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
(Warning: Overly simplified generalizations)
People love analog synths for the warm bass sounds and pads. They are often used like Cellos to provide a big warm sound. Digital is great for pads, leads, and misc sounds, and although they are getting better at the bass ranges, they don’t do that as well as analog does. This opinion is also genre-specific and doesn’t apply across the board. The best of both worlds is to have analog sounds from actual analog gear when possible, or digital samples and emulations when hardware isn’t available, in bass ranges and digital synths in upper registers to cut through the analog warmth. Some digital musicians are obsessed with orchestrial sounds for the similar reason of wanting what the digital tools can’t do perfectly.
At its heart digital is cold blooded. But some people like that. It lacks some depth and nuance.
It’s a square Vs a circle. Except now it’s more an octagon Vs a circle.
Analogue unravels silence. Digital constructs sound. Precision sacrifices motion.
The creatures you can catch aren’t as big as the ones that can catch you
Analog can have VCO instability, often equated with warmth, it also lacks the constraints of nyquist reflections in the upper harmonic ranges that can effect digital recreations.
Thing is, though, az mentioned before, this instability can be modeled by digital synths
Absolutely true, even with regard to analog DCO’s this instability is sometimes added to more fully emulate VCO’s but the most difficult unless you use increasing amounts of CPU power are high resonance frequencies of analog filters, often producing artefacts above the nyquist. But with increasingly more powerful CPU’s this has become less of an issue.
He’s done it in other videos, where he makes claims that converters don’t matter, or that certain outboard sounds just like other things. I’m not saying he’s wrong or right, just that he’s limiting his testing to one genre. Maybe the video you are referencing is newer because that comment had been made to him by more than one person.
I just got tired of his screaming all the time. I don’t think he needs a “schtick” to educate people because he has some good points at times.
Anyway, it doesn’t really matter. Many many ways to get great sounds.
On the analog vs digital debate, I had to pitch shift an analog synth bass up a quarter step on one song on an album I’m mixing right now. The sound was great, the part is really funky, but the synth’s intonation was flat. I think it was a Dave Smith Mopho that was used but I didn’t track the album so I am not 100% sure.
👍👍👍
Big fact, not sure that many people here can appreciate deeper truth behind this claim
had opportunity to compare Behringer K2 with Korg iMS20 and Behringer ModelD with Moog ModelD App - in both cases as soon as i started go with more intense modulations (especially with higher resonance and faster lfo) - the SW counterparts started to sound like complete crap, where HW was still great. Especially in MS20 case the difference was huge, but also model d app sounded like shit on high resonance and with fast lfo > filter modulation when compared to HW
it had just tiny time to check it so didn’t record it, but when there will be opportunity will record some examples. The difference was really big.
On other side, Korg iOddysei app sounds att 99.9999% same like HW (had one too) - it’s one of best, most precise emulations of HW analog. Really great app.
Dosent mean you would make better music.
I can think of a profesional artist who made mainly music on SW ( but probably using desktop synths ) Although I swear when I played an audiokit patch. I thought they had used the patch somewhere.
To then doing modular albums. Maybe modular isnt a fair comparison, not being as straight forward as a synth but as you can guess.
It would have sounded more lofi. Which dosent really determine potential resonance and quality.
Could sw ever be better than hw?
If we were to scrap all sw and make it so all sw is 99% as good. Can it ever be 100% as good or use an additional processor or AI for it to always be better than hw. Without hw using the processor. Maybe it might be a realtime adjustable filter based on what you have set. If its 99% with modulation. Then it might be better if it can remodel filter etc at other times
but obviously its a pseudo guess.
Well, this one is obsessed because that is what I used to record on. I don't have the space or money for that gear now but it is still what I like.
A pet topic of mine, as it happens. I've never met anyone, either on the internet or IRL who seems to find it interesting. Which is bizarre really, because there is obviously a fundamental mystery right at the heart of reality, and everyone just shrugs their shoulders.
this!
(Maybe this would be better in a PM, but what the hell)
So do you subscribe to the Copenhagen interpretation, the Everettian Many Worlds interpretation, Pilot Waves, or superdeterminism?
Many Worlds is what's currently fashionable, but it seems too far-fetched to me. I prefer Copenhagen, even though it's obviously so incomplete as to not even address the question.
(For those that don't know, some pointers):
i am not strictly for any of those interpretations, every one has some weak places and feels to me somehow incomplete. But if i would be force to choose then probably Many Worlds fits best to my brain :-)
At some extend it is consistent with Superstring theory (which also strictly from math point of view describes almost infinite amount of universes)
What i like on QM is that even through we do not know what’s really going on (in terms of understanding what math and observations really means), it’s experientally most proven theory in physics. Kinda a nice paradox :-)
Yes, “shut up and calculate” has worked well for the last 100 years. The theory has many practical applications, but it points to something deeply strange at the heart of reality. Either the world doesn’t exist until we observe it (or measure it, whatever that means), or a near-infinite number of universes are being created every second, or everything has already been determined from the moment of the Big Bang.
The only non-weird theory is Pilot Waves, but that doesn’t explain the results of the double-slit experiment. To be honest I don’t think Many Worlds does either (why does the result change if we know which slit the particles went through?), nor does superdetermenisim. That leaves Copenhagen which gets out of it by not explaining anything at all. Shut up and calculate 🙃
(And to the rest of the forum, sorry for the tangent).
He is a metal head and does content for the metal community. If I watched a youtube channel that had country music as its theme and recorded country music. I would probably say to myself, this advice I will take with a grain of salt because it is not really targeted at me.
The guy went on a trip in Europe and had recorded a couple of weeks of video a head of time and he was doing the screaming thing. He stopped doing it when he came back.
My point was that musician in general like to invent a lot of voodoo and fairy dust into things. In the synth word analog and vintage have a lot of voodoo in it and to me it’s mostly overblown.