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
Thanks, as always, @Gavinski. Sage advice, indeed.
Thinking about it some more, perhaps "excellent" was a bit of a stretch. I still think it could be set up in a way that could do most of what many people might want from an MPE controller, using a device that we all already own.
Just watch Cuckoo’s Video – then you’ll get an idea what I am talking about.
No need. I've been aware of the Haken Continuum for many years ever since I saw Amon Tobin play one, over a decade ago:
None of this really negates my point or question.
I agree with you there. But I think many people who want an MPE controller don't really care if they're getting and/or using full MPE. (In some cases this may be because they don't realize how far you can get without full MPE.)
For example, there are lots of Linnstrument videos on youtube, and many of them are of people playing piano sounds. Not only does this often not use MPE at all (no variation of pitch bend, timbre, or afterpressure), the control you have is worse than with a good keyboard, which has more subtle control of velocity than Linnstrument does. (Not a knock on Linnstrument at all, there's a reason these people like using it and its grid-based surface for what is essentially piano playing, and there are many other use-cases where it's desirable to add expression with up to three dimensions of per-note control.)
I like my Osmose very much. Its actually making me return to the ipad for music, because I want something I can get my hands on just behind/above the Osmose for quick recording, looping or using various MPE soft synths, and there are enough decent MPE compatible synths for the ipad. So I bought an ipad stand, finally bothered to wire my ipad up to an audio interface, and will start experimenting more with this setup in the coming days.
Other MPE controllers still have some strengths, especially when it comes to long pitch glides, but the sheer amount of key travel for aftertouch and initial pressure is so wonderful on the Osmose.
I tried out the Continuum at Discovery World a while back. Thus I had a good idea of what sort of sounds I could expect from Osmose. I understand Expressive E and Haken put in some effort to create presets for Osmose instead of just porting over Continuum presets. But the Osmose presets do remind me of the Continuum ones.
On a cello, viola, or piano, you have physical reference points you can use to locate pitches. The piano has some keys raised higher than others in a regular pattern, which helps the player locate notes by feeling the keys - that's how visually impaired players like Stevie Wonder and Rachel Flowers are able to play keyboard instruments. Cello and viola have conically shaped necks and upper bouts which help players feel where the notes are.
Continuum on the other hand has a flat and even playing surface. Players use the black stripes as visual references to help find the notes. Visual reference is all they have as there are virtually no tactile references to help locate pitches.
I had a conversation with someone who has a Continuum and either canceled an Osmose order or had an order and was thinking of canceling it. He was struggling with this in his head - on Continuum you could to a slow slide up or down like on a pedal steel, but on Osmose, there's no ribbon and to get the sound of a slow slide up or down a major 6th or whatever, you have to learn to use Pressure Glide, which he didn't to do. I didn't think of asking him what about the Osmose interested him in the first place then if the Continuum is better for him.... or maybe think of having both instruments so he could play chords on Osmose and his sliding melodies on Continuum?
Regarding MPE and the three dimensions of touch modulation, I would argue that Osmose doesn't really have them. Or that it does, sort of, but that the timbre and pressure modulations are not independent. That is, as I understand it, when you press an Osmose key you are first modifying the note's "pressure" (z-axis in MPE), until you get down to the "base" point, beyond which further depressing the key will start modifying timbre (y-axis in MPE). Or maybe it's the reverse of that, not sure, but whatever it is you can't modify one while modifying the other, and pressure will be maxed if you're varying timbre, and timbre will be minimized if you're varying pressure.
Other MPE controllers don't have this limitation. But of course most don't have the subtle control over pressure that Osmose does. Each controller has its strengths and weaknesses.
It might be interesting for someone to design an iPad keyboard that uses a similar sort of design to accommodate pressure and timbre variations along a single axis. Osmose combines them both on the z-axis (pressure, up-down). On iPad you accommodate them both on the y-axis (front of key to back). Front half of the key could be for pressure, from 0 at front to 127 at halfway back. Back half of key could be for timbre variation, minimum at halfway back to max at its back edge.
I think there may be a recent iPad keyboard that did MPE with 3 dimensions, and accomplished this by having one area for the note's pressure and a different area for timbre. They were independent, but it looked like it would require two fingers to play a single note if you wanted to vary them both at the same time. Not sure if my take on that is right, though, maybe it was working analogous to the Osmose-way.
WoodTroller. I havent tried it yet, I will.
From looking at the manual, looks like it is indeed analogous to how the Osmose does the three dimensions:
http://www.woodmansimmaculatemaplesyrupstudio.be/woodtroller/WoodTrollerHelp.pdf
Seems like with multitouch they could have implemented things so pressure and CC74 areas are independent and you could use two fingers to control both at same time. Wonder whether they've done it that way, to have in addition to single finger operation.
Has anyone seen SWAM instruments being played by an Osmose? I figured that would be one of the first things people tried and that both Expressive E and Audio Modeling would be interested in showing off the combination. But I haven’t found a video of anyone doing that yet.
Yes - it is not an ideal implementation really if you are used to the Roli style way
I’m sure that would be nice. As Hes said above though, you don’t really need a good keyboard to play monophonic ‘mpe’ instances well. Geoshred is very well suited to the task. Maybe with Osmose you could do splits though, which might be nice?
With so many people being satisfied playing SWAM with a breath controller and a simple standard MIDI keyboard, I wonder if the Osmose would do a better job in this specific case, not to speak of breath controllers with more than one sensor (Overblowing, Sax growl, vibrato etc).
Also, with a breath controller, (MPE Z) pressure is independent from the key pressed while on a keyboard it would be impossible IMO to play a melody with all the same pressure continuously.
But unless I'm misunderstanding, you seem to be coming back full-circle to agreeing with a position you earlier disagreed with i.e that most people will likely have no interest in all 5 dimensions.
The big hitters in terms of expression seem to be velocity/strike, side-to-side vibrato/tuning/glide and/or after-touch/vertical slide, and with more interest in monophonic lead-lines than polyphonic expression. As I proposed earlier, I don't imagine it being too difficult to split the keys (Waves/blades) into zones, along the x-axis. The bottom-half of the key could be divided into various velocity points. Then from wherever along that line the key is struck, it would then engage the x-axis slide. Of course, y-axis glide would ned to be possible from any point along that vertical axis.
I'd imagine there're a certain amount of users for whom the pinnacle of expression plays '2nd-fiddle' to their interest in having an instrument that has the more familiar layout (to them) of a stringed instrument. It's a much better option for someone who's played guitar their whole life, but who wishes to easily expand their sound palette.
As for the Linnstrument and subtle control of velocity? I had a very frustrating conversation with Roger Linn, many moons ago, regarding this very topic. One of my favourite things about the Seaboard is how well it works as a finger-drumming controller. It has the perfect amount of resistance/push back etc. to be able to eke out a very consistent performance. And if paired with a deeply-sampled kit, that consistency extends the whole way from the quietest of snare ghost-notes right up to the maximum of 127.
The downside, of course, is that the linear and sequential nature of a keyboard makes playing larger kits much more of a hassle. The Linnstrument seemed like it could be a great solution, given the layout. But after some back-and-forth, Roger (And my memory might be a little rusty) pretty much admitted that that kind of subtlety and consistency was not really the aim of the Linnstrument. And this, after making such a big deal in their advertising copy about how the L would be much more expressive than traditional keyboards, which were apparently nothing more than binary on/off switches...Which is nonsense, of course. More confounding than that, I'm sure he was lost as to why I thought that an instrument pitched as being so expressive should actually do "...what it says on the tin"
This is definitely one of the down-sides of the Continuum. Without tactile reference points, playing necessitates having to constantly look while playing. Moreover, without any boundaries created by (for instance) the undulating layout of the Seaboard, it becomes harder to accurately play anything (especially chords) where a few fingers need to stretch. Even with the 'relief' of the Seaboard layout, the sequential nature of the layout necessitates more of a stretch than traditional keyboardists are used to. I think this was a huge selling-point for the OSMOSE.
On balance, for certain sounds, the Continuum may very well be the most expressive of the bunch. But it's not able to cover as much ground as the others. Would love to be able to own one, nevertheless
Sorry, I can see the confusion. No, I never said people should all be interested in the 3 dimensional per-note control added by MPE. I thought I was always emphasizing how far you could get without full MPE, or without MPE at all. I was merely pointing out that iPads aren't generally a great solution for people who are interested in full MPE's added per-note 3-dimensional control. (They are pretty good if you only want partial MPE, added per-note control along x and y dimensions, but still have potential problems of size and glass surface.)
I'm not sure how ". . . with more interest in monophonic lead lines than polyphonic expression" fits as one of the "big hitters of expression". I would say that many people interested in adding expression seem most interested in using it with monophonic lines.
MPE is, of course, 'MIDI Polyphonic Expression". If your playing is not polyphonic, you have no need for MPE. You can get same elements of expression without MPE. All expression is per-note expression if you're always only playing one note.
Main thing is basic midi controllers allow per note control over velocity and typically have global control (non-per-note) over other expression (e.g, with pitch and mod wheels). MPE controllers add per-note control along 3 axes: x: horizontal, usually for pitch, y: vertical, for timbre, z: aftertouch-pressure.
Videos of Osmose being used as a controller have barely scratched the surface so far. Partly because Expressive E havent really marketed that side of it, or partnerships, strongly at all yet. Partly because most Osmose owners have gone deep into the immediacy of the on-board sound engine. And this is partly because a lot of the MPE synths out there are lacking presets that have been expertly tuned for MPE and Osmose in particular, in contrast to the Osmoses own presets which are obviously designed with Osmose playing in mind from the get go.
I've tried SWAM briefly. It works, using one of SWAMs existing MIDI settings presets for other MPE controllers. I'm not yet sure if I think the Osmose is the best SWAM controller, it depends on playing style and what you are trying to achieve. eg some other MPE controllers are better than Osmose for very broad pitch bends. I havent decided what I really think of the pressure-weighted portamento on the Osmose yet, theres a learning curve involved and since it uses pressure, its not truly independent of what else we might want to use pressure for. Also due to a patent issue the pressure-weighted portamento MPE messages arent transmitted from the 'ext MIDI' MIDI output of the Osmose. The Osmose does have an additional MIDI output, the MPE+ Haken one, which unlike the other one does include the pressure-weighted portamento data. However you need to use the EaganMatrix editor in order to configure this form of MIDI output to play nicely with things like SWAM, eg by reducing pitch bend range from 96 to 48. I've done that successfully but its another technical complication that has probably stopped some people from exploring this stuff as quickly as they have explored other aspects of the Osmose. And there are other devilish details too, eg the Haken form of MIDI output from Osmose probably doesnt send zero value MPE Y CC74 messages when a key is first pressed, and instruments like SWAM are expecting an initial value so glitches such as whatever CC74 is assigned to in SWAM initially being set to the mid-point value instead of 0 when a key is pressed on the Osmose will result (eg resulting in unwanted flutter on a flute until your finger on a key pressses down far enough to get into the MPE Y zone and then things will awkwardly jump to 0).
Very interesting. Jeez, MPE is such a minefield. Hence I have much less interest in MPE than I did before. Apart from issues with different controllers etc, I have been pretty disappointed with most of the ‘mpe’ synth offerings we have on iOS to boot. Hardly any take account of ‘note off velocity’ for example. It seems that many of the devs making mpe synths on iOS don’t have a deep understanding of MPE at all.
I dont blame devs for that really. There is a difference between things that the official MPE specification draws attention to, and wider perceptions. I'm not even sure there is any reference to release velocity in the official MPE spec at all, and so we could equally complain about devices not making use of note off velocity messages in the pre-MPE era. Rather, the perception by some users that release velocity is an important part of MPE likely comes from features that specific MPE controller manufacturers chose to highlight when marketing their products, eg Roli and their '5 dimensions of touch'.
When it comes to the official MPE spec, it mostly dwells on MPE config messages, proper use of channels, per note pitch bend, pressure and CC74. It does specifically state that initial values for thsoe dimensions should be sent at the same time as the initial note on message, and so when I go on about Haken CC74 issues, that is a failure to adhere to the recommendations in the official spec document. Probably an oversight that only applies to Osmoses use of Haken engine, given that Hakens own controllers/instruments inevitably have an initial CC74 value because as soon as the finger touches the surface the intended value of CC74 is known, whereas on the Osmose that zone doesnt contain any info until the key reaches a certain point of travel.
Where did I say that you were suggesting what people “should” do?
Given what I just said, and that in future if MIDI 2.0 takes off there will be a much larger number of theoretically possible per-note messages/dimensions of expression, I tend to set a low bar when it comes to my minimum expectations when dealing with a controller, synth or other instrument that claims MPE support. 5 dimensions of touch is not the minimum for me, 2 or 3 are. Beyond that its all variable detail, where I may invite disappointment if I set my expectations too high.
On iOS so far if something says it supports MPE, then I expect at a minimum to get per-note pitch changes, per note aftertouch / pressure, and hopefully but not always per note CC74(MPE Y).
Probably for me the bigger and more consistent source of disappointment is that when I look at the increasing number of hard and soft MPE synths I have, how few of them come with a good number of presets that actually make use of MPE beyond pitch bend and pressure (and how many of the presets that support pressure were really designed with traditional aftertouch in mind). Hopefully devices like the Osmose will sell in sufficient quantities that we start to see more MPE-specific preset designers, packs and factory banks in future.
Ha, I guess I extrapolated that from you suggesting I disagreed with assertion "that most people will likely have no interest in all 5 dimensions." You're right, I wasn't suggesting they should. Nor was I suggesting they would. Nor that they did, or do. In fact, as you say, they don't.
Though it is important to clarify that I think people do like having several methods of expression beyond velocity, though probably many/most don't care if it's of the per-note polyphonic type that MPE is concerned with.
Dare I suggest we kinda agree?
I've fantasized about getting a ContinuuMini for playing those slow sliding "Good Vibrations" type sounds. But getting it set up for use together with Osmose would be a pain because Osmose doesn't have a surface to put the ContinuuMini on.
This is a great discussion! I've never touched a Roli Seaboard, but the feature that always seems most useful to me is the ability to "portamento glide" between any notes at any speed you want (which would be great for strings and trombone). Otherwise, I feel that I can get most of the expressive nuances I need using a traditional MIDI keyboard with aftertouch + mod wheel + pitch bend wheel + one or more pedals. For example, I use aftertouch to trigger "growl" and mod wheel for vibrato when playing the SWAM saxophone. It sounds so realistic that I've been accused of using a recorded sax.
I ordered a Seaboard Rise yesterday and it’s been shipped today (!!j. I'm taking a chance… not on the Seaboard but on myself. We shall see.
Looking forward to your report. It will be interesting if you get on with it more than Osmose - particularly one-finger pitch bending/vibrato.
Indeed, @GovernorSilver i may just have to stick with the old fashioned (hybrid) piano but I hope not.