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.
Neural amp modeling + Individual pedal sims a good idea?
Hola. I was thinking about getting a nam loader (like NAM XT or GigFast Lite) and using Nembrini and Moog pedal emulators for guitar tones.
Did you try something like this out? In loopy would it just be placing the pedal before the amp sim on a bus? I’m hoping for something that wouldn't eat my phone or ad indescriminate latency.
Good idea/Bad idea?
Comments
Putting other plugins before an amp sim works fine.
https://apps.apple.com/us/app/studio-camera/id6748624781
Has a NAM auv3 plugin and tone3000 integration.
Yes, pedal captures in front of of amps work great. From the same dev https://apps.apple.com/us/app/overdrive-pedal-auv3-plugin/id6760108247 - I believe these are a collection of nam pedal caps. Also auv3.
@wagdog OFCI was gonna come back and be confused about the Studio Camera app! Just a little though. Do you find it a more convenient way to browse tone3000 captures from studio camera? Do you use it to load guitar as Auv3, is it able to browse from tone3000? Why use this instead of NAM XT or GigFast Lite?
Very good idea.
Go for it.
Flo
I have used it to browse tone3000, but to be honest, I found a twin model I love, and I only use that and the aforementioned drive pedal. Browsing tone3000 does not work in the auv3, only the app.
My reason to use it was cost and the simplicity of the auv3. It’s cheap and works well inside loopy pro.
@_smund
That tone3000 site has loads of overdrive, boost, fuzz, etc pedal captures as well. You can load these into the NAM apps and put them in front of your amp capture. One of the perks of NAMXT is it has dual slots for NAM so you can load a pedal and an amp in one instance. (I’m not quite sure if they run in series or parallel but the sound output is pretty great either way)
One of the downsides of using separate NAM profiles for pedals and amps at the same time is CPU use
VERY true, probably should have mentioned that. If you load an NAM amp n pedal on you’re iPad that’s about all you’ll be able to do haha. Especially if you’re device is older. Good thing there are a lotta other good app sources for drives and such. Personally like using the drive in Tapescam or the compressor section of Needlepoint 🤙
The other side of using NAM profiles (for amps or FX) is they're only accurate at the settings they were recorded with. Response of tone, gain controls, etc. can be very different from the real thing. That can be good or bad depending on what you're after and how it sounds to you.
I prefer modeled FX and amps by a long shot.
GigFast profiles are taken at many settings. So they respond more closely to the real thing. I can't say why but I just don't enjoy using them. ymmv.
I'm a guitar player, so my opinions are based on that perspective. You may be thinking of very different uses.
If you’re not a fan of NAM captures or the Gigfast profiles, I’m curious what you like using to amplify your guitar on the iPad.
I’m not sure what “modeled fx” means. Are those like the nembrini amps or the Arteras?
I'm partial to a handful of Nembrini apps, and a spattering of FX from others which I use rather sparingly. I like the playing dynamics of my chosen amps, but couldn't quantify what else I like about the tone to save my life. All I know is they sound exactly like what I want (after decades of hating any kind of sim). I always prefer IR cabinets, but there too, try religiously to stick to just a few favorites.
What I don't like about NAM models is how they only sound good to me in limited ranges and just don't respond like I think they should to playing dynamics and control tweaking. Which makes sense to me given how they work.
GigFast Lite is more difficult. On paper, it should work for me. In practice ... I dunno ... I just don't like what I hear.
THU? Tried it so many times. Just can't like it. Purchase options are too bewildering to me and download size is way too big also, but that's not why I just can't get along with it. Not for lack of trying.
Don't take anything I say as advice. I'm just a hack player and know for certain that I have a poor ear for tone.
Agreed on preferring modeled to captures. Captures tend to feel stale. My favorite is loading impulse responses in Nembrini or Aurora DSP sims that support it
Note that the Gigfast Lite internal models are fully parametric captures which is more than being captured at many settings.
As far as playing dynamics, even static snapshot captures (NAM or Tonex captures and TH-U rigs) should capture full playing dynamics for that snapshot’s settings if the capture was done correctly.
The input level to captures is very important and I have found that most people send input signals hotter than they should. Captures can handle huge playing dynamics. Depending on the capture, you may want your instrument’s level into the capture to be as low as minus 15 or even minus 20 if you are trying to get sound of standard guitar pickups into that amp. But calibration varies widely. Some times more or less is needed.
@wim
Thanks for taking the time! I guess I don’t own any modeled fx stuff then, unless Rob Jackson’s amp counts? I mostly play clean/edge and remember hearing the nembrini jazz chorus was well liked and they have a fender twin (my fav) as well. Perhaps I should do some dabbling… I’m sure my iPads CPU would thank me
The nam stuff can be pretty taxing on your cpu. All I need nowadays is Nembrini's Range 120, some IRs loaded on their IR loader and their free pedals.
I'll believe that once I look into it further. I don't intuitively understand how anything can be captured at infinite settings combinations. I'm fully open to being wrong. Thanks for the opportunity to learn some new stuff.
Science and theory aside. "I know what I like and I like what I know.*" You could be right, but it don't matter in my case.
Good info, but too much bother to be worth it for me. I plug in. I play. I like or dislike. I'm not gonna spend a lot of time thinking about stuff like the above. Been there, done that. Thanks for the context for those into capture based stuff.
(*"Keep them mower blades sharp!")
I think they clarified that at the "in-between" setting they used interpolation.
I don’t believe that is correct…I think they responded to a post of mine that implied it was interpolation to clarify that it is not interpolation between snapshots but actual parametric capture done with a custom NAM trainer. Steve Ack (NAM creator) documented some time ago how that can be done.
@wim : I am not trying to convince you to switch to NAM , just mentioning some information that might help others disappointed by NAM that are making the same mistakes I might when first evaluating it and TONEX.
Seems implausible to me. If there are an infinite number of combinations of knob settings then it would take an infinite amount of data points for a capture to absorb. It's not even physically possible to tweak an amp in every combination of settings, let alone compile a data set of the responses to their interactions.
But. Then again. I don't care for real. It just tweaks my brain a little bit. 😉
I didn't think you were. And I tried to be clear that it's helpful information for others.
Im kind of in love with the Marshal Emulator JMP pro!
It was based on a great emulator to begin with so its just straight up good. I recommend it (its quite cool for rockin cool clean sound to).
If i load up multiple amps + effects chains on separate busses, and mute the channels, does that still take up more cpu? I will only be using one at a time so, I was hoping
You need to set the send levels to the bus to 0 to idle the effects on the bus. Muting the bus does not idle the effects. Idle is triggered by an an effect’s input being silent.
Roger that @espiegel123
Well done
I can say for sure, it doesn't
I don't really do forensic modelling with my stuff.
If it's a model of anything, it's a model of the first wave of analog amp sims - think Tech 21 sansamp etc., including the speaker emulation - no IRs used here.
It's also an approximation of the sound I have in my head of my trusty old 70's Princeton in the sweet spot / edge of breakup zone.
On the topic of input levels / gain staging ANALOGyAMP was designed to take an instrument level guitar signal with zero gain added.
@Rob_Jackson_Music
Modeled or not, I loves it! And it’s great on my older iPads cpu. Was always curious which amp you chose as inspiration (guess I always could have just asked 🙃). Knowledge is POWER!
I'm curious what you mean by that. Different instruments output different levels and all have volume pots, and there is the interface in there as well. I understand "instrument level" from an impedance standpoint and that levels are generally somewhere between mic level and line level. I'm curious what audio level in db you reference as instrument level guitar signal.
Sorry, sure - so concrete example and it's what I do.
With passive guitar pickups and no other fx / pedals, striaght into my audio interface, the input gain on that instrument channel will be zero - literally turned all the way down. This is on a focusrite scarlet interface.
That's way, way lower than "as high as you can get it without clipping" which a lot of people still do as a rule of thumb. There was a massive debate about this in the context of digital modellers a while back.
The idea (according to me
) is that you add the gain in the plugin / virtual amp - not the interface.
What’s the benefit there?
Got it, I think. So, the standard practice of average levels high as possible where ideally nothing crosses 0db then? Nothing specifically related to guitar levels really since that isn't really a thing except at the input to the interface.
I agree that should be the input reference for any amp or distortion sim. (Though they better damn well respond nicely to lower levels as well or I have no use for them.)
Another reason I avoid amps sims that seem to need a lower level to behave well. I don't particularly want to have to remember to tweak my levels just to work with them.
Thanks for the clarification (assuming I did understand right).