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
Another way to quantify the relevance of Theory in music is to consider some of the music that has touched you the most -- the stuff that makes you glad to be alive -- make a Top 10 (or Top 5 or 25) and then research who made said music / how it came to be.
Personally I find many of my favorite Things (music, art) were made by complete outsiders (training-wise) who just stormed their craft with enough innate drive and feeling to create something amazing and change the course of "x" (genre, movement, era, trend, etc)
I believe that internal Sense trumps everything including training and theory.
Yeah as i understand 12 tone system comes from the harmonic series which is is based on physics, that's why it works but other systems use the frequencies inbetween, ie microtuning.> @Egz said:
All i'll say is go into it with an open mind, he's got a youtube channel as well that's worth checking out. I started with the free stuff and eventually did the course.
@JGY if you may have seen it but if not i recommend watching this, kinda sums up the process a lot of us go through.
@Western theory going on memory it comes from the harmonic series which is based on physics the 12 notes are frequencies that work sympathetically (ie C,E,G) and microtuning etc is just other frequencies but it's what are brains interpret as sounds that go together, if someone plays a duff chord you don't need any theory to recognise it.
That's interesting cause the video above speaks to that.
4 chords
I've heard that Ira Glass thingie before and very good it is too. I hadn't seen the video and it's pretty good too
I think he's spot on, I also think it's an interesting situation if there is one area of creative work that you have put in the 10,000 hours (whatever) and know you're good at and then you're involved in something else where you are relatively inexperienced, but have enough of that 'taste' to want to drive on. Hard not to be in a hurry
Bingo! Sums up my experience.
Added bonus: another great Liverpool 80's scene anecdote from Doug. Still curious when/how drums entered the picture
I do sense this is a long ongoing argy-bargy etc:
They will say that because of my lack of book learning, I cannot properly express what I desire to treat of. Do they not know that my subjects require for their exposition experience rather than the words of others? And since experience has been the mistress, and to her in all points make my appeal. —Leonardo da Vinci
Interesting middle ground:
"The trends of current European dance music are such that genres seem to crop up faster than we are capable of finding names for them. And yet one might also get a sense that these tiny sub-genres we have created really sound more alike than different, at least to the unaccustomed ear (and that would mean most of us). Have we come to a point where naming each variation is more important than recognizing the theme?
In the end, many modern thinkers (so-called because false modesty prevents them from calling themselves philosophers) wonder if we have become a society that creates technology faster than it can learn to use it, whose ability to offer the average consumer choices has far outpaced the consumer's capacity for judgment and taste. We are now more than ever Gadget collectors, but long gone is the age of the enlightened amateur.
The solution of musical temperament has often taken the backseat alongside such grandiose developments as opera and the piano-forte, perhaps rightly so as it continues to be an on-going argument to this day. That our modern tuning system is actually "out of tune" is not apparent to the average listener. Unfortunately, like finally seeing the animal-shape in an abstract computer-generated pattern, once you've noticed it you will always notice it. Simply put, sometime in the mid-1800s it was decided to make the intervals between notes on the piano of a perfectly even from one another - a C# would be perfectly in-between C and D. That this so completely obvious to a modern musician is an illustration of how much we've embraced this idea. However prior to this even-tuning, or Even-Temperament as it is known, a piano was restricted to playing in certain keys, mainly keys such as C with little or no accidentals. Transpose a piece to, say, the key of B and you were in for some discordant trouble. To understand the reason for this would take more explaining and mathematical diagrams than I have time for, but suffice it to say the tuning method invented by Pythagoras was not as divinely perfect as we had hoped. To compensate for this it was decided to tune all the notes on a piano except for the octave a little out of tune, but not out of tune enough for the general public to notice. The result was our new-found ability to play fearlessly in any key, and lo! we have jazz. But at what price? Well it may be too early to say, but it has been postulated that we children of the modern age are so used to hearing music out of tune that we simply no longer take true pitches into our consideration, and have perhaps lost one of the great beauties of harmonic balance for eternity.
Before the phonograph there were concerts, and then there was the amateur- that person who didn't have to be great at what they did, but did it because they loved it. Could you even imagine that in order to hear your favorite Beatles song you would have to go to a piano and play it? No, because to our modern minds the artist and their recording is inseparable. If you hear someone playing Hey Jude in a piano bar, you're not really hearing Hey Jude! No, you would have to hear played back that noise-shadow imprinted onto plastic by George Martin of the Beatles performing Hey Jude in 1969 at Abbey Road studios- that is Hey Jude. Anything else is simply an inept cover, even if it were the Beatles covering it themselves!
This association of music with a recording rather than a live performance, along with the loss of the average listener to be capable of playing the music they want to listen to and the absence of a piano in every average middle-class household, is probably the most defining aspect of our less-than-definitive musical age.
There is only one last major development to mention, and I'm sure that for those stalwart defenders of rock music it is the only one worthy of consideration - electric instruments. Whether this is actually a development or simply a conclusion we may be too close inside to actually determine. As we are speaking of something concurrent to the present, when everyone who owns a Macintosh has a virtual recording studio and the idea of an Enlightened Amateur may slowly be being resurrected, we cannot perceive it with objectivity or purity of understanding and so are best leaving that to our grandchildren." -And You Will Know Us By The Trail of the Dead (2004)
I've had this experience a few times in my life: a discussion of tones and melody and chords and intervals and those should-be-nonexistent things called scales sets out. Some smart-alec musician type shows me what discordant notes sound like by playing chords that are discordant one after the other. They state something like “see, didn’t that sound terrible” and I invariably think to myself, “sounds alright to me”.
What they’ve played is probably registering as more interesting than usual, to me, or more rarely heard, or less predictable, but without that depth of analysis, I just get the immediate impression that it’s not bad, or harmful, but sounds okay to me, and what are they getting at, that there’s something “bad” that I’m supposed to feel about what they’ve played? It all sounds alright to me. Any set of sounds sounds okay to me. Am I just being not fussy?
There is lots of stuff you can't say if you think in 12 tones and major and minor,
I guess we all will agree that this sounds nothing alike
@u0421793, thanks for demoing your stuff last time around. It's pretty cool that you've penetrated the abyss and returned with a sort-of musical elightenment that's free from the boudaries of time and space. And I'm totally with you on the "any set of sounds will do" thing. Hope this doesn't discourage others from making the journey though.
There's a thing in the art world ( I used to do a bit of painting) where if you can't intellectualise your work, and/or haven't got a doctorate in Fine Art then regardless if how good what you do is, it's not considered valid by the elite. One of the reasons I abandoned that hobby for this one is the lack (mostly), of snobbery in music. Long may it live.
But fine art is merely the currency of the rich.
No, you’re correct — that’s definitely me. I hide behind a fake aversion to music theory out of a lack of self confidence, and use it as a crutch to justify my own product’s idiosyncrasies when thrust at other people, as ammunition against their returned criticism.
It’s very much like when I tried learning programming. For years I told people I was a Forth programmer. I learned Forth. Or more accurately, I spent about five years trying to, but did nothing of note with it (other than pre-learn Postscript, which came in handy later in the DTP revolution I was then to be part of). Later, after I was a proper web/flash designer, I tried learning that programming thing again, so picked Ruby and spent another seven years trying to learn that but did pretty much nothing useful in it.
A few years ago I realised why I unconsciously home in on those esoteric languages. It’s because nobody else I ever meet was familiar with those languages, therefore nobody ever realised how crap I was at programming, but rather, they’re impressed, instead. It’s the same with music. I don’t find the notation or theory is usable. All foreign languages have tremendous usability flaws. Unfamiliar notations score appallingly on usability. If there were any elegance or natural universality in the whole model, we’d “get” it with almost no friction.
I agree that the art world is snobby having gone to art school. But it was the focus on conceptualizing (bullshit) and anti skill set ( paint splashes win mentality) which drove me away. The snobbiness is there in music, only it's fragmented by genre. And as seen in this thread the anti knowledge/skill attitude is as previlent in music as in the plastic arts at least regarding some genres. Of course, snobbiness can go both ways.
Rubbish, there's plenty of fantastic affordable art out there by talented artists.
I'm lucky that I get to hear a lot of music from people all over the skill and knowledge range, and I've never seen (heard) a corrolation between how much music knowledge someone has and how good their music it. Or maybe I should say how enjoyable it is. Yes, often times a lack of theory understanding leads to all sorts of terrible sounding tone poems. But I've seen the opposite enough too, where someone created something very unique and exciting sounding merely because they didn't know any better. In a world where so much music is soooo similar, that's a breath of fresh air to me.
Having said that, I do think having just a rudimentary understanding of music theory can go a long ways in helping us discuss it with other musicians. Especially if you're collaberating with them. It might not be a perfect language, but it IS the only langauge musicians generally share that can define the abstract concepts of music creation. And really I'm talking the bare minimum theory, note names, what is a scale, what is a chord, etc.
I taught myself up to a college level 4 in music theory years ago, and while interesting at the time, I ended up never using it and have subsequently forgotten most of it
I think it has less to do with experience and more to do with attention to detail. Someone who knows all there is to know about musical theory and has access to all the best studio gear may not be organized (efficient) enough to deal with all of choices. And they may take their experience for granted causing their concentration to wane, which can cause details to be overlooked. On the other hand, a neophyte doesn't know what they don't know, so it's not like that's a better position to be in either. Otherwise everything would sound like little kids chaotically banging on pots and pans.
The most important element IMO is the ability to enter the "zone" like a great athlete psyching themselves up for a big match. Or a fighter pilot in a dog fight. Or proper sex. It's not related to theory one way or another. It more like "catching" the sounds from Across the Universe.
Makes my face melt, he goes from Arabian 1/4 tone to do as I do gospel and back, he can take it in any direction he wants to anytime
Not in my experience of working in the Arts and knowing a lot of artists / Fine Art students. Most of them were as poor as church mice.
Same with me, unlike my music I used to be a bit more traditional where painting is concerned. I went to art college so I've been 'trained', but there are far better artists out there than me who haven't. Amusingly I faced snobbishness from those that had been trained 'more' than I had, or went to a better university, as if the amount of time you spent studying or where you did it equated to better work. That might be true of a mechanic, or a surgeon, but for splashing a bit of paint around it's not always the case.
Now I enjoy all forms of strangeness when it comes to art - same with music - I like very unusual stuff, mostly by people who think quavers are crisps.
Definitely, and each person will argue the corner that applies to them. I'm not trained, and some of the best musicians I know have no formal training either so I'll fight their corner. But I like to think I have an open mind, and can enjoy music from anyone, even musicians.
Technical skill and knowledge of theory aren't bad things - after all I've been playing guitar for nearly 40 years so I've probably achieved some level of technical ability - but it's not essential.
So you can't make Theremin type sounds with a piano? Wow, I din't know that.
Just for fun, this is my version of Toccata and Fugue in D minor by JS Bach, it requires zero musical theory or knowledge to play it, just follow the tutorial and have some with it, it has its own thread but I thought it may be nice to post it here. http://thesoundtestroom.com/how-to-play-toccata-and-fugue-in-d-minor-by-js-bach-the-easy-version/
This is one of the best posts I've ever seen here. It smacks of the experience and honesty that many of us may reach along the journey if'n we're lucky. Good stuff.
Well said that man. Know the rules and then break them.
Really? Zappa told people exactly what to play cos he knew his stuff. You wouldn't play random stuff you liked in Zappa's band. Zappa was a guitar player though.
Check out Zappa's son on guitar. He is an awesome guitar teacher. How can he do that? Definitely not by not being au fait with music theory. His father must have inspired him to be able to doing that today.
For me, knowing my music theory means I can go anywhere musically, play multiple instrumemts by transposing ideas from one instrument to the other and being confident that I know what I'm doing.
Sounds blasé and all that but it's good to know some music theory. Might not be for the faint hearted but it pays dividends. If you want to make just noise then even a two year old can make music by touching random notes on a piano
Some people play by ear and that is great as well. Have fun when you play. As Zappa would say: shut up and play yer music.
Chill out but with a purpose to the madness. There's many roads from A to Z. Back to doing some Locrian stuff
it requires zero musical theory or knowledge to play it - that's strictly not true as you have already acquired the knowledge to play it. If it didn't require any musical knowledge my four year old niece would play it
Yes, that's why I said he'd like the iPad as a compositional tool. It'd allow him to create multiple parts which he could then dish out to his employees.
Practice? Natural talent? Guitar lessons? All of those? As I said I've got nothing against musicians that have opted to study their craft, what I don't like are snobs that look down their noses at gifted amateurs.
I could teach this to someone who has never played keyboards in their life, in fact I used to teach this to the kids who wanted to play keyboards at The Rock Academy in Spain, most of them had never played before
> Western theory going on memory it comes from the harmonic series which is based on physics the 12 notes are frequencies that work sympathetically (ie C,E,G) and microtuning etc is just other frequencies but it's what are brains interpret as sounds that go together, if someone plays a duff chord you don't need any theory to recognise it.
Hm, it's not that simple I guess
So I try to explain it in a other way
In western music you have 12 fixed pitches (a=440hz) in a repeating manner half the frequency is an octave down double is an octave up, you create harmonic tension buy playing a bunch of them together at the time (you play chords that sound harmonic or dis harmonic and you work that through to create tension)
today we have lots on synths, samplers whatever, we can create any sound at any frequency we want - why stick to Bach and chords?
That's why I love sunrizer so much, I can experiment with all of that without falling in the usual trap, playing chords and pitches I know - if I don't want to; guess who talked giku into all this madness
Enough talk let's listen to more "non western scales"
