How do I move a Biab sgu file into RB for further editing?

Strat

Open it in RB is simplest way

I'd save it as a .Seq file in RB format once opened though, for future use.

Thanks Rharv
My main problem is that I have a hard time finding where Biab saves my file (blushing)

Fist thing you need to do is create a project file. Then "save as" into the project file.

I have directories set up for my

d:\Reaper Sessions\sngtitle\

and

d:\RB Sessions\sngtitle\

or

d:\BIAB Gigfavorites\sngtitle\

The last thing you want is to not know where your music project files are!

And now when I succeeded getting my sgu file into RB, everything sound different from Biab, how do I remedy that?
Please bear with me, up until now I have used RB as a multitrack recorder :-)
Strat

Seems like all the powerful sounds from Biab have lost their power when played back in RB, guess it's maybe some softsynth set up that behaves differently in Biab and RB?

Strat,

I've discovered that if you want to use both RB and BiaB to develop a song project it is better to do minimal work in BiaB and transfer the project to RB. The reason I say that is that many of the settings you make in BiaB are not read by RB.

When I want to use both programs on a song project I divide the project into two phases where BiaB is used to build the song structure and RB is used to develop instrument tracks.

In BiaB I concentrate on selecting the song key signature, tempo, swing or even feel, primary style, main instruments, basic chords and number of verses. I don't try "fancy" things like using F5, instrument patch changes, or using repeats because they don't always translate well to RB so they either waste my time or mess up in RB.

When I move to RB the first thing I do is (if the import has midi tracks) raise the file resolution to a higher setting then save the import in RB's native file format which is SEQ. That way future saves take less time and I always have the original BiaB SGU or MGU file as a fallback or safety.

Now I am in RB and can import other styles, try different instruments, use the multi-riff feature, modify the chord chart and do any other "trick" I can think of to create great instrument sounds.

Hope this helps.

Glad to hear you say that, it makes sense and matches my own experience, after all these Biab years I'm still trying to figure out how to deal with Biab and RB both. How to make the most out of two worlds.

Strat

You're using two different synths in BIAB and RB? If you're using RealTracks, they should sound the same in either program.


Regards,

Bob

Some people have better success by using the 'Freeze all tracks" feature in BiaB before saving it and opening it in RB.

Like Jim, I move on to RB as soon as I can. Saves time for me.

Both BiaB and RB have programming options to choose default soft synths. If you don't select one the default is the Windows GS wavetable. Perhaps you've selected something different in one program but not the other?

Seems like I have gotten my RB windows [*****] totally up, too high resolution tracks view, my left side graphics went outside the screen, any way to reset the setup to factory settings ? It's been way too long since I have used Biab/RB, sorry guys but at least I'm honest about it ;-)

Strat

The files are compatible back and forth between the programs BB & RB. Open cna close as well as edit as needed with no worries.

I always move my files into a folder set up specifically for a song project once I decide it's a viable song.

I have the general folder.... "SONGS 2015" ... one for each new year set up on my desktop for easy reference.

In each of the annual folders are individual song project folders which contain ALL the files related to that song project. That way, everything is on one place.

I can archive the annual folder to a storage drive & backup drives easily once they are over 2 years old to keep the C drive clean.

That's called "Return To factory Settings (in the Opts. menu). You can set up your synths like this:

http://www.pgmusic.com/tutorial_bbw_nosound.htm


Regards,

Bob

Jim, what exactly do you mean when you say, "raise the file resolution to a higher setting?" That sounds important, because my workflow sounds a lot like yours: sketch it out in BiaB, then finalize in RB.

Thank you!

In RealBand 2015 (8) in the menu bar you can change the midi resolution for the song by selecting "Options" at the top of the screen then "Resolution". The default setting is in parathesis beside the word "Resolution". When your mouse highlights "Resolution" a pop-up menu opens with selections that vary from a low of 48 to a high of 3840. I normally select 3840.

To change the RealBand 2015 (8)'s program default midi resolution select "Options" at the top of the screen then "Preferences". Select tab "3-File" then check the third checkbox "Convert PPQ of Loaded Files To". The selection box defaults to "480 PPQ". The choices range from 48 PPQ to 3840 PPQ. I normally select 3840 PPQ.

The 'reset to factory' is different in RB than BiaB.

For RB total factory reset (to my knowledge) is;
Close RB
Rename the files RB.CFG and Realband.INI to something else.

Then launch RB and it will go through the initialized setup process again and recreate those files.

If you don't like the result; rename the original files back ..

There is a way in Prefs-Drivers area to reset just the drivers and make RB retest/reload these, but the method above also includes other settings and is much closer to an actual factory reset scenario.

It IS.

Options-Resolution in RB.

RB and BiaB both default to 120 'slices' per beat, whether it is MIDI or Audio. Changing this setting to the highest allowed makes for much more surgical editing, and more accurate recording of data (not quantized to nearest 120th) etc.

This is an important function, especially once you start editing audio in RB.
VERY important IMO.

The one thing I would want to point out is it does NOT apply to only MIDI. This setting affects RB/PT for Audio also.

Audio events are triggered by this setting. You should be able to see this by looking at the Event List for an audio track. This can be enlightening.

The higher the resolution, the smaller chunks available = more accurate
/simplest way I could explain it
//I can go further if needed/requested

"//I can go further if needed/requested"

I'll bite and request you go a bit deeper. I understand the higher resolution/smaller slices information provided so far and that it can make for greater accuracy in editing.

On the help page from the menu where the resolution can be changed, Help tells us that no difference can be heard between the resolution of 120 and 960 so they default to 120...
Since there is no perceptible sound difference, then resolution must be drawing on greater CPU resources or else PGMusic would take advantage of the higher resolution benefits in editing.

Can you confirm this and maybe provide some guidance as to what to look for if the resolution has been set at too high a value and is taxing the CPU and becoming detrimental to the quality of the project.

Not sure of your help page referenced but maybe my explanation below will help. Since they reference 960 I'm guessing that was written a while back before RB/BiaB got higher resolutions.
When MIDI sequencers started being popular, 120 resolution was standard for many, if not all of them early on.

As for computer CPU load, any affect would be so minute as to be imperceptible in 99%+ of cases.
You'd be surprised how much of the time an AVG CPU is waiting for something to do. It is rarely the bottleneck. A 'sign' that the system is struggling is usually the cursor not moving smoothly during playback. Whenever I see this, I save, close out and reopen. This lets me know I have burned this session, but that's a whole 'nother aspect of DAW use (resources).

Lets start with audio and resolution. Doing audio edits is downright painful at 120 resolution. It is dang near impossible to get a clean cut/paste of a waveform exactly where you want it. The image below is zoomed in to show where a bass note begins on a track (it starts ahead of the beat as you can see). Anyone who has done audio editing knows you want a clean edit to avoid the nasty tell-tale pops/clicks of poor editing jobs. If I want to start this edit exactly where the bass note starts (sometimes called the zero point) I can do it very exacting using 3659 (with resolution at 3840).
With resolution at 120 I would have to decide on whether to use 114, which has the tail end of the previous note included, or 115 which is even worse because it is well off the zero point and will almost certainly make a noticeable click.
Then I would have to fight the same battle when deciding where to paste it in.
Does this make sense? I think this is why some think audio editing is terrible in RB; if you are trying it at 120 resolution it will be very 'clunky' and 'chunky'.

Now let's talk about MIDI and how Tempo and Resolution combine.
Since Resolution is defining the number of slices per beat, the number of beats per minute determine just how small a chunk of time each slice is.
At tempo 120 each beat is 500 mS (half a second).
If resolution is also 120 then each 'slice' = 4.17 milliseconds
If resolution is set to 3840 then each slice = 0.13 milliseconds
At tempo of 96 the results are 5.2 mS compared to 0.16 mS. Still huge difference.

Now if your most precise 'slice' of digital information is going to be every 4 to 5 milliseconds or so, every piece of data that comes in to get recorded (think MIDI here) is going to be written in one of those chunks, whether you played that note at exactly that point in time or not.
As an example Year of the Cat by Al Stewart comes to mind. Listen to the opening piano.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvBfIdhG974
If this were recorded (in MIDI) at 120 resolution some of the nuance of this performance would be lost. If the Cmaj7 chord and D6 chords did not roll (arpeggiate) the way they do the song would lose some character. Instead of each note being adjusted a tenth of a mS or so (at 3840), each note would be adjusted 5 mS or so at 120. The larger the chunks of adjustment the less 'real' the performance is. It's important to understand that no matter what actual point in real-time a given note was played, it is going to be written to the nearest 'slice' available.

Many times it may not be perceptible, but sometimes it is. If just 2 of the notes in the above referenced chords ended up being written in the same time slice, it changes what was actually played. In essence it has been quantized.
It is very small, but quantizing is actually taking place and you can decide how you want your performance quantized from the very beginning.
Once recorded at 120 resolution though, going to 3840 later does absolutely no good for MIDI. However, it does for Audio! you can raise your setting later to get more surgical control over edits.
What's interesting is RB/PT use MIDI to control audio events. Audio snips are 'triggered' using MIDI. To understand this open the Event Editor for an audio track.
The bottom picture shows a typical audio track here that has had edits done. Notice the resolution is at the 3840 setting .. makes for more accurate edits as mentioned above.

Hope this Helps explain how I look at it.

Thanks Rharv for taking time to share this information.
Here is what BIAB help says about resolution in the help file in Preferences for midi .

"Resolution for MIDI File

By default, Band-in-a-Box saves MIDI files with 120 PPQ resolution. This is about 4 millisecond resolution, which is very good resolution. In our listening tests, people couldn’t tell the difference between files at 120 PPQ and files at higher PPQ (like 960 etc.). But if you prefer to work in a DAW at a higher PPQ, you can now have Band-in-a-Box output at the resolution that you want."

Currently, I overcome the precision limitation of 120 PPQ resolution by cutting larger chunks based on breaks between words, chord changes or pauses. I acquired this habit based on the shortest time period I could edit or punch-in with the Tascam DP-24.

Your explanation is a great help and will make a big improvement in my editing. Thanks for replying.

Where it makes the biggest difference for me is audio editing. But if I can be more accurate with MIDI too, why not? It makes the capturing of performances more accurate.
The PGMusic statement "This is about 4 millisecond resolution" tells me they are also using 120 for the Tempo to determine this. Like I said above, at 120 tempo and resolution it's 4.17 milliseconds. Glad to see them verify my results!

If you play a grace note quick enough and at the right moment in time it can cause the two MIDI events to be written to the same time slice. I've had this happen, which is what started me along the MIDI resolution path.
I guess one other example could be a drum roll or flam on an electronic drum set. Recorded at 3840 would be much more real than 120 ..

Excellent explanation Rharv, appreciate you clarifying this area I was confused about.

Jeff