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.

Introducing the Behringer EDGE

13

Comments

  • @ashh said:
    The Behringer story so far, according to this thread: they ruin creativity and innovation, their staff seem like school yard bullies, they are seriously damaging the industry, their userbase may not value and respect the instruments they use, they have no R&D for the hardware they produce and lastly, they sell pharmaceutical drugs but not cheaply.

    Boy am I glad I didn't adopt Behringer Defender as an integral part of my personality when I was given the opportunity! It must be exhausting.

  • @cian said:

    @celtic_elk said:
    I worked in R&D for one of the largest pharma companies in the world for four years. Your characterization is wildly incorrect, in my experience.

    Hmm. Most drug company research is getting stuff through safety checks/efficacy tests (a thoroughly corrupted process at this point as demonstrated in the Vioxx lawsuits), developmental research (and even some of that relies upon university research), finding ways to vary slightly existing drugs to extend patents and acquisitions of startups (which in the US are mostly spinoffs from public research). There's also a large chunk of the research budget which should really be recategorized as marketing, as it's either getting stuff into journals where doctors can see it, or finding new uses for existing drugs to drive up sales. That's on top of the already huge marketing budgets that drug companies enjoy. Fun fact - as drug companies enjoy stronger and stronger IP protections, actual innovation in the drug industry has declined.

    Correlation isn’t necessarily causation. Innovation may have declined because developing novel drugs is actually pretty goddamned difficult. And even if you manage to find something new, there’s no guarantee that it will survive the regulatory pipeline - and you’re out the money whether it succeeds or fails. Tech transfers from universities and purchases of private startups happen because the pharmas have the resources and the expertise to navigate the regulatory process - and, as a result, they bear the loss if they fail. The researchers who did the original work have already been paid at that point. Likewise, finding new uses for drugs that have already cleared the safety hurdles is faster and cheaper than developing a new class of drugs to do the same thing.

    And we’re way off-topic now, so maybe we should agree to disagree on this point and get back to bitching about Behringer instead. :D

  • @ExAsperis99 said:

    @ashh said:
    The Behringer story so far, according to this thread: they ruin creativity and innovation, their staff seem like school yard bullies, they are seriously damaging the industry, their userbase may not value and respect the instruments they use, they have no R&D for the hardware they produce and lastly, they sell pharmaceutical drugs but not cheaply.

    Boy am I glad I didn't adopt Behringer Defender as an integral part of my personality when I was given the opportunity! It must be exhausting.

    Bore off.

  • But why bitching? Just like ModelD app doesn’t affect the sales of a desktop VST clone, which doesn’t affect the sales of the Boog clone, which doesn’t affect the sales of the original... these are options, and there is barely any overlap across the markets. Of course we all want one, of course we would love to choose the original one... but how many can actually afford one... or even realistically long for one?

  • wimwim
    edited October 2021

    @ExAsperis99 said:

    @ashh said:
    The Behringer story so far, according to this thread: they ruin creativity and innovation, their staff seem like school yard bullies, they are seriously damaging the industry, their userbase may not value and respect the instruments they use, they have no R&D for the hardware they produce and lastly, they sell pharmaceutical drugs but not cheaply.

    Boy am I glad I didn't adopt Behringer Defender as an integral part of my personality when I was given the opportunity! It must be exhausting.

    Ahh C'mon. Regardless of where anyone falls regarding Behringer, That post was a beautiful nugget of satire. I'm still chuckling. B)

  • @ashh said:
    The Behringer story so far, according to this thread: they ruin creativity and innovation, their staff seem like school yard bullies, they are seriously damaging the industry, their userbase may not value and respect the instruments they use, they have no R&D for the hardware they produce and lastly, they sell pharmaceutical drugs but not cheaply.

    Nicely done sir.

  • @celtic_elk said:

    Correlation isn’t necessarily causation. Innovation may have declined because developing novel drugs is actually pretty goddamned difficult. And even if you manage to find something new, there’s no guarantee that it will survive the regulatory pipeline - and you’re out the money whether it succeeds or fails. Tech transfers from universities and purchases of private startups happen because the pharmas have the resources and the expertise to navigate the regulatory process - and, as a result, they bear the loss if they fail. The researchers who did the original work have already been paid at that point. Likewise, finding new uses for drugs that have already cleared the safety hurdles is faster and cheaper than developing a new class of drugs to do the same thing.

    Thank you, I am familiar with the drug industry propaganda. This is clearly way off topic, but if anyone's remotely interested Marcia Angell's book on pharmaceuticals is still depressingly relevant, and Ben Goldacre's Bad Pharma is a good overview of how the drug industry has corrupted the regulatory and research process.

  • Behringer and Pharma still could get together.
    Uli could get Pharma Bro, aka Martin Shkreli, on the board.

    (for thinking hes such a master troll, martin isn't as smart as he thinks he is. he may own martinshkreli.com, but he wasnt smart enough to buy martyshkreli.com, which has been my troll account to troll the troll)

  • Absolute w*nkers, personal opinion. There's plenty of original hardware options out there for less than a couple of hundred.

  • wimwim
    edited October 2021

    OK, so at the several electronics hardware companies I worked for, not once did we stick with hand wired production past the initial prototype stage. Past the 80's we very rarely even did our own mass production. We just farmed it out to companies that specialized in doing that sort of thing and had the benefit of massive scale. We did it out of necessity to remain price competitive. This brought us mass production without diluting our focus and capital. Outsourcing didn't happen exactly at the snap of a finger, but it wasn't a massive effort either.

    Moog could do the same if they wanted to. Nothing is stopping them other than that they just aren't interested or that they like their business model and are happy with how they profit. The result without competition? Only a relatively privileged few get to enjoy their innovation. Is that wrong? No! They can do what they like.

    Will Behringer's product have any effect at all on Moog's motivation to develop products? I don't see how. If Moog wanted to offer inexpensive mass-produced product, they could. And you know what? Behringer would then be competing not only against massive brand recognition but also for a much smaller market share.

    Please don't label me as a Behringer defender. I do think they're scummy. What I'm saying is Moog has allowed the conditions for this to happen. If they wanted to address that, they could.

  • edited October 2021

    @SpartanClownTide said:
    Absolute w*nkers, personal opinion. There's plenty of original hardware options out there for less than a couple of hundred.

    This doesn't mean its a better option. Roland's revamps of the 101's and 808's aren't nearly as good, and they're more expensive. And if youre after an authentic 101, isn't that what matters in the end?
    (shy of spending stupid money on a busted up real one)

  • edited October 2021

    I'm simple guy, and this is simple story for me.

    Behringer makes a lo of great sounding synths for really REALLY good prices.
    I see no reason to not buy them.

    I don't care about that whole "blah blah" around that, it's just noise for me. Only what i'm interested in is - how synth sounds and what is price. Don't see any reason to pay 3x (or more) higher price for other product which brings nothing more or significantly better sound (when i was listening Crave vs. Mother32 i was like "wtf, it not just sounds 99% same, there are moments when i even like sound of Crave a little bit more than Mother32"). So i bought Crave.

    If there are people who are glad pay 3x (or more) for same thing because of some personal idealism, ok,it's everybody choice. I don't care about story behind, i see product, with some parameters, with some price. That's all.

  • wimwim
    edited October 2021

    @dendy said:
    I'm simple guy, and this is simple story for me.

    Behringer makes a lo of great sounding synths for really REALLY good prices.
    I see no reason to not buy them.

    I don't care about that whole "blah blah" around that, it's just noise for me. Only what i'm interested in is - how synth sounds and what is price. Don't see any reason to pay 3x (or more) higher price for other product which brings nothing more or significantly better sound (when i was listening Crave vs. Mother32 i was like "wtf, it not just sounds 99% same, there are moments when i even like sound of Crave a little bit more than Mother32"). So i bought Crave.

    If there are people who are glad pay 3x (or more) for same thing because of some personal idealism, ok,it's everybody choice. I don't care about story behind, i see product, with some parameters, with some price. That's all.

    Don't neglect to do deep research each company's views on climate change and social issues before considering either of them in the first place though. One can't be too careful who one buys from these days.

  • @dendy said:
    I'm simple guy, and this is simple story for me. (...). I don't care about story behind, i see product, with some parameters, with some price. That's all.

    that sounds sad to me. Sometimes it can also be enlightening to broaden your own horizon by also dealing with the background. even synthesizers are not just ready for sale but have a history of development, production and distribution. and that is extremely questionable at behringer.

  • Do what you like, of course! It's your money! I can see the argument that it's a raised middle finger to the "establishment" (Moog and Teenage Engineering, say) that extracts a premium for its boutique mystique. I also understand the argument that says, "I don't want to give my money to a ripoff factory."

    The Behringer stuff I've had has been total garbage. (I haven't had any problems with the Neutron that I inherited.) This is my personal opinion, and it is in no way scientific. But this video comparison of analog-to-usb mixers is pretty illuminating. The guy had to get three replacements of the Xenyx Q1202 before he found one working out of the box. He also made a statement that really stuck with me: "In all my time, I've never seen a Behringer analog mixer more than a year old that still had all its channels working."

  • TLDR: SHUT UP

    BUT HEAR ME OUT HERE…

    I do not have a dog in this fight, but I will say this once.
    If you don’t like Behringer, don’t buy it. Simple. The online bitching is stupid now. People talking about innovation and and shady labor practices but ya’ll typing on devices that work on minerals sourced unscrupulously and wearing fast-fashion brands that are wilding out dumping shit on the west coast of the worlds largest continent.

    Not saying that you shouldn’t be conscious of your product but also don’t be a woke hypocrite.

    IMO Behringer will always be Behringer and bitching like this only gives them more salience. The large part of the Eurorack Community seem to NOT EVEN SELL Behringer’s modules as much, but we were all hammering our keyboards about how they are gonna hurt smaller manufacturers When they dropped their 500 series years ago. Hell, I even cancelled my Neutron order and scooped an 84hp case instead because I didn’t want that energy.

    The market will be the market and that shit will iron itself out.
    But don’t come with the booooooring argument about innovation or labour bla bla every single time. Yes Behringer does shit, and actual good (check Ben Jordan videos) just like every other company that you buy products from every single day. THe difference is that their PR is just way better.

    OR, thanks to you keyboard warriors, probably not; probably it’s working just fine after all.

  • Not sure where the rage comes from, really.
    "Behringer detractors are, invariably, hypocrites." Invariably! Or even "woke hypocrites"!

    Must be economic anxiety, I guess.

  • edited October 2021

    Synths are a commodity, not holy relics.

    Every big company has questionable practices. Apple is no different, yet is revered. Foxxconn etc, lest we forget. Everyone should buy what they think will be valuable. If you want to inject morality into it, that's one's choice, but everyone can choose what they want to do with their money.

  • How’s the resale value and do they really come with fire extinguishers?

    🧯🔥🎹🔥🚒

  • @ExAsperis99 said:

    The Behringer stuff I've had has been total garbage. (I haven't had any problems with the Neutron that I inherited.) This is my personal opinion, and it is in no way scientific. But this video comparison of analog-to-usb mixers is pretty illuminating. The guy had to get three replacements of the Xenyx Q1202 before he found one working out of the box. He also made a statement that really stuck with me: "In all my time, I've never seen a Behringer analog mixer more than a year old that still had all its channels working."

    Dunno, but I know people who own that model of mixer who've had it for a couple of years and it seems to still be working for them. Calling it a 'professional' mixer seems like a stretch, but for home recording they seem adequate. And for $100 it seems a little miraculous. I do not own it and have no plans to buy one (I would probably buy a Mackie).

  • wimwim
    edited October 2021

    @auxmux said:
    Synths are a commodity, not holy relics.

    If I paid full ride for a Moog product I think I would be very interested in preserving the feeling that it was a holy relic.

  • @wim said:

    @auxmux said:
    Synths are a commodity, not holy relics.

    If I paid full ride for a Moog product I think I would be very interested in preserving the feeling that it was a holy relic.

    Ha! If Moog wants to send me a Matriarch I'd build it an alter. Otherwise, I'll have to wait for the Behringer Touchy Uncle.

  • I like my Behringer Cat

  • @wim said:

    @auxmux said:
    Synths are a commodity, not holy relics.

    If I paid full ride for a Moog product I think I would be very interested in preserving the feeling that it was a holy relic.

    LOL, they are selling an expensive commodity that some worship. But the same is true for Lamborghini or $2000 iPhones, neither of which I would ever buy nor worship.

  • edited October 2021

    @wim said:

    @auxmux said:
    Synths are a commodity, not holy relics.

    If I paid full ride for a Moog product I think I would be very interested in preserving the feeling that it was a holy relic.

    All of the out of production Moog products I own have appreciated significantly in value since I bought them. Not why I bought them, but I'm quite happy about it :)
    It's also cool knowing that when I buy Moog, I can usually get back what I paid for it, or if I hold on to it long enough, sell at a gain (if inflation isn't too out of hand). Again, not the reason I buy Moog, but it's a nice feature.

  • edited October 2021

    Nm

  • edited October 2021

    @auxmux
    Synths are a commodity, not holy relics.

    this !

    @ExAsperis99
    The Behringer stuff I've had has been total garbage. (I haven't had any problems with the Neutron that I inherited.) This is my personal opinion, and it is in no way scientific. But this video comparison of analog-to-usb mixers is pretty illuminating. The guy had to get three replacements of the Xenyx Q1202 before he found one working out of the box.

    Yeah Behringer mixers are infamous for their poor quality.. This is not the case with synths (they are build by completely different sub-company). Synths have great build quality (had Neutron, now i have Crave, had in my hands also Model D - they are build really solid, and sounds great. Definitely top class products)

    @u0421793 said:
    I like my Behringer Cat

    very cool synth, it's on my wishlist :-) demos on YT sounds soo much beautifully smooth ...

Sign In or Register to comment.