Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread
Print Thread
Go To
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Off-Topic
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
J
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
J
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
the GUI DOES matter. this has been proven over and over in plenty of studies. and companies like Apple have excelled at implementing great GUIs. for me the "eye candy" part is worthwhile but the usability and workflow improvements are really where a good GUI shines.

I don't really understand why anyone would feel the need to be defensive about this. it is OK to love BIAB and still acknowledge it has an out-of-date interface.

Last edited by JohnJohnJohn; 02/03/13 02:42 AM.
Off-Topic
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,079
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,079
Quote:

Those listening to our creations only hear the music, they can't see the gui of the software used to create that music, eh?


Wise words from Mac.
I would like the GUI of my current long term lady friend tweaked in a few spots BUT I would not change what is "under the hood"

Off-Topic
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
M
Mac Offline
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
M
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
I require hard DATA, plus proper analysis of said data when designing and redesigning.

There are some things I've noticed about these issues in my work in design.

*EVERYBODY thinks they can design it better.

This typically comes from people who have little experience in the design, prototyping, production and marketing fields. Much like the writers who declare themselves to be Music Critics, it is a rather easy task to take something, anything, and be critical about it in a negative fashion with little to no regard for actual realworld reasoning and experimentation that might have taken place during development.

*Disregard for the reasoning that lies behind designing a product in a certain way.

The best example for this one I can think of right now is Band in a Box itself (topical, eh?), Unlike just about any other program being sold today, Band in a Box does not wrie to the windows registry. BB still works from the "old fashioned" .exe file, which can be run standalone on any PC. The only parts of BB that must write to registry are the Fonts, PGMusic DX plugins, and any DXi synths you may wish to use for MIDI.

I don't know for certain the reasoning behind that decision, but do know that PGMusic is rather good about backwards compatibility issues, plus trying to make an ever increasing program load still work on older and slower computers, a factor that I'm sure helps people to still use the product on a worldwide basis. Before someone points out that Realtracks in a file sent to someone with a version of BB that shipped before RealTracks came out (or any other New Feature for that matter), that file *can still be loaded and played* on the older version with the substitution of an earlier MIDI file. This might not be important to those who can afford to keep up with the latest and greatest fast offerings, but I have no idea how many users there are in the world who cannot do that - and neither does anyone who has no access to PGMusic sales records. Even then, there would be a need to figure out how many past users are *still* users, plus a few more datapoints before any good solid enumeration of what's going on could be done.

*For those who say that the BB screen is "too busy" -- this critique I answer in the same fashion as for those who have said same about various controls and systems I've worked on in the day job. "Okay, what would you remove?" -- And back it up with sound logic.

Finally, thinking back on the questions I've attempted to answer on these forums over the years, I would say offhand that a large percentage have been involved with issues other than the complexity of the controls and commands, for example, quite a few have been involved with rather common Music Theory issues, naming of chords, understanding of tempo or timing, Key Signature issues being little understood, concepts of Chorus and Verse based on the vernacular used for lyrics and not accepted Music Theory Practice, use of Fakebooks to try to do song and chord entry when there is no standard out trhere for fake chords and the likes making translation to the types that BB uses to be misunderstood, well, a whole host of issues that have nothing at all to do with the Band in a Box screen and control presentation. Matter of fact, these are all issues that would fit better under the heading of Music Education.


--Mac

Off-Topic
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 385
Journeyman
Offline
Journeyman
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 385
Quote:

Finally, thinking back on the questions I've attempted to answer on these forums over the years, I would say offhand that a large percentage have been involved with issues other than the complexity of the controls and commands, for example, quite a few have been involved with rather common Music Theory issues, naming of chords, understanding of tempo or timing, Key Signature issues being little understood, concepts of Chorus and Verse based on the vernacular used for lyrics and not accepted Music Theory Practice, use of Fakebooks to try to do song and chord entry when there is no standard out trhere for fake chords and the likes making translation to the types that BB uses to be misunderstood, well, a whole host of issues that have nothing at all to do with the Band in a Box screen and control presentation. Matter of fact, these are all issues that would fit better under the heading of Music Education.




This is absolutely true, and I, for one, have benefited enormously. Thanks.


Brad -- My FAWM
Off-Topic
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,079
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,079
+1

Off-Topic
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
J
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
J
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
Mac, you make good points but you don't need a degree in music or GUI design to provide useful input on a software interface that harkens back to DOS or Windows 3! In fact, when I have designed GUI (and I have been doing it for 28 years) I seek out inexperienced users so I can conduct focus groups and make sure I get it right. It proves very little if the experts can figure out how to use the software, unless you are only marketing to experts!

So I'll keep using BIAB because what it outputs is nothing short of amazing as you pointed out earlier!! But I also encourage PG to listen to the GUI comments and implement as many as possible. Because there is no real competition they have been successful in spite of their GUI but I suspect when and if real competition arrives with a sleek GUI like Reaper or ProTools this could change.

Off-Topic
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
M
Mac Offline
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
M
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
There was s car named the Turnpike Cruiser...

Nobody today has likely even ever heard of it.

This car was supposed to make the Ford Motor Company competitve with General Motors sales.

The project was headed by a man named Jack Reith.

Reith insisted on doing the entire project only the way he saw it to be done.

He did not listen to the inputs of designers, engineers, marketing, advertising or sales.

He got Henry Ford II to give him literal carte blanche on the project by promising that Ford was going to bury GM with this new car.

He tried to gain on the competition by doing what he thought was exactly what the competition was doing. Well, he also figured that the way to go was to do even more of what he thought the competition was doing.

But what the competition was doing at the time was just as bad.

The Turnpike Cruiser was only on sale for one model year.

It was followed by the Edsel. Still the top honor for the largest amount of money ever lost on a single car in Detroit.

Jack Reith?

He got fired and later committed suicide.


--Mac

Off-Topic
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
J
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
J
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
great point Mac. Jack Reith should have listened to his users as well as designers, engineers, marketing, advertising and sales!

and I Googled that car you mentioned. OMG it is easy to forget just how big cars were back then!

http://www.plan59.com/images/JPGs/mercury_1957_turnpike_cruiser_black_00.jpg

Off-Topic
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
M
Mac Offline
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
M
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
Jack DID survey users.

But then he proceeded to cherry pick the data to fit what he wanted to do...


--Mac

Off-Topic
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
J
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
J
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
sometimes that works and sometimes it does not! Ask Steve Jobs (or anyone who worked for him) whether he ever pushed his opinions on stuff.

Off-Topic
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
M
Mac Offline
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
M
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
I equate the genius that is Peter Gannon with the kind of genius that was Steve Jobs.

Case in point, when lots of folks were Wishlisting for Drum Loop capability, likely because they only knew of Drum Loop capability from other programs such as Acid and Frooty Loops, Peter came up with RealDrums. Totally unexpected, and, an elegant answer in its own right. MUCH easier than forcing the user to have to try to assemble canned Drum Loops one bar or four at a time, RealDtums not only can generate the entire drum part with one button push, from the very beginning it could also automatically substitute RealDrums in any already existing MIDI style, provided there was a match. And inside the RealDrums Picker, we could even control how tight or loose that automatic substitution could be.

Band in a Box is different - and it is my contention that the difference should be celebrated rather than pushing to have it just become "like" something else already out there.

Steve Jobs' methodologies are an excellent example of daring to be different in an age of across-the-board conformity. He also represents a designer who often refused to listen to the input of others about whether or not to implement something in a fashion different from the existing commonality. Sometimes you incur losses when doing that, but the individual who is able to land on their feet and keep on with the new ideas often prevails.


--Mac

Off-Topic
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
J
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
J
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
Mac, I agree whole heartedly with your assessment of Gannon and I have stated over and over how awesome BIAB is! You will get no argument from me there. But with that said, I can still see vast improvement opportunities for the BIAB GUI.

You seem to be saying BIAB is so great we should be happy and not ask for more. That is where I respectfully disagree with you. I LOVE BIAB AND I believe it needs a major GUI overhaul!

Off-Topic
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,129
J
Joe V Offline OP
Expert
OP Offline
Expert
J
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,129
I think Mac is suspiciously defensive on this GUI question - Mac - did you play a big part in designing that GUI ; )

Last edited by Joe V; 02/03/13 06:41 PM.
Off-Topic
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
M
Mac Offline
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
M
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
Quote:


You seem to be saying BIAB is so great we should be happy and not ask for more.




Nope, that's not it at all.

I'm saying that Peter Gannon and company are the decision makers about their fine product and that I don't want to insist on them doing things in any certain way, that when they do implement designs said designs are quite often in a direction from the madding crowd, and when they do that they typically come up with the more elegant solution.

Another example is PG's note entry method. Absolutely wonderful, faster and if you want to talk user-friendliness, there it is. And I know of no other program that uses notation that has anything even close to it. Should they then make it more like the rest?

That and I tend to view this situation from the standpoint of being the crusty curmudgeon, PGMusic is Peter's baby and already a huge success. I don't think he got to this point by imitating others all that much.

Over the years I've seen so many of the famous New Features go in directions that are actually quite unique and always quite usable, once understood. When something is entirely new and different, the user has got to be prepared to learn how to use it.

--Mac

Off-Topic
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
M
Mac Offline
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
M
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
Quote:

I think Mac is suspiciously defensive on this GUI question - Mac - did you play a big part in designing that GUI ; )




The implication that I might be that kind of man is noted.

This is just personal attack in lieu of sound argument.

Use of emoticon to hide behind doesn't work as such is not funny.


--Mac

Off-Topic
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,074
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,074
there's an old joke about a sign hanging in the auto repair shop which says "Good Price. Quality Workmanship. Fast Turnaround. Pick any two"

When you can't have everything, you have to prioritize what is a MUST HAVE and what is a luxury. Not everybody prioritizes the same things.

If I had to choose between features and interface, I'd concede the interface and insist on features.

Granted, the interface is not a core strength of the product, but it gets the job done.

If I were scratching my head trying to decide whether to buy the latest version... if the main change was a bunch of new real tracks I liked, I would probably go for it. But if the main change was an interface change, I would certainly skip that release. That's just my preference.

And I bet I'm not the only person who feels that way.

Off-Topic
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
J
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
J
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
Pat you make an excellent point about prioritizing. My priority would be different; I would welcome an updated interface because that would improve my workflow.

Off-Topic
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
J
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
J
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
Quote:

Quote:


You seem to be saying BIAB is so great we should be happy and not ask for more.




Nope, that's not it at all.

I'm saying that Peter Gannon and company are the decision makers about their fine product and that I don't want to insist on them doing things in any certain way, that when they do implement designs said designs are quite often in a direction from the madding crowd, and when they do that they typically come up with the more elegant solution.

Another example is PG's note entry method. Absolutely wonderful, faster and if you want to talk user-friendliness, there it is. And I know of no other program that uses notation that has anything even close to it. Should they then make it more like the rest?

That and I tend to view this situation from the standpoint of being the crusty curmudgeon, PGMusic is Peter's baby and already a huge success. I don't think he got to this point by imitating others all that much.

Over the years I've seen so many of the famous New Features go in directions that are actually quite unique and always quite usable, once understood. When something is entirely new and different, the user has got to be prepared to learn how to use it.

--Mac




Mac, you keep saying that we want PG to imitate others! Nope! I would just like to see them update their GUI from 1991 to 2013. That is a perfectly reasonable suggestion! And really there is nothing you can say to me to convince me a piece of Windows software with a 90's interface could not use improvement!

So you and I will just have to disagree on GUI. And that's OK. We agree that the output of BIAB is simply awesome.

Off-Topic
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,784
R
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
R
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,784
The GUI debate has been ongoing for a long time. I think we can all agree that BiaB could use some modernization. There are a few issues involved. 1 BiaB is somewhat of a utilitarian type software. Far more so that protools, reaper, sonar, logic, etc. all of these are just DAW software. All very full featured, but certainly nothing like BiaB, not even close. BIaB does what a half dozen other softwares do combined. 2. It also has a deep user base, each using it for very different things. Teaching, practice, auto generation of song bases, live performance, and a few others. Each of these require different approaches, and different tools sets. Where do you draw the line with GUI changes, and who do you listen to? So far PG chooses to leave that alone and focus on new features, and more tools, rather than a fancy new modern look.

With Reaper for instance new features are focused around either midi upgrades, and or audio processing upgrades. So face lifts are really just I eye candy issues, and the entire program is tailored towards user input. BiaB has about 20 to 30 features that Reaper does not even sniff at. I mean reaper, sonar, protools, do not have styles, chord wizards, RTs , RDs, melody generators, harmony generators, and I could go on and on. How do simplify all this with so many people using it for so many reasons.

One of the biggest gripes I heard over at the sonar forums when they did the big GUI changes for sonar X1 was that things were not where folks were used to. When MS word and Excel we're upgrade to new GUIs again they argued that " I can't find anything" I think this is PGs fear. Where do you start, and stop.

Finally I agree it could use some modernization, but really it is not at the loss of new features, and tools.


Lenovo Win 10 16 gig ram, Mac mini with 16 gig of ram, BiaB 2022, Realband, Harrison Mixbus 32c version 9.1324, Melodyne 5 editor, Presonus Audiobox 1818VSL, Presonus control app, Komplete 49 key controller.
Off-Topic
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,129
J
Joe V Offline OP
Expert
OP Offline
Expert
J
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,129
Quote:

The implication that I might be that kind of man is noted.
This is just personal attack in lieu of sound argument.





My name is Joe Videtto, and...I am a hoarder.
... (if you saw my garage, basement area, and desk at work, you'd understand...)

My name is Joe Videtto, and...I love music and having other people to talk about with it.
... (a very personal thank you to Mac, Peter (yes...the Peter), Pat, Bob, Bob, Bob (I think I got all Bobs), Ryszard, ZeroZero, Danny, ROG, Silvertones,Scott, Mario, Eddie, Rob...and all you guys that give me free music lessons on every post I put up here).

My name is Joe Videtto, and...I'm a good guy at heart, but often accidentally say things that ***** people off or insult them...maybe I have a tinge of Asperger syndrome.

... (Mac - that was really meant to be funny, regardless of whether there was any fact to it, to me it is funny to point out in a lighthearted way when someone seems to be a little overly opinionated, fixed, or attached to a particular issue. Of course, if you have to explain it like I am right now, it's obviously not funny. To the extent that you took the comment as one about your character - here is my public apology "Sorry Mac - I didn't mean it in that way, and if it came across that way, I'll refrain from such comments in the future").

Last edited by Joe V; 02/04/13 03:57 AM.
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Go To
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

Link Copied to Clipboard
ChatPG

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.

PG Music News
Convenient Ways to Listen to Band-in-a-Box® Songs Created by Program Users!

The User Showcase Forum is an excellent place to share your Band-in-a-Box® songs and listen to songs other program users are creating!

There are other places you can listen to these songs too! Visit our User Showcase page to sort by genre, artist (forum name), song title, and date - each listing will direct you to the forum post for that song.

If you'd rather listen to these songs in one place, head to our Band-in-a-Box® Radio, where you'll have the option to select the genre playlist for your listening pleasure. This page has SoundCloud built in, so it won't redirect you. We've also added the link to the Artists SoundCloud page here, and a link to their forum post.

We hope you find some inspiration from this amazing collection of User Showcase Songs!

Congratulations to the 2023 User Showcase Award Winners!

We've just announced the 2023 User Showcase Award Winners!

There are 45 winners, each receiving a Band-in-a-Box 2024 UltraPAK! Read the official announcement to see if you've won.

Our User Showcase Forum receives more than 50 posts per day, with people sharing their Band-in-a-Box songs and providing feedback for other songs posted.

Thank you to everyone who has contributed!

Video: Volume Automation in Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows®

We've created a video to help you learn more about the Volume Automation options in Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows.

Band-in-a-Box® 2024: Volume Automation

www.pgmusic.com/manuals/bbw2024full/chapter11.htm#volume-automation

Video: Audio Input Monitoring with Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows®

We've created this short video to explain Audio Input Monitoring within Band-in-a-Box® 2024, and included some tips & troubleshooting details too!

Band-in-a-Box® 2024: Audio Input Monitoring

3:17: Tips
5:10: Troubleshooting

www.pgmusic.com/manuals/bbw2024full/chapter11.htm#audio-input-monitoring

Video: Enhanced Melodists in Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows®!

We've enhanced the Melodists feature included in Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows!

Access the Melodist feature by pressing F7 in the program to open the new MultiPicker Library and locate the [Melodist] tab.

You can now generate a melody on any track in the program - very handy! Plus, you select how much of the melody you want generated - specify a range, or apply it to the whole track.

See the Melodist in action with our video, Band-in-a-Box® 2024: The Melodist Window.

Learn even more about the enhancements to the Melodist feature in Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows at www.pgmusic.com/manuals/bbw2024upgrade/chapter3.htm#enhanced-melodist

Band-in-a-Box® 2024 DAW Plugin Version 6: New Features Specifically for Reaper®

New with the DAW Plugin Version 6.0, released with Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows: the Reaper® Panel!

This new panel offers built-in specific support for the Reaper® DAW API allowing direct transfer of Band-in-a-Box® files to/from Reaper® tracks!

When you run the Plugin from Reaper®, there is a panel to set the following options:
-BB Track(s) to send: This allows you to select the Plugin tracks that will be sent Reaper.
-Destination Reaper Track: This lets you select the destination Reaper track to receive media content from the Plugin.
-At Bar: You can select a bar in Reaper where the Plugin tracks should be placed.
-Start Below Selected Track: This allows you to place the Plugin tracks below the destination Reaper track.
-Overwrite Reaper Track: You can overwrite previous content on the destination Reaper track.
-Move to Project Folder: With this option, you can move the Plugin tracks to the Reaper project folder.
-Send Reaper Instructions Enable this option to send the Reaper Instructions instead of rendering audio tracks, which is faster.
-Render Audio & Instructions: Enable this option to generate audio files and the Reaper instructions.
-Send Tracks After Generating: This allows the Plugin to automatically send tracks to Reaper after generating.
-Send Audio for MIDI Track: Enable this option to send rendered audio for MIDI tracks.
-Send RealCharts with Audio: If this option is enabled, Enable this option to send RealCharts with audio.

Check out this video highlighting the new Reaper®-specific features: Band-in-a-Box® DAW Plugin Version 6: New Features Specifically for Reaper®

Band-in-a-Box® 2024 DAW Plugin Version 6: New Features Video

The new Band-in-a-Box VST DAW Plugin Verion 6 adds over 20 new features!

Watch the new features video to learn more: Video: Band-in-a-Box® 2024 - DAW Plugin Version 6 New Features

We also list these new features at www.pgmusic.com/bbwin.plugin.htm.

Forum Statistics
Forums66
Topics81,394
Posts732,487
Members38,441
Most Online2,537
Jan 19th, 2020
Newest Members
zagrajbarke, Ernest J, Izzy, BenChaz, Csofi
38,440 Registered Users
Top Posters(30 Days)
MarioD 195
Al-David 124
DC Ron 112
dcuny 87
rsdean 82
Today's Birthdays
CeeDee, SethMould
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5