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
Thanks. Now I hate myself. I picked an 128kbps mp3 as best for one of them... Shame
I don't think this is appropriate - who uses such small compressed MP3s these days? If I have 320kbps I can hear a little difference in the hh maybe, but can't tell which file is which, just that they are different, sometimes they just sound the same
quality of audio is a strange name for a strange animal, u c from a technical point of view distortion is bad sound quality, but if I like the distorted audio it's good quality,
I think we are long past the point where compressed audio sounds bad, there are still ppl buying vinyl records, lol - talking about bad sound quality - haha
Interesting they used Tom's Diner to test MP3 during its' creation.
I think you need high quality speakers or headphones to tell the difference. The AAC codec on iTunes is good enough for me.
320 is pretty transparent, but I'm not happy unless I'm listening to lossless. I always listen with decent headphones, no earbuds.
In each that I listened to, I picked the 128K mp3, but notably, what turned out to be the wav was invariably the one I certainly wasn’t going to choose, leaving the choice between the other two.
Technically, a 128K mp3 should be perfectly adequate for everyone, unless it is a] joint-stereo (in which case, make it even higher bandwidth and it’ll be fine) or b] badly transcoded from some other source. It would be interesting if they’d put in a 64K AAC in the test, too.
(oh, just to note, I was listening in Safari on my McBook Pro speakers, over wife-eye).
Good that you added that last sentence.
I listened to each with reasonable headphones plugged into a computer. Although i picked 4 out of 6 correctly (with 1 of each mp3 quality as the others), in most cases there was actually very little to choose between them. And bear in mind that I was listening very carefully, which most of time, people don't, so even the "low quality" mp3 would be fine for me for everyday listening. Interesting!
I haven't listen to the the 'test/s', but..
In the eye of the beholder, in the ear of the listener.
May not be the key for all of us, but certainly the key for the marketplace. Reminds me of the often quoted story (sometimes its Springsteen, sometimes others) of folks who'd mix and master and then would take a cassette (as was) out to their car and listen to it on the tape player to hear what the kids would hear on the radio etc.
Agreed. Of the two I missed I picked 128k. I'm going back later and do it again and again to see how my perception changes if at all.
I am being redirected to another page if I tap something....grrrrr....
I got 3 right. The "wrong" ones were all 320kbps. The one thing I was able to do well was identify the 128kbps streams (less high end, slightly more compressed and grungy sound, etc). There really isn't much of a difference between mp3 320kbps and an uncompressed 16-bit wav at 44.1kHz to the average consumer.
Yep..... instant sucks!!!
I think we are long past the point where compressed audio sounds bad, there are still ppl buying vinyl records, lol - talking about bad sound quality - haha
I was womdering if you ever listened to some vinyls and used a good needle.
This site is spam. It is a redirecting service. dont know how much these people pay per click but they sure won't be counting mine anymore. Facebook links to 'he caught his wife cheating, her reaction was priceless...' are enough for me, thanks.
This is a little better but doesn't seem to tell exactly the kbps. I expect it will be the highest MP3 because it is real tough to tell the difference.
http://test.tidalhifi.com/intro
I got 1 out of 5 first time around when listening mostly to hi frequencies. Then I tried listening to highs and lows and ended up with 4 out of 5 but the differences are soooo slight it could easily go either way.
Funny.. I didn't get any spam redirects. I was on my laptop though
@proto
yes I did, I remember vinyl quite well.
You play a 12" 20 times and the high end has gone the way of mechanical abuse into oblivion
it also gets less bright on the inner half of the disc ...
there is no need to be dumbo to hear that
I think the reason I got all the 128K mp3s is that I probably had my “mastering” ears on, and they’re the ones that sounded more integrated and whole, like soup made the day before.
Vinyls got this special warm sounding you cant achieve with digital recordings because coverting analog to digital loses some information in converting to 1s and 0s.I agree with the high frequencies but vinyls are not crap like you describe.They both have their pros and cons.
Here is some more information
http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/question487.htm
Man alone in a dark room. Young girls scared to enter, matron encouraging them, girls, in fear, whispering "but he's got his mastering ears on..."
Vinyl is fine for a few plays but no matter what level of equipment you have you eventually get clicks, pops and scratches.
huh? what?
of course do my 20 year old records sound like crap - they only sound good if they are new and haven't been played much ^^
I still have some of the first records I bought, there isn't much of the music left on them ^^
sssssh, more noise, sproing (skipped a beat) shhhhhh, crackle crackle, ssshhhh noise, ploop, rumble rumble
DO NOT BELIVE THE SHIT PPL TALK ABOUT VINYL it basically sounds shit compared to a 128mp3 ^^
in fact I rebought lots of my old vinyl as aac/mp3 so I do not have to listen to the burned out records
btw. and I am pretty sure you never published a record, because then you would know that the record never sounds anything like the master recording
so vinyl sounds never like the original recording and the sound goes totally to hell after you played it a few times and it gets worse every time you play it and that is supposed to be a good thing ?!?
you may want to check reality before you trust all the bs you read online ...
oh I forgot to say that vinyl also isn't true stereo ...no bass form the left then bass from the right then bass from the left again, you can't press this - the f*cking needle would jump of the record
cheers
Lala i wish you good luck with your 128kbs mp3 collection ; )
This was bound to end this way
^^ yeah, come back when you know what you are talking about
maybe in 20 years, you'll hear you records won't sound pretty anymore ^^
I will be 60 then and still enjoy my compressed audio because it won't decay like my records did
LPs sound great if you look after them. When I had a record collection I changed the needle every 6 months and cleaned them on every listen. Also taped them for on the go listening. A bit of a hassle, but there's nothing like a good analog system done right. These days I'm happy with CD quality. mp3s? Never. There's no excuse for not going lossless in 2015. However, if earbuds and iphone speakers are all you listen on then it wouldn't make much difference.
Lala im 36 years old. Lol. Most of my records still sound fine after 20 years.I don't use them anymore and also digitalized them about 10 years ago, but i rather have a 24bit 96000khz audio source instead of a compressed mp3. Seems like you never cleaned your vinyls or changed a needle.Enjoy your compressed audio.
To each his own. I have had systems where I had everything positioned precisely in the room for "optimal listening experience". Then other things became more important and music became something to listen to as opposed to something to "listen" to. Whether one is "better" than the other is down to what works for you. This audiophile argument has been going on for years. Technical specs don't make the music itself any better or worse.