PG Music Home Forums PG Music Wishlists Band-in-a-Box Wishlist What do you like,and what do you er, hate about BIAB ?

After trying out several similar programs (ok,BIAB is a very unique program,but that does not make it necessarily the best) , I have realized a few things about BIAB.
Not everybody will agree,but here's my list of the things I'd like to see in BIAB,and the things I really dislike (ehm,hate ,actually ) about it. Let's start with what I really like about it:

1. It's an invaluable learning tool. Very educative. I am certainly no beginner in the music field,but I always like to learn. I wrote a commercial a few weeks ago by analizying a Django Reinhart tune that was feature in BIAB.
I don't claim that BIAB wrote the music,I take the credits for creating my music (in fact,this feature of BIAB even coming up with a TITLE for the tune,is a bit too much, I think!
But hey,if you don't want to use the feature,no one forces you to,right?'

2. Loads of styles and loads of add-ons. Great choice: there's a bit of everything. Classical,jazz,etc

3. A very good manual,and best of all, a stellar collection of videos,an area that even years ago,
PG Music was miles ahead even compared to Steinberg and Cakewalk,whose absolute disregard for free videos but no disregard for 'passionless' manuals always make me think these people never actually made any music.

3. You can type in the chords ! That to me was a real innovation.

4. VST and ASIO support

now,the things I really dislike about it:

1. The program is overbloated with options. Changing a zillion little things isn't the way.....
I remember that years ago,someone said this,and I disagreed with him. Sorry man! You were 120 per cent correct!

What matter is directness and speed of implementation,and a certain economy in the interface. A composer wants to get to the nitty-gritty. (who has time for everything? There's only time for the most important things. ) I think that people that have to meet schedules,would all agree that a feature is only good if it helps to stimulate inspiration and if it stimulates the user to actually write music,and bypass all the 'wordly' concerns....in other words,I want to carry out whatever operation on the program,in a few steps as possible.

I have used BIAB for years,but did I ever 'explore' all the zillions options? No,I didn't, I had other things I had to learn and deal with : harmony,etc....and I am glad I did

Writing music is ALL that matters. A clean interface stimulates concentration and clarity.
What does a good student does,when he wants to study a certain topic? (whether or not it's music).
He'll clean his desk and get rid of all the distractions. It helps to focus.

The guys at PG Music are great because they try to make their customers happy and they care about their users. It is demonstrated by the constant additions to the program. That's really great,I am not saying 'don't add features' ,but I think they should be added with great care.

2. I don't like the mixer. I don't like these numbers,I 'd like to see a row of SLIDERS and something that looks like a mixer. We want to move sliders,to change the volume,not enter numbers.

3. The Sequencer.....
God. The one on my 1989 Ensoniq SQ1 looked almost as bad. I press Seq,and that terrible little Windows thing comes up. Where are the tracks? I mean,graphical tracks?

4. The intros.....they are really lame. I think that this philosophy about making a program that 'always plays something different when you hit ,again, Play ' is a bit of a limitation. Yamaha arrangers are not as 'interactive',but the intros sound great.
I mean, this 'endless possibility' thing about BIAB always playing something different,is a bit of an illusion. I want to hear ONE intro that sounds great,not 30 of them where all that is happening,are two bars with a tonic and a dominant chord.

Don't get me wrong, BIAB is a fantastic program,and it's not to be compared to other ones,because it does his own thing. But the fact that One Man Band can import Yamaha styles (and thus great intros can be heard -and studied- ) or that the interface in Songtrix Gold is so incredibly 'musical' ,clear,clean ,and 'to the point' make that program have something unique too.
You just click on a bar and you hear the part played by that instrument. It feels like a musician is playing it because you asked. The piano roll shows events separately for each track. In BIAB, i import a midi file,I hit Piano Roll,and I see a wall of notes from all the instruments at the same time.

The mixer in Songtrix looks like a mixer.
BIAB eats Songtrix for breakfast as far as number of styles and add-ons go. The add ons are important....you are given the choice to implement something in the program,but only if you want it.

Also,Songtrix doesn't even support ASIO and VST instruments yet,although I think that the guys at Songtrix are working on it.

But I still love that interface. I wrote more music with that in a week than all the music I wrote in 6 months.

I love BIAB and this post is only intended as a contructive criticism. Obviously I am underlining the criticism more,but BIAB also has fantastic innovations that other programs can only dream about....Realtracks,for example.
BIAB is a great program and an invaluable learning tool....i just hope it will be more direct to use ,more oriented toward stimulating musical composition (I mean written by the user! )
I'd start with a cleaner interface and a mixer....

So what do you love and what you like less about BIAB ?

I understand what you are trying to say, but the problem is, for every user that hates a feature there are ten who love it. So why even discuss it, for the larger part it won't change anything, really. I personally find it easy to use, and not cluttered at all. There are many features i do not personally use, but there are many who do use those. The mixer is fine to me, as it is small and does not take up space. If I want to mix and master a song I will do it in a true sequencer, like RB, PTPA, or Sonar, or whatever floats my boat.

I realize that BiaB is not written for me, but for a large cross section of people. If you like songtrix for some purposes use it, then use BiaB for what it does you like. I use three programs regularly, BiaB, RB, and another DAW i find does the final mix better.

There are a lot of decent points in that first post, but in the end there is ONE thing that has botherd me for years....since V4.......the endings..:(..they flat out suck, and brings down the entire program IMHO.

Listening to the Real Drums/Tracks I was hoping to finally hear some real endings....but no go. The 4 bar Intros are fine by me, and yes, you can always fade out the end. But there are times that you want and ending to stop on certain chords, etc.

I love the program, and even with the nasty endings I am still going to get the Ultra Pack for the Real Tracks. There is NO other program that does what BiaB does...a lot of copiers, but IMHO no one comes close...I just wish they would get this ending thing sorted....

I am a BIAB user and a songwriter. While I am writing a song I often save different styles with the song until I finally decide on the one I will use permanently. Now I have several songs by the same title showing up on my song picker and no way to delete any of them without going through the process of using the Windows explorer which does not show me the style like it does in the song-picker so I have to bring up each song to see which style it is using. This is a lengthy process that I think could best be avoided if we could have a delete button added to the song-picker page. Please, Please, Please! Have I missed some instructions somewhere for an easier way to get those songs off my song-picker list?
Val

I WAS a BIAB user. It's a great program as long as you use Windows. I hate the fact that:

1) Mac users have been waiting 4+years for a new version
2) PG refuses to tell us anything about what's going on.
3) PG keeps saying 'we're working on it' but then doesn't ever release anything.
4) PG keeps selling an obsolete product for ridiculous prices without a clearly warning Mac users that it's a crippled version, out-dated version.
5) Peter rarely ever answers these kinds of posts and when he does he prefers to be as vague as possible.


Yup....

I'm a long time user of BIAB. I don't use any of BIAB's intros or endings. Read the manual and learn how to compose your own. As far as deleting songs, try using F3 - BB - right click what ever song you want to delete and delete. Later. Ray

I cannot overstate how much I love what BiaB (and RB) does.

But by the same token, the interface is well overdue for a complete remake.

Hard to tell for me what I don't like since I just work with it for a few days. I see lots of pro's still and not so many con's (yet). I can though after reading this see what you mean. The interface could absolutely use a make over. In those few days I found it negative ,that it has no option for spreading over two monitor screens, except for taking the screens that are floating, apart in the other screen.

I have some soundcard related trouble, but that is obviously my own setup I need to work on, but what I don't like is the fact that and that is mainly because of the many options mentioned before, I got a lot of midi in- and especially out trouble. I don't need midi out, I use some plugin for MIDI for now at least, maybe I will hook up my yamaha keys later on still, but for now I don't want to be bothered all the time for midi connections that not seem to work while I said "no midi input/output... Maybe I still need to learn more about the program, but well being an audio-engineer, I follow the ways of logic trouble shooting, but that is pretty hard if the system is not really transparant and making "studio-sense".

Hi:
I have used BB for a long time now, and I have not upgraded yet, due to 2 reasons:
1. the styles have not improved yet for DRUMS. I feel that the drums section is the weakest link of BB, for example the rolls before going to a chorus, or going back to a verse, is so limited, that it does not give the song much legitimacy.
I woould like to see the DRUMS section improved, such as an user can specify how busy the drums or vice versa will be, as well as different styles of rolls before changing verse or chorus, etc...

2. and I also wish that BB has the ability to arrange the harmony following the melody that you input in. For instance, how can we have a block chord style, if the arrangement does not know how to follow the melody. For normal arrangement, the melody should give an indication as to where to be busy, and where to be not. Based on what other plug ins and samplers can do, I think that BB can achieve this with not much difficulty.

Until then, I continue to use what I have.

Sincerely,
dan le

Like many here, I too, have been using BIAB for a long time (version 6 on the Mac). BIAB works for me for the type of music my band plays (love songs) but...

1. I would love to be able to start the click intro and then have the program 'hold' until signaled to start from that point. [For example - If I want the singer to sing 12 measures a cappella and have BIAB come in on the downbeat of measure 13.]

2. Fade outs would be a great addition to the Mac version of the program

I agree ( if anyone actually said this) that its all about the interface. Dont add a host of new features like triple harmony auto generate, just give us a clean easy interface this will do the basics -- generate a credible intro, let you tweek the middle chourses easily, and generate a credible ending. That's it! Do it in a very simple interface that works like a wizard. Keep the complex stuff for those who want it but dont force people who are more muscian than computer head to use it to get good results.

Greetings all,

This topic comes up every so often. I would first like to say I admire Peter Gannon and PG music company for the way they treat their customers......

A. Loads of help here at the forum (No nasty vibes either.....nice!)

B. Live help (How many companies do this for free?)

C. NO COPY PROTECTION!!! (If I had 1 $ for every problem Ive had trying to authorize other software, Id be rich!)

D. Great upgrade packages.

I first bought BIAB in 1990 for the Atari. BIAB has changed dramatically in that time. In my opinion, here is what needs to happen to make BIAB better:

1. A new GUI, the current GUI is dated, confusing and WAY to busy.
2. I still am not happy with the midi timing in BIAB, it was rock solid on the Atari, I blame the Windows OS for this, still, it should be possible. And at least 480-990 PPQ please.
3. BIAB needs multiple VST support. I would love to use Ivory, Trilogy & BFD at the same time for example.
4. Rewire support. It would be so cool to use BIAB with Reason.
5. The notation is still Ïffy............Take a look at Sibelius or Finale. Although the lead sheet print out is good, the whole Triplet swing issue is annoying.
6. Intro´s and Endings really need a makeover.
7. Serious updates are needed for the Sequencer and Mixer. Take a look at Logic, Pro Tools or Sonar, it would be great to get some of these features into BIAB.
8. Update the PROCESS of making new styles. The current method is confusing and difficult.
9. Real Tracks: Vocals (Uu´s, Ahh´s) String lines, Be Bop soloists, Funk and Rock Horns, etc.

And, a BIG thank you to Peter and Co. for finally beta testing and bringing out the new Mac version. Can´t wait to use it!!!

My 2 cents,
Ed

Take a look at Logic, Pro Tools or Sonar PRICE$ too...

I love the program and use it on a near daily basis.

I love the price. I think the program is easily the biggest software bargain that I use.

I hate the endings.

"Hate" is such a strong word.

I am always confused by the request for making BiaB more like Logic, protools, and Sonar. First off it is nothing like them period, it is an autoarrangment software, they are sequencers. Those other softwares do very little of what Biab does, so to me it is not important to have Biab do much of what they do.

Isn't that the job of powertracks and now Real Band? to grow into a competitor of the big name DAWs? In my opinion the only thing holding both RB and PTPA from being a direct competitor of Sonar, or Logic is the fact it is a bit behind in VSTi implimentation.

As far as multiple VSTi output that might be nice for the play live crowd with BiaB. To be able to use better synths would help, but i would hate to see it head directly toward the full DAW market. I like the fact that it does what it does. I have four different DAW programs on my system for tracking, one RB allows me to send BiaB files directly over and add what i want to them.

When you go to forums like Sonar, or Logic, one of the biggest complaints is that the programs are becoming so big and bloated that the are not stable. With all that Biab does not to add Something like Sonar into it, would be to me a kiss of death.

I would rather see what can become of RB for the next two or three years, and let BiaB make some samll tweaks for the time being.

I don't hate the endings. But, three times out of five, I have to seriously rework them, and one of the other times I have to add something to cover a problem.

As do we all, filkertom.

But I ain't wastin' any of my time and resources on hatin' things nor people.


--Mac

Ah'm feelin' good enuff to stir up trubble now 'n again, my friend.

You?

Vertical and conscious. Physically I'm pretty much recovered, although since I was practically handicapped before I hurt my leg that ain't saying much. I'm trying to get Medicaid and SocSec disability income; we'll see how those go. Musically, I'm not yet really back in the groove -- even the smallest projects are tough to get started, and the larger ones I want to do aren't inspiring me right now. But all will work out, and performing is still a blast.