Audiobus: Use your music apps together.
What is Audiobus? — Audiobus is an award-winning music app for iPhone and iPad which lets you use your other music apps together. Chain effects on your favourite synth, run the output of apps or Audio Units into an app like GarageBand or Loopy, or select a different audio interface output for each app. Route MIDI between apps — drive a synth from a MIDI sequencer, or add an arpeggiator to your MIDI keyboard — or sync with your external MIDI gear. And control your entire setup from a MIDI controller.
Download on the App StoreAudiobus is the app that makes the rest of your setup better.
Comments
I agree about it becoming more of a norm but not about it being a good thing.. I'd like to buy serato studio but it's subscription only too so I won't do it.
I think the answer to devs not abandoning apps is putting in features that their customers ask for a good example would be Lumbeat apps, I've purchased all but one of them but imho they all need audio export. I think subscription is not the answer, audio export is the answer
btw why do you say that devs can't charge for updates, why would apple do that?
They can charge for “updates”, but they have to sell them as whole new apps, as in Xequence 2 , Patterning 2 and Audiobus 3, or as add-ons, as in “Bilbao for Korg Gadget” or “Sample import for Elastic Drums.”
So you don’t subscribe to other things? Like electricity, gas, sewer/garbage service, water? You don’t pay for Dropbox? If you do the free tier to Dropbox, who do you think pays for you to be able to do that?
How is adding audio export going to get any more money out of you to pay for the development cost to do that? You specifically want that feature...How are you specifically going to pay for it?
I can’t tell if you are trolling me or not. Answer me this:
How would Auxy charge an existing v5 user for the v6 upgrade if they were not doing a subscription model?
The same way Patterning charged for Patterning 2, Xequence charged for Xequence 2, and Audiobus charged for Audiobus 2 and 3?
I’m asking Kobamoto
now you're just trolling yourself as you obviously didn't want the answer... and No I wasn't trolling you, I care about the apps I don't care about your current state of Trollage.... hopefully that is out of the way now.
yes I pay for my electricity monthly, no I do not pay for my beat machines monthly, it's not hard to figure out.
whatever is the fair price of the lumbeat apps to include audio loop export like every drum machine either hardware or software in the world does and is expected to do , I would pay that price, that's what I would do. I have purchased every single lumbeats app besides the electronic drums app so I think I've got the routine down now, put the feature in and get paid.
Drez I don't have any app subscriptions, what happens if you stop subscribing can you still use the apps?
With AUXY, you just can’t use the more “advanced features” and the subscription available packs. But the app is still usable.
Lots subscription apps have basic free tiers, but usually it’s a hook to try and catch you as a fish
They are usually month to month or cheaper if you pay for longer terms.
But there are definitely ones that are subscription only. Just have to weigh if it’s worth it to you.
But how do you now pay them if they add the feature? You don’t have the feature now, but you are saying you would pay them for the feature. Who is going to pickup the development cost of the new feature? There is zero incentive for them to add it for you.
And for me, if I bought the app I wouldn’t care about that feature. I just render it in the host I use. So that feature is worthless to me.
The point I’m making is that that those apps are 4 years old. They’ve barely got any reviews. I think the app with the most has 165 or something like that. Over 4 years. That’s all. One of them has 16. Again over 4 years. Thats not making that dev any money.
Nobody else is going to magically start buying that app in droves because of audio export. If you sort reviews by time you can see that they aren’t getting very many new buyers, so I think that supports that theory.
So why should the dev waste anymore time adding anything more if he’s barely going to get any more money out of that app?
And you didn’t answer my question about how a dev is able to charge an existing user for an upgrade. Like ableton. If I own Live 9, I pay a nominal upgrade fee to get Live 10. I don’t pay full price. New users do, but not existing customers. This is how the rest of the universe works...but not iOS. You seem to think it could be done but I’m not understanding how you are saying it can be done.
So how is an iOS dev supposed to generate new income on a product if it’s market is tapped out? You, the loyal buyer, has already spent your money. He has no incentive to help you out and add the feature. Zero.
There’s always the ‘attract new customers’ model as well. That seems to be the way a lot of desktop plugin makers do it. Try to keep costs down for existing customers and try to build that user base to bring in new revenue.
True but they get residual income based on paid updates from their current subscriber base, which funds the new features. Otherwise they are just throwing development work in for free hoping it attracts customers. It’s just terrible that apple wont let you do this on iOS. I absolutely have no idea why.
Well he must have figured out something because he is going to implement audio export, I don't know the date it's coming but he already said he's going to do it.
the Gist of what I'm getting from you is that there needs to be a monetary incentive for the dev to make upgrades, the gist of what I'm trying to convey though is that there are extra curricular features and there are standard features that shouldn't be omitted in apps.... audio export for drum apps, filters in synth apps, sample import and export in sampling apps etc... now I know you don't need the feature as you're only thinking of AU usage by the sounds of it, but I'm thinking and I would Hope that any dev would be thinking about the merits of their app on it's own. I need to be able to drop the drums into any other app I'm using on and even off the iPad and the fact that every other drum app has audio export for this reason shows that most drum machine makers understand this, because of this being a standard way of drum machine applications I think it would behoove the dev and I would appeal to the dev to go my way in this example rather than yours based on the fact that yours is not the norm, on top of that you still get your way as well. To me it sounds reasonable, and maybe this is the reason why he is going to implement the feature.
that's definitely a minus for apple, but there must be a way if the devs and the users are willing to find it.
even with ableton though, not everybody updates, the people who don't need what is in the updates don't whether they are paid updates or free ones... if it ain't broke don't fix it, but they don't have to worry about ableton live not working because they didn't update.
if you are saying that there is a way to do subscription services and have it be like that where the user doesn't have to update but still gets to use the app then I'd be all for it, but then it wouldn't be an subscription at that point because I'd stop paying after I have the features I need.
btw, I didn't mean to make you think I was trolling you, this is a serious issue for me.
Oh I apologize, I meant it tounge in cheek. We’ve had a good convo going. No problems for me! I just want to make sure I understand things before I assume anything. I thought you were saying that you_could_ do paid updates in iOS. That’s why I thought you were trolling me
Yeah it’s just not a good situation for the developers or users in general. Right now, everybody gets screwed in some way. I really think paid updates would be just huge for these kind of apps like audio which have such a limited audience anyway compared to games, for example. It’s a shame apple cant see it or they just don’t care
Usually with an IAP. Apps do that all the time—add new features and then let users unlock them by purchasing an IAP. Gadget, Cubasis, Elastic Drums, SeekBeats, Groovebox, all have added new capabilities, features, or instruments and then required existing users to pay for access. Audio tracks are going to be an IAP unlock when they’re added to Nanostudio 2. Multi-port audio out will soon be an IAP feature in Elastic Drums. I’m gonna buy both.
Or if they want to add a bunch of new features at once, they just release a new version of the app and make users buy the new version if they want the new features. Xequence 2 just did this. A lot of us gladly paid $10 for the updated version of an app we already had.
So yes...technically, Apple doesn’t allow developers to charge for updates. But there are ways around this, and they don’t always involve a subscription.
Fair point. The issue becomes trying to then write the application so that all the combinations of things that you may or may not be able to do are flipped on or off by the various IAP combo's. It makes it super difficult to not only design from a UI/UX experience, but so often these features feed into another feature. Not having a cohesive end to end solution would be, IMO, a nightmare to try to support and make usable in the end.
Audio tracks as an IAP in NS2 have been on the docket for a long time. Meaning he has designed the product with this in mind. This does support your argument, but to my counterpoint, you can only do this with a handful of features before it starts having an adverse affect on your product. Heck even most of the desktop products do stripped down versions of the most expensive version...like limit track counts, include less plugins, less content, etc. I know that blip is also going to do an IAP for a convolution reverb, and that's a great idea(!) but its a specific plugin...its not changing the very workflow of the application. Its very very difficult to strip features out...especially for a single developer. And again...a 5 dollar app isn't going to make you much money where you want to invest a ton of time/planning/design when you most likely aren't making a lot of money anywho.
Xequence is a good example. And for 10 dollars, nobody probably batted an eye. The issue I see is when you pay, lets say 50+ dollars for an app (say a really good DAW on iOS). Then you'd like to just add a .X version upgrade where you aren't doing a File -> New and starting over and rewriting the whole thing, but adding a fair number of features to your existing product and feel you should get compensated because people have been asking for these features but its taking you time and money...because time is money. You now have a conundrum because how do you not burn your existing customers and force them to spend 50+ dollars again while your new customers get it for the same 50 dollars? Many have voiced their displeasure when this happens when there's not much to be done about it.
Good discussion!
Where are they getting the ‘7700’ instruments and samples from? I have just downloaded the full subscription free trial. I tap on add an instrument. I choose from the two options- melodic sounds (the other being drums and samples). I then get to choose from roughly 24 sound packs each containing approximately 12 sounds- which according to my calculations is about 240 melodic sounds to pick from- where are the other several thousand? I have had a good look round but I can’t find them. How do I access the thousands of sounds?
I am so glad you asked the question I have not yet etc. Anyone?
It’s marketing spin, honestly. There might be 7700 samples in total. There are definitely nowhere near that many melodic instruments. The verbiage is a little misleading.
One way to address the customer loyalty issue has been app bundles. If you already have the previous version of the app, you get the discount by buying the app bundle which includes the old and new app. If users really appreciate the developers work, they can always forego the bundle and pay full price. Others have an introductory price for the new app.
The biggest issues with IAPs are that they no longer work if the developer closes shop. Of course the app itself will lose functionality within a few iOS update cycles. It will be interesting to see how many apps get left behind with iPadOS.
The same people who hate subscription apps will subscribe to entertainment like cable or internet, but maybe they hate that too. A music app to a musician, even a non-pro, an app used regularly as a centerpiece of their production, should be the most important and used entertainment they've got. Subscription of a few bucks a month would seem to be easily justifiable. If the app isn't a main production tool, or worth the cost to a person, then it's simple not to subscribe, but for those who buy in, subscription is a commitment by, and reason for, the developer to stay engaged, to continue to develop.
Many devs will continue to sell their apps at a relatively low price and then basically give subsequent work away to existing customers for free. Despite some eventually selling new versions of old apps, or squeezing in some IAPS, free giveaways have become the norm. Great for us users, but then so is an app worthy of subscription. If someone isn't willing to subscribe, how bad do they really need or want the app?
The problem for me (and forgive me for anyone who has heard me voice this already) is that you should not have to subscribe to tools. Services are a whole different matter. Hence the name Goods and Services. I am being given electricity and water at a constant rate. Not once. Dropbox is renting me a space I don’t have. But a subscription for an app is not a service. Devs know this, and that’s why they try to justify it with content (goods). But not all of us need content. We have plenty of nails, we just want a hammer. Now we are paying every month to use a hammer. This makes no sense, and it isn’t sustainable.
I am all for devs earning what they need to make their business work, but the subscription model is problematic on many levels.
So you are willing to buy any app just like a hammer? With no fixes or added features. Just...a hammer? We already have that model. You are free to use that model, as is, today.
Uh... I can only use the model the dev offers? And why are there no fixes or added features? Because it’s not a subscription? Since when was that the rule? There are paid upgrades (both incremental and new versions) and other alternatives? Am I willing to buy any app just like a hammer? Well they’re not offering a new kind of app are they? They’re offering a new model, which is just a way to make the app profitable for them. If it were about the users, then it would be rent to own, no?
Listen, if you use a model that is only aimed at profitability, history tells us it creates a bubble and the bubble eventually bursts. You have to create something that makes sense for users and is profitable. It’s not a users job to worry about it. Endless monthly payments for a ONE good/tool does not make sense for the consumer.
There is no incremental upgrade model available for iOS. Not one that is inline with a .X version increase. You can pay for a new version, or a new hammer, but that’s it. There are bundles, etc, but that’s putting lipstick on the pig of the horrendous apple update policies.
How does the iOS developer pay for his development effort for added fixes and features? If he’s saturated his market (meaning tapped out his customers) all he can do is redevelop the app or build another one. It’s a really broken system for the iOS developers, IMO.
Further, there are tons of subscription models that are successful. Software as a Service (SaaS) models have been around for years, i’ve been involved in several. Slack is a perfect example. It’s a software package. It’s also a service. Same with Adobe. They are doing just fine. Both are doing quite well. And while you pointed out since when are no fixes and updates a rule, the same can be said for a subscription model. There’s no rule if the customers are willing to pay for it. It seems to be working for Auxy as they’ve been doing it for quite awhile now, so maybe the proof is in the pudding, so to say? I’m sure if it starts to fail, they will bail, but it seems to be working for them right now.
It has to be working somewhat because I’m a paying customer of theirs
Subscription is a joke. You don't pay a month and you loose all the features you paid for a year+ ????
StageLight has the best upgrade system. New version? You pay. You don't like it? You stay with the fully working previously paid version .
There are other clever ways : Bundles.
Many apps offer a bundle that let you upgrade with discount . It is more fair for existing customers than introducing a limited introductory price.
I referenced point upgrades because this stemmed from kobomato speaking of a sub for desktop software, not iOS.
I agree that there’s no rule if customers are willing to pay for it. Slack isn’t a perfect example because as you said it’s a software and a service. Auxy is not, nor is Serato Studio or any other DAW or synth really.
The jury on the success of subscriptions is still out. Just because Auxy is still in business doesn’t mean it’s working, just the same way the devs who are not selling subscription based apps could still be struggling. What they may have is a more constant flow of income, but it’s too early to tell what the long tail advantage is if there is one. Adobe is the only platform that I think people can say is working as a subscription based tool. This is mostly because they had that market cornered and many people invested in their platform as a means of income. There are very few others in this position.
But yes, you are also right that time will tell. I believe that subs are a stopgap while the industry figures out a truly sustainable method. We’ll know soon enough I guess.
I definitely do not think that the subscription model is the right model, but like you said it’s a stopgap until something better comes along. Along with the bundles, etc. All stop gaps. I Hope paid upgrades magically get rolled out at one of these apple mass hypnosis yearly events.
Yeah, it seems that way. Stagelight probably has as many instruments for the single “unlock” fee. I already have Stagelight. I wonder how it compares to Auxy...