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
I’m wondering the same. To me Spatializer sounds like a focused reverb kind of, and one that’s limited to small spaces. But it does sound a little different than a regular reverb, more sutil. Is there a Pro-R preset that would be equivalent in order to compare?.
Yes indeed — if possible always display the sampling rate, even when supported. But somewhere unobtrusive.
I’ve never used FabFilter so can’t speak to why it can do. But Spatializer definitely fits a niche I didn’t have. I have plenty of tools for side-to-side widening and narrowing. But I don’t have any that really give a solid 360 feel and control to the sound. That’s where Spatializer comes in. I can have a sound front and center and gradually surround myself with it. That’s super neato.
Hi @BCKeys, no we think that's a great subject and was also standing by with an answer to @tahiche's earlier question (rephrasing an answer that was given in another forum), kind of hoping that people who have the plugin would provide answers first.
I can provide the developer's point of view if you'd like.
Unlike reverbs, Spatializer has a linear phase mid channel with maximally flat frequency response.
In this setup, unlike reverbs, you're restricted from taking advantage of the mid channel contributing to the overall stereo frequency response. Spatializer however has a very specially optimized impulse response to give you a balanced spectral density (across L, R, S, and trivially, M) that you wouldn't get if you just removed the mid channel from a traditional reverb. (For the sake of completeness though, if we were to limit our focus to only look at either the L or R channel output in itself, reverbs - especially convolution reverbs - can deliver a better temporal density which could further reduce the theoretical probability of side channel artifacts. But whether an increased phase shift complexity would benefit all possible use cases is a more subtle question.)
Most importantly, Spatializer has dynamics processing, including a multi-band envelope shaper that aims to minimize lingering post-echoes when the signal is full of sharp transients. That creates a very focused, sharp response, that has further beneficial properties when the mid channel is kept unaltered.
@tahiche: one additional point for your original question. Spatializer and all wideners ultimately spread out the signal in time. Now if that basic property is paired with the aim for approximating a flat frequency response, you pretty much arrive at a description that covers reverbs just as well. This is more pronounced as the spreading out happens on larger time scales. Apart from the differences listed above, maybe the most basic one that Spatializer works very hard to avoid a reverberant tail, when the input signal concludes. Because it only modifies the side channel, such late reflections would collapse the spatial perception. This behavior is generalized further for transients, so we've arrived at the second main feature listed above.
So use a high-quality reverb when you really want to simulate an acoustic space, and use wideners when you don't really want reverberations and echoes messing things up. And use wideners with high timescale settings for experimental sound fields, or use them together with reverbs (on different tracks) to get more variation into your sound stage. And as we mention in the app description, and what @bangzero referred to, a widener can remove a "distance gap" that you sometimes get with large-scale reverbs, like halls, when you feel that the direct/dry signal has a prominent flat sound that is in contrast with the spaciousness of the wet signal, and simply mixing the two does not provide an adequate solution.
Lastly, given the qualities listed above, you would be more inclined to use Spatializer on the master bus for a wide variety of genres than a reverb (if that's something you do), I think @McD's comments are relevant from earlier in this thread.
@quantovox Hi, just jumped the fence i was waiting on since release and bought the plugin to compare it to a Pro-Q/-R setup described above. I‘m no mastering expert (and my hearing probably isn’t the best anymore) - but i think still can give some comments:
I used a Slammer instance with all sounds setup to identical neutral settings (no internal reverb, pitch, all center etc) that i additionally forced to mono using AUM‘s internal stereo-to-mono FX.
The Spatializer presets sound very nice and natural, for my taste the ‚brilliant booth‘ is a bit too bright. The ‚Bright Room‘ and ‚Stage‘ presets enter the realms of revers - due to their time scale > 100% which adds a kind of pre-delay in addition to prolonging the sound.
In my ears the sound and effect of the Spatializer presets differ from what i can achieve with the FabFilter combo - and also from what Infected Mushrooms Wider does or Blue Mangoos Binaureal Location (without Orbits, which introduce doppler like FX)
As mentioned above, my main checks were done with the harder case of pure mono input. In the few tries i did with stereo input, the Spatializer plugin managed to add nice spatial information which can aid in better sound positioning.
.
The plugins UI looks very nice and smooth. I really like the analyzer, which is also active if the plugin is set to in-active 👍🏼 That way i could visually compare the effect of a Pro-Q (Subtile Stereo Enhancer preset) / Pro-R (Closet preset) combo to what Spatializer does using its radial display. Didn‘t yet manage to dial in similar behavior, the Pro Q/R combo shows a different general movement distribution.
.
I have two requests
+1 to making knobs available as AUv3 parameters for automation purposes.
Also, great review. I especially like the tip about using the analyzer in inactive mode to see what’s being done by other plugins.
Very valuable addition to the discussion, indeed. That's what makes this forum great.
Let me copy a comment we added under a youtube video on the second point:
(Also we noted the feedback, will share more info later - the rollout can happen in 2 or 3 phases, depending on feedback, etc. Making the timescale param automate nicely can have a rather big performance impact, so would like to understand the need around that, and whether a performance drop would be a reasonable tradeoff.)
@quantovox will automating the Timescale parameter impact the sound?
Having the feature added won't change or degrade the plugin's output in any way compared to previous versions. If that was the main point of the question.
That was the main point of the question.
Thank you.
@Gravitas As i understand the answer, allowing for timescale param automation might be problematic as this would result in a bigger performance impact.
I know listened closer to what happens when manually changing the timescale parameter and i notice a bit of quiet digital noise (like bit degration) when a sound is playing while fastly moving the knob. (IPad Pro 10.5, IOS 13.6). The dsp algorithm probably needs to reinitialize many parameters and tables on change resulting in small gaps or jumps in interpreting its buffers. (Fast jiggeling the time-scale knob probably isn’t happening in any normal use-case and clearly not in the intended scope of the plugin, so this is not a bug or problem that needs to be fixed)
Allowing for interactive smooth changes would need a different (not so optimized and more general) algorihtm including the option to change the timescale - and this would impact the whole plugin performance. In my opion its therefor better to not support timescale automation and instead keep the dsp low.
@_ki
Quantovox mentioned automating the ,’Timescale Parameter’, in an earlier comment.
“Making the timescale param automate nicely can have a rather big performance impact”
hence my question in regards to the sound of Spatializer.
Quantovox also mentioned that automating ,’Timescale Parameter’,
will not change or degrade the sound in anyway so,… all is good.
yes what was meant by "performance" was computational efficiency, and this was maybe understood as audio performance.
@_ki thanks for the additional input. Yes it can become a balancing act between users that use the effect on many tracks, together with other effects (maybe even on older hardware) versus those that require more computationally heavy features. So decisions need to be weighed carefully.
@quantovox thank u so much for the explanations and involvement.
I suck at reverbs, and if you suck at reverb you end up making a big boomy mess. So I’ve been using Spatializer on basically everything in a tune I’m doing and my very technical description would be “it makes stuff sound better”. It provides a sense of space but it’s very subtle, like you can’t really tell it’s there until you take it off. And that’s great cos it means it’s natural.
My noob recommendation… if you’re trying to get some nice, subtle space for your instrument/track but you suck at reverb, just drop Spatializer in and go through the presets.
That's awesome. Over time, no doubt you will get more familiar with the controls and how they relate to various effects. If you're experimenting with doing away with regular reverbs to a large extent, we recommend that you check out the mono mix early on, as there could probably be a big difference compared to what you're used to, which could go both ways - but that can very much depend on your tracks and your effects chains as well.
Cheers.
@quantovox ,please make this app available for ios13.4.1 users if,possible.
Thanks!
+1.
This app is a spice you'll appreciate on every mixdown session. It's one of those tools you add and hear immediate benefit.
It's a scalpel type of app that you dial in while playing the track.
What I usually want from a reverb is a sense of "Placement" for the performers and I rarely use pan's but I get a strong sense of space with this in the mix. But reverbs due tend to blur lines between parts and this does not seem to add blur... just a sense of giving the listener a space for the music.
Since to focuses on the mid-channel I suspect you can pan left or right on something you want to be added and not dominant.
Remember this is an intro price until the iPhone version ships. Try to participate before you realize people are using this and you need to pay $10 or more... like DDMF... this could be a niche $25 app to justify the coding and maintenance effort. Sound engineers will get it. Clients will think you're worth the extra cost of using a pro. Just let them hear it with and without.
Bought the app, still getting used to...and looks fantastic!
Question:
How would the app be used on a master EDM track to widen the high end or maybe better: how to use it on full masters for any other purposes? I find having a stereo widener for the high end on the master pretty nice so would love to implement spatializer for this...
I keep hearing about front/back balance, but only see a knob in tutorials for left/right. How is that achieved?
Hi Bob,
Have you had a chance to try Spatializer for the purposes you describe? Since your question hasn't been answered yet, the best way forward perhaps is to experiment (or to address the users directly who posted about these topics earlier), first with presets and then by tweaking the settings. With respect to widening the high end, if you find the plugin's performance not fulfilling that goal to the extent you wished, you may look at using a 3rd party Mid/Side EQ plugin to shape the Side EQ curve a bit more freely, possibly boosting the high end. And in addition to that, perhaps look at lowering the timescale values, but then you may want to cut back the lows and mids. And even more elaborate setups could be created if necessary, but not sure if that's really the case. Would love to hear your feedback.
Cheers!
Hi Sylaar. The front/back balance is an emergent property of three things: the input signal, the settings (knobs), and the base phase shift profile (of which the plugin has one). This balance you can gauge by looking at the visualizer, and one of the display modes is a simple 1-dimensional chart that makes reading this very easy. A numerical readout is also something we may do, but there are some questions around that.
When we say "emergent", it does not mean it's totally unpredictable, just partly (and the question of perception also comes into the picture). Basically the low end is the most predictable (for someone who has become familiar with the plugin), but due to the specific peaks and valleys in the phase shift profile, fine-tuning may be necessary if you want to get the most out of the plugin.
There are a succession of 3 presets for example that progressively introduce more back emphasis, and that works relatively consistently. Checking the visualization is not a must, but can be a really useful tool.
Good news. Please check the app store now.
Cheers
Support for GarageBand instruments running at 22050Hz is now available.
Thanks for the update. Just got it.
Thanks for your patience. @Jumpercollins I think you also were expecting the fix.
Reposting my iPhone demo vid since the universal update is out.
Spatializer was also used pretty heavily on my most recent release.
@quantovox Thanks a lot for the update with so many new features 👍🏼
Great work @DukeWonder I really enjoyed that beat