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
Your musical taste and knowledge is still a big factor when you dial in prompts and filter through the output, kinda like a DJ digging through records to include into the collection and sets. You have to know what to look and prompt for.
Taking a short piece genrated by AI, unmixing it with stem separation and remixing it into a proper song will likely become a thing and way to get into music production.
Let alone from our own minds.
We also „learn“ by probing, trial&error, use an internal „database“, benefit from other‘s experiences, etc.
From a math pov it‘s essentially identical, the only difference may be speed and volume of input/output.
Btw industrial neural network technology is quite old, Intel introduced their „neural nets in silicon“ chips in the early 90s, almost 30 years ago ($500 per piece in low qty).
Machine reading of handwritten bank transfers was one of the first applications.
The current hype is just that: a hype... as it‘s ever been when new technologies were (mass) introduced.
Remember C++ ? Can be great, but also a curse.
That‘s one question, the other one is how to deal with fake content ?
I‘ve recently read about a method to „poison“ digital images, so an AI model can‘t use them any more, but for humans there‘s no visible difference...
The problem is the attitude of companies like OpenAI where it’s all about expansion without considering the consequences for everyone else. Rather than stop using copyrighted material in the training, (since that’s the only thing which makes the models useful for a consumer or create "good" results for a mass market, they admit without copyrighted material it won't be as popular) OpenAi have said they will cover the legal costs of fighting copyright claims if you’re paying the higher tier. They are much more interested in growth over any damage they are doing to get there.
It will come down to originality and story telling, a personal taste
I am a painter, and do digital art, people are still asking for my work even with all new Ai stuff.
You can eat a burger, but steak will always taste better
I asked in a general sense, if someone deliberately mimics with those tools established artists who live from their work, what will happen? No one knows yet.
I saw a chat with some folks from the US Copyright Office Something Something and they said copyright laws cover outputs of a process and not inputs so to them the whole thing was just a curious anomaly and didn't seem remotely relevant to what they do. The artists who set up the chat seemed to enter it thinking "Finally, we have a meeting with some grown ups who can help us!" and said grownups were like "Not my job mang."
So I think at the moment it is completely legal to train on copyrighted data and to even prompt with the name of the source. Lucas openly 'prompted' Kurosawa and Buck Rogers to make Star Wars, blah blah blah. Yah to automate and industrialize creativity is a kick in the head to a lot of artists but seems like open season now. /imagine run to the hills mixed with dust in the wind played on kazoos
It has been happening a ton and so far no direct consequences but overall 2D imagery has been massively devalued in a lot of areas.
If you are talking about Nightshade, a workaround for training those images was found right away.
Doesn’t come unexpected...
Errr, depends what you’re making music for. Music is so much more than just a recording.
Yes, nightshade and glaze! Artists are fighting back with same tools
I guess these steps were necessary since artists lost in court regarding usage of copyrighted material
Well I'll be damned...
Ww, "should as well" IS grammatically correct. Man, my eyes started burning and I began twitching when I first saw the threads title. Good on you @jo92346 for giving me another vocabulary nugget.
The AI examples @jo92346 posted sounded like porno music for ants. Just notes vaguely in the same key being farted out in quick succession. Digital and the pace of technology is just a huge double edged sword. While we get all of these powerful audio & music production apps and Logic Pro running on a tablet, we also get an overuse of AutoTune and these AI models making robotic muzak.
My AI song (inspired by this thread):
https://forum.audiob.us/discussion/59536/my-first-all-ai-song-i-aint-real
A few things. The AI generated music will compete with a lot of the music out there simply because a lot of it is not great, and neither is the AI stuff, and many people will not notice the difference, or care. The concept of posting a song that's just OK and expecting it to get a lot of attention is already in the rearview mirror, although it's never been a reliable strategy in any decade. The advent of social media and means to publish and perform songs resulted in a mass influx of people looking for alternatives to commercial music and open to listening to new things, but that peak has also passed.
There are still some things left that AI cannot replace. People creating songs because they need a creative outlet. People expressing and sharing their experiences through music. People releasing music as part of their greater artistic and commercial endeavors.
Also, a piece of music created and performed by a person has an existence outside of the tones and timbres of the piece. It exists in reference to the writer, the performer, their influences, the listeners, the fans, and history. If Beethoven had written the 5th symphony and it never got published or played would it sill be a work?
AI generated music doesn't have any of that - it's just a static piece that was created at a specific moment in time, and it will always be exactly the same, and emerged from a conglomeration of sources chosen by some computer expert.
It doesn't work though. Easy to bypass.
Good thread.
Imho that‘s kind of a pseudo defense (of human activities) and even limited to a very reduced spectrum of possible „motivations“.
As mentioned I‘m convinced there‘s no significant difference between „artificial“ and human creations, assuming available resources are similar.
It‘s no secret (sorry, I didn‘t check precise figures) that 80% of top40 hits have their origin in a group of (say) 20 composers/producers.
Such stuff is spilled out in industrial mode, with permanent quoting of rhythm and melody fragments, that have proven to „catch“.
Some of that type of workers used Band-in-a-Box back then (of course never admitted or mentioned it), and they will use current technology... which certainly is more sophisticated than the generators of the examples posted.
Because it’s about fame and business.
And exactly this success (the resulting tracks) is the dream of millions of home producers releasing their own attempts on streaming services.
Which does not mean each and every one publishing on streaming services has this very same motivation, but imho it‘s driving the majority.
Whoever does music for his very own reasons, can either ignore certain technologies or simply use them, if some of it applies.
There‘s no reason to glorify humans after all...
I have yet to see or hear anything spit out by these "ai" that is inventive or feels at all new. For a moment, when Dall-e was still new, I had a moment where I was tricked into thinking that the tools were being creative. But they are merely clever. There is no wisdom behind it. It's missing the key ingredient of experience.
I'm not so worried, and not because I don't believe that it will soon be able to spit out convincing replicas of all sorts of art.
If anything, it will help us sort out the difference between content and art. Something imbued with meaning.
Consider this. If you are presented two woven baskets that look very similar. You learn one was made last week in a factory in Guangdong that produces 8 thousand identical baskets per shift. The other one was handmade by Peublo basketmakers nearly 10,000 years ago. Do they hold the same value? The same meaning?
The existence of machines that have the ability to weave a basket does indeed cheapen the experience of owning a basket. We probably don't marvel at our laundry hamper or fruit basket unless we have had the experience of weaving one ourselves. But the option to weave still remains.
Should we give up playing games if the computer can beat us? Should I not learn a bach fugue if it can be played by a midi app on my phone?
As someone who makes a frail living making and teaching music, I am ok with AI decimating the capitalistic parts of the music industry. I hope the music industry crumbles to dust.
My hope is that what is left when the dust settles is the understanding that making music is a joyful experience, and without the pressure to produce content for the content mills, we can get back to making music simply because it provides deep meaning through the very act of playing it.
And even if real AI actually does eventually come around (because remember that it doesn't exist yet. what we call AI, doesn't meet criteria). Actual AI that can invent new, unimagined, and beautiful music that chills me to my core - that's great. I'm certain I will still enjoy playing music with my friends, or perhaps with my new AI frenemies. Who knows.
That's my take too. Let the business go extinct. Return music to its original function of creating community trances and transmitting wisdom in small group settings.
Yah I stopped calling myself an artist over ten years ago (although it is on my linkedin for work reasons and co-workers etc call me that), but nah it ain't art and I ain't an artist. The disruption of AI was a big existential shock to some friends/co-workers of mine who still identified with the A word but it's not like I saw humans making amazing new innovative things in the 'industry' I work in, so it didn't really shake me in any real human sense. It is a hell of an impressive parlour trick, optical illusion, special effect etc, but nah, not really a threat to actual art. The capitalist passive entertainment garbage machine paved the way nicely for the robots to easily roll in.
Good points, seconded
I have years of experience as an English teacher and I also thought this was a grammatical error. If a student said this, I would discourage it, as I think many examiners would also view it as an error. It's definitely non-standard in British English, and I have never heard anyone use it, until this thread! But maybe this way is considered standard in some places? Who knows, languages do constantly evolve and change. Either way, interesting thread!
I agree with you. Back in the early '00s, I led a few seminars at the SF convention about AI and advanced generator tools, as well as L-systems and plant generation. But the most interesting part was when I told them that artists would soon be able to generate their own worlds filled with creatures and imagined societies, music, and vistas. We are at that time, as we speak. We should cherish this moment.
Oh my, C was and still is my main language, so whenever I write anything in C++, my mindset is still deep in void*.
You can‘t deny your heritage
This reminds me on my most expensive demo, that turned out to be the best investment in education I ever made. Or rather... the one with the most significant consequences.
Iirc it was $500 for 3 weeks trial of a cross platform gui lib covering Mac, Win3, OS2 and 2 flavors of Unix.
Entirely written in Ansi-C, but it’s paradigm was fully object-oriented. No need for C++.
All documentation (brilliantly written) was contained in the header files.
The runtime lib a meager 2 Megabyte of object code. Those were the days...
Anyway, it opened my eyes about software quality in mass market, in particular regarding a certain company located at the northern part of the US west coast.
But for me it finally was Prolog soon after that experience.
When I was looking up info on 'should as well' I saw a few sources indicating it was in the Southern states American English vernacular. I love learning bits like that.
I think as well that one could as well ask if we can say might as well and may as well then why not should as well?
Do you not think people would rather see a live human creating music than a digital representation on screen or 3D ? Unless of course it’s a tribute like Elvis , ABBA etc .. it’s called a live show for a reason 🤷♂️ Maybe Ai will cause a revolution in the way musicians produce and play new material at the same time whilst preforming . For example , ios music production drastically reduces the amount of equipment needed to preform but provides you with almost endless instruments at your finger tips so those entering the music industry have the potential to become mini maestros and if seeing is believing then why care about Ai making good telephone jingle music ?( It’s usually played too loud to point of distortion anyway ) iPhone or an iPad n a decent speaker, away ye go 🎶🎶🎶 almost a party in yer pocket and your pockets don’t need to be that deep ! 🎶🎶🎶 bring it on and use it as inspiration I say 🎶🎶🎶 how about jamming with Ai ?!! Now there’s an idea for show 😉👍
People would rather look at their phone than their date sitting right across from them. I think AI wins this war.
This sounds promising
https://stability-ai.github.io/stable-audio-demo/
I for one welcome our AI overlords. It’s not like they’re replacing us, they still need someone to plug the cables and press the switches