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 Store

Loopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.

Want to be a MUSIC/SOUND pro in 2025? THINK TWICE

135678

Comments

  • Commercial work is not where creatives have their gifts for anyway. The problem is not that ai is taking over commercial needs for music production. The problem lies with the system that is running this world. But most people are too programmed and caught up in it to see it for what it is. If technology would fully be used for the true benefit of humanity, creatives could just focus on authentic creative expression.

  • @torusfieldrecordings said:
    Commercial work is not where creatives have their gifts for anyway. The problem is not that ai is taking over commercial needs for music production. The problem lies with the system that is running this world. But most people are too programmed and caught up in it to see it from that perspective.

    Commerce is the sum total of human economic actvity. You are the system. I am the system. Everyone is the system.

  • edited May 28

    @Robin2 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @Robin2 said:

    @UrbanNinja said:

    @Michael_R_Grant said:
    AI slop is never going to replace talented animators, writers and voice actors.

    You may be a little behind the times. It has been a while already now since they stopped hiring rooms full of animators drawing mice on mylar sheets. Manipulations of digitized recordings of voices of people living and dead have been used for years. Disney/Hollywood etc. have been using computer animation for years and are using AI extensively now. The only difference is more people have access to tools of similar quality (better quality than Hollywood had ten years ago) for less money.

    Doubtless there will continue to be a human element, but if anyone thinks human jobs will not be lost at exponentially greater rates than ever before with this revolution I think their head is firmly embedded in sand (no disrespect intended -just saying).

    To what extent the number of human jobs will diminish in the industry is something history will decide, not LoopyPro forum. You are free to disagree this will happen, but I and many others think the writing is already on the wall:

    Mene Tekel Mene Upharsin.

    Completely agree, (unfortunately). The view that ‘AI can never replace human creativity’ might, debatably, be true in a sense - it will always, in its current form at least, be a pastiche, however brilliant, created to fulfill what the AI model thinks we want rather than achieving its own goals and expression. However, taking that view is also sleep walking into the future, while the possibilities and dangers of AI should be faced head on rather than just assuming everything will be okay.

    AI is getting better at what it can do at astonishing, terrifying speed.

    Tesla’s robots are coming soon and may genuinely cause enormous unemployment around the world - one human employee in your factory that you have to pay year in, year out or a one off purchase of a Tesla robot for $30,000? Plenty of employers without a conscience who’ll go for that unfortunately i imagine.

    The possibilities are very worrying and should be taken seriously rather than just assuming it can never replace human beings - such complacency is why it happens.

    Regarding the expected "mass unemployment" to come from legions of robots replacing people who are doing repetitive, dangerous and/or boring work: It's coming and nothing will prevent it. On the other hand, a one person business will also have the power to grow and adjust operations as needed to meet demand. Small business owners will suddenly be able to compete. One need not even have a vivid imagination to realize the boon to entrepreneurial activities this will represent. Most business owners run small businesses and there are more than 1 million empty job positions in the US today. There is a shortage of workers. Robots will fill many of these roles. A.I. will also fill many of these empty positions. The very nature of work is changing and it's "adapt or die" time.

    The problem is, is it acceptable that those who don’t, or can’t, adapt should figuratively or even literally die? Just so others can maximise their profits? Such questions should matter to human beings in my opinion.

    🎯

  • There are countless people who are willing to change for the better, and would, but for the circumstances they’ve found themselves in, courtesy of specific malignant others, or simply courtesy of a cold, indifferent, sociopathically profit seeking culture.

    Also worth noting: self destructiveness is not something that just “comes about”, like, out of nowhere. Things have clearly gone horribly wrong somewhere along the line. And no one is 100% functionally stoic, 24/7. Sometimes, something’s gotta give, and it just does. Mental illness is no joke, folks.

    Drug abuse, for example, is sometimes referred to as self medication. People seeking to escape trauma, pain, wrongness; whatever it is that’s gnawing at them.

    Anyway. Hope that helps to clarify.

  • edited May 28

    @distantstar said:
    There are countless people who are willing to change for the better, and would, but for the circumstances they’ve found themselves in, courtesy of specific malignant others, or simply courtesy of a cold, indifferent, sociopathically profit seeking culture.

    Also worth noting: self destructiveness is not something that just “comes about”, like, out of nowhere. Things have clearly gone horribly wrong somewhere along the line. And no one is 100% functionally stoic, 24/7. Sometimes, something’s gotta give, and it just does. Mental illness is no joke, folks.

    Drug abuse, for example, is sometimes referred to as self medication. People seeking to escape trauma, pain, wrongness; whatever it is that’s gnawing at them.

    Anyway. Hope that helps to clarify.

    I'm well aware of what people are willing to do to escape reality and they are free to do so. It's not the responsibility of others to prevent them from making bad decisions or be forced to support them if they do.

    Anyway, I'm sure the mods patience is being tested by how far afield this conversation has strayed from the main topic, so if a new thread is warranted to continue this thread derailer, it should probably be moved to some Other category.

  • edited May 28

    I’m going to express my opinion, and thoughts here. I am not here to change anyone’s mind or tell you that in any way that I’m correct or incorrect or that you are correct or incorrect. That being said here is my brain fight about this topic that I have been having.

    Can AI replace a human in a creative way…yes and no. Some people will use Ai to do this, and it will be effective at doing whatever it is TRAINED to do (model). So what I am saying is if 500 artists put a painting in a store and Ai put 1000 paintings in a store -(humans can’t out speed AI at all at this point)…. And art buyers were allowed in…it’s still going to be the same as it always was with just human creators. Your art and somebody else’s art and AI’s art will compete for the money of the patron. The patrons money and taste will dictate the purchase. I won’t buy an album just because it’s your album, I’d rather just give you 10 bucks than pretend that I like your music (if I don’t). So just because AI can make a full song complete with believable parts and great mixing and mastering (it literally can) doesn’t mean people are going to buy it over your music…not at all. Music has always been a competitive space, and also a space that is built off taste, so this changes nothing. That is my opinion. If people love what you do, they will support it.

    Now I am going to address the real monster under the bed …

    PROMOTION and MARKETING
    This is where a great many artists fall short, so if you are worried you will lose sales to AI, then maybe learn to promote and market yourself effectively to your base. Many of the folks in here are talented creators, but nobody knows until you put it in front of them, right? Heck, AI can even be a tool to help you here.

    But as for the cheating and all that stuff…
    If Bassmaster Billy plays bass on my album, it’s not cheating…so we can’t have a double standard…if AI played bass it’s no different, sometime Bassmaster Billy is a royal pain in the ass in all his greatness and expects a lot for a little…so Bassreplace AI was a better budgeted option hahahaa…you get me here…I think…laughing out loud.

    If you generate a whole entire song and pose like you made it…yea that’s pretty wild…. But we have that deception every day with tv programs, movie stars, real recording artists, record companies, lawyers, you name it…lots of posers in the world…what’s one more?

    If you love to create music, do what you love… if you link me, I’ll listen...even if you used a little izotope ai mastering, or scaler, or logic smart instruments, or waves curve…hahaha! It doesn’t matter if we like it or not AI is here to stay and improve exponentially until it kills us all, or keeps us as little pets. May skynet be with us!

    As long as there is choice there is a chance ;)

  • @MrSmileZ You're right that things are not going to return to the way they were. People WILL figure out how to use the new tools. We always do.

  • edited May 28

    @Michael_R_Grant said:
    I'm plugged pretty hard into folk from the creative industries, including people who work in music, videogames, movies, TV and visual FX. I could count on one hand the number of them doing the work who think that AI could ever 'replace' what they do to a similar or better standard, or even a workable one. It's a house of cards where many companies are betting the farm and are going to crash hard.... probably far too late to prevent the consequences of laying off all the people they'll find they actually need. We're going to be drowning in AI slop from people who think they're creative but aren't, while actual creatives who are professionals in these industries will now be having to fix the mistakes, hallucinations and general bad output of AI.

    Most entertainment related companies have realized that the CEO can't just prompt "me want money, make me good money thing now" and are instead using skilled people with conventional/traditional skillsets who are also AI savvy. They just don't often advertise for these roles openly, but a few do here and there. People in games now sometimes get hired then are surprisingly given their enterprise account license for the AI generator that the company vetted as appropriate to them and are expected to use it to accelerate their work. The YT influencer vomit sphere paints a massively distorted picture of the overall situation.

  • @Michael_R_Grant said:

    @Robin2 said:

    @UrbanNinja said:

    @Michael_R_Grant said:
    AI slop is never going to replace talented animators, writers and voice actors.

    You may be a little behind the times. It has been a while already now since they stopped hiring rooms full of animators drawing mice on mylar sheets. Manipulations of digitized recordings of voices of people living and dead have been used for years. Disney/Hollywood etc. have been using computer animation for years and are using AI extensively now. The only difference is more people have access to tools of similar quality (better quality than Hollywood had ten years ago) for less money.

    Doubtless there will continue to be a human element, but if anyone thinks human jobs will not be lost at exponentially greater rates than ever before with this revolution I think their head is firmly embedded in sand (no disrespect intended -just saying).

    To what extent the number of human jobs will diminish in the industry is something history will decide, not LoopyPro forum. You are free to disagree this will happen, but I and many others think the writing is already on the wall:

    Mene Tekel Mene Upharsin.

    Completely agree, (unfortunately). The view that ‘AI can never replace human creativity’ might, debatably, be true in a sense - it will always, in its current form at least, be a pastiche, however brilliant, created to fulfill what the AI model thinks we want rather than achieving its own goals and expression. However, taking that view is also sleep walking into the future, while the possibilities and dangers of AI should be faced head on rather than just assuming everything will be okay.

    AI is getting better at what it can do at astonishing, terrifying speed.

    Tesla’s robots are coming soon and may genuinely cause enormous unemployment around the world - one human employee in your factory that you have to pay year in, year out or a one off purchase of a Tesla robot for $30,000? Plenty of employers without a conscience who’ll go for that unfortunately i imagine.

    The possibilities are very worrying and should be taken seriously rather than just assuming it can never replace human beings - such complacency is why it happens.

    Tesla's robots are terrible. There is absolutely no way that the company will be producing a workable one that replaces any skilled jobs for $30k anytime soon. This whole debate is full of really ill-informed speculation about potential, rather than the facts on the ground:

    https://freedium.cfd/https://wlockett.medium.com/teslas-robot-is-utterly-pathetic-365874848eb6

    I'm plugged pretty hard into folk from the creative industries, including people who work in music, videogames, movies, TV and visual FX. I could count on one hand the number of them doing the work who think that AI could ever 'replace' what they do to a similar or better standard, or even a workable one. It's a house of cards where many companies are betting the farm and are going to crash hard.... probably far too late to prevent the consequences of laying off all the people they'll find they actually need. We're going to be drowning in AI slop from people who think they're creative but aren't, while actual creatives who are professionals in these industries will now be having to fix the mistakes, hallucinations and general bad output of AI.

    And for non-creative industries such as financial services, the amount of hallucinations and sheer wrong answers are ridiculous and make AI a non-starter as a replacement for human labour. When you have to get someone to check everything the AI is spitting out because otherwise you risk it being wrong and costing you loads of money, it has little value.

    And then we have the IT industry: https://old.reddit.com/r/ExperiencedDevs/comments/1krttqo/my_new_hobby_watching_ai_slowly_drive_microsoft/

    In the next 5 years, AI is likely going to decimate the worker economy when execs get dollar signs in their eyes. Lay off workers, use AI to replace them, spend way less money, make way more money - it's perfect, right?! Unfortunately this gargantuan bet on AI will also decimate the actual economy when the Emperor's New Clothes of it all becomes clear and people wipe the scales from their eyes. For example, the progress made with each LLM model is lower despite each one being trained on more and more data. The ratio between advancement and the necessary resources to advance gets ever worse. And the models are even going to run out of new data to be trained on before long! Unless someone comes up with a whole new way of doing things, progress is going to stall much more quickly than you might think on the present path.

    Oh, and then there's the environmental impact of all this which is being conveniently ignored: https://mashable.com/article/energy-ai-worse-than-we-thought

    I used to be a big advocate of AI. I thought it was going to be incredible. But the more I see, the more obvious its flaws are, and the more obvious it is that it isn't going to be the saviour of everything.

    @Michael_R_Grant - I wonder if you've ever tested your outlook for unconscious bias by projecting yourself back a few years and examining if you would have predicted the state of things today back then, or if you would have said that it's impossible we would be where we are today.

    It's a game I like to play with my own thoughts. I'm often astonished at the results (right and wrong).

  • wimwim
    edited May 28

    @richardyot said:
    All of that! 👆

    .. and crypto will utterly crash and disappear as of few years ago. 😉

  • @wim said:

    @richardyot said:
    All of that! 👆

    And crypto was going to utterly crash and disappear as of few years ago too. 😉

    LOL. I remember well the dire predictions here regarding Bitcoin (and cryptos in general).

  • wimwim
    edited May 28

    @NeuM said:
    LOL. I remember well the dire predictions here regarding Bitcoin (and cryptos in general).

    All I remember is I blinked ... and ended up a little better than break-even. 😂

    (of course, as with all prophecies, they may end up being true, but just not in the right time-frame)

  • @NeuM said:

    @torusfieldrecordings said:
    Commercial work is not where creatives have their gifts for anyway. The problem is not that ai is taking over commercial needs for music production. The problem lies with the system that is running this world. But most people are too programmed and caught up in it to see it from that perspective.

    Commerce is the sum total of human economic actvity. You are the system. I am the system. Everyone is the system.

    I am talking about the system that makes people trade their time and lifeforce for survival.

  • wimwim
    edited May 28

    @torusfieldrecordings said:
    I am talking about the system that makes people trade their time and lifeforce for survival.

    In other words ... life?
    Has there ever been any other system?

  • The only realistic outcome of all this is fully automated luxury communism, sorry, but it’s true 😂

  • @wim said:

    @torusfieldrecordings said:
    I am talking about the system that makes people trade their time and lifeforce for survival.

    In other words ... life?
    Has there ever been any other system?

    Hahaha

  • wimwim
    edited May 28

    @UrbanNinja said:

    @wim said:

    @torusfieldrecordings said:
    I am talking about the system that makes people trade their time and lifeforce for survival.

    In other words ... life?
    Has there ever been any other system?

    Hahaha

    I'm kinda serious too though. It's a sincere question.

    As a species, for the most part, it seems to me that mankind works less hard now to survive than ever in recorded history. (Except maybe for Adam and Eve, until they messed that up. 😉)

    No species escapes that fate, to my knowledge.

  • The more advanced AI becomes, the less impressive it seems. At first it was astounding to see what AI could create. But all the supposedly amazing stuff it does now, like the videos in this thread, are just awful and clearly inhuman. If you consider art and technology as a continuum then I think those people who are closer to the side of art see clearly how deficient AI is, and those who are more invested in technology are wowed by it. But yeah, it's been a couple years since AI impressed me at all.

    Hey, remember when we were all supposed to be riding Segways? Pepperidge Farms remembers.

  • Most of the eras where humanity prospered have been erased from the history we get taught in these ‘schools’.

    The early dynasties of ancient Egypt are echoes of these times.

  • @wim said:

    @UrbanNinja said:

    @wim said:

    @torusfieldrecordings said:
    I am talking about the system that makes people trade their time and lifeforce for survival.

    In other words ... life?
    Has there ever been any other system?

    Hahaha

    I'm kinda serious too though. It's a sincere question.

    As a species, for the most part, it seems to me that mankind works less hard now to survive than ever in recorded history. (Except maybe for Adam and Eve, until they messed that up. 😉)

    No species escapes that fate, to my knowledge.

    For sure.

  • @wim said:

    @NeuM said:
    LOL. I remember well the dire predictions here regarding Bitcoin (and cryptos in general).

    All I remember is I blinked ... and ended up a little better than break-even. 😂

    (of course, as with all prophecies, they may end up being true, but just not in the right time-frame)

    I have a relative who bought ONE Bitcoin back when it was about $50. That seemed like a lot of money to waste on something so risky to me back then. LOL.

  • @Krupa said:
    The only realistic outcome of all this is fully automated luxury communism, sorry, but it’s true 😂

    In Communism, the leaders prosper while the population dies off.

  • edited May 28

    @wim said:

    @UrbanNinja said:

    @wim said:

    @torusfieldrecordings said:
    I am talking about the system that makes people trade their time and lifeforce for survival.

    In other words ... life?
    Has there ever been any other system?

    Hahaha

    I'm kinda serious too though. It's a sincere question.

    As a species, for the most part, it seems to me that mankind works less hard now to survive than ever in recorded history. (Except maybe for Adam and Eve, until they messed that up. 😉)

    No species escapes that fate, to my knowledge.

    And with the multiplicative power of A.I. a single person can already have the productive output of thousands of people. As we approach the theoretical "Singularity", one person will have the equivalent productivity of every individual who has ever lived. And with the history of bad decisions made by powerful people already in our rearview mirrors, that's the thing that can really keep one up at night.

  • @NeuM said:
    And with the multiplicative power of A.I. a single person can already have the productive output of thousands of people. As we approach the theoretical "Singularity", one person will have the equivalent productivity of every individual who has ever lived. And with the history of bad decisions made by powerful people already in our rearview mirrors, that's the thing that can really keep one up at night.

    Shit. Just what I needed, another way to convince myself we could be heading for disaster. 😂
    Not really though. I'm quite fatalistic about it. Like nukes - if it happens, it happens.

  • @wim said:

    @NeuM said:
    And with the multiplicative power of A.I. a single person can already have the productive output of thousands of people. As we approach the theoretical "Singularity", one person will have the equivalent productivity of every individual who has ever lived. And with the history of bad decisions made by powerful people already in our rearview mirrors, that's the thing that can really keep one up at night.

    Shit. Just what I needed, another way to convince myself we could be heading for disaster. 😂
    Not really though. I'm quite fatalistic about it. Like nukes - if it happens, it happens.

    The only thing we can be certain of is people will always act in their own interest first. As it has always been, it will always be.

  • @MrSmileZ said:
    Can AI replace a human in a creative way…yes and no. Some people will use Ai to do this, and it will be effective at doing whatever it is TRAINED to do (model). So what I am saying is if 500 artists put a painting in a store and Ai put 1000 paintings in a store -(humans can’t out speed AI at all at this point)…. And art buyers were allowed in…it’s still going to be the same as it always was with just human creators. Your art and somebody else’s art and AI’s art will compete for the money of the patron. The patrons money and taste will dictate the purchase. I won’t buy an album just because it’s your album, I’d rather just give you 10 bucks than pretend that I like your music (if I don’t). So just because AI can make a full song complete with believable parts and great mixing and mastering (it literally can) doesn’t mean people are going to buy it over your music…not at all. Music has always been a competitive space, and also a space that is built off taste, so this changes nothing. That is my opinion. If people love what you do, they will support it.

    I partially agree with this but i think there is a deeper, more fundamental damage done by the advent of AI for artistic creation.

    Imagine that AI ‘cracks the algorithm’ for writing brilliant music and produces results that everyone has to begrudgingly accept are very good, way beyond just being generic musical box ticking. Once it has that algorithm, how long do you think it will take it to then compose all of the tunes possible? A week ? A day? An hour? There are a limited number of notes after all and therefore a finite number of ways to combine them into tunes - true, the number of ways will be astronomically high, but a computer can cope with such high numbers. And after this has happened, where are the tunes for anyone now or in the future to come up with by themselves? AI would thus rob human beings of the chance to be original, to be brilliant, and diminish all creativity in the process. AI in this scenario - hopefully just a dystopian fantasy for some time yet - isn’t ‘just another competitor’, it’s something which has taken away the possibility of creation by anyone else other than itself. Okay, we’re not there yet, but as I’ve said in other posts, i think it pays to imagine what happens when the capabilities of AI are far greater than they are currently - the latest advancements in video generated with sound are testament to how fast AI is changing so to talk about how things are today is almost pointless - we need to consider the ultimate goals and what happens if they are achieved.

    Of course you’re right, people won’t necessarily buy AI created music and i suspect they will prefer human created works over it but, alongside this, the very existence of AI will also, i’m guessing, introduce an element of suspicion around the creation of artistic works going forward - did you really do that or did you have some ‘help’? That suspicion will potentially devalue all works of art made after a certain point. Of course, I hope I’m wrong about that…I hope my pessimistic view on all of this is wrong!

  • edited May 28

    @Robin2 said:
    There are a limited number of notes after all and therefore a finite number of ways to combine them into tunes - true, the number of ways will be astronomically high, but a computer can cope with such high numbers. And after this has happened, where are the tunes for anyone now or in the future to come up with by themselves?

    Bach already composed every possible melody. It doesn't matter. What makes a song good is the feeling and thought the composer puts into it. But you make a good point—really, an argument to ignore AI, because it creates an indiscernible ocean of content regardless of value.

    I'm sure some AI songs will become popular, just as lots of pop songs are algorithmic and manufactured. But that's competition for the Biebers and Dua Lipas of the world, not the average musician.

  • edited May 29

    Haven't seen a thread bump on the evils of using drum machines and how lifeless they are compared to a real drummer here for a while. A genuinely hot topic back in the day before most everybody gave up about it with the advent of Disco ('not real music') A MIDI loop and sampler will never replace real music played by musicians playing real physical three-dimensional instruments. Most of the music production discussed here at Loopy Pro is of that sort.

    If we have real Luddites on this forum, why stop at trying to fight the AI revolution? Probably because they all use drum machines and samplers. Amusing when you think about it.

    "While he is waiting for Julia, he recognizes a song that a prole woman below the window is singing, which is a popular song written by the versificator, which is a machine that writes songs with no human input." -George Orwell Nineteen Eighty Four (1949)

    Maybe the Ludite Revolution in this thread will provide a spark that will halt this emerging Dystopian Age of robot-produced elevator music predicted Orwell, and God forbid artificial characters in a future Veggie Tales version 86. Not sure Vegas will offer good odds of it though.

  • wimwim
    edited May 29

    @Robin2 said:
    Imagine that AI ‘cracks the algorithm’ for writing brilliant music and produces results that everyone has to begrudgingly accept are very good, way beyond just being generic musical box ticking. Once it has that algorithm, how long do you think it will take it to then compose all of the tunes possible? A week ? A day? An hour? There are a limited number of notes after all and therefore a finite number of ways to combine them into tunes - true, the number of ways will be astronomically high, but a computer can cope with such high numbers. And after this has happened, where are the tunes for anyone now or in the future to come up with by themselves? AI would thus rob human beings of the chance to be original, to be brilliant, and diminish all creativity in the process. AI in this scenario - hopefully just a dystopian fantasy for some time yet - isn’t ‘just another competitor’, it’s something which has taken away the possibility of creation by anyone else other than itself. Okay, we’re not there yet, but as I’ve said in other posts, i think it pays to imagine what happens when the capabilities of AI are far greater than they are currently - the latest advancements in video generated with sound are testament to how fast AI is changing so to talk about how things are today is almost pointless - we need to consider the ultimate goals and what happens if they are achieved.

    This has happened over and over as long as music has existed. Not to the extreme case of "all the tunes possible" but to the extent of "all the tunes most people care about" for each evolution.

    Then a creative revolution occurs and new genres / movements are born. They come from the gut, not from logic circuits.

    I don't really think AI is likely to replicate those kind of revolutions. Those are born out of the human spirit and that is what people connect to. Sure, there could be certain evolutions of purely AI produced new genres that might excite some people for a time, but I think the novelty will wear off for lack of that genuine human connection.

    To the extent that we are human (not provable btw), I think we share something unique that AI can imitate, but not completely replace. I think that'll always be craved, always find ways to be expressed, and will connect with humans in ways that AI can't reproduce.

  • wimwim
    edited May 29

    Another thought that just occurred to me ...

    People talk about "catching the creative muse". I'm not sure I completely buy into the concept that artistic vibes are always floating about in the cosmos, and the essence of creativity is tapping into them. But if that is true, the technology does not exist to tap into that, and so machines may never be able to truly be "creative" in a way that we will more than temporarily relate to.

Sign In or Register to comment.