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
Then they'd be wrong. Usability isn't subjective - it either is or it isn't, providing everyone's using it the way it's intended. Look and feel is. Personally I don't care whether it's a skeuomorphic Turnado or Flat FLUX:FX, as long as I can wiggle the buttons and it doesn't crash the thing I'm a happy donkey.
I agree with the thought that for most of us non-professionals reaction to design is 'Yes' 'No' or 'Wow', but I often begin with one and within five minutes have moved on to another....
I know we see eye to eye on this stuff (design matters, but not as much as usability and design without regard to usability is wankery) so I'm going to put a wrench in it: usability is subjective. It has everything to do with the target audience(s), and as you eluded to, their intended use. An SH-101 is an incredibly usable synthesizer to me or anyone with a basic understanding of subtractive synthesis. It's completely incomprehensible to a friend of mine who likes what comes out of it. I love vim but holy shit, the first few years with it were a nightmare.
@syrupcore Interesting. I think many of us (read: me) are of the idea that if I 'get it' quick then it's good. Whereas I'm sure there are folks who design certain apps/projects based on the idea that there will have to be some commitment/curve, but that those that choose to make it will be rewarded (no, not in the game sense, but just as in your example...). Cue long rant about kids today (read: me) who want everything handed to them, but the bats are flying, it's dusk, and now's the time I go out into the Maine air and try my best to be grateful as regards being currently alive. Another interface that takes some learning.
As for that subjectivity of usability/prettiness, since buying in I found Cubasis's appearance odious, overly pretty, somehow wasteful of resources (?) - until I found the app suddenly useful (this upon the last update, when kit making was added.) Oddly enough, I then found a reason to learn how the piano roll works, without having it jump around suddenly. Now I find I like Cubasis's appearance - especially that of the piano roll, quite a bit.
If I was single I might be worried about how my abbs look but ....oh, apps.
It's more about the functionality for me, but often they go hand in hand don't they. An app maker who puts effort into a making a good product is going to put effort into the design too.
My main instrument is a guitar. It’s gorgeous (a Hohner G3T-LH) but it has serious usability issues. The whole guitar idea has serious usability issues. How am I supposed to keep the required strings down without muffling half of them? Total usability fail, it’s so impossible as to be difficult. And in all the decades I’ve had a guitar, there’s never been one single update for it! How do they expect people to hold chords down at all? And what about labelling the scales and notes? How do they expect people to know? What a UX fail! It’s all just looks, and no affordance of usability whatsoever — I mean, what do they expect people to do? Spend hours reading the manual?
I'm very visually inspired when it comes to music making, I've been known to repaint hardware synths if they were too bright or garish for me (Emu XL-7). So I definitely tend to gravitate towards apps that I also find pleasing to the eye, and will definitely pass on capable gear if I find it ugly to look at.
I knew you were going to say that, that's why I added the "providing everyone's using it the way it's intended" bit.
Designers can't make their work usable for all possibilities, they have to focus on the core intentions of their work and how the majority of customers will use it. There will always be some ofdbod like me trying to do things with an app that it wasn't designed to do, or getting harassed by 'draft saved' pop-ups on a forum, but designers should provide an accessible, user friendly UI for the majority of their customers. Or die.
I don't like blue but use Sunrizer day in day out.
I just spend time harassing @monzo but not actually answering the question. Rich.
Yes, it matters to me how apps look. Function over form, for sure, but form counts. "accessible, user friendly UI" matters way more to me than graphics, gradients or fonts. Well, maybe not fonts.
I don't mind things being difficult at first if the pay off is worth it (and the thing is difficult for good reason vs bad ux design). Think that's probably true of most things for most of us though. Med school, child rearing or piloting a plane, for instance.
That's the thing, if an app is good enough I'm willing to forgive all sorts of graphical/usability nightmares (Turnado, I'm looking at you...), and sometimes less than UI friendly graphics (but beautifully crafted nonetheless) can add to the experience of using the app and influence what I do with it (I'm looking at you now, Cyclop). Though I'd have a much better time if they cleaned things up a bit.
Or the opposite effect when they clean things up a bit to much,like Mitosynth.Half of the interface is empty and every adjustment you wanna make you have to open menu in menu.It looks and sounds great but it doesnt work well.