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 Store

Loopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.

Loopy Pro: FIRST LOOK

1…1314161819…25

Comments

  • wimwim
    edited October 2021

    @espiegel123 said:

    @wim said:
    Ooooh. That's a little disappointing. I'm with @tahiche, I like to hear the processed track when recording but record the dry only.

    Or am I misunderstanding, and this is actually possible?

    You can record dry and have effects only applied to the output. And, as I posted earlier, the mixer and bus architecture is not yet fully implemented.

    Yes, but can you monitor with the post FX as you record dry. I'm not clear from your answers on that point.

  • espiegel123espiegel123

    @wim said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @wim said:
    Ooooh. That's a little disappointing. I'm with @tahiche, I like to hear the processed track when recording but record the dry only.

    Or am I misunderstanding, and this is actually possible?

    You can record dry and have effects only applied to the output. And, as I posted earlier, the mixer and bus architecture is not yet fully implemented.

    Yes, but can you monitor with the post FX as you record dry. I'm not clear from your answers on that point.

    Today, you cannot monitor wet as far as I know BUT as I said, the full mixer and bussing architecture has not yet been implemented. So, even if it isn't implemented today that doesn't mean it won't be. So, I wouldn't be disappointed based on what is implemented today. If this isn't already intended, I am sure Michael will give it some thought.

  • wimwim
    edited October 2021

    @espiegel123 said:

    @wim said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @wim said:
    Ooooh. That's a little disappointing. I'm with @tahiche, I like to hear the processed track when recording but record the dry only.

    Or am I misunderstanding, and this is actually possible?

    You can record dry and have effects only applied to the output. And, as I posted earlier, the mixer and bus architecture is not yet fully implemented.

    Yes, but can you monitor with the post FX as you record dry. I'm not clear from your answers on that point.

    Today, you cannot monitor wet as far as I know BUT as I said, the full mixer and bussing architecture has not yet been implemented. So, even if it isn't implemented today that doesn't mean it won't be. So, I wouldn't be disappointed based on what is implemented today. If this isn't already intended, I am sure Michael will give it some thought.

    Thanks for answering. I'm imagine there are ways to accomplish this using routing outside the app in the meantime. It's a pretty big omission though, so I hope it's up there somewhere near the top of the to-do list.

  • celtic_elkceltic_elk

    @wim said:
    Thanks for answering. I'm imagine there are ways to accomplish this using routing outside the app in the meantime. It's a pretty big omission though, so I hope it's up there somewhere near the top of the to-do list.

    Currently on the "Post-1.0 Release Target" list at https://loopypro.com/beta/: "Send monitor audio through currently-recording group’s effects"

  • wimwim
    edited October 2021

    @celtic_elk said:

    @wim said:
    Thanks for answering. I'm imagine there are ways to accomplish this using routing outside the app in the meantime. It's a pretty big omission though, so I hope it's up there somewhere near the top of the to-do list.

    Currently on the "Post-1.0 Release Target" list at https://loopypro.com/beta/: "Send monitor audio through currently-recording group’s effects"

    Thanks for that confirmation and the link to where to find the list. That should eliminate a lot of my questions. B)

    Do you know if the post 1.0 list is in any kind of approximate order (priority or time)?

  • lukesleepwalkerlukesleepwalker
    edited October 2021

    .

  • espiegel123espiegel123
    edited October 2021

    @wim said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @wim said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @wim said:
    Ooooh. That's a little disappointing. I'm with @tahiche, I like to hear the processed track when recording but record the dry only.

    Or am I misunderstanding, and this is actually possible?

    You can record dry and have effects only applied to the output. And, as I posted earlier, the mixer and bus architecture is not yet fully implemented.

    Yes, but can you monitor with the post FX as you record dry. I'm not clear from your answers on that point.

    Today, you cannot monitor wet as far as I know BUT as I said, the full mixer and bussing architecture has not yet been implemented. So, even if it isn't implemented today that doesn't mean it won't be. So, I wouldn't be disappointed based on what is implemented today. If this isn't already intended, I am sure Michael will give it some thought.

    Thanks for answering. I'm imagine there are ways to accomplish this using routing outside the app in the meantime. It's a pretty big omission though, so I hope it's up there somewhere near the top of the to-do list.

    Big omission? As noted in my two previous messages, there are features that are planned but not yet implemented. One can’t implement everything at once.

    It is in beta and not yet feature complete.

  • wimwim
    edited October 2021

    @espiegel123 said:
    Big omission? As noted in my two previous messages, there are features that are planned but not yet implemented. One can’t implement everything at once.

    Jesus. You'll quibble about anything.

    OK, "important feature to have missing". Better?
    I should know better than to engage with you. Pisses me off every time. :D

  • espiegel123espiegel123

    @wim said:

    @espiegel123 said:
    Big omission? As noted in my two previous messages, there are features that are planned but not yet implemented. One can’t implement everything at once.

    Jesus. You'll quibble about anything. OK, "important feature to have missing". Better?
    I should know better than to engage with you. Pisses me off every time. :disappointed:

    I simply think it isn't reasonable to label things as "big omissions" and "disappointments" when for all you know, the features will be there. Saying "important feature to have missing" is no more reasonable. You are implying that it isn't going to be implemented.

    It was pointed out to you that new features are being actively added in this area.

  • anicktanickt

    Him: “Why are you crying darling?”

    Her: “Well, we haven’t even had sex yet and people are already saying our baby’s ugly…”

    👶🏽👶🏽👶🏽👶🏽

  • tahichetahiche

    @espiegel123 said:

    @wim said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @wim said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @wim said:
    Ooooh. That's a little disappointing. I'm with @tahiche, I like to hear the processed track when recording but record the dry only.

    Or am I misunderstanding, and this is actually possible?

    You can record dry and have effects only applied to the output. And, as I posted earlier, the mixer and bus architecture is not yet fully implemented.

    Yes, but can you monitor with the post FX as you record dry. I'm not clear from your answers on that point.

    Today, you cannot monitor wet as far as I know BUT as I said, the full mixer and bussing architecture has not yet been implemented. So, even if it isn't implemented today that doesn't mean it won't be. So, I wouldn't be disappointed based on what is implemented today. If this isn't already intended, I am sure Michael will give it some thought.

    Thanks for answering. I'm imagine there are ways to accomplish this using routing outside the app in the meantime. It's a pretty big omission though, so I hope it's up there somewhere near the top of the to-do list.

    Big omission? As noted in my two previous messages, there are features that are planned but not yet implemented. One can’t implement everything at once.

    It is in beta and not yet feature complete.

    “Big omission -> Missing a very important feature” … is that ok? 😜
    Really, being able to monitor with effects but record dry is very, very common and a basic feature.
    The effects obviously affect performance and how you play… a guitar line with a huge delay feedback sounds silly without, but recording wet means you can’t tweak the delay later. Or the mentioned example of the pitched guitar to play a bass line… This “monitoring a track” capability is present in every daw. I hope this is considered critical and bumped to the very top of the list.

    @wim

    I'm imagine there are ways to accomplish this using routing outside the app in the meantime.

    Probably as auv3, adding effects after loopy. But since it’s not multi-out yet (right?) you’d have to keep changing effects depending on what you’re recording.

  • espiegel123espiegel123

    @tahiche said:

    “Big omission -> Missing a very important feature” … is that ok? 😜
    Really, being able to monitor with effects but record dry is very, very common and a basic feature.
    The effects obviously affect …

    Did you miss the mention that it is a planned feature and that features are still being added?

  • celtic_elkceltic_elk

    @tahiche said:
    “Big omission -> Missing a very important feature” … is that ok? 😜
    Really, being able to monitor with effects but record dry is very, very common and a basic feature.

    It's very common in DAWs. Is it a very common feature in live looping apps? (That's an actual question - I've been working in the hardware-looping world, so I don't know what is and isn't common in those feature sets.)

  • espiegel123espiegel123

    In any case, it is planned for Loopy Pro.

  • ashhashh

    @espiegel123 said:

    @wim said:

    @espiegel123 said:
    Big omission? As noted in my two previous messages, there are features that are planned but not yet implemented. One can’t implement everything at once.

    Jesus. You'll quibble about anything. OK, "important feature to have missing". Better?
    I should know better than to engage with you. Pisses me off every time. :disappointed:

    I simply think it isn't reasonable to label things as "big omissions" and "disappointments" when for all you know, the features will be there. Saying "important feature to have missing" is no more reasonable. You are implying that it isn't going to be implemented.

    It was pointed out to you that new features are being actively added in this area.

    Well, no. You are implying that's what he was getting at. Yes, I get it, you've already told everyone what is happening with future updates. Great, you've had your say, step back and let others do the same. You are making it difficult to even discuss these things because you jump onto any comment that seems to be critical and begin defending LP. Surely it's ok to talk about what each of us feel is missing for our particular workflow?

  • LiquidmantisLiquidmantis

    I saw a flood of new messages and thought there was news. Imagine my disappointment... On the other hand, I do love a good semantics debate.

  • ExAsperis99ExAsperis99
    edited October 2021

    @wim said:

    @espiegel123 said:
    Big omission? As noted in my two previous messages, there are features that are planned but not yet implemented. One can’t implement everything at once.

    Jesus. You'll quibble about anything.

    OK, "important feature to have missing". Better?
    I should know better than to engage with you. Pisses me off every time. :D

    @wim said:

    @espiegel123 said:
    Big omission? As noted in my two previous messages, there are features that are planned but not yet implemented. One can’t implement everything at once.

    Jesus. You'll quibble about anything.

    OK, "important feature to have missing". Better?
    I should know better than to engage with you. Pisses me off every time. :D

    Wtf, man. You're really reading more into this response than is there, I think.

  • ExAsperis99ExAsperis99
    edited October 2021

    .

  • lukesleepwalkerlukesleepwalker

    @Liquidmantis said:
    I saw a flood of new messages and thought there was news. Imagine my disappointment... On the other hand, I do love a good semantics debate.

    Word.

  • NoiseFlooredNoiseFloored

    @lukesleepwalker said:

    @Liquidmantis said:
    I saw a flood of new messages and thought there was news. Imagine my disappointment... On the other hand, I do love a good semantics debate.

    Word.

    What do you mean?

  • wimwim
    edited October 2021

    @tahiche said:
    Probably as auv3, adding effects after loopy. But since it’s not multi-out yet (right?) you’d have to keep changing effects depending on what you’re recording.

    I'll probably just put Loopy on one AUM bus and the FX on another, then use a bus send on the guitar input and do my monitoring on the FX channel. That's pretty much what I do now anyway. I imagine there might be workarounds for the standalone as well, such as routing to two donuts, one with FX and one without, but that's just a guess.

    Monitoring with post FX is definitely on the post-release list (2nd from the top, but that I've no idea if it's sorted in any way). Multi-out is too. So I'm not overly concerned anyway.

  • 0tolerance4silence0tolerance4silence

    By the time all possible workarounds will be listed and discussed, M will be done with the implementation :)

  • wimwim

    @celtic_elk said:

    @tahiche said:
    “Big omission -> Missing a very important feature” … is that ok? 😜
    Really, being able to monitor with effects but record dry is very, very common and a basic feature.

    It's very common in DAWs. Is it a very common feature in live looping apps? (That's an actual question - I've been working in the hardware-looping world, so I don't know what is and isn't common in those feature sets.)

    Of the ones I've tried, I think QuantiLoop, Group the Loop, and Loopy don't have that ability. I think Looperverse does. My memory could e be faulty though.

  • Max_FreeMax_Free

    @Hmtx said:

    @Max_Free said:
    So I hope all these fancy swiping-gestures and so on will have their complement in Midi/AU-Automation. Both on current track/fx-slot and individuals.

    Yes, any action you create as a gesture could also be set up as a response to midi input from an external controller.

    “MIDI automation” ? If by that you mean recording and looping midi data… it is on the roadmap. It won’t be in v 1.0

    Thanks. That gives me hope. I meant MIDI or using external MIDI mapping to AU automation in a host like Aum for the plugin.

  • espiegel123espiegel123

    @Max_Free said:

    @Hmtx said:

    @Max_Free said:
    So I hope all these fancy swiping-gestures and so on will have their complement in Midi/AU-Automation. Both on current track/fx-slot and individuals.

    Yes, any action you create as a gesture could also be set up as a response to midi input from an external controller.

    “MIDI automation” ? If by that you mean recording and looping midi data… it is on the roadmap. It won’t be in v 1.0

    Thanks. That gives me hope. I meant MIDI or using external MIDI mapping to AU automation in a host like Aum for the plugin.

    Pretty much any action that can be assigned to a gesture can be triggered by MIDI.

  • michael_mmichael_m

    @Liquidmantis said:
    I saw a flood of new messages and thought there was news. Imagine my disappointment... On the other hand, I do love a good semantics debate.

    Yes, seems like there’s a lot of mass debating going on…

  • wimwim
    edited October 2021

    @michael_m said:
    Yes, seems like there’s a lot of mass debating going on…

    masterdebating

  • supadomsupadom

    Ban and sink, now!!!!

    This place sure is fun!

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]

    can anyone here tell me whether we will be able to export stems from loopy’s sequencer (I understand it has no multi out?) ?

  • sloJordansloJordan

    @janpieter said:
    can anyone here tell me whether we will be able to export stems from loopy’s sequencer (I understand it has no multi out?) ?

    absolutely yes. also auv3 multi out will be eventually implemented as well. Also multi-out in standalone mode is possible already.

This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2024