Is it just me? Since getting a laptop and going mobile in 2005, I have shared the program (the idea, not the software) and my creations with others. I have used the Jukebox and the chord sheet to do lightning jams with friends. I have created songs and edited them on the fly to demonstrate its ease of use. I have done all of this through good synths so as not to get the snark about how cheesy it sounds.

Never once has anyone said, "Cool, I'll give it a look," or, "That was great, I went ahead and bought it!" The responses have been 100% negative, ranging from "I'd rather do it by hand," to "that's cheating," to "I tried it once, it's a toy," to an outright insult: "I bet you're the best accordion player in your trailer park." (WTF?)

Any thoughts on my experience? I am almost hesitant to bring it up now. (I do have fun when people ask how I made something that sounds good. I just say I have a secret weapon.)

What about you? Who has had any luck in persuasion? How did you do that? Or is it the same for everyone?

Enquiring minds want to know.

Richard

I think the reasons branch out in a lot of different directions, most of them based on personal preference and prejudice. Somebody who has acquired great skill with a coping saw might thing that using a jigsaw is cheating... but they're just different tools that help the craftsman in similar yet different ways.

My current take on the matter is to regard the misconceptions and/or narrow-mindedness of others as being THEIR problem, not mine. If the tool works for you, use it whole-heartedly. Other people are using the tools they like.

Whether the topic is religion, politics or music software, people seem highly resistant to other peoples' preferences and I don't expect that to change any time soon.

In respect for PGMusic, I acknowledge the use of the software any time I use it, and if people like what they hear, they can take it from there. Evangelizing my preferences has never worked out well for me, no matter what the topic happened to be. So at its core, I think this is less of a BIAB thang and more of a "resistance to other peoples' preferences" thang.

Or not. That just my opinion, and you are free to have a different one. ;-)

There does seem to be an unreasonable bias against the program. I've heard the “cheating” jibe, mostly on other sites, and mostly from amateurs or hacks.

It's amusing that the same people who AutoTune every note look down their noses at BIAB.



Regards,

Bob

Richard, my experience has been the same as yours. The biggest complaints I have heard about BiaB is that it looks like something from Win 3 and it's only 32 bits.

I also have heard that it is cheating. That from at least one person I know who uses loops! There is your WTF!

I will keep pushing it. I always mention on SoundCloud and other sites that BiaB was used in the making of this song.

As Pat said it is their problem not ours.

3 piece bands everywhere are playing with prerecorded horn, keyboard and vocal tracks so they sound like 7 pieces. This is no different.

That last one is funny but rude and mean!


In my opinion...don't bring it up; focusing on the tools distracts from your music.

So......I'm cheating because I can't play every RT/RD like the award winning artists who created them for PG Music??

If some knucklehead suggested that to me I'd tell him to check back in after he wins grammy awards for playing multiple instruments. And, if they think it's "cheating" then they are clueless as to the amount of time that goes into the mixing side of the equation. Comping tracks, mixing and mastering IMO allow you to take RTs and RDs tracks to another level. Using it literally right out of the box is fine but I think several folks on the User Forum are producing songs that many experienced listeners would equate with studio productions. And, I don't even explore the midi side of things...too enamored with RT's!

I'm privileged to have known some really ace musicians for years and they have been uniformly impressed with what I've accomplished with BiaB RT's and RD's...and they'd tell me in a New York minute if they weren't. But, hell, I live out in the provinces so perhaps I don't run into the snobs

I credit BiaB on all of our videos and extoll its virtues any time I get a chance.

Bud

Biab shows up on time to every gig and recording session.
Doesn't get drunk and and out of time.
Doesn't run off with the bass players wife.

As a bass player with a wonderful wife that is another reason to use it!

Bud

Funny, but I remember in the earliest days of RealDrums, that one was actually false. The state of the art in PCs ten years ago was such that things like wireless mice or misbehaving network cards could cause latency problems in digital audio. I used to describe the resulting sound as "having the drummer playing while falling down stairs"! I'm glad we're almost completely past that sort of problem now.

My experience as a BIAB evangelist may be different from most of you because, while I can play horns, I do not play piano, guitar, bass or drums. Thus, composing, or at least checking what I composed, was difficult. I received tons of inquiries about how I wrote all the songs on my CD, and the answer that surprised everyone was BIAB. I know I was responsible for some sales.

Richard, I will never be close to the best accordion player in any trailer park, but I've had a good run with music. For the last 24 years, BIAB has had a lot to do with that.

So true what you're all saying! In my experience many musicians tried BIAB a long while back when to be honest the instruments were cheesy and they haven't come back. I was in the same boat myself until I discovered realtracks and now I see the future. I'm happy to talk up BIAB to a receptive audience but otherwise fondly refer to my 'band' as Matcham and Jackson Family in promo material.

All of the above and (sorry if I missed it) but I truly feel some people are afraid of it in the sense that they would not get the same results as many of us do. I know crazy but I am reading that in-between many detractors lines of conversations.

I feel sorry for theses cats. I have one guy who despises the use of tracks on an online venue I play. I also might ad that I see he and his band doing 4/5 gigs a year while me and BIAB are booked 75 - 100 nights a year not counting eConcerts. I seriously feel sorry for some of these cats.

Later,

Great answers! I think I'll take the time I used to talk about it, and just use it instead.

Yeah—that's the ticket!

Funny thing, there is a guy on the BNB Facebook page today questioning the 'quality' of BNB. It is easily seen he is one of the above mentioned naysayers mentioned in above posts. I referred him to the User Showcase to satisfy his demands to hear what can be done with BNB. I haven't been back to see if he has posted a response.

My take on this is,

If you are going to record a song say in a studio you will hire the best musicians possible (even though you may be a musician yourself, but you can't play everything) Provided you have the money and means to do so.

No different with biab, you are hiring those guys to play, only thing is you pay them once a year.



Musiclover

I have had the same problem in the NYC school system. People that are deep into music, AND 'techies' LOOOOVE it and feel a personal challenge learn to use it. People that are not....have issues.

I have found the following spcecific little challenges - in isolation, or in group:

1.) The interface - is OUTSTANDING for a power user - everything is one click away. It's overwhelming for a beginner. There are 40+ ? buttons. Unless you walk them through it and show them EXACTLY which 3 to 5 buttons to hit in EXACTLY what order, and what to pick in the submenus.
--suggestion: Include "simple" interface options - hides ALL button toolbars, and allows a user to Pick from a list of custom SMALL toolbars designed for various uses of the program....e.g. the simplest would be "PLay Along" - only 5 or so buttons - 1.) SONG Open (via songpicker) - notice I intentionally did not put FILE open 2.) some voiceover instructions about selecting a song of interest (e.g. maybe highlight only titles and keys - don't confuse them with other columns)
3.) "What Next" button - explaining how to listen, mute the solo instrument, and then play along.



2.) When one opens the most important screens - songpicker or stylepicker - it is not intuitive to a beginner (someone who hasn't read the manual or about the program) what they are going to get or HOW they should use the loaded song...eg "Walk Me Through" button
--> suggestion: 1.) see above - 2.) to elaborate --> video tutorial MACROS with voiceovers that point to the buttons/menu items to press with pointers that the user has to actually execute (e.g. click) , and voiceovers and BIG MENU with buttons giving instruction 'options' about what to do next and why in terms of HOW to use the program productively. I've found that people don't read manuals or watch the YouTube videos unless they ALREADY have a high motivation to learn the program


3.) MANY of my highly skilled musician friends prefer iReal pro over BB - one factor is price - another is I believe simplicity - even though the backing arrangements are baby-sounding compared to BB.
suggestion: create a cheaper, phone-based BB that is equally simple as iReal pro, but includes the beautifully sophisticated arrangements as current BB. Remove all "generation" features - average users don't care - just want some good backing tracks to practice or jam with...in fact - remove EVERYTHING except the good sounding backing tracks....(of course - I'm not so sure that's so easy for PG to do - or I think they would have done it a long time ago)


Just my 26 cents worth : )

Just read a few more of your posts -
1.) the user interface - these poor PG guys can't get away from the look and feel of the user interface looking 'old' (then again - I'm old, so I focus on useablity and function, and I find it very well done). Their issue is really 'style' - think Apple vs. Windows).

2.) agreed - many people HAVE used the programs MANY years ago and you know what they say about "First Impressions" - it has stayed with these people for 10+ years

suggestion: 1.) change the UI - get a UI expert from the 'state of the art' music UI group (PS - I don't even know what people consider state of the art UI's these days)
2.) ONce you have the new UI - start a new company, with a new name, and give the program a new title - so nobody knows and new "First Impressions" can be made.

Well, some interesting observations.

So.... I don't mention who did my tracks on a song unless someone specifically asks. Once they ask, I tell them how I did those tracks.

I've been in the forums where BB is considered "cheating". So the response I give them is, "Do you play all the tracks on your music?" The obvious answer to that is "no".

So if you used a drum synth, or a bass synth, or even hired another musician to play it for you.... isn't that essentially "cheating" too?

I don't waste my time anymore arguing or discussing the use of BB as cheating.

There's at least 2 folks here in this forum because they heard the music I was creating with BB, liked it, and got involved. I didn't try to convince either or hard sell them on what a great tool BB was. I simply showed them what it could do when they heard my music.

Aside from this forum, (Showcase) I don't list any of the tracks and who played or how they were recorded. Many of the old-timers on the other forums know me and know I use BB and as I listen there to others music, I hear more of them slowly starting to incorporate BB into their projects as well.

I've found in life this truth.... You can't convince someone to do, or buy something they don't see as a value to them personally. They gotta want it themselves first.

I don't evangelize, but I do demonstrate to other musicians if they seem interested.

Some of them say "It's cheating", some are interested and I don't know if they end up with it or not, and I have turned it on more than a few people who have purchased it. Including a teacher who uses it in the classroom.

The teacher has invited me to school a couple of times and the kids seem very enthusiastic about it.

There will always be resistance to something different for those who developed a skill that it might be replacing.

You can offer them the benefits, and either they take it or leave it.

I find not being too enthusiastically about it when demonstrating it is most effective.

I used to resell BiaB, back when it was on disk. I also found I sold more when I didn't sell it myself, but referred them to PG Music. As soon as they found out I was profiting by selling it, the wall went up. So I don't sell it anymore, but refer them to PG Music. Then when the find out how wonderful the app is, I can sell them my style and fake collections.

Insights and incites by Notes

I like JoeV's idea but would apply it differently in BNB. i would not create a new program, just a new included feature on how BNB is accessed.

BNB should create a Quick Start Tutorial that takes a beginner through creating and inputting a complete song demonstrating features along the way by guiding the 'student' to select the buttons via highlights or arrows. A hands on creation rather than watch a tutorial. Some existing tutorials were done long ago and there are confusing differences between the graphics. Startup of BNB would be either Quick Start or Normal.


A selection button could be added to the splash screen at startup allowing the user to select Quick Start or Normal start up. This would provide new users guided help creating their first song or their 50th song simply by selecting Quick Start rather than Normal.

For advanced users, the splash screen should have the choice to opt out having to click Normal each start up by selecting "Don't show this screen at Startup"

The Quick Start Song could have the yellow/green messages to guide and explain selections of "if you want to change key or tempo" ; To add more bars to your song"; "Let's add some Reverb"; "Let's mute the guitar on the solo track".

Charlie

Joe V, you make an observation about the overwhelming nature of BIAB's UI about which I made this suggestion; but first, some history.

Some decades ago auto manufacturer Bentley reintroduced a model called the Lagonda. It was ultra high end, and priced to match; they only made 24 a year. It had a pre-digital dashboard with a panel that had 144 readouts. This was overwhelming for all but, say, military test pilots with ADD. So there was a button for essential readings, which cut it down to 12.

BIAB is almost intimidating in the amount of choices it offers. Powerful, but overwhelming. So I suggested an "essential controls" option for basic functions, and for the ability to customize the menus as such as certain versions of Windows did. There are functions which I know I will never use, so I feel I shouldn't have to wade through them every time I call up the dialog which contains them. (I posted these on the Wishlist long ago.)

Many naysayers would be shocked to learn how many top music schools are currently teaching BIAB in their curricula. Perhaps we are only on the bleeding edge of music technology in education. Although the software has been available for some years, music educators are only now being made aware. I firmly believe that today's music students will open the floodgates soon.

It is also being taught in Broadcasting Courses at Green River College and Illinois State University (Don Gaynor Special Needs Music Department (Blushing)) as well as Julliard College of Music, Temple University, and many others worldwide.

I am very pleased to be propagating PG Music whenever/wherever I can.

There is a predictable lag while these first tier students complete their education.

Don

There is something with Microsoft in collaboration with PG but I can't remember the name of it.

Bob

Microsoft Songsmith

Guess I'm a bit of the odd man out -- there's ample precedent:) I like the array of options available as buttons on the primary page. The alternative is drilling down through menus or remembering short cut keys. For somebody interested in a quick creation of a few backing tracks I think the routine would come quickly particularly given the huge numbers of styles. From help screens to videos to google there's a lot of quick info on how to accomplish certain tasks. My first version was 2011 and I was able to noodle around and create my first production rather quickly. My DAW (Logic Pro X) may have a more trendy GUI but initially it was much more intimidating and harder to scale down to my needs than BIaB. Logic has a "dumb down" mode but it is not configurable and it kills options that even a newbie would quickly need.

Admittedly I harness only a small percentage of the power of both Logic and BiaB but I find it easier with BiaB to learn new procedures. However as a Mac version beta tester I do get exposure to a lot of BiaB that I don't typically use. It's remarkable how many different ways this program can be used and yield a high quality output. Pardon another ole phart ramble.

So I had never heard of Microsoft Songsmith...but a quick Google:

http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/projects/songsmith/download.html

Anyone use it and care to comment about it compared to iReal ?

All this talk about UIs prompts me to remark that as a long-time Mac user I continue to find BIAB's UI decidedly PC-like ie overwrought and unattractive. As Mac users we are used to a certain slickness/cleverness in design. This matters on a brand level because the overwhelming majority of professional studios use Macs and they too are used to the Mac way. I believe that a sound strategy for PG to gain mainstream acceptance is to get pro acceptance. Then schools, music courses etc will feel obliged to introduce BIAB to their students. As it stands, BIAB has a kind of home hobbyist image that undermines its powerful functionality.

I don't mean to raise anyone's ire btw. I usually try to stay away from the usual Mac/PC needling.

On a related note, given that the realtrack concept surely has to be the way forward for music I'd very surprised if some big companies (I'm thinking the Apple Logic team for instance) aren't already working on their own algorithms. There are opportunities and threats in the market for PG. It's interesting to read that PG has partnered with Microsoft. I hope that's the right way forward.

Ryszard - I think your question might be phrased in a misleading way. I happen to know you and I have a lot in common. Rather than phrase it as 'selling people on BB' - I think you meant that you love to SHARE YOUR ENTHUSIASM for the program and are surprised that others don't see the value and share your excitement at what it does.

Good thing you don't have to sell anything - PG has to do that : )

It's way less pressure to share enthusiasm for something you believe in than to be involved in its financials.

That said - it's funny how much we are all so enthusiastic enough about the program that we love to give our "marketing / product development" strategies to Peter and his crew. It's almost like (maybe exactly like) - we wish we developed it and took it to the point it is now, and could help determine its future ; )

Songsmith is designed to take a melody you sing (record), then figure out a chord progression around it, then give you an arrangement by using PGMusic provided styles.

It will definitely give you some weird results, since the chord progression is based on what you sing (good, bad, or indifferent).

I bought it a number of years ago (it wasn't very expensive) along with the additional PGMusic styles, but was never very satisfied with the results. I've still got it on my computer still, but never use it. I don't think its core functionality has been updated in a very long time.

I've been singing the praises of BIAB for about 20 years now and I'm always surprised when people say they've never heard of it or never tried it. I've even heard some say the name, "Band-in-a-Box" makes the product sound gimmicky or amateurish. Strange.

Basically, I think most people have enough trouble learning to play and/or sing with any proficiency to get very deeply into the technical aspects of production and mixing. They just want to get recorded. At least that's been my experience.

I've used BIAB for decades, from making backing tracks for students, to creating full-production album projects, and most importantly for my own original music. I'd been recording my own creations since the late 60s with a TEAC reel-to-reel and had spent a lot of time and money in big studios working on projects when I discovered BIAB. The first day I installed it (from floppy discs no less) I stayed up till 2am playing with it. It was the mid 90s and I was in the process of building my own project studio which I wanted to be as self-contained as possible. I wanted to do it all, and BIAB seemed to be the answer to a prayer. Twenty years later I'm still convinced of the validity of that idea.

If you've ever spent any time in a big high-end studio, paying $150/hr or more for tracking and mixing, you know how much BIAB is like a big studio project at a fraction of the cost. Real Tracks and Real Drums has taken the product to the professional level. Some of the current Real Tracks artists are friends on FB. Most of them I couldn't afford to hire even if they didn't live 1,200 miles away.

I watched closely back in '85 while a famous producer brought in the best studio cats to lay down tracks for my first original album project. Not unlike BIAB, he had each sideman play along with the basic tracks and then had them "regenerate" their performance to suit his taste and vision of the song. Sound familiar?

Thirty years later these are my observations: Great players have a broad lexicon of great licks and phrases to add to your song. Local "hot pickers" may be just as talented with a smaller musical vocabulary. But the process is the same. They play along until YOU find something YOU like. Sidemen usually get about $100 per song to do studio recording. It's adds up fast. That first album project cost me about $20k, no small amount in '85. I got a great production and mixing education to be sure. But, since then I've done much better projects with BIAB at a tiny fraction of the cost, both for me and my clients.

I've produced nine full album projects for one well-known Colorado artist/songwriter and I've used BIAB on every song on every album in some way. He claims his albums are better than any he's heard from other local pros. Can't argue with success. I'm to the point now where I figure BIAB should be primarily a producer/engineer music creation tool. And I've pretty much stopped trying to get people to try it. Mostly, I just show them what it can do and let it be. Besides, I get paid pretty well for doing what I do...and who wants the competition. Maybe they should change the name to PG Music Authoring Software. Something a little more classy. On second though, just leave it like it is. No need to crowd the market, eh?

I agree 100%! Seems like there are 4 possible outcomes from me trying to convince someone of how good BIAB is...

1) they look at the GUI and overall complexity or listen to the stock MIDI results of the starter package and decide it is lame

2) they see its power and then say I am cheating

3) they don't care either way.

4) they love it and start producing high-quality music to compete with me

None of these results help me!

Along this topic I recently had the opportunity and pleasure to sit down with one of my favorite on-line music educators. This guy is big on the web and you-tube and is a fantastic musician and teacher. I have followed him for years and never the mention from him of BIAB. So I took the opportunity to ask him about it. Well, I was shocked by his response. "...of course I know it, it is fantastic! I have the current version...". So I asked, how is it you have never ever mentioned it in any of your videos or lessons? His answer was simple " It is the competition and no one advertises the competition."

When they say you are cheating, ask them how many Beach Boys they think played on Good Vibrations. And if they ever heard of The Wrecking Crew.

Wasn't The Wrecking Crew nothing more than live people doing what BIAB/RB does? Roger McGuinn says in The Wrecking Crew movie how angry the members of The Byrds were when the studio cats did the music for their albums. In the next sentence, he also reveals that when they finally DID play live, the intro to Turn Turn Turn took 77 takes.

So jazzmandan - who is the mystery music educator ? I'd love to check out his online stuff.

see PM

In a way, I guess it is cheating, as The Wrecking Crew, The Swampers, dubbing vocals for actors in movies, and so on. But in another way it's just another tool to be used to make something with.

When I started doing computer backgrounds with my Atari/ST computer, other musicians told me "You are going to put musicians out of work with that." I replied, "I am going to put a musician to work with that, me."

Later on. many of those same musicians who criticized my use of the computer are buying styles from me, buying karaoke tracks on-line or full sequences from somebody else.

I suppose the first "Sideman" drum machine was the first cheat. Or perhaps the capo? But things that are called cheating one day become normal the next.

I still play live with backing tracks that I make myself, many with the help of BiaB and a couple totally BiaB. I'm still in the same duo I started with that Atari in 1985, and we're still gigging with 17 one-nighters this month.

I do 100% MIDI backing tracks and Leilani and I sing and play either guitar, synth, wind synth, sax, or flute over the top.

I prefer MIDI over RTs for live performance, because the mix needs to be different live than it does for a recording. Hotter snare drums, exaggerated horn stabs, more dynamics on the bass and most other instruments. Plus the groove should often be exaggerated. It makes it sound more live to the audience.

Whatever, it's working.

If it's cheating, so be it.

Insights and incites by Notes

Presented without comment

I wonder if all of those folks who think that using these tools is cheating also think that using stunt men is cheating?

I was at church one morning and we were doing some upbeat music. I was using my arranger keyboard's built in styles, but also playing stuff myself on the keyboard, along with two guitarists (we didn't have a drummer or bass player at the time). Really, not much different than using a BIAB style.

After awhile, someone came up and watched for awhile at what I was doing and then he said "Hey, that's cheating. You're just pushing buttons" (of course I was playing the keys also, but whatever...)

I looked at him and said, "Ah, but I know which buttons to push! Would you like to try?" He respected and appreciated the effort after that.

A wise variation on that old saw about the unsolvable engine problem where they finally call in the expert. He makes one tap of the hammer which fixes it and presents his bill for $10,000. They complain, "All you did is one little tap of the hammer!" and he says, "Yes, but I knew where to tap".

Great answer John.

I've had guys walk up and tell me we're cheating. That's why I carry a pistol.

Not everyone is looking at this right. You don't have to sell it. Keep doing what you are doing on this forum.
I had BIAB about 8 years ago, and the midi sound drove me away... rather quickly. Two weeks ago I wanted to check it out again. The newer YouTube samples, and the fact that this is an active forum is all it took for me. This software with realband is the future.
Cheating? So is cruise control and that tool has saved me a fortune in tickets.

As far as changing the interface, I don't think PG has to be as drastic as some of the above posts suggest. Afterall, doesn't a DAW have a crazy amount of buttons? I simply don't see this software as being for a casual user, so not much point in making things overly clean.

The real change that PG needs to make is get rid of the ComicSans like font for chords. Hate it. I suspect that font alone sends so many (below age 45) away. The good news is that a guy from Germany appears to be helping resolve that.

Yes, we look forward to that new font. But, just checking, do you know that BIAB allows you several options in the choice of fonts, particularly as of version 2016?

Comic Sans is so interesting in how polarizing it is! I've even seen it on resumes (not what I would have recommended).

Hi Matt, thanks for making sure; Yes I did find it eventually. But it was more than one click away. But boy was I motivated to change it.
Even I am surprised at how strongly I feel about disliking the font. I suspect that most here are used to it, but the ComicSans font is the subject of so much scorn. Google 'ComicSans Failblog'
That issue aside, it is a great product, and you guys with history add a lot to it.

A similar yarn about a banker who locked himself out of the vault. He called a locksmith, who, after a few moments of looking & studying the door, gave it an mighty hit with a sledge hammer, and the vault door swung open.

He presented the banker with a bill for $500.00.

"$500.00 for 5 minutes work, that's ridiculous!" sai the banker, "Give me an itiemised account."
The locksmith handed over an invoice, which read:

Hitting the vault door with sledge hammer..................... $10.00
Knowing where to hit the vault door with sledge hammer.....$490.00

Dear Fellow BIAB-ers,

I usually try and employ a refined and aristocratic response when I hear jabberwocky of this ilk.

First I usually say something like "Take off you hoser! You know you're a hoser, eh? And worse than, you're nothing but a Hosehead!!"

If that doesn't work, I will ask to hear something THEY recorded all by themselves. When it is done, I will say "Who recorded THAT--your grandma or your stoned uncle?"

If they are still arguing that Real Tracks are cheating at that point, I will pass them an acoustic and ask them to play something.

Then I will take it back from them and I will play something.

The conversation usually stops right there and they crawl away.

Hope that helps.

another facet to this question is the demographic. We automatically assume that musicians will like BIAB more than the rest of the population.. yet it's typically musicians who feel threatened by it.

I mentioned it recently on an animation forum, because they have a need for music they can use without worrying about copyright infringement. The responses were quite favorable... in fact, I saw NO negative comments whatsoever! Several people said they would look into it!

People who need music, but who aren't able to play it themselves seem to like the idea of generated music. So... a heads-up to PGMusic's marketing folks: don't limit your ads to musicians. Focus on people who produce content in other media, and who need music for their projects. Animators, Indie video producers, advertisers etc are all potential customers.

In case you want to target these groups, Here's a list of animation software that has a loyal following... all of whom need music:
----------------------------------------------
Smith Micro: Poser, Anime Studio / MOHO
Digimania: Muvizu
Reallusion: iClone, Crazy Talk Animator
ToonBoom: Harmony
Autodesk: MAYA, 3DS MAX, Sketchbook Pro, Mudbox
Adobe: Flash
GoAnimate
Blender
FlipBook
Cinema 4D



programs used by Indie film makers:
------------------------------------
Adobe : Premiere, After Effects
Hit Film



Other software used by people who also need Music
------------------------------------------------
3D-Coat
Z-Brush
Mari


Game Creation software
----------------------
Unity
Unreal