Originally Posted By: pedwards2932
Not to jump in the deep end of the pool or to hijack this thread but I am using BIAB to do backing tracks for a cover duo and for the most part I am able to get an acceptable backing because we are able to play keyboards, guitar, and guitar synth over top of the backing. How is RB better at making backing tracks? Is it because it is easier to record tracks into? When I tried RB it still uses a style that may not play exactly what I would want. Here is an example (a stupid one at that) I want backing tracks for Louie Louie....all the chord progressions are the same only difference it the starting bar the organ plays a E note then goes to A....not much but a signature start. The chord pattern doesn't change but chorus and verse are played in an entirely different rhythm. I can play this song in my sleep but the best I can do in RB was to get adequate bass, drums, and a simple chord strum. I know I can easily do backing tracks for this playing each part myself in Sonar but I use it as an example that would easily explain the issues I have run into. Don't get me wrong because for what I need BIAB will work wonderfully I just want to understand how to corral it into playing some parts a bit more specifically. Thanks for all the help as this forum has made my learning curve a lot less steep.


RealBand specifically lets you regenerate portions of tracks or the whole track, create multiriffs and is a DAW so you can cut/paste and copy riffs into tracks once you have created the authentic sound you want. RB allows you to have multiple tracks of the same instrument with each creating a unique version of the chord progression. RB is more intuitive to work with plug-ins and VST's. RB can import multiple audio and midi files. RB is better suited to edit midi files. BIAB is not a DAW and RB is.

BIAB Ultra Pak+ 2024:RB 2024, Latest builds: Dell Optiplex 7040 Desktop; Windows-10-64 bit, Intel Core i7-6700 3.4GHz CPU and 16 GB Ram Memory.