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
I'm in trouble. I am not a carpenter, nor can I (ever) make anything from the IKEA instructions. All out of artistic options it would seem. Damn you cruel fate, leaving me here by the side of the motorway, a blind boy beating randomly on a non-existent box.
If that's the plan for your August SOTM submission then I'm excited to hear it, artistic options or none.
...leaving me here by the side of the motorway, a blind boy beating randomly on a non-existent box.
That scene should be in your next music video!
You may value your own process highly, doesn't mean you have to rubbish other peoples.
At no point it has been my intention to rubbish other people's approach to songwriting, but maybe my words touched a particular nerve in you @Jocphone
I shall stop here as I'm already imagining a crowd of generative apps users gathering to pitchfork me out of my miserable existence.
DIY furniture, I've no ikea what to do, instructions that need instructions, but what a lovely milking stool and all these spare parts at no extra cost, how thoughtful.
Well, it's officially next week somewhere in the world; so, where's the app?
:-)
As long as what I feed into a randomizer is an original piece of sound, I feel justified that it's mine. Every artist has their "line in the sand", in terms of what they feel is theft, luck, or true artistry.
I think there's a lot of misunderstanding around concerning random processes. I'll try to state my understanding of it: Randomness is not just pressing some button, which will produce some kind of nice-sounding tune for you, but is about allowing part of your setup to contribute "soundgenerating ideas", which do just play one part in the composition, it's still the "composer", who choses what and when, and in which constellation, to allow, and what to further rearrange. To me, it's all about giving up total control concerning my work. I'm artist by profession, and all my lifes experience is about this "giving up control", for the sake of the better work (better as in: more than I alone would be capable of...).
I also tend to feel as part of something bigger than the physical boundaries of my body. (Please don't stone me for it, dear fellow Forumerianers...)
Of course, everybody has their right to differing opinions, I just thought, I'll explain my own a little further. Now, that was MY rant :-), cheers everybody, keep creating!
The Beat Generation have already proven the legitimacy of using randomness as an artisitic method. It's a bit like complaining about Jackson Pollack. "That's not painting, it's just gravity!"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleatoric_music
Mozart, Duchamp, Stockhausen, Cage, Autechre, etc etc etc
Maybe that's the point @supadom is getting at, and I'm with him here strongly.
Download the cutup-machine inspired by William S. Burroughs. Is it the real thing?
@Jocphone There are many, many ways that randomness or chance events can feed into the creative process and artists of all disciplines have influenced their work to broaden their ways of working.
Yeah, agree, that's a constant:)
It's an EffectsTaxi for AudioBus!
Get it??
Nudge, nudge...
Damn... which stupid guy started the randomizer thing here........ uups
Indeed, i also don't like a synth to randomize whole patches but i like different kinds of randomize as modulation source f.e.
Each organic sound is a kind of randomized thing (of course we can go now again back to the chaos theory). In reality you could never create the same sound a second time. Maybe after a billion years it will repeat by random
And if you write your own randomize algorithm.... is it not a kind of composition too.
Just stopped by to leave a random remark.
Completely randomizing a whole patch has it's uses I suppose. But I am just not patient enough to edit the results from most implementations I have tried on various IOS synths. The best "randomizer" I ever used was really not a true randomizer (is there really is such a thing). Back in the day on my lowly Commodore 64, there was a patch utility for the Casio CZ 101 that had a unique approach. The idea was to load 16 sounds and the "randomizer" would pick values from each patch at random to create a new patch. It was quite effective at creating variations where I would set say 12 of the sounds to be the same patch (which had some characteristic I was interested in) and then choose some thing completely different for each of the remaining 4. Always gave useful and sometimes very surprising results....
Crystal synth has a grew patch orboreser creator
Is it a free candy generator. So everytime we push the audiobus icon we get a reward ?
XP points ?
Chance and randomization are appealing because they renounce artistic intentionality at the bottom foundation, AND YET art somehow gets made. They're about getting closer to art (not to mention play), like all artistic strategies. It's brave to give up control if you know what you're giving up. That's why criticisms about originality or authenticity miss the point entirely. A chance process in composition is already intended to question the mythical value of writing your own thing from inside your heart while sweating your own blood or whatever. There are long traditions of randomness in art that have much, much more to say than this strawman "you're just pressing a button" argument.
It's also not like anyone expects "pressing a button" to be it (and if that works, then you won the lottery). I can make all kinds of fine-sounding stuff in 3 seconds with SECTOR, but it's pretty clear it will always take additional bending, twisting and layering to make the algorithm hold up. It's just not of the "plotting notes on musical notation" variety. OK sorry, something just randomly hit a nerve.
Yeah, being "good" at "art" usually comes down to having good taste.
I like some controlled randomness, but life is mostly an uncontrolled random mess.
Jackson Pollock's splishy splashy was noteworthy because he got there first. Guys, let's face it. You're a beautiful bunch of philosophers and my 5 year old does beautiful creative music with musyc. Everyone is the winner. Play the guitar and come up with close vocal harmonies or swipe your finger on the screen, what's the difference? Seemingly none. What is the definition of music not sure, guess whatever you fancy. You can twist and turn this argument as much as you like but would Picasso be who he became without making countless pencil sketches or Stockhausen without understanding harmony and composition? Not really. So yeah, keep swiping your screens, and pressing spawn buttons, sooner or later something noteworthy will come up. We're all but a mould on this blue planet anyway.
'Good taste' definition being?
And I never really much cared for Jackson P., either.....
Now, that's a rather large can of worms being opened, isn't it?
I get into arguments with my wife about art. I maintain that it is, at it's base, entertainment, because if someone is not entertained, is not captivated enough to participate for a while, then it's not much use, except of course to the creator, who felt they had something to say. She maintains that I'm devaluing the creative experience.
Truth is, it's pretty much semantics. So, I would not want to define "good taste". I feel the wounds and bruises coming just thinking about .
I like what Stephen Fry said during an interview recently: 'the moment an artist starts worrying about the audience he becomes an entertainer' which is quite the opposite to what you've just said. Still, it's damn hard not to think about the audience if at all possible. In fact I doubt any of the great 'artists' we know had complete disregard of the audience. Quite the opposite I think ego-drive is not to be underestimated in the world of creativity.
@taroface, control needs to be obtained first or it can't be relinquished.
Being able to decide what to show and what to throw away from countless sketches (or random doodles).
Ooh, ooh, I know this one: is it a More Cowbell sound enhancer? 'Cos I've got a fever.
But Pollack didn't put paint into a randomizing machine, either.....