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
Rubber faced showroom dummies bad lip-syncing, with 90’s disaster movie style FX?
Doesn’t do it for me I’m afraid.
Using an AI algorithm that has learnt to help diagnose cancer in scans is the kind of thing this technology should be used for.
I’m far less comfortable seeing it used ‘creatively’.
AI art without the humanity is at worst plain plagiarism. A Frankenstein’s monster mish mash of what has gone before with no inbuilt taste. Not that all humans have much taste either but that’s a separate discussion. lol.
I hate seeing people make things with AI and think they’ve shat a miracle just because they typed a few words into the prompter.
Art is human.
AI is to creativity what Botox and cosmetic surgery is to natural beauty. Fake and a little bit repulsive.
There are plenty of areas in which AI can help creativity — if you’re an animator and use AI to help create the inbetweenies that’s one thing. Getting it to actually create the ‘art’ itself is another thing entirely.
Still really not interesting or controllable enough to be of much use for serious work, we’re four years into the so called revolution now and it’s still feeling very much like “soon soon soon”😅
Even the argument to use it for previs is a flawed one as you’re not allowing the imagination to be sparked in the same way that traditional storyboards encourage. There’s a reason these processes have evolved over the last century or so…
Not to say there won’t be new artworks emerge from this tech, and plenty of useful tools down the line (I still look to Martin Nebelong on Twitter for his interesting work in creative amplification as an encouraging direction…) but in a similar way to photography not replacing painting, I think the traditions of film making will endure and eventually thrive again. But your Marvely trashalike movies will surely all have this emotionally vacant vibe in the near term, and maybe for their audience, that’s just fine…
Ai generated content is so quick and easy, it’s already increasing the signal to noise ratio of every media type it touches.
People spending months making a video are buried under an avalanche of AI generated content that took no talent and less effort.
In other media areas, companies are buying up old websites (for example TUAW) and replacing real journalism with AI generated content to just be a content farm to push adverts down our throats.
It’s disingenuous. And wrong.
Wherever you stand on the AI debate, it’s diluting real, actual, talent and effort already.
It’s got to the stage where people already don’t trust photographs anymore.
Yes. This. 100%
Will AI make our lives easier and more convenient in some areas? Very likely (if laziness is your thing, we're living in the golden age).
Will it ultimately be a net negative for the world? No question.
You mean like how the car companies destroyed the horse and buggy market?
No, that was a drop in the ocean compared to the impact Ai will have on society.
Forget lousy Ai videos & music - wait until people start losing jobs to Ai.
AI to do my taxes, do my chores around the house etc. Yes.
AI to take over meaningful activities that bring value and pleasure to my life. Hell no.
AI that encourages us to raise a generation of kids with no clue, no skills and no way of getting through life without typing a prompt. Hell no.
"Skills schmills. Putting in the work is for losers"
I'm sorry, it just doesn't work like that. Supply and demand doesn't disappear with the advent of A.I. Demand will change and people will adapt. That's how it works.
“Julia was twenty-six years old... and she worked, as he had guessed, on the novel-writing machines in the Fiction Department. She enjoyed her work, which consisted chiefly in running and servicing a powerful but tricky electric motor... She could describe the whole process of composing a novel, from the general directive issued by the Planning Committee down to the final touching-up by the Rewrite Squad. But she was not interested in the final product. She "didn't much care for reading," she said. Books were just a commodity that had to be produced, like jam or bootlaces.” - George Orwell, 1984.
It’s touching that he believed in his future the ‘proles’ would read anything at all…
Celebrity chat shows won’t be quite as entertaining, when all the current famous actors, musicians, artists and writers have died:
“Tonight, Celinex912, your AI generated host will be streaming a live chat with AI developer bot dS400Og, author of the radical new neural network learning algorithm ‘SZOOOOpz’, and later on we’ll be featuring a text from Reginald Farrell, a delivery driver from Eccles, promoting his iPhone 27 produced disaster movie ‘Nuclear Dystopian Nightmare, Part 373b’. But first, what is Fermat's little theorem?“
No more Lennon-McCartney’s, no Oliver Reed crashing around pretending to be drunk. No more comedians. No eccentric artists with unusual facial hair, just unlimited sterile content from carefully honed prompts.
‘Creativity is for robots. Get back to work, those turnips won’t dig up themselves!’
Exactly this, actors these days have to schlep around half a dozen TV channels in every territory convincing the would be audience of their stage acting skills, their emotional attachment to the subject of the piece, and just how privileged they were to get to do it all in the first place. In a similar vein to Kubrick never worrying about how much film stock he was using, it’s about the product and how convinced the audience is to buy into it, not how cheaply it was made.
Just now on a pretty high profile Netflix gig, they were so insistent on properly licensing even the 3D models we were to use for the shots, I ended up modelling them all by hand just so we could safely say that they were free to distribute images of them in all territories without fear of any comeback, even any whiff of it, so even with the Lionsgate thing, it’s not going to be anytime soon that the gigs are up. The thing that’s affecting production more than anything these days is that the film studios are in trouble cause everyone watches TV, and the TV folks are in trouble cause they’ve had a decade or more of disrupter cash stuffing their pockets, but that’s all coming home to roost…
That’s the one thing that all these eerily accurate future predictions have in common: the reality tends to turn out even worse.
Like during The Great Depression...?
People adapted to being out of work.
From 1986...
Sure, factory farming, wars for fossil fuels etc. everything that pushes us further out from the direct relationship with nature and into the clutches of the human hive ego war machine, creating generations of entitled give no fucks infantilized sociopaths destroying mother earth for a quick fix, moohoohahaw etc.
Lots of talk about Ai helping to cure cancer or wrecking the arts but what about Ai and the military...?
That's the one where things could really go bad.
Yah, maybe things like when country X gives an AI bot to country Y to fight country Z there will be a much stronger argument from country Z that country X is actually directly at war with them.
Replace "AI generated content" with "digital photography" and the sentence remains true. Does that mean you would rather we ditch digital photography tech and require all photos to be shot on film and developed in a lab?
It is a bit too much doom and gloom from get off my lawn guys in this thread. How about AI assistants that can help anyone learn about anything? It is being worked on: https://techcrunch.com/2024/07/16/after-tesla-and-openai-andrej-karpathys-startup-aims-to-apply-ai-assistants-to-education/
The iOS music app scene has been a tremendous boost to democratizing access to music-making tools to hobbyists that would otherwise not dabble in this space. It's just funny to see the reaction to these new AI tools, doing the same kind of democratization access.
I don't see anywhere that klownshed said to shut it down. But to play that game, in regards to hypothetically banning digital cameras (on the grounds of whataboutism) that would be like wanting to ban fireworks because of the existence of nukes.
I think some people in this thread mistakenly see objections to AI technologies based on theft being used to replace content creators without compensation (the people whose work was required for the technology to be useful) as objections to all AI technology.
A programmer or musician using AI to improve their productivity or the quality of their work — or for a writer to use it for help editing— is very different from the corporate classes using the technology to eliminate the jobs of the people their engine required .
The analogies people make to other eras where increases in efficiency were beneficial may not be apt. What happens when predictive text engines replace humans on a large scale for information and art is different from anything we have seen before.
My note about carbon footprint is about the proliferation of the use of energy AI generally not movies in particular.
Personally I object to AI art on the grounds that it's all complete shit.
I’m not completely against it, though I personally don’t appreciate most of the prompt generated stuff. What I would like from it is for it to really amplify my work. For instance last week I spent the best part of a day and a half going one by one through 3d objects I made in a hurry checking them for geometry errors such as wrong facing normals, or double faces, ripped vertices etc, all just to avoid some flickering in the shadows of the massive scene I’m building. It was only after trying all of this that it turned out a default setting in the lighting was causing the issue. I want AI to spot that kind of thing. What I don’t want is that I vaguely describe something and have it delivered on a plate. It’s satisfying neither for me, or my audience/client whatever…
Looks like I'm late to the discussion.
With my feet firmly planted in the pro AI corner, I have a few things I would like to point out.
There are clearly many people with a film or television background that are playing around with these tools. If you look at the quality of some of the posts on the r/aivideo subreddit there are some amazing posts .
I'm just a working poor hobbyist with an 8 year old PC and a graphics card that was considered "the budget card" when it was new. I use free tools where I can. I would love to invest more money into it but ultimately it's just a hobby.
As far as "Stealing" is concerned,
Igor Stravinsky is known for saying, “A good composer does not imitate; he steals.
Would a group of mop topped British guys have ever released "Honky Tonk Woman" if they weren't borrowing heavily from the blues musicians that influenced them? Would anyone know who M.C. Hammer was if he didn't sample Rick James?
I think there's still a lot of questions about copyright, compensation, and what AI's effect will ultimately be on the creative community.
I don't have the answers. I'm just trying to make some content. Express myself in a way I could never do before and hopefully entertain a few people along the way.
That’s ridiculous and if you truly believe that then you’re not a photographer.
The whole point of my post was that AI strips out the humanity.
If I want to take a photo of Tower Bridge at sunrise I have to get off my arse, go to London and find a good spot for a pleasing composition, choose my focal length and make other artistic decisions, wait for the light to be right then press the button.
That’s very different to typing ‘Tower bridge at sunrise’ into a text field.
One is artistic the other is not.
Thanks for that.
No I didn’t mean that at all, clearly. I said I don’t like it being a replacement for human artistic creativity. I also mentioned where AI is genuinely useful and literally saves lives.
And digital cameras are a tool used by real creative humans. How is that like ai? Smh.
And just because I dislike AI generated art of any kind, music, video etc. doesn’t mean I want it banned.
Unfortunately you can’t have ‘good’ AI without people using it for bad things (and I’m not even talking about art here either — it is used for propaganda, and criminal activity already).
But I am allowed to think AI generated music, art, videos and music are frankly quite horrible, both in the final result and in spirit.
I’m starting to wonder if that was an AI generated reply to me