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
Maybe @elf_audio should license out his hand-crafted algorithm then?
However, unless he chooses to, the point is still valid - at the prices we currently enjoy paying on ios we shouldn’t expect elastique (or close) timestretch from indie developers.
definitely a point here.
lets hope they find a way to improve the algorithms even as an IAP would be okay for me.
Fully agree. He’s extremely competent, and even with the modular approach it’s surprising how proficient he is.
Thinking about the “as simple as a UI element”… it’s in the UI dept where I think we can all agree he’s not that great. It’s a shame because UI is extremely important and really defines your relationship with an app (I’m also a programmer). I guess he doesn’t feel that way or thinks it’s not that relevant.
It’s difficult isn’t - what would my paying customer prefer I spend my limited time on? A “nicer” UI or an improved timestretch algorithm & an enhanced warp-markers solution plus a raft of “showstopper bug fixes” to enable clip launching in their specific workflow?
I suppose Paul has to prioritise.
I will add, however, that good UX & UI are subjective - I mean everyone is raving about the UI in Rymdigare right now but personally I absolutely hate it (I seem to be the only one that doesn’t actually like its output too and regret buying it, but I digress) - I personally don’t mind Paul’s products’ UIs, but I acknowledge that tastes vary.
Paul's app have UIs that are logical, well laid out with items that are clearly labelled.
They are not trying to be design trendy. I like them.
I also like how he brings out a perfectly good app and then someone suggests an extra feature and he adds it and releases an update, usually within a week or two - at no extra cost to users. Not many developers do that.
I’m firmly of the belief now that any new feature added by any developer (for an app that isn’t subscription based) should be an IAP. That includes “bug fixes” for getting a perfectly working app to work in someone’s obscure workflow.
Developers (and their families) have to eat too.
Well said. He’s one of the few iOS devs who release fixes almost immediately.
When it comes to feature requests, it takes him few hours to implement.
The UI is simple to understand although everyone have their taste.
@attakk if you have suggestions for improvements, you can contact Paul ( [email protected] ), he will respond immediately if not busy.
I don’t - I’m very happy with every one of his apps I’ve ever bought (some get used much more than others, but that’s natural).
They’ve all done (for me anyway) what they’ve promised and I use them a heck of a lot.
No issues from me at all 👍
Each developer has their own way of running their business and which software development model they choose to follow and of course not all of these models involve shipping something intended to be feature complete on day one. Paul in particular seems to prefer to get an idea out there rapidly and then factors in some period of extra time for each of his releases where he adds things from his own plan and is in parallel pretty open to taking requests for user suggested features or tweaks. That’s the way he does things and both developer and users seem to get along with that arrangement. He might spend the same amount of time overall on a project as developer B who releases their vision of a “feature complete” app, but has chosen a model which involves his users more in the direction of some of the features while they are being developed (Agile-ish I guess). If v1.00 of the app has everything in it that you need and you hit no bugs then that is great.
He set a precedent recently by releasing DigiStix 2 which I certainly supported as a way of purchasing extra features added to an older app. I’d like to see him do this again in the future for some of his other apps. For Paul’s apps specifically then I think that outside of the initial release period it is fair to ask for more money when new features are added.
I would disagree that bug fixes should be charged for, otherwise I’d be a rich man. If a release contains a reproducible software bug which a customer has taken the trouble to report soon after release then I would hope in most situations that it would get fixed for free regardless of how obscure or unnecessary it might be perceived to be against my workflow or use of the app. If it is reported some later time after release and is not a critical issue then you could make an argument that nobody else had hit it and so was not financially viable to fix or to fix it in v.next which is charged for along with new features.
I didn’t say bug fixes should be paid for. Sorry, the quotes around the term ‘bug fixes’ (ie “bug fixes”) was a way of indicating that what you may consider to be a bug that needs fixing in the app is not really a problem with that app at all. Sorry if that got lost in translation.
What I was trying to say was if an app works but doesn’t work for you because your workflow is just plain weird or convoluted then that is not a bug with the app - in that instance making the app work with your workflow, to me, is a feature request & yes should be paid for. The alternative if you don’t want to pay is to reassess & redesign your workflow.
But to reiterate - I didn’t say/mean bug fixes should be paid for.
I don’t get what’s “wrong” with Paul’s interfaces. There are similar approaches (somewhat skeuomorphic) in other apps and much worse ones nobody seems to problems with. To each their own of course.
His interfaces feel a bit dated I guess, especially compared to stuff from Erik but I don’t see how that should impede anyone’s musical progress. I admit that stuff like Rymdigare has already been inspiring from the visuals but if I really need visual stimulation for creation, I can throw on YouTube on my tv. Airwindows literally has no UI but I’d hate to miss out on those greats plug-ins because I was too worried about aesthetics
Conventional, not dated.
4Pockets apps don't have abstract design interfaces and I'm glad they don't. It wouldn't suit them - they are very practical and functional audio tools with a lot of features and options that do specific things. An abstract interface would just make them inpenetrable. With 4Pockets apps you really need to know what this button does or that fader does. A conventional interface makes it very clear how the app works.
I am sometimes a bit lost with the interfaces of apps like Erik's and Klevgrand. But their apps are sound so good they are still worth getting.
Suggestion for Paul/4Pockets...
Could you PLEASE work on a decent SoundFonts keyboard/player or fold such a capability into an existing synth?
Tutorial 3 from Paul:
1.05 released
Crazy" wow
Does this have multi-out?
Yes, Paul fixed the recording AU interface in 1.05 so you can use the record AU parameter to (for example) trigger recording via a cell in LK and a different cell can then be used to play it back using the inbuilt Neon launch MIDI interface. This way you can start the recording each time you tap the cell until you get a good take. Triggering via LK means you can do this in sync with other cells that might be triggering MIDI to play a synth/whatever or other Neon audio clips. You could swap LK for anything that sends MIDI such as a MIDI pedal.
Edit: It is not an elegant solution though as you still need separate triggers for play and record and because the samples are not saved with the app state then you cannot easily transfer or backup an AUM project containing these Neon instances. Moving the samples to Koala pads after recording would be a better bet as Koala does save them with the state of the app. Maybe worth having a play with though until the ‘other’ app arrives
Tutorial 4 from Paul:
Hi all, just bought neon and koala with all in apps. Both are great for timestretching and more! Neon do great job what I expected from Enso in past.
Drambo still is main part, but many of auv3 plugins are so amazing! This forum is also amazing! You people are amazing! It is my favorite place in the web (and yt). You are my friends! I never introduced my self, it is not related to neon, but generally Im extensive user of Drambo and everything around. Yes, I have rme octamic xtc connected to iPad, and (problem) I get only two stereo outputs in standalone (even if in AUM I see all 24 in/out), but who cares?
Still a lot of fun! Fortunately I have also UFX+ (connected by TB to mac) so I can switch interfaces to see if Drambo support UFX+ better. I know strange introducing, but never is too late I hope. I hope you enjoyed, and see y in other posts! szczyp
Welcome to the forum @szczyp ! 👋
Welcome... These developers are just AMAZING...
And this forum...
Thanks to all..
I’m struggling with the timestretch quality reports. It’s a bit of a showstopper IMO
Neon, Im happy with this plugin. (EDIT:) And with multitrack recorder. (for multi take comping before resampling to neon). Timestretching is more than usable for me. I hear big change in timing after radical tempo change, AND some parts of my take I always must crop, remove unwanted, even if I was sure it was good take. But after tempo changing not everything is shit, some parts are working good with this plugin and you can change tempos.
Overall I recomend to buy neon and koala as in Drambo koala give you record on separate notes and you have internal multioutputs in Drambo to use. Neon is great to prerecord audio , and then you can decide if leaving neon or resample to next or also to neon.
I Was trying BM3, Cubasis 3 and Zenbeats2, now with neon I Feel No need for audio tracks. It is audio track. Because I accept this quality of timestretching, and next tools (loopypro2) is under corner.
It is nice to Have all of this options. I use mostly atom to generate MIDI in Drambo, but lk and various step machines are also on the board. If Neon is as much interesting, maybe Helion is also unique?
Lastly, I use some of VisualReverb and there is internal compression module. Its worth to have this reverb IMO. Sound very subtle, like other yes, but this compression is „magical”.
Welcome my friend.. 🤝 you’re absolutely right about this place + all the beautiful people within it.. Dare I say.. Magical..
Tutorial 5 from Paul:
Looking cool...
...since I'm not on beta or anything a '2nd pass bounce' could be handy when applying compression, reverb or delay to sounds