The iPad At 1 Year: The iPod Of Tablet Computing

apple-ipad

It’s been a year since the Apple iPad was announced.

When it was introduced last year, we had this to say about what the iPad means for music:

Steve Jobs today introduced the Apple iPad, a handheld multitouch computer, and it’s likely to be the biggest music technology introduction of the year.

The Apple iPad, conceptually, is a large iPod touch.

However, what Apple has really done is create a new device that builds on what it has learned with the iPhone and iPod touch. The operating system, and the applications that Apple includes, are optimized for both the size of the hardware and the types of things that you would want to do with a device this size.

The iPad won’t replace the power of a dedicated music computer – but it is creating a new platform that will support new types of mobile music making and new ways of controlling and playing music.

It was probably our most-hated post of last year.

ipad sampler

A New Platform For Music Making

Apple has sold 5 times as many iPads as analysts predicted after the products’ launch.

90% of the tablet computers sold worldwide are now iPads. The iPad is a platform that developers can make money on. There’s already a healthy ecosystem for iPad peripherals.

And it has become a new platform for music making.

But, instead of looking back or wondering why colleagues didn’t predict this, we’re more interested in where tablet music-making is heading.

The iPad is now the iPod of Tablet Computing.

One year in, Apple has established the iPad as the iPod of tablet computing.

There will be cheaper tablet computers. There will be more powerful tablet computers. There will be tablet computers that are more open and ones that have more ports.

But competitors are going to be jockeying to be the Zune of tablet computing: knock-offs that try to beat Apple in a market that it defined.

The De Facto Platform For Multi-touch Music And For New Instruments

For musicians, the iPad has become the de facto platform for multi-touch music and for new musical instruments.

While we expected the iPad to  be a hit with musicians, we’re surprised at how entrenched the platform already is.

Apple addressed many of the concerns that we raised last year, including multitasking, access to the iTunes library and third-party device support. It’s added MIDI support. And this has opened the floodgates for all types of iPad music software.

This is going to be very disruptive for music companies, but ultimately good for musicians.

Instead of buying a Roland keyboard or a Yamaha or a Korg, you’ll be able to buy a $400 tablet MIDI dock and stick a $500 tablet on it and run anybody’s synthesizer. Or drum machine. Or sampler.

Instead of buying a $3,000 multi-touch controller, you’ll buy a cheap tablet and use the control software of your choice.

It’s a very different paradigm for music companies and musicians, and it will probably take a few years for the dust to settle.

But ultimately, you should have companies competing to offer you the best MIDI controllers for the iPad and companies competing to offer you the best synths and music apps for the iPad. And that competition is going to mean you’ll have a lot more options, for a lot less money.

ipad korg ims-20 synthesizer

If This Is The Future, Where’s My Flying Car?

While the iPad has proven to be hugely influential, there are several challenges limiting the device’s development as a platform for music making:

  • MIDI support is 25 years behind – we were excited to see CoreMIDI come to iOS, but support for it is spotty at best. While many apps have been updated to add MIDI support – try to sync two iPad apps together, or an iPad app to some music hardware, and you’ll find that MIDI support on the iPad is 25 years behind the rest of the world. Developers, if you’ve done it right, leave a comment below.
  • Everything feels first generation – There have been a lot of interesting music apps released in the last year, but even the best ones have first generation problems and limitations.
  • Most apps are too conservative – there are lots of companies making software synths and samplers for the iPad, but where are the developers taking creative leaps? See our 10 predictions for electronic music making in the next decade and start blowing some minds!
  • We need more power – the iPad is surprisingly fast, but music apps are surprisingly demanding. Apple needs to juice up the iPad to handle those mind-blowing apps we’re interested in.
  • The DAW manufacturers are missing in action – the platform is here and it’s useful. DAW makers need to get on board and drive forward the iPad as both a controller and DAW peripheral.
  • We need workflows – the best iPad music apps, at this point, tend to be very specific and single-minded. Try to get them to talk to other apps or other instruments, or to share audio with other apps or platforms, and it’s a challenge. Developers need to start thinking about how the iPad can solve musicians’ “big picture” problems.

Bottom line: If you’re interested in iPad music making, it’s a fantastic new platform, but it’s also a work in progress.

What are your thoughts on the iPad and the potential of tablet music making?

33 thoughts on “The iPad At 1 Year: The iPod Of Tablet Computing

  1. Hey Synthtopia, I know Apple obsfucates device and app sales, but how about some actual sales and preorder numbers of these pre/post-NAMM 2011 iPad music devices? Something substantive. Anything!

    How about taking a hard look at the platform in terms of Apple's planned obsolescence and the abysmal legacy support most companies have displayed with their iOS hardware accessories?

    For example, if a first-generation iPad purchased today can't get the latest iOS update in five years, and that iOS update introduces features quickly adopted by a plurality of software and hardware engineers, what good is it? I don't know whether that'll be the case. But why aren't you thinking critically? Is the "shiny newness" factor blinding you?

    Stepping away from the technology for a moment, what kind of musician is iPad music making for? What kind of musician is it not for?

    I feel confused about the magnitude of the iPad's role in music today, two years from now, and five years away. Based on the amount of coverage here, it would be easy to think that every musician everywhere just can't get enough of this iPad gear and apps. I understand the desire to look to the future and imagine the possibilities. But this is Synthtopia, not Gizmodo.

    I hate to be cynical, but I suspect this is mostly about blogpolitik, namely pageviews. There's something mechanistic and offputting about ending literally every single article by begging for comments. Did you even send anyone to NAMM, or just aggregate real music news sites' reporting? And if you're just aggregating other blogs, well… I guess that explains your apparent myopia when it comes to the iPad.

    The quality of Synthtopia is declining. Please, for all of your readers, try to make this site as good as it once was.

  2. I thought it was interesting, and agree. iPad is a big deal…to the extent where I'm seriously considering jettisoning some hardware controllers to pay for one.

  3. I perfectly agree with mr. I'M A SHAMROCK. I would expect a more critical approach here. There's more to the iPad than just the "shiny newness".
    The Lemur has been discontinued due to the iPad, but it remains to be seen if it was a win or a loss for the musicians. Is the iPad really the better option?
    Let's just think about that for a second. Sure the iPad seems like the better solution, you spend 500-800$ and get a multi-function device, which can run different control softwares. Sounds great. A lemur would have cost twice as much (or more, don't remember the exact price tag).
    But maybe a Lemur would have lasted for 6 years, while the iPad will last a couple of years, then you will be forced to invest in a new device, because your apps won't work anymore. so in the end will you have saved money?

    I'm not saying the Lemur was better, I say: add one point to the list: better long term compatibility.

    I'm pretty sure we won't get any usable alternatives to the iPad in the next years, since the competitors don't have a chance anyway, Apple has already drained the market. So certainly the iPad will be the only device in this market sector, and will be a part of the future of making music, though the problem remains that Apple is not really a company focusing on music making, it's a digital entertainment hardware/software manufacturer, which is progressively focusing on the broad mass market. So the next point for the list is: we need devices we can work with, not only play around with.
    Admittedly, toys are fun and have a right to be and many people make music for fun, and that's great. But there is also people who make music professionally, and those are the people who get left out all the time.

    Third point for your list: control. We don't want Apple to control us, we want to control our software, and our devices. A good example is the app Control (sorry for the weird pun here), which really shows how much more you could do if Apple wasn't so paranoid and restrictive. I mean, why can't I just copy the scripts on my device? Why must I set up a webserver, and then download the scripts from there? Makes it all just complicated.

  4. As an iPad owner, I found the article's criticisms to be pretty dead on, especially the lack of consistent MIDI support.

    Maybe it's unfair to expect developers to have their act together on MIDI already, since CoreMIDI support just got added. As an end-user, though, you can't do some of the things you'd expect to do with a MIDI device, yet.

    I'd like to see more cutting-edge apps, too. It's just like on the desktop, though – everybody wants a virtual Minimoog.

    Using the iPad as a MIDI/OSC controller is very useful. But I'd like to see more sophisticated control parts. How about a mappable LFO, for example?

    Not so sure about Shamrock's gripes, though. Mostly knee-jerk anti-apple BS.

    Especially the whole "planned obsolescence" argument.

    Can you expect to upgrade any of your other electronic music tools 5 years from now? No.

    Will any of your electronic music tools or an iPad stop working 5 years from now because you can't upgrade them? No.

    The real question is whether or not you can get $500 value out of a tablet computer.

  5. hanzolo

    So your point is that it's better to pay 5 times as much for a Lemur, which runs one app instead of 50,000, because the Lemur's OS is non-upgradable (because JazzMutant killed the product and won't release the code so that people can fix its bugs)?

    That makes complete sense.

    And you don't want Apple to control your mind, either. A tin foil hat might help with that.

  6. hanzolo has the right idea.

    Nothing I said was anti-Apple. The whole issue is about the opportunistic use of the popularity of general-purpose technology to advance music technology faster than previously possible.

    What I was getting at in my isolated hypothetical scenario is that no one seems to be examining the ways this will change development over time. It's naive to think that the interests of a relatively small market share (musicians) will have much influence on a massive consumer entertainment gadget market with drastically different release and development cycles. So the question is, how might attaching music technology to gadgets change music technology for the worse?

    We've heard an endless pie-in-the-sky stream of the benefits. The difference in what "long-term" means when talking about "long-term usefulness" for gadgets (average of 3 years) and for musical instruments (decades) is just one aspect. What are the pitfalls we need to watch for long-term in a rapidly accelerating music market? Is more, more, more always better? Will it make us more, more, more creative… or just make us dependent?

  7. Thanks for reminding me of point 4 to be added to the list: less users trolling you every time you fail to praise the wonders of Apple.

  8. These are mostly rhetorical questions. I'm pointing out the complete lack of critical thinking here at Synthtopia when it comes to serious examination of what I think all of us can agree for better or worse looks like the first waves of a sea change.

  9. i love my ipad so much I bought 2 more…

    I usually don't use it for music creation, but it has potential.

    Apps like iElectribe, iMS20, and TouchAble, are a step in the right direction for me. I do think we are all a few years away from powerful/portable DAW tablets with comparable battery life.

    I don't agree with SHAMROCK's 5 year analogy… just because something will become unsupported does not mean it will become useless.

  10. "Nothing I said was anti-Apple."

    Except for the anti-Apple BS, like "Apple obsfucates device and app sales", "Apple's planned obsolescence" & "We've heard an endless pie-in-the-sky stream of the benefits".

    Actually, the article raised half a dozen pretty serious issues with music apps on the iPad that musicians should be aware of. Those concern me a lot more than worrying about whether or not I'll be using it decades from now. I'm not planning on it!

    What's the real life-span your DAW? About 2 years between updates. Your VSTs? They get updated every 3 years. A Kaoss Pad? Korg will come out with a cooler version in 2 years.

    If you're worried about being dependent on technology, do you really want to be an electronic musician?

  11. I think the author does ask some questions regarding what will be necessary to make this work better or more effectively for musicians. As for a general discussion about the efficacy of ANY new technology for use in creative endeavors…that's joining in a conversation as old as music technology itself and doesn't really make sense in terms of attacking a particular manufacturer. Think of the controversy of the Cello over the Viola de Gamba, the Spanish Guitar over the Vihuella, the Piano over the Harpsichord. I think the discussion should be, what can I do with this device to make my music better (maybe the answer is "nothing"), what will it take for me to use this thing or other similar device?

    I think bemoaning whether the iPad will be "useful" in 3-5 years or that the press is focusing on this as a device is pointless. It's the same for any technology. I suppose then we should go back in time and not talk about the excitement around the development of MIDI, sampling, synthesis, electro-acoustic instruments etc etc etc. Or maybe the modern orchestra over the boroque orchestra.

    The article is a retrospective of predictions from last year and where this device stands now as well as what still needs to be done to bring it to a usable baseline.

    As with all creative technology, it's limitations will be seen as a crutch to some and a platform for new creativity to others. Since your initial post specifically speaks about Apple's obfuscation and planned obsolescence, I can understand why some would feel that this is simply Apple bashing. All technology companies have products with limited product lifetimes (including all synth manufacturers going back to Moog and Arp) so singling out Apple as some sort of aberration in the computing field is spurious at best. As for longevity of the physical device; as a Newton user (13 years and still going!), I can attest to the fact that most of Apple's "gadgets" will generally last longer than your presumption of "a couple of years."

    I also think we can look at the iPad ecosystem from a different perspective. I think that it's popularity as a general computing platform will actually benefit the music development community. As a developer I would think that the existence of a well supported, successful computing device that supports a new level of interactivity would be an incitement to develop new tools and instruments. The iPad's success makes it easier for a developer to commit resources to a project for that platform specifically BECAUSE of its success, which guarantees at least some longevity as a platform. From a developer's perspective the big issues here will be synchronization support and processor power, the latter of which will probably be addressed relatively soon. Additionally, the app store is sorely lacking in decent Information Architecture, and is an impediment to musicians finding the kind of software they might be looking for.

    What is the long-term viability of the iPad (or any other piece of technology) in terms of longevity as a musical instrument decades from now? If that's what your looking for, better stick to something that doesn't use a microprocessor, electricity, software, interfacing, data, etc.

    Viola de Gamba anyone?

  12. I think the author does ask some questions regarding what will be necessary to make this work better or more effectively for musicians. As for a general discussion about the efficacy of ANY new technology for use in creative endeavors…that's joining in a conversation as old as music technology itself and doesn't really make sense in terms of attacking a particular manufacturer. Think of the controversy of the Cello over the Viola da Gamba, the Spanish Guitar over the Vihuella, the Piano over the Harpsichord. I think the discussion should be, what can I do with this device to make my music better (maybe the answer is "nothing"), what will it take for me to use this thing or other similar device?

    I think bemoaning whether the iPad will be "useful" in 3-5 years or that the press is focusing on this as a device is pointless. It's the same for any technology. I suppose then we should go back in time and not talk about the excitement around the development of MIDI, sampling, synthesis, electro-acoustic instruments etc etc etc. Or maybe the modern orchestra over the boroque orchestra.

    The article is a retrospective of predictions from last year and where this device stands now as well as what still needs to be done to bring it to a usable baseline.

    As with all creative technology, it's limitations will be seen as a crutch to some and a platform for new creativity to others. Since your initial post specifically speaks about Apple's obfuscation and planned obsolescence, I can understand why some would feel that this is simply Apple bashing. All technology companies have products with limited product lifetimes (including all synth manufacturers going back to Moog and Arp) so singling out Apple as some sort of aberration in the computing field is spurious at best. As for longevity of the physical device; as a Newton user (13 years and still going!), I can attest to the fact that most of Apple's "gadgets" will generally last longer than your presumption of "a couple of years."

    I also think we can look at the iPad ecosystem from a different perspective. I think that it's popularity as a general computing platform will actually benefit the music development community. As a developer I would think that the existence of a well supported, successful computing device that supports a new level of interactivity would be an incitement to develop new tools and instruments. The iPad's success makes it easier for a developer to commit resources to a project for that platform specifically BECAUSE of its success, which guarantees at least some longevity as a platform. From a developer's perspective the big issues here will be synchronization support and processor power, the latter of which will probably be addressed relatively soon. Additionally, the app store is sorely lacking in decent Information Architecture, and is an impediment to musicians finding the kind of software they might be looking for.

    What is the long-term viability of the iPad (or any other piece of technology) in terms of longevity as a musical instrument decades from now? If that's what your looking for, better stick to something that doesn't use a microprocessor, electricity, software, interfacing, data, etc.

    Viola da Gamba anyone?

  13. I think the author does ask some questions regarding what will be necessary to make this work better or more effectively for musicians. As for a general discussion about the efficacy of ANY new technology for use in creative endeavors…that's joining in a conversation as old as music technology itself and doesn't really make sense in terms of attacking a particular manufacturer. Think of the controversy of the Cello over the Viola da Gamba, the Spanish Guitar over the Vihuela, the Piano over the Harpsichord. I think the discussion should be, what can I do with this device to make my music better (maybe the answer is "nothing"), what will it take for me to use this thing or other similar device?

    I think bemoaning whether the iPad will be "useful" in 3-5 years or that the press is focusing on this as a device is pointless. It's the same for any technology. I suppose then we should go back in time and not talk about the excitement around the development of MIDI, sampling, synthesis, electro-acoustic instruments etc etc etc. Or maybe the modern orchestra over the boroque orchestra.

    The article is a retrospective of predictions from last year and where this device stands now as well as what still needs to be done to bring it to a usable baseline.

    As with all creative technology, it's limitations will be seen as a crutch to some and a platform for new creativity to others. Since your initial post specifically speaks about Apple's obfuscation and planned obsolescence, I can understand why some would feel that this is simply Apple bashing. All technology companies have products with limited product lifetimes (including all synth manufacturers going back to Moog and Arp) so singling out Apple as some sort of aberration in the computing field is spurious at best. As for longevity of the physical device; as a Newton user (13 years and still going!), I can attest to the fact that most of Apple's "gadgets" will generally last longer than your presumption of "a couple of years."

    I also think we can look at the iPad ecosystem from a different perspective. I think that it's popularity as a general computing platform will actually benefit the music development community. As a developer I would think that the existence of a well supported, successful computing device that supports a new level of interactivity would be an incitement to develop new tools and instruments. The iPad's success makes it easier for a developer to commit resources to a project for that platform specifically BECAUSE of its success, which guarantees at least some longevity as a platform. From a developer's perspective the big issues here will be synchronization support and processor power, the latter of which will probably be addressed relatively soon. Additionally, the app store is sorely lacking in decent Information Architecture, and is an impediment to musicians finding the kind of software they might be looking for.

    What is the long-term viability of the iPad (or any other piece of technology) in terms of longevity as a musical instrument decades from now? If that's what your looking for, better stick to something that doesn't use a microprocessor, electricity, software, interfacing, data, etc.

    Viola da Gamba anyone?

  14. Planned obsolescence definitely gripes me. That said, your iPad and current apps won’t automatically explode after you’ve had them for exactly three years. Neither will an Android tablet and its apps. Aside from the products just dying from old age, you aren’t forced to upgrade your OS or your software. That process can be completely at your discretion.

    Having worked at a music software company, I’ve seen many users convinced that when an upgrade comes out, their software somehow doesn’t work anymore or is useless. Look up Bob Staake who does amazing artwork in Photoshop 3.0 to see this idea proven glaringly wrong. There are plenty of people using old computers and software to do wonderful things.

  15. Shamrock – Thanks for your feedback, even if it's not always what we'd like to hear.

    As the article notes, this was one of our "most-hated" topics last year, and this post looks like it's well on its way to being just as hated.

    That said, we're not trying to tell you what you want to hear, we're making clear statements about where we see music technology heading and offering concrete criticism of some of the problems that we see.

    We encourage feedback because we believe that getting a variety of viewpoint benefits everybody. Synthtopia readers have a lot to contribute and we value that.

    You raise a concern about planned obsolescence.

    Obsolescence can obviously a concern for anyone using music technology.

    Anyone worried about the obsolescence of electronic music technologies, though, needs to check out the work of artists like Laurie Spiegel, Benge or even Jarre with obsolete technologies. Or remember that the TB303 was an obsolete technology shortly after it was introduced. Or ask an Amiga user why they still use those old things.

    I'd be interested in hearing reader's thoughts on their expected life-spans for various electronic music technologies.

  16. Synthtopia, you just read my mind!!! Especially the line:

    "Developers need to start thinking about how the iPad can solve musicians’ “big picture” problems."

    You guys nailed it! Awesome Article!

  17. Viola da Gamba FTW!

    Thanks for the deep feedback! Interesting perspective on the long-term viability of musical uses of mainstream technology. Hadn't thought about it from that viewpoint, but yes – they'll be millions of these floating around if parts are needed.

    Have to agree on the note about the app store information architecture. It's designed to bring mainstream music apps to the top – not the niche ones.

  18. Viola da Gamba FTW!

    Interesting perspective on the long-term viability of musical uses of mainstream technology. Hadn't thought about it from that viewpoint, but yes – there'll be millions of these floating around if parts are needed.

    Have to agree on the note about the app store information architecture. It's designed to bring mainstream music apps to the top – not the niche ones.

  19. Surely the point is – love it or hate it, you can't ignore it. The iPad IS news. It is selling in vast quantities and reaching parts of the market that regular computers can't reach (I know – my jaw hit the floor when the missus asked for one for Christmas – I have spent half my life finding new and interesting ways to justify buying yet another computer.)

    One thing I haven't seen mentioned – redundancy. Say you're in a synth band. How many mission critical pieces of tech do you have? Things that when (not if – when) they die will screw your gig or your recording session. Sorry, we can't play tonight, the drum machine is kaput. Do you have spares for all of them? Nope, you can't afford that level of redundancy.

    But if they were all iPads, how many spares would you need? One. Two if you're totally paranoid. And not even that if you don't mind rushing out to the to pick up a replacement when you need it.

  20. The iPad is a fun distraction at this point. I can't imaging many people using just the ipad to make anything serious without it being slow and tedious. Lots of cool toys that you can use one at a time unless you buy another ipad. So you render it, or record it and import it to your real tool…

  21. I guess no one sees the iPad as the dawning of a new way of doing things. Just like the advent of computer music, it took time to develop. And I see it as the start of multi touch user interfaces. Soon all displays will be multi touch. And user interfacing will become more and more intuitive. There are already apps for turning the iPad into a second monitor for your desktop. Making it a wireless touchscreen for your desktop computer. And with development being open to all, who knows what else will come from the developers in the future.

  22. Good point – love it or hate it, you can't ignore the trend towards electronic music instruments built on cheap multi-touch computers.

    It's iPads now, but it will be a broader trend in a few years.

    Your point about redundancy makes a lot of sense, too. Most musicians won't buy two of all their gear, but it will be realistic to have two tablet computers that can run the same software.

  23. DJD – a lot of readers and people in the music industry obviously see the iPad as a distraction or an expensive toy, not a potential platform for music.

    It's fantastic, though, to be able to pay less than $20 and download something like Korg's iMS-20, which is really a virtual studio as much as it's a software synth.

    Multi-touch will probably percolate down to all computers over the next few years, but it's probably going to be 5 years until laptop hardware and software is updated to offer a decent multi-touch experience.

  24. I think any article that brings ouf the richness of comments this one has is worth writing, so thanks Synthtopia. I'm now 60, made records in the minimal synth era of the early 80s as one of The Metronomes with no computers and no midi…I can't understand why any synth musicians are cynical and suspicious of what's going on. New devices are what have always given synth music its energy, it's edge, the promise of new horizons and new possibilities. Synth music is as much a state of mind as a pragmatic debate over operating systems. Otherwise it's just another establishment music form. I'm personally very excited about recording new tracks on the iPad, and combining the process with Logic, to see where one ends and the other begins. I'm not sure yet, and I like not being sure.

  25. I was lucky enough to be given an iPad as a gift. I was on my way to buy one myself because of the hype, especially around music apps. However, while it's great for quickly checking the news or facebook or what's popular on YouTube without booting up a computer, doing anything more than that is quickly frustrating and I turn to my notebook instead. I actually haven't booted up my iPad in 3 weeks now, and yes, I have iMS-20, Rebirth, and various other things on it.

    It's an interesting little device, but game-changer it is not, and I was surprised to see so much focus on it at NAMM, especially since world+dog is launching tablets this year which will presumably be much more compatible with your typical desktop software packages and not so subject to Apple's dictatorship when it comes to what you can do with them..

  26. I have to agree with people's critic of the whole ipad fad. The most annoying of all being the amount of neanderthal applications showing up day by day on site's like this . After the dust settles a little bit i think everybody will have to face the simple truth , a controller is only useful if it is offering some kind of feedback. Touching a flat surface can only provide visual feedback, thus nothing interesting in a musical context.

  27. BEST. ARTICLE. EVER.

    Finally some honesty about the appalling state of MIDI for iPad apps, and how off target the major DAW manufacturers seem to be in not getting into the game early.

    Many of you posting here clearly:

    a. don't have an iPad.

    b. wouldn't know what to do with it from a musical standpoint if you had it, lol.

    c. have never used powerful controller apps like touchAble to control Ableton Live.

    I mean, this is a place called SYNTHTOPIA. Which is basically a digital music site with a heavy geek factor. But, ffs, most of your posts are like…WTF? Do some of you even HAVE electronic instruments?

    If you took all other iPad apps and threw them away, and were only left with touchAble, it would be worth the price of an iPad alone. It was and is an utter, total, and complete GAMECHANGER ™. lol. I've dumped all my hardware controllers and replaced them with touchAble.

    The iPad is the most exciting thing to come along in music making in I don't know how long. What else is more exciting? Another fucking Boss looper stomp box? lol.

    Jesus Wept.

  28. "Man, I don't get this iPad thingy for making music. Overrated. Too expensive. Soon obsolete and outdated…*grumble*"

    3sec later….

    "Oh! Wow! Look! The Gibson Firebird! This is a gamechanger!

    2 sec later….

    "Oh hey! The 856th hardware controller to come out THIS MONTH!"

    lol.

  29. Well, I have one, and have used several of the apps. Many are good, but as I said above (with all the downvotes 🙂 ) you can't really do everything beginning to end on the ipad without it being really tedious. Touchable is great, but unfortunately automation is not that good in session view, so I generally have to switch to arrangement view at some point.
    Some of the synths sound great, like miniSynthPro, etc. But, if you use some of these apps via midi, it's one at a time unless you want to buy another ipad.
    For those downvoting, please shed some light on how you are currently using the ipad as a core piece of your workflow, as opposed to just something to play around with on the side. I'm really interested in ideas.

  30. I thought so till I got my ipad. Then, after about 10 minutes, I knew it's too expensive piece of sh… For this price you get PS3/XBOX + some second hand games + blofeld or some korg micro and there's still some money left for pizza.
    But still, you need to try it till you know it.

  31. jesus. by reading most of your comments I would hate to live your lives. so stale and boring, no change. How exciting.. *insert jerk off motion*

Leave a Reply