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
What if you Cheese whizz the fook around? Is that ok?
If it's on a steak in Philly, then yes
+1. Thumbs up to anyone giving up their time to test this, and support the development of what could be an essential tool for most if us.
I've been hit by another work mountain landslide so can't sign up myself, but I appreciate the efforts of everyone that has.
I do beta testing for the 3D software from which I make my living, and the funny thing is that every year when the software gets a big update it's the beta testers that get blamed for all the bugs
The most frustrating thing about testing is seeing bugs you reported go unfixed, and believe me, this happens a lot.
The problem is sometimes we see that despite having a big army of testers that many apps get released with tons of bugs..missing essential features sometimes too.
My feeling is that developers would do well to hire professional testers who deliberately hunt for bugs like dischord to ensure a smooth release version
Yes Johnny harsh, sorry I didn't reply to you sooner. Just like you can be blunt and direct with your comments on some people's music ...I chose to be regarding certain things too
It's one thing to rush to test an app cause you want an advance glimpse at it, but it's another thing entirely to thoroughly test all its features in a committed manner
Was not hoping for any particular reply at all. Just said how I felt...
I can deal with all kinds of replies
I'd rather be honest and get shot down to be honest..
ah,sorry.With reply i meant,mail reply from the Auria Team
I've worked for some big Software companies and bug testing is a major part of the job, and costs them a fortune. Ideally iOS app developers would use a similar environment, but if the figures don't stack up then they probably can't justify the costs - either that or we'd have to pay a lot more for the apps they produce.
As for missing bugs, that's not always down to the testing - reported bugs can be ignored or temporarily put aside by the developers for a range of reasons. The ideal would be a mix of professional and community testing, which I'm sure most developers aim for.
Devs should not be in a hurry to release if bugs have been reported..
Unfortunately business and financial pressures often dictate otherwise. Can't imagine there are many devs who can afford to keep going until there software is completely bug free.
To be honest, no software is bug-free. Most complex commercial packages ship with hundreds of known bugs and in many cases the bugs will never be fixed unless they are severe.
iOS should be a little better since the apps are often a little simpler than desktop counterparts, but I'm sure something as complex as Auria will always have bugs. Same goes for Cubasis and Gadget.
8(
@Jocphone and @monzo nailing it again.
A bug !== a bug. I'm a web developer by day (and night lately!) and am confident every single site/web app I've ever been involved with (hundreds at this point) went live with known bugs. There are simply too many usage scenarios to get 100% coverage and at some point there is money being lost if you delay shipping to try to cover every single user/use case. Even in scenarios where there are no "known" bugs, you sorta know that there are bugs in there if someone pushes some part of it in just the right way. Sometimes even big blatant known bugs are temporarily ignored because of external pressures (say, a marketing campaign already in motion).
Then, there's the insidious bit where you fix a bug and unwittingly cause a new one; and the new one you caused goes unnoticed because that bit has already been tested 150 times! You can sort of cover these sorts of things with unit testing but 100% test coverage is practically impossible (and can be a prohibitively expensive investment for a single developer).
Auria Pro will ship with bugs. It's software. It's ok.
I think that's pretty much sewn that one up in a velvet bag and sent it home to mum. More tea Vicar?
Same with hardware music gear. Most hardware synths have bugs in their software and many never get fixed. With software it's even harder as iOS is a changing commodity.
Auria has been one of the most rock-solid, stable apps I use. I believe in Rim and the beta testers. Bound to be a glitch here or there at first, but everyone will do their best to smooth it out and ship another solid product.
Beathawk comes to mind ... a couple minor glitches, but nothing disruptive to the workflow and ease of use. Bound to get better with updates.
Rim wants this to come out, and be pretty much perfect, though as syrupcore said, there's always some stuff. But he doesn't want anything major. If he comes out with something with the current audio side as strong as Auria, and adds midi, he is perfectly positioned to eat this market alive. The iPad pro will probably make more people take a look at this ecosystem as a viable alternative, and this will be the strongest, most complete DAW in the iOS market.
And apps are like restaurants. When the doors open, everyone will rush in, and if they all go, pah, what crap, the moment is lost. You want the reviewers who are all hopping up down waiting to go, to say, "this is it, this is the one. You're a loser if you don't get on board." Because then everyone else is trying to catch up.
Can't wait to start testing. It'll be fun.
Yes. good luck Auria and Rim.
P.s. I'd miss Auria, if I lost it.
There is not much competition for daws in iOS..everyone releases synths, drum machines
Not many daws/ sequencers really, we do need more
Off the top of my head:
Auria( pro)
Gadget
GarageBand
Music studio
Nano studio
Multitrack daw
B step sequencer
Ims20
Ipolysix
Beat maker 2
Isequence hd
Maybe a few others, and that's less than 15 even, compare that to how many synths there are
So, what rim is trying to do, has not really been done as yet, so there is zero competition
It amazes me why most devs want to make synths and hundreds of fx apps when what we really need is proper daws and sequencers
Add audio tracks and longer sample hosting ( even editing ), more fx and global eq options to gadget and it's a done deal, but..
For the record that no one's keeping and as much as I'm super looking forward to AP, I have been taking NanoStudio out for an extended run (she's been in the garage for at least two years) and maybe I just know a little more than I did, but this is a very good application.
Yeah still surprised what Nanostudio's synth can come up with.
Oh yeah, Nanostudio was pretty solid and feature-packed right out of the starting gates. Love the Eden synth.
Me either,i'm checking my mails every hour to see if further infos landed
WML is one of the best developer on iOS and particulary Rim is an exceptional helpful person.He never rest to iron bugs out.I had problems with Auria back in the days but if you report it to the forum,you can be sure he is taking care and always response with lightning speed.Additionally he is always open to suggestions.There is a reason why AP took so long (it's been arround 2 years since the first midi announcement),he just don't want to "do Midi"he wants to deliver the best midi you can get in an iOS DAW.There is no doubt that AP is another game changer,the first full fledged DAW on iOS and to me an iPad is matured at this point.There are still things that are out of his hands (Midi sync and IAA) but since i already bought quite a lot of the Auria plugins,i don't care that much anymore.For now my workflow is still seperated between lay down ideas in Cubasis (or Gadget) and bounce/copy them all over to Auria to mix and arrange.That can be up to 20-25 tracks,some of them quite long (automation)and it's a real time and workflow killer.It can even happen that the result doesn't sound exactly the same like before,that some"mojo"got lost during this process.AP will save me a massive amount of time and let me concentrate much more on what it's all about : making music
On all projects I manage, the level of quality is agreed beforehand. This level is dictated by a number of criteria, among them commercial considerations, market considerations, project budget and scope.
QA and UAT test to ensure the quality agreed, and while that may mean testing every minute detail, it definitely does NOT mean resolving issues with features down to the minutest detail. It means logging those if in scope, but addressing the ones which are highest priority and fall inside the scope of quality which is acceptable taking into account the multiplicity of project considerations.
The view that every function must be logged and/or work to the minutest detail is simplistic and is very different to what I see with software development in the real world.
@skoptic Good reality dose.
The main point of beta testing is not generally to provide a test of every function down the nth degree. For the most part, you don't tell folks much of anything, except maybe at a high level, to say, "this is the really new stuff, this stuff shouldn't be changed a lot." Even that, maybe not so much, as you don't want to lead people.
The whole point of beta testing is to put the thing into the hands of people that use it, and see what happens when they do their normal stuff, and try to do the new things. Because they will try things in a bunch of ways that may or may not not have been considered in the original tests. Standardized tests are both great and a trap - you never cover everything 100 percent, but they give you the illusion that they do. So, you give the code to folks who will misuse, abuse and torture it, as they normally do in their day to day workflow, and see if they can break it.
That being said, Rim has not told us what he wants, and he may have something more detailed. We'll wait and see.
As a user, I try to prove the manual right by testing each feature as it is covered in the manual. That seems the best approach if the published feature set is to be solid enough for any level user.
Would love to have a peek at the new manual
Me too.