, that would cost yet additional "gas" fees.
In short, unless you're a superstar "it" boy like Beeple and there's someone willing to pay $69million for an NFT of your work... then it's likely not worth these insane fees.
I'm told that when ETH2.0 is brought online and adopted, the fees will come way down.
Alternatively, there are other blockchains. One that's starting to catch on is based on "Proof of Stake" and has very low transaction fees with almost no significant environmental impact. The one I'm exploring is not very intuitive, but it's based on Tezos $XTZ cryptocurrency on the Tezos blockchain. The one I've experimented with is at https://www.hicetnunc.xyz where it only costs around $.30 to "mint" work to NFTs on the Tezos blockchain. It's not widely adopted yet, but it appears to be catching on.
Also...
I don't know if this is a trusted source, but it breaks down what looks like shady insider manipulation involved in that now famous Beeple $69million sale. I think it's very much the wild west with some nefarious characters taking advantage of the chaos at the moment. I still think after the dust settles, this will be a legitimate new marketplace... but for now, make sure you you keep a healthy level of caution and skepticism.
https://amycastor.com/2021/03/14/metakovan-the-mystery-beeple-art-buyer-and-his-nft-defi-scheme/
Many of the "facts" on that site are in dispute -- such as the claim that cheap energy is always clean.> @wim said:
Up thread were articles that dispute many of the claims made in the page Dendy posted -- he dismissed all such articles out of hand when they were posted. Some of the "myths" exploded in the page just posted (such as cheap energy = clean energy) are issues disputed in any number of articles that provide sourcing.
It is true that lobbying groups sometimes tell the truth and that one should be fair in one's analysis -- it is equally true that one needs to take the bias of a source into account when performing an analysis. Just because the tobacco industry says that smoking isn't causally linked to cancer doesn't mean that they are wrong -- but when a speaker has a vested interest in the information that should play into one's analysis.
i like that article because how it is made.. like fairytale for kids.. i thought you guys will like it, because you like fairytales and myths about bitcoin energy wasting and so on.. my mistake sorry :-))))
@espiegel123 i didn't get any reply on my very long post on previous page where i debunked some myth you posted before, so i guess you did read it and you haven't any other question about things i mentioned there ?
I agree with everything you just said. My only point was about skirting the actual arguments.
Of course, my own comment accomplishes nothing either. All the points being dismissed on both sides have been addressed in other posts already. Coffee is now kicking in and I realize I shoulda kept my mouth shut.
so do your research, take every assertion and do your research.. After years in crypto i learned to not stick with somebody said but validate information for my self and think logically.
those are not random assertions.. it's basically extract about most important myths .. behind every of that assertions it large more in depth set of facts, information and numbers (lot of them i mentioned on previous pages)... I posted it there half-seriously half-joke ..
Of course. Everybody can choose from 3 options when it compes to complex topic which needs many hours of study to understand it more deeply
1/ believe what said somebody who really didn't studied it in depth, just compiled some random numbers from other people who didn't studied it too
2/ believe what said somebody who spend a huge smout of time by studyimg subject
3/ do your own research. understand how it works. go deep, to the core. study. learn.
my suggestion is 3/, obviously vast majority of prople outside crypto are for now wollowinh 1/ because source 2/ is "biased" and "shilling bitcoin"
ok. i got it. will not wasted my or your time anymore with this topic, to lower our carbon footprint
i understand you guys. I was huge sceptic and anti-bitcoiner 5-6 years ago. I wish for you to change your mind someday.
Well, the computers are on anyway, so posting should be pretty much carbon neutral. Please just try to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by trying not to fart too much while typing.
Dendy the long article you posted lists a few things such as the notion that cheap energy means clean energy and that there are no issues of scalability that were questioned in other articles posted in the thread. But since every time someone has posted an article from what you consider a mainstream source you shoot it down as being biased, I didn't bother to re-post or post yet more articles calling your assertions into question.
The claim that crypto uses 70% renewable or other clean energy traces back to a "study/survey" that a crypto-special interest group did. I can dig up the information (as anyone here could do easily enough). A number of groups including researchers at Cambridge dispute the accuracy of that assessment.
The nature of bitcoin's current methodology has inherent scalability issues (again well-documented and if you really want sources I am happy to provide links, but the information is already covered in other articles posted here ) seems not even to be questioned by people in the industry -- including the creator of Ethereum who has promised that in the future the problem will be solved -- but that promise is years old.
I still don't understand the purpose of the debate over whether crypto mining is bad or good for the environment. It is here to stay. There's not a damn thing anyone can do about that, at least not here.
How risky it is, whether it's beneficial for investors and for artists. Those are the interesting aspects to me.
Hey, I'm already a couple-hundred dollars richer (probably temporarily) as a result of this thread. I can't complain.
please read my post on previous page.. i explained why scalability (number of transactions) is totally unrelated to power consumption .. This is pure fact. It's me explainimg it to you, how it works, cause i simply understand how this technology works. I know that i'm probably for you just unreliable random
guy from internet but that is. I spend 5 years studying this technology, i deeply understand how it works. And believe or not i don't have much money in it (cause i don't have much money at all lol. But i like the technology)
Once again : Scalability of bitcoin network is TOTALLY unrelated to power consumption. Who is telling you something else, knows shit about how it works. Period. Sorry but that's it.
I'm definitely not smart enough to opine on on the blockchain, and from what I have read, if you meet someone who says he understands the blockchain, he's lying haha.
I do feel somewhat "attacked" (as the kids so dramatically say) that you posted this after I pointed out that the ironic cryptocurrency fairytales was published by a Bitcoin trade group. I think it's perfectly fair to point out when the source of information has an obvious financial interest in a certain point of view.
Re: scalability. You made a CLAIM how it works. Other people expert in the field dispute your characterization -- so, since I don't have the expertise to do an independent analysis, I am simply going to say that there are enough people with expertise in this area that dispute your scalability claim to not take your claim as a fact.
I apologize for making you feel attacked. I was whining about the debate over sources being valid or not. I'm hungry for data on this subject and simple dismissal of sources on either side is just a distraction. It wasn't directed at you specifically, but at the practice.
It was none of my business. I was being a whiner. I hate whiners.