Hi! If your question relates to Loopy Pro, you may find a faster answer at one of the other Loopy Pro communities (https://loopypro.com/communities) – this forum has been closed down.
Help guide Loopy's future! Feature requests galore
Hi!
I want your help to guide Loopy's future, and I've set up a poll:
http://www.facebook.com/questions/504463922928679/
Here's the thing: The to-do list for Loopy is quite long now, and I would like to gauge the interest for each item, to help prioritize in a way that benefits the most people. We've got stuff from effects and advanced MIDI control, though to multi-channel audio interface support, loop and session management, audio-triggered punch in, and a whole lot more.
What's important to you?
You can vote on existing items, or add more ideas of your own (make 'em ones you're passionate about only, though, no "Inbuilt shopping list" items here, please!).
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Note: If you have something you'd really like to see that isn't there, add it to the poll, don't just mention it here.
If you have ideas you'd just like to play around with, though, feel free to discuss them here.
There are two items (currently 16 and 17) on the list. Perhaps user entered? Can some one explain the difference? To me they are technically the same.
I am big on doing as much as possible by MIDI (foot controller) since both my hands are playing guitar.
@ganthofer I think the first would mean triggering 3 different events simultaneously with one foot press. The second would be triggering 3 different events in a sequence - one per foot press.
Three is probably a bad example! Two would likely be used more often. You could set a midi trigger to toggle record on the first press and stop on the next, for instance.
@syrupcore's precisely right - my bad, I could probably have explained that better.
I know you can do it with audiobus, but adding effects like EQs, reverb, and delay would be awesome. I run an iPad gen 1 so AB is not an option. EQing would be awesome for sure!
Plus, @michael can make some extra cash making in app purchases that we'd all most certainly buy for a couple bucks!
I'm kinda in two minds about these kind of effects (although reverse, decay, etc are still definitely coming).
I built Audiobus pretty much for that purpose (using it with Loopy, both for audio generation and manipulation), and I'm pretty content with how it's turned out, although I do know that owners of older devices are left out in the cold, there.
The thing is, audio DSP isn't really my specialty, and I'd be concerned that what I would come up with would be inferior, compared with something from someone who is an expert at audio processing (and something that would be made available via Audiobus). I have actually had pre-emptive comments from people asking me to stay away from adding effects unless I can do them exquisitely well!
At the same time, I understand that there're always going to be folks who want to use the app on its own (or have to, due to hardware limitations), so I get that.
@Michael - what are the chances of a spin off MIDI app that does the multiple triggering (1 midi command in > multiple out - obviously not truly simultaneously) and step through a sequence of actions ( 1st time MIDI command sent MIDI command x sent out, 2nd time MIDI y sent out, ....) and possibly other MIDI management functions. Loopy only needs the functions available to be bound.
Reason for this path, is that more and more apps and hardware that I use can be controlled by MIDI. So to control Loopy, effects on my guitar, start/ stop the Sequencer, add what you like.... It would/could be very useful.
Yes a hardware MIDI controller that sends multiple commands and is programmable would be better, maybe. But I have not found one that is flexible enough. Also looking into running my foot controller MIDI output through my PC and processing it there. Bonus is that MIDI can connect to the iPad via wifi then.
Something I've always dreamed about for this app is some kind of a snapshots capability. With 12 loops going at various levels and states, it would be mighty sweet to be able to store these conditions somehow, maybe even transition between them. The only other alternative right now is just to take notes or save as completely different sessions. This would add a lot of power and playability.
@Ganthofer - Do you know for sure there isn't one already? That seems like something that should already exist, to me! Then again, all the great ideas are a bit like that
Are you talking about use just with Loopy, or with other apps too?
@Smeeeth - Funny you should mention it, I've had this idea for a while. I just haven't figured out the best way to make this work yet, although there's lots of discussion about it here.
@Michael - the closest I found is MIDI Bridge, which let you clone and redirect MIDI commands, but not the functions discussed above.
Ideally, with other apps ( and connected MIDI devices ) too. That's why I phrased it "spin off app". Just within loopy would be great also, but perhaps the user base might be bigger for a MIDI utility app. Just tossing out ideas.
Interesting...
@ganthofer you might try emailing the makers of some of the more advanced midi control surface apps to see if any of them will do this for you. Lemur, TB MIDI stuff and Control all allow you to do stuff with multiple messages out. I know they each respond to MIDI in but I'm not sure if you can connect them like that.
I'm hoping so because otherwise I'm pretty sure you just derailed Michael!
Too bad you can vote for more than one item. Hard to see what people's main priority is. I wanted to click half of them but limited myself to three! It would be cool to see a sister poll to this: How do you primarily use Loopy and what sort of music do you make? That would expose actual use cases to help align feature requests. A person with a midi controller creating pop songs is pretty different than someone doing ambient soundscapes via audiobus. Live vs studio? Mics or Audiobus? Many sources or one? And obviously there are many more slices than that.
I didn't add it because it sounds like you're on it from other threads but a rethink of the sidebar is my number one request. Speaking of use cases, when I'm using a midi controller, I don't really care about the sidebar! Well, except for levels.
I did add 'mix view' so that you can adjust the mix of all tracks at once without a bunch of tapping.
Loop trimming is a really interesting request. For actual trimming, loading it into a proper editor is the way to go for me. But for playback only, it would be crazy cool if you could set bounds right on the loop ring - like a timeline selection in a linear editor. If it had snapping to say 1/4 notes, omg. Careful though, I will beg you incessantly about scene recall the second you add a feature like that!
I'm one of the people who say let other devs deal with the effects (unless it's interesting to you). That said, and I yacked about this elsewhere, simple low/high pass filtering would go an awfully long way to cleaning up loops.
On that same tip, loop sequencing seems like a wrong move to me. I mean, I'd use the shit out of it but it seems like it would be better for loopy to expose more stuff through midi and allow external sequencers to do what they do best. Allowing each loop to be addressable from it's own midi channel would be epic. Then we could automate volume and pan and blah blah blah.
Enough sunday afternoon thoughts. Thanks for doing a poll.
Nice, Will, thanks heaps for the thoughts. That idea about individually MIDI-addressable loops is inspired, btw - I freaking love it.
You're probably right about the multi-choice nature of the poll skewing the real results - that poll system's a bit inflexible.
I'm with you on the sequencing stuff - that's not Loopy's main game, so I'm not going to address it from within Loopy.
Anyway, good stuff! Gonna keep this rattling round my head.
Love the App !! Here's my feature request.
Can a number be placed in the center circle of each track so we can visually know which track it is? Sometimes I use the iPad in portrait, sometimes in landscape. It throws me off which track is which, unless I had a numerical visual cue.
Thnx
now that you've said that, @Boris, I couldn't tell you how many times I've meant to unmute a track, only to begin recording an adjacent track by mistake (doh! Wrong pedal). I keep telling myself that I'll overcome this with more practice. It would be good to have the display of these numbers turn on or off.
Michael - this is a splendid idea. The black press button in the middle of each loop could have a number that would turn on or off. Would this also appease the 'label nazzis' - although I suppose each could be a different colour?
Meanwhile... I'll just keep practising which pedal I'm supposed to hit, which time. Also Michael, as ever, thanks for your attentiveness and for giving users of your app such a wonderful opportunity.
Gary
Or at least be able to assign a track number manually as to correspond with the pedalboard.
Track 1 wouldn't necessarily be 1 on the board so if I could just place a number value, I wouldn't have to think about it in a live setting. Just an idea.
that's where colours could come in... label your pedals the same colour!! (just dreaming out loud).
Mmm...track colours..
;-)
Oh, and thank you, Gary
I suggested this on the facebook comments thread I think as well, but it ties in here too. I think you could expand on the color idea and any track set with the same color could be muted at the same time. That would require some sort of advance color setting though - or it would tie into the ability to save snapshots of the loop setting that someone else suggested.
Ah yes, this is something I or maybe someone else mentioned a while back in another thread. I do quite like this idea.
Support for bindings for "tapping" a footswitch vs "pressing or holding" a footswitch, so that 2 buttons can be invoked from a single button (by timing note on and note off, or CC toggle on and off). Would be similar to a Boomerang III.
Also, easy "master" and "slave" looping. First loop dictates loop length. Slave loops could be 1X, 2X, 3X, etc lengths, and always start recording so they are in sync with the master. No need to predefine 2X, 3X, etc ... user just taps to start loop at next master loop start, then end whenever.
"Fade all loops."
@soundog - That 2-stage MIDI pedal thing's an option on the Facebook poll. If you wouldn't mind voting there, that'd make it easier for me.
You can already have loops that automatically quantize to the appropriate length - just turn off Count In.
Sorry, Michael -- I was having issues with my FB account. Got it sorted it out and voted. Thanks for letting users help shape Loopy's evolution. I look forward to it!!
@Michael did you ever think of having a stutter effect like in this video. It seems to be pretty cool when used on beat boxing (almost like a fill effect). It's done in this video using Ableton Live 8:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCtGNX9JHOE&sns=em
Ooh, that was cool
Only problem is I have no clue how it actually works....haha. The video itself is incredible. Some pretty neat features in it
Hopefully minor: logarithmic volume control. I spend most of my time within 10db of unity. I'd love it if we're easier to adjust within that range.
Completely absurd and mentioned before but saying it out loud anyway: record midi with each loop if present. At one point, this seemed over the top to me. With Audiobus and more and more apps being able to import midi files, this possibility gets more and more attractive. For recording/songwriting this could save an otherwise perfect take. With some butter added to the workflow, this could also allow you to experiment with different sounds for the same take and record the result to a new loop (or replace the audio of the current loop). For instance, I tend to lay drum machines tracks manually/live into loopy via pads now into audiobus. This option would allow me to change the drum kit later, or maybe just the snare or whatever. Or maybe that synth sound would be better served by Magellan than animoog. Definitely not inline with the 'live looping' paradigm, I realize!
So, syrupcore, are you saying you would like CC# volume control for each loop, if you could set the min and max values? Yeah!