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
“Introducing MID(A)I, the latest feature of Apple Intelligence! A whole new standard for recording input relying solely on ChatGPT interpretations of your key presses!”
Good idea on MIDI routing.
Hi @dwrae - the update today fixed the "Directory" import option. Thanks!
I was kind of expecting that importing a directory would create a sub-folder rather than importing all the samples in the directory to the current folder. But once you know you need to create a sub-folder first, it's fine.
TBH these DAWs just struggle with the common sense IMO. E.g. in Cubasis each track has an option to select one MIDI input or all of them. But not multiple. Same with channels - one specific channel, or all, no option to pick several channels on your taste. And this behavior of MIDI FX that looks like a parallel to the original input. So no matter if I cut out the channel 16 in MIDI FX - it will still reach the instrument somehow (but here maybe I don't understand something).
And using AUM for midi mapping seems like a workflow killer for me. You can't just "open and create", you have to set things up each time. Even keeping 2 tracks for each SWAM instrument (one for MIDI FX and filtering and one for instrument) seems a bit complicated, IDK even how will it work during actual recording and editing yet. Though AUM's mapping matrix is the best UX I've ever seen (but it may be blown up with too much midi effects I guess).
TBH I don't understand why iOS DAW developers focus on in-DAW instruments/effects, especially not-IAPs. iOS has a lot of cheap and well made AUs alredy. Why do they spend time on them instead of doing the state-of-the art DAW with flexible MIDI and audio routing, convenient UI, tempo / meter tracks, convenient automation lanes, well-polished audio editor and all these things that we are really lacking? I have no idea. I'd buy such a DAW even for $100+ even with 0 built-in instruments/FX.
Im guessing that its possibly the size of the iPad music making market not being large enough to support the costs involved with such a large and time consumming project. I think this may be why only the companies that already have Desktop DAWs are able to get close and others seem to drift away eventually. Even without designing all the instruments and fx built in as you said, th3 task of creating a decent DAW with the sort of abilities that we take for granted on Desktop, is such a gargantuan undertaking without clear signs that 'if they will build it...they will come'. Even Apple that have long almost given away Logic at such a low price for what it is, seem to be carefully treading in the iPad DAW pool. Maybe it will all come together in time.
That makes sense, though I also think that the part of the problem is how (especially big) developers see the users. It looks like FX/Instruments developers see iOS as a playground for esoteric experiments: we have dRambo, Loopy, Patterning, all sorts of hacky-wacky sequencers, groove boxes and unusual synths. But on the other side it looks like major DAW developers saw the platform as a toy, and users as kids, that don't need more than "8 tracks, 4/4 120bpm" and always need a dosen of pre-installed instruments to play without additional purchases. And even if the platform starts looking more and more serious now, all these developers get caught by the legacy codebase that have never been designed for "serious" things. That's why Cubasis existed for 10 years without tempo track and side chains for example. And that's why Cubasis doesn't allow you to select several MIDI inputs per track, I guess.
And smaller individual developers indeed can't cover complex development, so they do things they needed personally, and don't focus on other things. That's why MultiTrackStudio has only 3 MIDI FX. And Nanostudio 2 didn't work with CC64 for piano when I bought it (it really just made MIDI notes longer when pedal is pressed, this immediately caused overlapping and collapses). The developer just didn't work with this style/genre/workflow approach and didn't think about it. And these developers suffer from legacy even more.
And that's why we have a super versatile toy for experiments and random jamming, that doesn't work when you know what you want and your flow doesn't follow "the most common usage pattern"©.
My experience has been that in the case of DAWs on iOS, it’s like the game of Rock, Papers, Scissors.
This DAW this, but not that. That DAW does that but not this. Etc
On desktop there is a similar game but at a higher level and price tag. Features are more competitive, but there are still omissions and some DAWs offer the same features as others but do them less well, or more awkwardly.
When I started doing music on iOS there was no power for anything like a full DAW. Now the power is almost there. But still isn’t enough for the likes of Live or Bitwig or FL. No way
Another factor I’ve seen USA that for the limited DAWs do have, users are not all fully versed in what the tool can do, as some software is both deep and idiosyncratic. I’ve had many occasions when I have given up ons DAW in frustrating struggling with a use case, then learned that the thing did offer that feature, in a hidden mechanic
Lots of interestng points from all here. Some great reads. Would love to carry on this conversation, but bad head time coming so my words will soon be gone for the day lol
?? So you think an M4 Macbook has more power than an M4 iPad?
Meanwhile I'm running Bitwig and Reaper on my lowly M1 Macbook Air.
Computing power is not the problem.
Exactly! You couldn't have said it better.
Yes. I think the iPad is not enough for the laptop apps, even the top iPads compared to the lap top. I am often wrong though! I hate to remind myself how dangerous certainty is.
Here’s what my AI friend says;
“While the M4 iPad Pro and M4 MacBook Air/Pro share the same base M4 chip architecture, their computing power differs significantly due to thermal management, active cooling (fans) in Macs, and operating system restrictions. The MacBook sustained performance is superior for intensive, long-duration tasks, whereas the iPad offers exceptional burst performance in a tablet form factor.”
So I stand corrected I think: it’s not power it’s type of power, allocation of power and operating system differences. Which I guess isn’t power as such. Given whatever it all sorts out to be, i don’t think the iOS devices can run Bitwig the way your MB Air can.
I’m looking at what’s been done so far with the available DAWs. Of the 2 versions of Logic, I’ve always thought the iPad iteration is a nerfed version of the laptop one, given the differences in power (types of power…).
Meanwhile when I read here about iOS Logic, I understand it’s crashy. Maybe that’s a code issue. I find another very direct port from laptop more stable. More elegant code I guess, and far less nerfed,
When I tried Logic on my air4 (minimum recommendation chip) I ran it into the ground treating it the way I treat my laptop DAWs.
But certainty and knowledge-wise, for the Apple spec and tech I’m not that guy
Yes, thermal management is definitely an issue. There is a speed difference for sustained performance, but it's not huge. You could try asking your AI friend how an M1 Macbook Air compares to an M3 or M4 iPad Pro regarding sustained cpu performance. I think he'll tell you that the iPad comes out on top. In any case, the differences in performance are relatively small, not enough to make a DAW the same software unusable on one but fine on the other.
Also it worth bearing in mind the OS differences Apple have in place to promote the products to differing markets, although this is in flux. By this I mean things such as the ram usage limits that Apple used to have or possibly still do for apps. I beleve that apps werte only allowed to address a certain amount of RAM so that it kept the system nore stable for running under the low amounts of RAM put into iPads. Possibly initially to keep costs low as the iPads were initially more aimed at being a lowish cost device for mass market consumer consumption. Macs on the other hand have followed more closely to the PC model of a system designed more openly for various roles, but more tightly controlled by Apple than the PC market.
Damn think weve possibly drifted of the original topic....cant remember lol
@hes
For fun I asked my pal Ai the big question, why doesn’t Bitwig port the software to iOS?
“Bitwig Studio is currently not available for iOS primarily due to a combination of technical, philosophical, and market-driven reasons. While users have requested it, the developer focuses on maintaining high-performance desktop features across Windows, macOS, and Linux.
“Key reasons for the lack of a Bitwig iOS version include:
“Technical Architecture & Frameworks: Bitwig uses Java for its UI, which allows them to efficiently support Windows, Mac, and Linux with a small team. Porting this to iOS/iPadOS, which primarily uses Objective-C or Swift, would require a massive redevelopment effort.
“Lack of VST/CLAP Support on iOS: A major selling point of Bitwig is its modulation and VST/CLAP plugin capability. iOS does not support these plugin standards, making it impossible to achieve full cross-compatibility of projects between desktop and iPad.
“Philosophy and Ecosystem: Bitwig has indicated a preference for open systems rather than the closed ecosystem of Apple's iPadOS.
“Pricing and Market Misalignment: Top-tier DAWs on desktop are priced in the hundreds of dollars, while the iPad app market often balks at paying $50 for software. This creates a difficult return-on-investment scenario for a complex, premium DAW.
“Development Resources: Bitwig is a smaller company with a small, specialized team. They have historically prioritized core features for desktop over entering the mobile market.”
Your pal makes some good points, assuming he's right about the details of Bitwig.
For other DAWs, e.g., Logic Pro, I expect these are also big impediments to porting to iPad: (1) small screen and touch interface require big changes to UI, (2) iPadOS/iOS security features, like restricted file access, require big changes, (3) low price and small expected audience for full scale DAW on iPad (essentially the RoI point regarding Bitwig).
I do love that Bitwig. The 4/12 box is pretty great w/it. I have it on a surface pro, so there is touch like on a big iPad but with Phaseplant and Bazille etc
MTS is also nice as touch on Surface.
On topic, the coolest DAWs for me are the ones most like the laptop ones I like. Bitwig reminds me of BM3, and iPad MTS is very close to laptop MTS
Admittedly I’m DAW promiscuous, (fickle?) and can recommend many of the others for reasons. So I like Cubasis because it seems homey, accommodates multiout drum boxes like Drumcomputer and Dialekt. And it exports DAWproject. Which pops up nicely in Bitwig.
And so on.