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
The only way I would ever subscribe is if it get something new each month. Like a magazine, I own each and every issue, i get to keep them and new ones with new content come every month. I will get to keep those as well.
The problem with these “subscriptions” is you pay for a year whether you use it for the year or a day- same price! So if it is 10.00 per month it is really 120.00 no mater how you slice it and that is for a year, then you don’t own it any more. It is a lease not a subscription and if you want more money from me every month for the rest of the foreseeable future make it worth it to me, otherwise stop trying to take advantage of your customers
Nobody’s talking about a $10 a month subscription and who’s “trying to take advantage”?
I think this is a good discussion of the pros and cons of subscriptions and people’s ideas on what would or wouldn’t work. It’s the kind of info that would be helpful to devs and is not locked into any specific way of doing things.
Good points: if I get a sample pack every month then the subscription makes sense. For apps that don’t, in-app purchase makes more sense for upgrades. I really like how Korg handles there apps. Not cheap from the beginning and you can add and upgrade for additional monies but apps will continue to work without paying anything more.
I have literally hundreds of apps now. If I had to pay subs on each, I’d be bankrupt.This also means that outside of a fistful of essentials like AUM, Cykle, Alteza reverb, MIDILFOs and MIDIgates, I use any given synth or effect once in a blue moon. I like it that way, keeps my sounds and workflow fresh having such a massive choice.
I will never, under any circumstances whatsoever, ever pay a sub for a musical instrument, effect, sequencer, or whatnot, no matter how good it is. Case in point - Roland. Lovely synths, but on a sub? No thanks.
I will gladly pay for upgrades or IAPs or V2s that add value to my original purchase, and have done, e.g. Moodunits, Model 15 preset packs, etc.
Although it pains me that all our apps are really on a lease, not owned, given that the day our devs give up paying the ransom to Apple, the app gets yanked, and lives, or dies then only on whatever I device you might have it on at the time.
I hate that Apple took away the possibility of proper local backup so your zombie apps, no matter how brilliant (sniff, Giant Isopod), will one day die.
Well said, I can’t think of any music production apps mobile or desktop that run on subscription other than Arcade, which has the constant content to back it up.
Auxy tried that and very quickly realized it was hard to generate new content every month, and that slowly tapered off which undermined their premise for going subscription in the first place. At least that was the impression I got.
I feel the same way though, its easier to pay monthly for Spotify or Netflix (or any CONTENT provider) because you know each month you are paying there's something new for your enjoyment that justifies the continued investment. Subscriptions where you only get to keep using the app as it already is just seems.... not the way. Just charge me what your time is worth up front and I'll decide if it's worth it for my workflow. You spend a lot of time improving things and making fixes based on feedback? Awesome, thanks, charge me fairly for that update in a way that justifies your time.
Just like buyers shouldn't purchase apps on the premise of what might get implemented in the future, I don't think developers should price their apps on the hope they might blow up. You put the work in and charge appropriately to feel compensated for that work. If people aren't interested, well... that's what all new businesses, products, or services have to deal with, apps aren't any different. There's a reason successful desktop apps aren't $5.
If you have a product people want, they will want to pay for it fairly. Otherwise your product just isn't compelling enough.
[flame suit on]
It’s the proposal, ‘without subscription apps won’t survive’, seems like the software industry survives to this day defies that logic.
One online option that has been floated for years is micropayments, but it's almost never been implemented. If I wasn't paying $1/app/month as a subscription, but $0.03/app/day and only on those days when I use the app would be totally different. I'd be happy to buy a ton of apps at their current price, then pay (what? 15-30c per day?) extra to use just the ones I used on any given day.
But they’re not selling apps at $2.99 either. Should the price of iOS apps be the same as desktop?
What is a reasonable price that will support the creation and maintenance of an iOS app?
Yep - definitely.
It’s like all those guys who tried to justify using warez/cracks as supposedly “try before I buy” but then wouldn’t buy and never ever intended to.
You get the occasional exceptions obviously, but human nature is to love a bargain or to get something for free. One of the most popular threads on here is the sales thread, where it is championed when a $5.99 app is reduced to $3.99 . Someone with the nature to wait for then jump on that sale isn’t going to pay $2 a month every month into the tip jar.
Piano Motifs app has a tip jar (I admit that I’ve never tipped, never even think to) - it would be interesting if the dev could let us know if they get enough tips a month to put food on their table?
I’m also not a fan of subscriptions but I think it depends on the model. I think we all agree that many music apps are too cheap. But if you raise the price many people wont buy it. So, I think this is where subscriptions could come in handy. Users can easily check out an app with a 1.99 subscription and if they don’t like it they can just cancel the subscription after they evaluated the app. If they like the app they can buy it for let’s say 30 bucks and get the updates without subscription.
The basic problem I have with an subscription only model is that if I use the app just rarely I spend a lot of money to have access to the content I created with it. If I bought the app I can still use at least the version I paid for and can use the content I created with it. With subscriptions it can’t work this way. If you cancel, you will loose everything and your content is lost as well.
I’m a programmer by day job and pay a yearly subscription to Jetbrains for ReSharper. I have done this for years and ReSharper is totally ingrained in my workflow.
That subscription gets me 4 updates a year specifically containing new functionality.
If at any point I cancel my subscription I get to keep the version I have at the point I cancelled. I do not lose access to ReSharper, I only lose access to the future updates that I’m no longer paying for.
I am 100% happy with this business model. I wish Matt at NS2/BlipInteractive would adopt this model as NS2 is also totally ingrained in my workflow.
Come work for me! I'll pay you once and then you work until I say stop, right?
The price of that has to be determined by the developers, the market may eventually reach parity or even go higher than the desktop market, in the desktop market, I’d estimate that MacOS software needs more maintenance than Windows software, but parity in price for the different systems is often maintained, all these different aspects of releasing software have to be evaluated by the developers/producers.
for me there are 2 main reasons why subscription is absolute no-go for me ..
1/ psychological barrier .. i have no problem to pay one time payment for app $200 - but then i feel like "it's mine", "i bought it" .. but i have big problem with paying $8/month for next 2 years - albeit it's same price - because i don't feel app is mine, it's just borrowed, thus i can't make bond with app, which is for me mandatory to use it for making music. Simple dumb human emotions :-)
2/ problem that i can lost access to app even through i pay for it a lot
Let's say you're paying sub $10/month for 5 years .. you invested into app $600 ... now when you stop subscription, you loose complete access to app. It would be fair, if after some period of subscription, your and access to APP version / stage of app / which was available during your last subscription payment, will be still available to you - but this is not the case .. You stop subscription, you lost whole access to app.
So. For me subscription is extremely disadvantageous to user. I rather pay 10x of initial price but app is mine, i can use it forever, and then i'm happy to pay again for EVERY next update, the price which will correspond to size/importance of that update.
I think one problem in this domain is that there are so many synthesiser apps, even at the top end. If all the top synth apps were subscription, a person would only subscribe to one of them, justifying it because it’s a synthesiser and thus should be able to sound like any sound, imaginable or not. Consequently why even have two synths?
As it stands we each have about 700 synth apps, mostly not used. This isn’t how most other subscription things work. I have a subscription to HP Instant Ink. I don’t also have another fifty printers lying about the house to compete with the HP printer simultaneously. If a person has a subscription to a thing or service, the chances are that that’s the only instance or example of that thing they have, and they’ve chosen that subscription only.
Of course, the parallel and thread-derailing argument is – why do we keep having new synths appear in the App Store? Surely there’s already far more than enough, I have to wonder why when a new synth appears, what was the motivation for investing time and effort into an already solved problem or market hole? I could do almost literally everything I want to do musically on the first three synths I ever bought (probably the first 1 synth, as it was iMS-20) and be done with it. In that alternative reality, a person would pick the synth app they want from the manufacturer they want and stay with that (or abandon that and move to another) – much like we currently do with almost any other subscription in our non-synth lives.
The problem is that most of the people on this forum will, by now, have over a hundred music apps. So the subscription question isn't, 'What if this app I really like goes subscription only?', it's 'What if tens of the apps I really like go subscription only?' Those two questions are VERY different in their implication.
One sub is completely fine. At scale, though, across our app libraries it would be completely financially unsustainable for users. That's why there's such a negative thought about subs on here and I'm not sure how to square that circle. Maybe an 'Apple Arcade' style service for music apps, although Apple would never do that for such a niche, unfortunately.
This is simply not true regarding subscriptions - see my post re ReSharper:
I think people are choosing issues that have historical relevance but can also be a good indication of the ethics behind a development team. Vote with your wallet.
Loads of apps you want are using a subscription model? Use a service that takes a flat monthly fee for them instead.
It sounds to me that this is about ownership. Like, who owns a subscription app and will it be available if I stop my subscription? I guess that's another of those questions that you can use to decide if you want to subscribe or not.
A lot of the issues people have are not solved by paying once. The dev stops updating the app and leaves the app store. What happens then? I guess you still have the app but then I would not subscribe to any app that cuts off access on the day I stop subscribing.
I think that this model is tainted by the sum of past shady business practices but that doesn't mean that it would be a terrible choice in the future.
Okay, that sounds good. I wonder how often you can find such subscriptions. I usually know the type that terminates the service when you terminate the subscription.
An 'Arcade' style could work.
I was also thinking back at when I was throwing coins at pinball mmachines. Didn't mind that then. A fixed monthly fee per app I have to admit would not work for me though, just thinking of checking those all the time. I guess paying per minute wouldn't bother me much. And perhaps for pro users you can buy 'minutes' at whole sale prices. A platform where you can use ALL the apps but pay per 'minute' or whatever unit you can come up with.
Anything time limited is just stressful and not the way I want to pay for my tools. I only subscribe to things which are essential services and that doesn't include iOS apps.
My immediate reaction was meh but I've just been through the process to buy ebike minutes so the model is there. I guess all of this innovation is cut off in the womb by the app store, isn't it?
I think Apple are just trying to push this subscription model because it's only they who will definitely make more money as a service for app streaming and not indie developers who most people will cull from monthly costs as they are not essentials.
Yeah it's just a brain fart and you're right, none of it will be allowed by Apple. Still worth contemplating, because these models are going to change I firmly believe.
I agree. Even if it isn't, and I am with you that it is, then I think great ideas come from these kind of threads.
Most of us have over 100 apps. But let’s say 30 we really use.
30 * 3$ for subscription = 90$ a month.
I am not ready to pay that much monthly.
Most People have a really hard time managing their budget. Subscrition make it even tougher.
I see Netflix subscription very differently. 99% of what I watch I will never wanna watch again. It is consumable. They give me so much for 10$ vs 3 buck for a app monthly.
Me either and this is the real challenge. A good example of a bundle subscription is Adobe Creative Suite, which works well for people who get paid from what they make, but no so much for the hobbyists. I feel there is a happy medium between subscription and one-time. I truly feel there are some creative ways for developers to be compensated beyond the initial purchase such as offering third party sample libraries, third party presets and special upgrades such cool UI skins and new features!
I’m curious to hear feedback from a successful developer like @brambos . Hello sir, why don’t you do subscriptions for your apps?
I won't do a subscription but I can do IAP every time the app is updated that would be good. Like in Drambo he keeps adding things that I buy because the app is really good and when it is updated I don't mind paying for a IAP. Or maybe a tip jar like in Piano motifs, I have tipped him even though I rarely use the app but I find it good and he is always updating it