Please let me know what you think...I AM looking for feedback here...

So I have had BB since 2015 and use it as a tool in my recording studio to create everything from bed tracks for songs that i am working on for myself and my clients right to using it to create every track for whole albums.

One of the things that my client brought up last night was why I use BB to create the basic bed tracks then port them over to RB to add instruments to the song.

He said why don't you just RB and bypass BB as RB has some abilities that BB does not like the ability to have real time effects when recording vocal etc...

I seemed to recall that using BB to create your beds or flesh out your songs arrangement was what was "recommended" by either PG Music or someone I was talking to at PG Music...not an employee....a customer.

It seemed that after some quick checking that there doesn't seem to be a real reason to use BB to do the bed tracks as RB can do everything BB can do plus more. It may seem a bit more cumbersome to do some of the things but all of the functionality seems to be very much overlapping between the two pieces of software.

So what are YOUR thoughts about BB and RB?

Are they 2 pieces of software that do nearly the same thing?

How do you use them?...Together as I stated above...or separately?

I'm curious to hear what people have to say...

Thanks

Tony

Hi Tony,

A number of people on here use RB exclusively for building arrangements without BIAB involved in the process anywhere. The arrangements that they produce are first class.

I'm one of those who begin in BB and, as soon as I have all my chords and melody working (if my song has a notated melody, that is), and I have found a suitable collection of instruments and drums that sound good, I usually jump to RB.

My reason for using BIAB first is that BIAB begins playback not too long after the generate button is clicked. This allows me to quickly hear how tracks sound. This is because BIAB begins playback before generation is complete and continues to generate the tracks in the background while playback is underway.

RB, on the other hand, requires that tracks are fully generated before playback can occur. This makes it a little slower -- especially when more than a single track is involved.

In the early stages of song creation, BIAB saves me a little bit of time.

Sometimes, because of new features in recent versions of BIAB, I'm now finding that I use BIAB entirely for generating Realtracks. I do this when I want to take advantage of the "Avoid transposition of Realtracks" option in 'Song Settings'. I've found that if I want to get the highest quality of sound, activating this option is one thing that can help.

I also like using the 'Force Simple Arrangement' option that BIAB offers individually for each track. The new 'Natural Arrangement' option offered for each track in BIAB is also sometimes useful for me. As far as I'm aware, RB does not have these features.

When click tracks, tempo maps, and unusual time signatures are important, RB is superior. Realband also allows for partial regeneration of Realtracks and Realdrums.

Just my two cents worth.

Regards,
Noel

• my latest song: He’s An African Rhino (2018)

BB is a great starting point for quickly parsing through hundreds of Real Tracks, getting your bar settings in order, and using the extremely powerful yet rarely (if ever) discussed on these forums melodist and soloist functions. I'm pretty sure none of these features can be utilized in RB (although I could be wrong).

RB is ugly (which I don't actually care about), laggy (which I do), and gruesomely cumbersome (you can probably infer how I feel about that bit).

That said, RB has the absolutely brilliant multi-riff generation function, which you can use to take your RTs from 90 percent to 110. It also has unlimited tracks (HUGE benefit), volume automation controls, and audio recording functions with take comping (which is indispensable for overdubbing). Recording guitar in RB is possible, but limited to the point of near uselessness.

Hope this helps!

You'll get lots of different and nuanced answers.

I only use BIAB.

Had RealBand been available before I learned several DAWs, I might have used it a great deal.

I also think based on comments by new users that many do not even know about RealBand.

Hey Noel,

Not the OP, but I'm confused by the bit where you say "...I do this when I want to take advantage of the "Avoid transposition of Realtracks" option in 'Song Settings'. I've found that if I want to get the highest quality of sound, activating this option is one thing that can help."

I'm puzzled by this because, as I see it, you either need to transpose a track or don't... Could you please clarify what you meant by that?

Thanks in advance!

It means that when changing chords, it will minimize transposing various RealTrack patterns and always use one recorded using that chord or closer closer to that particular chord. It results in fewer possible artifacts, but at the expense of fewer available riffs. I don't know how the engine intelligently selects the patterns, but this setting will try to use a closer chord instead of transposing a different chord to achieve the result.

When creating RealTracks, they don't record the all the same riffs for every single possible chord, and especially for some of the more esoteric chords. So, if the RealTrack has a C69add13 (I'm just making stuff up here) recorded, but you need an E69add13, instead of transposing the C version up to E and keeping with the same basic rhythmic structure of the C chord, it will find a recorded chord at or closer to E to use or transpose instead; however, there may be fewer riffs available on that closer chord than just transposing the the C chord up.

Hope that made sense, and it really is all magic.

Personally I don't use Real Band. I have been using Cubase since before I found out about BIAB. So I use it as a tool as you described above. I generate my instrumental tracks in BIAB then export them to Cubase where I do all of my editing, recording other instruments/vocals and mixing.

I am another BiaB only user. I used Cakewalk software for years. Now I use Studio One Pro 3.5 and the transition was an easy one for me.

I figure out a chord progression, at times use the melodist and/or soloist then I go straight my DAW.

Ok thanks for the feedback guys...

But one thing I find odd from those of you that do not use RB, how do you go about making all of the tracks for your tues in BB.

I see BB and RB as 2 different tools in my toolbox that can do many of the same things, but I use them very differently.

Like I may have stated I start in BB and get my song to where I am happy with it's arrangement and basic band sound...bass, drums, guitar, piano etc...basically your bed tracks.

Then I import that song into RB and from there add to what I have with other instruments that may be other rhythm or backing instruments or solo instruments.

I took the page from how many people record and when picking solo instruments I take multiple takes of the ones I choose. For example if I find a great guitar soloist that works I will create 4 or more tracks of that players work. Then when I get to my DAW (Samplitude Pro X2) I add all those instruments in and work through them...much like you would in a real studio session.

And like Deacon above stated I too use the multi-riff generation function to create the intro, solos and or extros I want to hear that to me are very specific and important. Most of the time the 4 plus takes (per instrument) that I have of the instruments I have chosen in the song are adequate to produce more than enough fills for the rest of the song...and if not well then I just go back to my RB friend and generate a few more.

That is how I do things but I was wondering if I could cut out the BB part and go straight to using RB. And now that Noel has enlightened me as to why BB seems so much faster than RB to generate or re-generate stuff...well that makes sense...plus RB doesn't seem to have what BB has in the way of a Generate and Play button all in one...(unless I'm wrong). It's a 2 step process...click to generate...then click to play....not a big deal just an annoyance...:)

And I do NOT use RB as a DAW to me it is cumbersome and not easy to use...

I am a BIAB only user. I don't have a DAW and my approach is to use BIAB strictly for accompaniment. I don't have frozen tracks or specific licks, in fact most of the styles, Real Tracks and Real Drums remain unused. all my songs are regenerated when I use them.

I used to use only the bass and drum parts, but now use some styles with Real stuff. It is more interesting, but for the most part, unnecessary.

I know here is a lot more I cold do with the product if I wanted, but so far I have never had the inclination to move from the basics.

I do recommend to new users that, if they don't have a DAW, they should learn RealBand.

It's free, it reads BIAB files (which no other DAW can do), it can regenerate part of a track (that BIAB cannot do), and it offers more than one audio track for recording. Pretty good for free.

I agree - and if I needed one, it would be an easy choice. Just haven't sen a need yet.

I'd just like to say . . . . W/O BB, there wouldn't be a RB. You need all of the RT's and Styles from BB to begin with. Just sayin.

Trax

I use only BIAB. About 3 or 4 times a year I try to use RB and end up frustrated. It is not a good DAW for all the reasons already stated by others. I have tried a few times to use the Multi-Riff feature which is brilliant and should be included in BIAB!

What I do is mostly accept what BIAB generates for bass and drums. For solo instruments or more prominent instruments I will generate the song and then freeze it and save it. Then I'll unfreeze, regenerate and save again to get a new set of tracks. Once I am done I can bring all the various tracks into my DAW and use the sections I want to comp complete tracks. If BIAB had multi-riff I would love that because it would reduce this effort.

I am always kinda put off by folks who claim RB is free therefore it is a good deal for new users. Well, first off, it is NOT free; I had to buy BIAB to get it! And second, Windows Paint is also "free" but if I want to do any serious graphic work I'd never even open it opting instead for something far more modern and powerful. And finally, I always recommend new users NOT use RB because it is so frustrating and slow and quirky! The last thing I want to do is put a newbie on a path where they are more likely to get frustrated. Instead, they should grab the full-featured Reaper demo for free or the new Cakewalk that is truly free!

I'm just hoping for JJJ's BiabVST idea, this will give you Biab right in any 64bit DAW along with MultiRiffs, this way you can do it all directly in the DAW, start to finish.
You can even have other studio or live recordings and the BiabVST will generate up any extra instruments to the same tempo map in the DAW.
This will be even better when the Audiophile version moves to 24bit audio quality and multi stem RealDrums to give full mixing control of the drums.

So the current Biab will stay unchanged for those that use it for accompaniment, songwriting and as a learning tool etc...
While those that need it for high quality studio track creation will use the BiabVST.

Use whichever tool works best for the task.

BiaB is faster .. it generates as it plays, but gives less control over end result.

RB takes more effort/time, but lets you expand/refine your idea much better .. as mentioned. Many more tracks, multiriffs, etc. However it has to generate everything before it plays, so for BiaB users it may seem slow/sluggish. For trying new variations of a given section/track, maybe not so much. No other DAW allows this. I get it that other DAWs are better in other ways, but they can not generate RTs .. which is a trade off that needs to be decided by the user. When you don't need the generate option, move on to your desired next tool.

You don't have to choose just one. There is no 'right way'.
They are tools.
A screwdriver can work as a nail punch .. and a chisel can be used as a pry bar .. but when you use each tool for the right purpose they are much better tools.

Basic flow if starting a song from nothing here -
BiaB -> RB -> whatever other tool I need

The answer depends somewhat on how you think.

If you think about a song in parts, in other words song structure, then Band-in-a-Box likely better works the way you think. Band-in-a-Box has a feature that lets you assign bars to a block and you can rearrange a song by moving blocks instead of bars.

If you think about a song in a linear fashion, RealBand likely works the way you think since RealBand follows a timeline from beginning to end.

Rharv makes an excellent point. I use MIDI almost exclusively thus I do not need the RT tools that are included in RB. My work flow is to have BiaB generate MIDI backing tracks then bring them into my Studio One Pro DAW. In my DAW I either erase a track and play it myself, or have JonD or BobH play it, modify it to my satisfaction and/or keep it as is.

If I do use a RT I just generate one in BiaB, bring it into my DAW and cut and paste as needed.

Biab is great for the sketches, and i just started using RB for adding realtime miked instruments (audio) for soloing or live feel. For the finishing of a project i usually export all audio and midi to a DAW, and quite often exchange some audio or midi generated by PGstuff. F.i in Cubase one has far more editing, mixing and synchronizing possibilities, at a price though.

Hiring musicians is a great thing, but often i want to change arrangements completely in a later stage. Besides some recorded BIAB musicians are beyond my playing capabilities anyway, and can't be found easily where i live ..... But i can imagine that if you're in a hurry one can get results quickly using Realband as DAW only. F

For creating from scratch, I think nothing beats Band in a Box. Especially for beginners to create music. Great for beginners before moving into DAW recording. It's a way beginners coming from the background of analog recording with multitrack recorders with a limited number of tracks; they can bring many of those multitrack techniques into BB to extend track count, bounce tracks and increase the number of instruments in much the same way they did with their analog multitracks.

I think most people are unaware that BB can produce a song with dozens of tracks and dozens of different instruments, at CD quality and no loss of quality to the audio without having to use another program.

All of the same dxi,vst and audio effects available in RealBand are also available in BB. I think that another advantage to using BB over RB for creation to a beginner that processes like panning, gain changing, fading, etc are more similar to working with presets and beginners can spend more time making music than learning DAW programming. I see it as a beginning and more conducive to motivating the artist with successful production of music rather than frustrations of not being able to get the music in your head into a format that produces the audio you hear because of technical computer skill limitations.

Band in a Box is a great place to begin your creation journey and allows you to enjoy success as you grow into the more complex areas of production.

+1 on that
Cheers
ian

Being on the Mac side I don't even have the RB option, but from what I've heard about Multi-Riff I would be delighted to see that feature incorporated into BIAB. On both platforms.

Like many others I find BB is much faster to create and generate the initial draft of a song. I may or may not take the song into RB to add bits, make use of multi riff etc then I set everything to the same volume (90) and centre each track. I then export tracks to .wav and pull the tracks into a daw either Sonar or Reaper depending what I intend doing to the tracks. Then I check all is about the same volume and it is all down the middle. After that I start the editing (chopping up parts maybe moving or deleting them or whatever) adding extra midi parts (I have been using Sonar for many years and find creating midi parts simpler in Sonar where I also have a far greater choice of VST instruments) and start the mixing processes.

I have heaps of time on my hands but I find it easier and faster and more consistent to do things this way.

Tony

Hi Charlie what you said below is really important especially that Biab allows you to be successful despite a lack of understanding or while you are working on an acquired production skill and in this sense is very motivational,great insight thanks

Band in a Box is a great place to begin your creation journey and allows you to enjoy success as you grow into the more complex areas of production.

I'm a little late to this party, and don't have time to read all the posts (what I did read was thoughtful) because I have an early gig today, so excuse me if I'm being redundant.

First of all, there is more than one right way to make music, so my way is best for me and may not be best for you.

I like my apps separate. Band-in-a-Box (auto accompaniment), MIDI sequencer, notation and DAW.

If I am going to use BiaB, I generally start with it, export what I want to keep as a MIDI file and work with that using an old version of Master Tracks Pro. If I want to add audio I'll use a DAW and for what I need, Power Tracks Pro Audio works great. If I want a chart, I'll use an old copy of Encore which works great with Master Tracks Pro.

I like separate apps because I work better at one phase at a time (not a great multi-tasker). I find my concentration level to be deeper that way and the output better. Of course I could work on more than one phase in Real Band, but with separate apps, I find the interface less cluttered, no menus with sub menus and sub-sub-menu choices which leaves me to have more time with my hands on musical instruments and less time with my hands on the computer.

I have a web page on how I make backing tracks for my duo. Feel free to use what you like and ignore the rest http://nortonmusic.com/backing_tracks.html

Of course YMMV.

Insights and incites by Notes