|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,153
Veteran
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,153 |
I am building a new computer, and I'll be running a quad core Phenom II 64 bit processor. I've decided that I wanted to run a 64 bit OS on it, as well as a dual boot capability to run XP Pro 32 bit. While I have two CPUs in different computers that are 64 bit capable, I've never actually run a 64 bit OS...until now. On my 'spare' computer, which I don't use that often, I removed the primary hard drive and installed a blank drive. I had downloaded the Windows 7 64 bit Beta from Microsoft. They are allowing 2.5 million people the opportunity to download and install it, and they don't appear to be picky about who they let do it. So I did.  My computer is an older 754 socket motherboard, 2 gigs of DDR ram, an AMD 64 3000+ (about a 2gHz CPU), an ancient ATI X1550 video card, and a Creative Platinum ex in this computer also. The install was very slow, a few hours. That may have been because my DVD drive and hard drive were on different IDE controllers, and I didn't have in my 'master' removeable hard drive for IDE 1, I don't know. During install it installed drivers for almost everything, except a Linksys wireless lan card, which I'm not using anyway. My onboard lan was installed, the Creative was installed, the ATI card was installed, everything. I've not used Vista, so I can't compare this to that OS, but the desktop is very nice, I like the program bar at the bottom a lot more. I guess it has the Aero feature, but I don't know. The Creative card sound is a little choppy sometimes, I'm using both analog and digital outputs. But, not always. I installed BIAB and RB from the hard drive that came with the latest update. I 'installed' BB, and then copied drums and RTs. The RTs for any song play back well, and there is no problem getting it to run. Real Track generation time is probably a little more than half or 2/3s the time of my AMD 64X2 3800 Dual Core with XP Pro. Roland VSC I can't get to install, Coyote installs, but I've been unable to get sound from it. Since I can't find any kind of drivers whatsoever for the Audigy 2 on Creative's website, nor a site that has Daniel K's drivers, I am unable to load SoundFonts, so I do not know if they work or not. I'll have to drag a keyboard to this computer, find a MIDI interface, and see about MIDI with Win 7. The only real trouble I've had so far has had to do with installing networked printers. It sees them, but won't install drivers. That, and Yahoo IM has issues in that it won't open a window to show if I've received a message from someone. It appears that this is a very stable, fast and nice OS. It's still in Beta, but based on what I've seen so far, I'd be willing to buy it. What I have not tried yet, and will be trying tomorrow, most likely, is to output wave files from BIAB, and opening them in RB, to see if the DRM is applied to them. That has always been a worry for me with Vista. Gary
I'm blessed watching God do what He does best. I've had a few rough years, and I'm still not back to where I want to be, but I'm on the way and things are looking far better now than what they were!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,641
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,641 |
I know two people who are using this and both are impressed, and surprised. They can't believe that now that Bill has turned over the reigns MS made a good OS!
I told them to give it time; it's still in Beta- plenty of time to screw it up.
Seriously, I've been told by an instructor who teaches OS230 that this OS has been redesigned including the kernel, which is unique for MS to do, and he is really impressed with the low overhead and speed of the system. Here's hopin'!
For once I'm hearing other people talk about how great an operating system is, instead of MS telling us how great it is. Sure didn't take long to get something out behind Vista, huh?
Thanks for posting another good review of Win7
Make your sound your own!
.. I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,439
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,439 |
Don't be fooled - Win7 is vista - bit of a facelift and some bug fixes and code optimisation. Still a loooonnnggg way to go. Still FAR too resource hungry.
In this day and age, with the truly mind boggling processing power we have in our little 'puters, an OS should be loaded before we have time to think about it. Waiting the time we must for the most basic of operations is totally unacceptable.
I'm not yet satisfied. An OS that a needs minimum of twice the horsepower to run slower than it's predecessor, or in the case of Win7 to maybe match the OS two versions prior is deplorable.
--=-- My credo: If it's worth doing, it's worth overdoing - just ask my missus, she'll tell ya  --=--You're only paranoid if you're wrong!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 301
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 301 |
Hmm.... Conflicting views here, most interesting all the same. I'm still using XP and have deliberately avoided Vista and hoped that Windows 7 was gonna be the one! I'm more than happy with XP but it's time for a new system, cant get a new one with XP (without going backwards that is) Looking forward to your completed findings Gary. And indeed others....
Cheers,
Dave.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,153
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,153 |
Lawrie,
I confess innocence of Vista, until next week anyway. What I do know is that this slower, single core CPU running at 64 bit with Win 7 appears much faster than my Dual Core CPU running XP Pro is.
Time to start. Including everything, including loading programs like Yahoo IM is about 2:15. That's from the time I hit the power button to I'm fully up. It's about 90 seconds or less until I have a useable desktop, meaning I can start clicking stuff and use it with the final stuff is loading.
Band In A Box Real Tracks generation seems 1/3 to almost 1/2 faster than my Dual Core with XP Pro.
Most accessories are recognized and functional upon plugging them in, without factory drivers. I plugged in a web cam and was functional. No, I don't have all the bells and whistles for it, but it works. Didn't do that on XP.
Sound with the Creative Card is still spotty.
One of the biggest concerns I had was with DRM for wave files. In creating wave files from BIAB, I can move them to RB and Audacity with no apparent problem. I have not yet tried a CD to see what happens with that, i.e, ripping it or trying to use ACW.
I had one shut down error last night, just after I installed Office 2000. It is possible Outlook was still open, though. I have been unable to duplicate it this morning.
I know there are still bugs in it, but, with one exception, so far, for my purposes, if they offered to sell it to me tomorrow, I would buy it.
Again, I don't know about Vista, because I haven't used it yet, but I am rather impressed with this. I have not used a 64 bit OS before, either, but insofar as I've been able to tell, I've had no problems with drivers, either. I've seen one or two 64 bit drivers, but for the most part, it's 'Vista' drivers, I install them, and they work. The OS bit depth seems to be, at least so far, a non-issue. The possible exception to that is Coyote Forte. It installs, but I get no sound from it.
That may very well be a configuration issue on my part, I don't know. I don't usually use DXis anyway.
Gary
I'm blessed watching God do what He does best. I've had a few rough years, and I'm still not back to where I want to be, but I'm on the way and things are looking far better now than what they were!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,439
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,439 |
Quote:
I'm still using XP and have deliberately avoided Vista and hoped that Windows 7 was gonna be the one! I'm more than happy with XP but it's time for a new system, cant get a new one with XP (without going backwards that is)
This is my industry - well actually network integration, but we sell 'em and fix 'em too. At this point in time we still sell XP where possible - corporate LANs need predictable, reliable compatibility and vista wasn't that.
I too hope Win7 will be "the one" 'cos we're running out of choices...
--=-- My credo: If it's worth doing, it's worth overdoing - just ask my missus, she'll tell ya --=--You're only paranoid if you're wrong!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,439
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,439 |
Gary, gotta run for now - will reply when I get back from Church
--=-- My credo: If it's worth doing, it's worth overdoing - just ask my missus, she'll tell ya --=--You're only paranoid if you're wrong!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,439
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,439 |
Quote:
What I do know is that this slower, single core CPU running at 64 bit with Win 7 appears much faster than my Dual Core CPU running XP Pro is.
Time to start. Including everything, including loading programs like Yahoo IM is about 2:15. That's from the time I hit the power button to I'm fully up. It's about 90 seconds or less until I have a useable desktop, meaning I can start clicking stuff and use it with the final stuff is loading.
Band In A Box Real Tracks generation seems 1/3 to almost 1/2 faster than my Dual Core with XP Pro.
I have a Dual Core notebook running vista as a testbed - it's a serious dog! Dual core or not, the CPU is just not fast enough. If you check the clock speeds of the core 2 multi core CPU's you'll note Intel are only just strarting to get clock speeds approaching 3 GHz - early dual cores were around 1.6 GHz - simply not in the race.
Running 64 bit is a 2 edged sword... You should see some improvements in load time, as well as execution time, but driver availability has been a real problem in the past. Given that m$ have stated that they are moving to pure 64 bit has undoubtedly finally started the product manufacturers to make 64 bit drivers for their stuff. Although, while I haven't checked this out, it would make sense for m$ to create a mechanism for 32 bit drivers to be used properly.
Vista would also seems to get to a usable position fairly soon, but is functionally useless until everything else loads - this is particularly so in networked environments.
Quote:
Most accessories are recognized and functional upon plugging them in, without factory drivers. I plugged in a web cam and was functional. No, I don't have all the bells and whistles for it, but it works. Didn't do that on XP.
Sound with the Creative Card is still spotty.
My guess is that with the debacle m$ caused with the driver model changing so much in the lead up to vista, and the subsequent lack of compatible drivers, they have bitten the bullet and created a lot of their own drivers for the most popular hardware - just a guess... Witness the Creative card problems... If you can locate a reasonable Creative or KX project driver set you'll find it should work (vist drivers will be fine given that Win7 is a vista facelift...)
Quote:
One of the biggest concerns I had was with DRM for wave files. In creating wave files from BIAB, I can move them to RB and Audacity with no apparent problem. I have not yet tried a CD to see what happens with that, i.e, ripping it or trying to use ACW.
I'll be interested to hear your results - m$ DRM implementations worry me - you could easily find your self having to buy the same songs many times over...
Quote:
I had one shut down error last night, just after I installed Office 2000. It is possible Outlook was still open, though. I have been unable to duplicate it this morning.
m$ are pushing people into upgrades as hard as they can. I still use office97 - does everything I need and has a much better licence for multi user environments. These days, everytime I have an XP problem and Office 97 happens to be running (I don't have to be using it, it just has to be in the background) the m$ advisory says to upgrade Office 'cos it's too old. Like that's gonna happen when I know full well that office had nothing to do with the problem...
It's my guess there are incompatibilities with legacy products deliberately written in to "encourage" people to "upgrade". I've seen m$ do this in relation to 3rd paty products in order to stop them working so that people will tend to migrate to the m$ equivalent - it's workd fairly well unfortunately, so why wouldn't they use the same tactic on their own legacy stuff?
Quote:
I know there are still bugs in it, but, with one exception, so far, for my purposes, if they offered to sell it to me tomorrow, I would buy it.
Again, I don't know about Vista, because I haven't used it yet, but I am rather impressed with this. I have not used a 64 bit OS before, either, but insofar as I've been able to tell, I've had no problems with drivers, either. I've seen one or two 64 bit drivers, but for the most part, it's 'Vista' drivers, I install them, and they work. The OS bit depth seems to be, at least so far, a non-issue. The possible exception to that is Coyote Forte. It installs, but I get no sound from it.
That may very well be a configuration issue on my part, I don't know. I don't usually use DXis anyway.
I'm interested in your findings as time goes by. Are you networked? Vista to XP networks were a disaster - terribly hard to get working properly. Would be interested to see if Win7 to XP will just work like it should or is there gonna be the same raft of configuration hoops to jump through...
--=-- My credo: If it's worth doing, it's worth overdoing - just ask my missus, she'll tell ya --=--You're only paranoid if you're wrong!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 673
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 673 |
I'm trying to get a handle on MS's naming convention for their OS's.
Let's see, there was:
Win 1-3.1
Win95
Win98
Win2000/ME
WinXP
Vista
Win7
Sorry, I can't figure this out, can you?
BIABguy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,153
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,153 |
BIABGuy,
WIndows 1 through 3 were just that.
Windows 95, 98 and ME were Windows 4
Windows 2000 and XP were Windows 5
Vista was Windows 6.
Lawrie,
I'm doing a reinstall on the OS right now because I finally found a copy of the Daniel K drivers for Vista for the Audigy. They did not work, leaving my Audigy card basically dead in the computer. I'm going to go back and see what happened, and if the Creative will be nearly functional (short of things like SoundFont manager, etc, which I know it won't do) just as a basic card.
Since Creative is not supporting any drivers at all for anything other than the latest, available cards, I have no 'official' drivers I can test with. It isn't going to matter, because I've made the decision to go with the Asus Xonar D2X for the new computer anyway. I don't use SoundFonts any more, and if I really wanted to, there are software solutions.
Other than the Creative thing, and trying to use Daniel's drivers, I've had no real issues.
Gary
I'm blessed watching God do what He does best. I've had a few rough years, and I'm still not back to where I want to be, but I'm on the way and things are looking far better now than what they were!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 673
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 673 |
Quote:
BIABGuy,
WIndows 1 through 3 were just that.
Windows 95, 98 and ME were Windows 4
Windows 2000 and XP were Windows 5
Vista was Windows 6.
Yeah Gary, I supposed there's a way to rationalize just about anything in this world! 
Like there was no change from 95 to 98? (Windows 4)
Why did MS bother to put out 98? Why not just call it Win 95 SP3?
Like there was no change from Win 2000 to XP?
I was hoping and praying when they made the name change to Vista, that it was going to be the death of the Windows name.
But no such luck. 
I guess pretty soon they'll be going back to naming the OS
DOS 14, or DOS 15, for a complete 360!!!
BIABguy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,153
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,153 |
BIABGuy, I'm not sure if you were being funny, or if you didn't believe me. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Microsoft_WindowsLook at the Product Progression at the bottom of the page. I didn't get the information from there, but it's a nice thing to have it back up what I said. Gary
I'm blessed watching God do what He does best. I've had a few rough years, and I'm still not back to where I want to be, but I'm on the way and things are looking far better now than what they were!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502 |
The assumption is that there was an over-arching convention to the naming system.
Maybe there was, maybe there wasn't.
Maybe there was a bit of convention going on for some, but another for others.
Who knows?
In my case it is more like, "who cares?" (grin)
I know that the engineers don't name the product.
I heard once that the people who name the products at our company wear propeller beanies, though. Frankly, they look more like the cast from Dilbert...
--Mac
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 673
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 673 |
Quote:
BIABGuy,
I'm not sure if you were being funny, or if you didn't believe me.
....Look at the Product Progression at the bottom of the page. I didn't get the information from there, but it's a nice thing to have it back up what I said.
Gary, I did believe what you said. I was just trying to be cynical.
To any rational observer, MS has been 'winging it' as far as their numbering/naming convention goes for Windows.
Who counts like this:
1, 2, 3, 3.1, 95, 98, 2000, XP, Vista, 7 ???
Each major number/name change was short-sighted.
Couldn't the marketers foresee a problem five years down the road with the 95 name?
How difficult would it have been to name the product Windows 1995?
Just as short-sighted was the major name change to XP.
I mean what do you use for an encore after that? seXP?
It seems they ran out of ideas now after Vista and are retreating
to their safe but confusing numbering system once again.
The problem is that they tire quickly over their own names!
A couple more years of numbers and they'll be back to some
equally nonsensical naming system.
Is that cynical enough?
BIABguy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502 |
Quote:
Who counts like this:
1, 2, 3, 3.1, 95, 98, 2000, XP, Vista, 7 ???
Those guys upstairs in the propeller beanies I toldya about do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,641
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,641 |
Lowrie said- "Don't be fooled - Win7 is vista - bit of a facelift and some bug fixes and code optimisation. Still a loooonnnggg way to go. Still FAR too resource hungry."
I was told by a CIS professor that it is a new kernel, meaning it is not Vista with a facelift.
Also- you were saying Win7 OS had a lot of bugs, and you were in the networking business, yet you asked Gary how the networking was on Win7... shouldn't you know that? Or have you not tried Win7 yet (?) Just asking.
Where did you hear it was just an upgrade of Vista? I plan to ask about it again at school tomorrow night, in my Operating Systems class at college..which is where I was originally told it is a whole new OS with a new kernel and a lot less required overhead. The first new kernel for an OS in many years. Since Windows NT I believe. 2000, XP and Vista used the NT kernel if I recall correctly, and I hope I do, since it will on my exams soon.
Make your sound your own!
.. I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 235
Apprentice
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 235 |
"Ballmer also confirmed the relationship between Vista and Windows 7, indicating that Windows 7 will be an improved version of Vista." Wiki it! Also, much has been left out of the version discussion about Windows NT which is what all later windows versions have essentially been. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT
DTuna
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,439
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,439 |
Quote:
I was told by a CIS professor that it is a new kernel, meaning it is not Vista with a facelift.
The industry docs I'm reading make it clear the kernel is not "new" from vista (which was not as new as m$ wanted us to believe either). In any case, if it were truly a new kernel then it could not use vista drivers...
Quote:
Also- you were saying Win7 OS had a lot of bugs
Umm, I believe I said is was a bug fix for vista - I do not know how successful that was, and I am not aware of which bugs still exist in Win7 - or which new ones have been introduced.
Quote:
...and you were in the networking business, yet you asked Gary how the networking was on Win7... shouldn't you know that? Or have you not tried Win7 yet (?) Just asking.
Networking is my game. I was asking Gary about his experiences because:
a) I like to get other peoples perspectives on things (primary reason) and
b) no, I haven't played with it yet - would rather let someone who has the time to find the faults in new releases. I won't be rolling it out until there is absolutely no choice - home users have the luxury of plying with new (read untested) stuff, businesses (who are my customers and therefore my livelihood) cannot afford to take those same risks. We've only sold a small handful of vista licences that haven't been immediately downgraded to XP. ALL the vista business licences we've sold have been, only the home licences haven't.
Quote:
Where did you hear it was just an upgrade of Vista? I plan to ask about it again at school tomorrow night, in my Operating Systems class at college..which is where I was originally told it is a whole new OS with a new kernel and a lot less required overhead. The first new kernel for an OS in many years. Since Windows NT I believe. 2000, XP and Vista used the NT kernel if I recall correctly, and I hope I do, since it will on my exams soon.
Hmm, you need to answer the exam with the answer the examiner wants, but the whole "new kernel" project which was supposed to result in vista was shelved about 3 or 4 years ago 'cos they just couldn't get it together - wish I still had those journals so I could cite them for you. It's a very interesting read. Note that m$ have been claiming new kernels etc. for years. I remember when '95 was first released it was:
a totally new 32 bit operating system, MSDOS was gone and we would never see another GPF (General Protection Fault). Bill made these claims and was misrepresenting these things:
a) Totally new - there was large amounts of code from Win3.1 in '95
b) 32 bit - there was still 8 bit code in '95 - not a problem, not even a real need to update that code, but don't lie about it...
c) MSDOS was gone - hmm, '95 still booted MSDOS first - however, to obscure things all the code in the old MSDOS.SYS was migrated into IO.SYS
d) No more GPFs. Well, this is almost right - they renamed them - now they're "Exception Errors", but they are still generated by the same (14 or 15?) Processor generated error codes... In NT based systems they cause the dreaded BSOD (Blus Screen Of Death), so they're still with us... The reason they stop everything is that the CPU halts...
In other news IIRC:
'95 is V4.0
'98 is V4.1
ME is V4.9
NT4 is V4.0
W2k is V5.0
XP is V5.1
vista is V6.0
These are internal version data. And guess what:
Win7 is - wait for it - V6.1. This alone denotes the same core kernel as vista. If it were a truly new kernel it would have to have been at least V7.0, even though that convention does not hold completely true for W2k/XP and vista.
--=-- My credo: If it's worth doing, it's worth overdoing - just ask my missus, she'll tell ya --=--You're only paranoid if you're wrong!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,687
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,687 |
I read an online article at PCWorld that agrees with Lawry. My nephew is an IT pro and beta tested Vista and never got a Creative card to work right. It installed and would play CD's but other recording and synth functions simply would not work and he's a world class hacker. If he can't get it to work, it ain't happinin. My worry has always been that home recording types are such a small part of the computing world that we're going to be left in the dust with a new hot OS. Gary speculated that maybe MS wrote their own drivers for a lot of devices because of the previous problems with Vista. That's great but I don't see them spending resources on writing drivers for our very limited production stuff and my understanding with Vista was that third party developers don't have access to the registry and that's why the drivers either don't exist or took forever to come. Just like PG trying mightily to get the new MAC version of Biab released and it keeps getting put off, it's going to be so much trouble to get all of our beloved toys to work with the new OS that most of the developers just give up and we're going to be left with very few choices. I really hope that's not the case.
Oh, btw my nephew also thinks Vista is much faster for his very high end gaming machine and loves it but not for music recording. Since Win 7 is basically Vista, I'm hopeful but won't be surprised if it doesn't work well for us.
Bob
Biab/RB latest build, Win 11 Pro, Ryzen 5 5600 G, 512 Gig SSD, 16 Gigs Ram, Steinberg UR22 MkII, Roland Sonic Cell, Kurzweil PC3, Hammond SK1, Korg PA3XPro, Garritan JABB, Hypercanvas, Sampletank 3, more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502 |
Back when the Longhorn beta testing was happening (Longhorn = Vista) -- there were not ANY soundcard drivers written yet.
Some few soundcard developers managed to catch up, others were still trying to figure out Vista soundcard drivers a year after Vista was released.
Not sure why it took so long, but have a feeling that m$oft's allegiance to DRM had something to do with it -- recalling when Longhorn suddenly decided that all my own created audio files needed to be protected from me...
--Mac
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ask sales and support questions about Band-in-a-Box using natural language.
ChatPG's knowledge base includes the full Band-in-a-Box User Manual and sales information from the website.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Video: Next-Level AI Music Editing with ACE Studio and Band-in-a-Box®
Band-in-a-Box® 2024 German for Windows is Here!
Band-in-a-Box® 2024 für Windows Deutsch ist verfügbar!
Wir waren fleißig und haben über 50 neue Funktionen und eine erstaunliche Sammlung neuer Inhalte hinzugefügt, darunter 222 RealTracks, neue RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, "Songs with Vocals" Artist Performance Sets, abspielbare RealTracks Set 3, abspielbare RealDrums Set 2, zwei neue Sets von "RealDrums Stems", XPro Styles PAK 6, Xtra Styles PAK 17 und mehr!
Paket | Was ist Neu
Update Your PowerTracks Pro Audio 2024 Today!
The Newest RealBand 2024 Update is Here!
The newest RealBand 2024 Build 5 update is now available!
Download and install this to your RealBand 2024 for updated print options, streamlined loading and saving of .SGU & MGU (BB) files, and to add a number of program adjustments that address user-reported bugs and concerns.
This free update is available to all RealBand 2024 users. To learn more about this update and download it, head to www.pgmusic.com/support.realband.htm#20245
The Band-in-a-Box® Flash Drive Backup Option
Today (April 5) is National Flash Drive Day!
Did you know... not only can you download your Band-in-a-Box® Pro, MegaPAK, or PlusPAK purchase - you can also choose to add a flash drive backup copy with the installation files for only $15? It even comes with a Band-in-a-Box® keychain!
For the larger Band-in-a-Box® packages (UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, Audiophile Edition), the hard drive backup copy is available for only $25. This will include a preinstalled and ready to use program, along with your installation files.
Backup copies are offered during the checkout process on our website.
Already purchased your e-delivery version, and now you wish you had a backup copy? It's not too late! If your purchase was for the current version of Band-in-a-Box®, you can still reach out to our team directly to place your backup copy order!
Note: the Band-in-a-Box® keychain is only included with flash drive backup copies, and cannot be purchased separately.
Handy flash drive tip: Always try plugging in a USB device the wrong way first? If your flash drive (or other USB plug) doesn't have a symbol to indicate which way is up, look for the side with a seam on the metal connector (it only has a line across one side) - that's the side that either faces down or to the left, depending on your port placement.
Update your Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows® Today!
Update your Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows for free with build 1111!
With this update, there's more control when saving images from the Print Preview window, we've added defaults to the MultiPicker for sorting and font size, updated printing options, updated RealTracks and other content, and addressed user-reported issues with the StylePicker, MIDI Soloists, key signature changes, and more!
Learn more about this free update for Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows at www.pgmusic.com/support_windowsupdates.htm#1111
Band-in-a-Box® 2024 Review: 4.75 out of 5 Stars!
If you're looking for a in-depth review of the newest Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows version, you'll definitely find it with Sound-Guy's latest review, Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows Review: Incredible new capabilities to experiment, compose, arrange and mix songs.
A few excerpts:
"The Tracks view is possibly the single most powerful addition in 2024 and opens up a new way to edit and generate accompaniments. Combined with the new MultiPicker Library Window, it makes BIAB nearly perfect as an 'intelligent' composer/arranger program."
"MIDI SuperTracks partial generation showing six variations – each time the section is generated it can be instantly auditioned, re-generated or backed out to a previous generation – and you can do this with any track type. This is MAJOR! This takes musical experimentation and honing an arrangement to a new level, and faster than ever."
"Band in a Box continues to be an expansive musical tool-set for both novice and experienced musicians to experiment, compose, arrange and mix songs, as well as an extensive educational resource. It is huge, with hundreds of functions, more than any one person is likely to ever use. Yet, so is any DAW that I have used. BIAB can do some things that no DAW does, and this year BIAB has more DAW-like functions than ever."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums66
Topics81,664
Posts735,587
Members38,532
| |
Most Online2,537
Jan 19th, 2020
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean