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.
The Problem with Subscription Apps
I have to say this: subscription apps are unattractive because the thought of paying monthly for access feels uneasy. I understand the premise: developers receive financial support to continue developing apps, but I feel there is a better way.
I actually don’t mind supporting developers via subscription, but I don’t want to lose full access to the app if I’m unable to keep subscribing. Let me clarify: if I pay for an app, say $29.99 I don’t mind supporting the developer by subscription for maybe $4.99 a month (tip-scription) to guarantee future feature upgrades, but if I can’t I still like knowing I can use the app in full. If I choose not to subscribe I don’t mind paying for an in-app purchase to buy new features. So in other words I support the developer via “tip-scription” or in-app purchase.
This is my two cents on subscription apps.
What are your thoughts?
Comments
I’m definitely not paying a subscription for apps. I’d sooner go without.
^^^^ Yep, this!
I don’t understand being anti-subscription.
If an app costs me $30 for a years access and I determine it’s something that I will use what is wrong with that? That’s $2.50 a month. I can afford that. Most likely that dev has offered a $3 one-month subscription for a cheap trial period. So if I get into, it’s with full knowledge of what I’m getting.
If, at the end of the subscription period, I decide to continue with that app or not, it’s my decision.
Maybe with subscriptions we would get better apps with better support at prices that are reasonable both for the user and the dev.
The $5 app with eternal free support is not sustainable.
I think the reality of the situation is that for any of these apps to be profitable (maybe) and for support to continue then a subscription is the only viable way.
I mean jeeze, if the model is being used in desktop land then I can’t see the alternative for our iDevices in the long run.
Well, the idea with subscriptions should be that we, as users, wish to support further updates and feature additions. Unlike a one-off-payment for an app, with expectations of eternal updates forever after (i.e. "the old model"), instead with a subscription based model the developer will get a continuous incentive to do those updates, which in turn should mean less "dead" or "abandoned" apps for the users. So far so good, and I think many users can sympathize with that, and also that we wish for our fave apps to continue to be updated, and the developers to be able to feed their kids/pets, right?
It does take two to tango though. The thing that can be really annoying is when an app jumps on to the subscription bandwagon, but when I, as a user, look at their update history I mostly see tumble-weed or "oh-shit-another-ios-version-just-came-out" type of updates.
I think some apps/software have gone for the subscription model without seeing their obligation to that contract. If we as users pay for continuous improvements, bug fixes, feature additions etc, I as a user expect those things to trickle in at a steady pace too. Otherwise I would just have paid for a one-off purchase.
Secondly, there are actually apps/software out there that has solved this in what I would like to call a "fair" way. If you look at the app Working Copy for example (which is a git client for iOS, so not related to music), you pay the dev an annual fee. Within those 12 months you will get all the features, updates, bug fixes and feature additions.
If you, for any reason at all, decide to not pay for Working Copy the following year you will still get bug fixes for the features you got when you paid for it, but you will not get access to new feature additions. However, and this is the thing: the app will still work just as it was when you paid for it. You are just not getting the "new shiny" stuff.
The calendar/note-taking app Agenda works in the same way. Pay for 12 months, get every feature they've released. Stop paying and you won't get new features from month 13 and onwards, unless you renew. It will still work perfectly fine just as it was when you bought it though.
On the desktop (Mac) the drawing app Sketch works like that too.
Just wanted to highlight that there are ways to incentivize users to continue paying, without punishing users who for some reason choose not to. I just wish most subscription apps worked like that.
Just some free floating thoughts on the topic, and all IMHO of course.
I’d rather pay per new feature and tip the developer. I feel like a “tip subscription” and in-app purchases could accomplish the same goal as a subscription and probably get more money! At worst this idea is worth trying…
I feel you’d get more people not tipping than tipping.
My biggest issue is that I go through phases when it comes to using gear for making music. So I might go months inbetween using something, and I keep seeing that monthly charge and it stresses me out. Even if it comes out to the same amount paying monthly versus once a year, I'd rather par yearly.
Is it really that dissimilar to have a purchase price, with iap and version upgrades, and have access to the product to use if and when you want. Versus one that you pay for regardless of feature additions, and to have nothing at the end.
Nearly forgot to answer my own question. Yes, there is a difference. No subs for me.
Funny, have just been going through our current subscriptions with my wife to see which ones we can cull. Now Spotify works with voice using CarPlay means no need for Apple Music as well, etc. Subscriptions make you feel chained in a way that frivolous one off purchases just do not seem to do. There’s a lot of psychology involved here, I think.
And because of this, I worry that the subscription model will be really bad for most independent developers. It will force people to choose and consolidate. Rather than just buy everything which is kind of what happens now for many of us.
I just won't do infinitely-auto-renewing subscriptions.
I wish Apple provided users the ability to set a subscription to run for a select number of months, then terminate at the end.
For me the infinitely-auto-renewing subscription model seems too predatory and scheme-like for my liking.
Have an accident, wake up from a coma 8 months later to a whole bunch of debt.
Even if people just forget to cancel.... I don't believe that the human potential to be imperfect and fallible, should be anything that vendors can take advantage of for profit.
IMO.. A fair subscription is one that provides the subscriber with an ability to pre-select a criteria that triggers cancellation.
e.g.
IF Payment method = 0 THEN CANCEL subscription.
IF current subscription MONTH = 4 THEN CANCEL subscription.
IF total AMOUNT spent >100 THEN CANCEL subscription.
I have a little sub budget and am flipping things on and off each month. Works for me.
This for me as well.
Good point
Interesting idea!
I would just take an annual (once I was committed to the app) and then immediately cancel it. Then just set a reminder one month before expiration to review whether I want to continue.
I would subscribe only if all of our favorite devs got a cut from the same subscription.
Like a super-bundle of various devs apps.
Also, wouldn’t it be great if devs got payed by screen/usage time?
I’m not doing subs, period. I don’t do it with desktop apps. I don’t do it for music streaming services or “TV” apps, and I’m certainly not doing it for iOS apps. I have no issues with paying for major upgrades.
I’m fine with paying for upgrades. Do not do subs. I have so many apps, I could call it quits now and be well stocked.
I’d honestly pay $19.99 to $49.99 for an app and $4.99 for each upgrade with the option to tip anytime. There is definitely a psychological component to subscriptions, but I would almost compare this to renting over owning. No matter how long you pay, you still only own the app for one month. So three years from now if an app subscription is $4.99 a month I would have paid nearly $180. I’d rather pay for an app one time for $100.
I'm with you @Stuntman_mike . Perfectly happy to pay an up-front amount for an application, provided I can keep using that application forever. However if I ever update anything on my iPad that breaks the application, that's on me - I don't expect lifetime support for a $5 purchase. Nor do I expect to get every new feature that appears in that application for free, till the end of time.
Very happy to pay a monthly or yearly subscription to get that lifetime support, and any new features that come up. That's the model Wotja works on, and I'm very happy to pay them each year. I wish more app creators would taken that approach; not only would it give them an ongoing money stream to pay them and keep them building features that people want, but they could also feel free to just walk away from their app when they think it's not worth their time any more. Once I stop paying a subscription, that sends a message to the dev that I don't think the current feature set is worth paying for into the future, and they can take that feedback or ignore it as they see fit.
I get that there's a culture of expecting iOS apps to be incredibly cheap - around the price of a coffee - and that's great for everyone except those creating those apps. Every time I see someone complain about e.g. the lack of audio support in NS2, or the lack of MPE editing in Atom 2 (as of right now), or ..., it annoys me. Go ahead and ask nicely, but don't complain if/when it doesn't turn up. Stuff like that doesn't just happen - you pay your money for an app and you get what you get, and the dev gets your cash minus the Apple tax. If you thought you were going to get some great new feature that wasn't there when you paid, even if the dev said it would turn up, then it doesn't - it's on you. You could've waited to buy till that feature appeared, but you didn't
@Stuntman_mike that’s certainly reasonable but would enough people be willing to do the same?
@monch1962 It totally blew my mind that NS2 only sold 5% of what NS1 did. People have always spoken so highly of NS1 I would’ve expected NS2 to sell at least 60% of what NS1 did. If it had done that we probably would have those missing features that were planned.
Caustic dev also said sales in iOS were much less than expected. I feel this is one of the most underrated apps on iOS. Still works great but I doubt we’ll ever see any further development.
🤔 Do we have a case study of a successful subscription music creation app to reference?
Which app is considered a financial success in general?
…I know games make the most revenue with in-app purchases and entertainment apps like Netflix and Spotify dominate subscriptions. I gladly pay for Netflix and Spotify. Hmm 🤔
I really hate subscriptions. I might be convinced to get a subscription possibly, but probably not. I would decide not to buy something because of it in most cases.
The only subscription I currently have is the apple care on my watch. I only got it because I originally paid up front and decided to go with the option to renew, which is monthly and functions through their subscriptions service. I may discontinue this as my watch is older now, so I may possibly just get a new watch if mine breaks, at which point paying insurance doesn’t really help anything.
…my mental justification for subscribing to Spotify is having access to new music all the time. Like @DMan I subscribe to Apple Care for all my Apple devices because I like the peace of mind it gives me. I also buy my IPhones and iPads monthly, so I don’t have to fork over a $1000+ in one go. Maybe the idea of paying monthly for something I don’t always use is the real issue. If I had to pay $4.99 a month for AUM I would stop using it. Sometimes I go months without opening AUM, but then I might spend a whole weekend in it another time. I utilize multiple workflows: AUM, NS2, BM3, Koala, MPC One, Ableton and Machine; none that I pay monthly/yearly for. Not one flow is king, I use them like instruments like a guitar player has multiple guitars.
We love talking about subscriptions though…
Another thought I had was developers charging a third of the cost of the app for upgrades. So $9.99 to upgrade a $29.99 app. Korg seems to apply this model.
The biggest problem IF every app goes subscription - we are a lot of users that use many many different apps, so, $3 per month per app can be a lot of cash if you use 15-20 apps…
Better, higher prices, annual updates with more features that cost some bucks, but it should be free to deny…
The most incredible example, I paid $1 for AniMoog back in 2011, and, it still works, it has’nt ask for more cash since then, although I have made some IAP… Wow!
It’s subjective. If an app.s usability comes from static design, functions & features, subscription based model is useless and become failed one. Whereas the usability comes from the frequently variable contents, it’s good to have subscription model. That’s why Reason plus attracts Less