Simplify, simplify, simplify - please?

PG Music Home

Hello,

I don't know if anyone at PG Music actually reads these threads, or more to the point, even takes heed of them. Further, since I am probably so far removed from what, reading the previous comments on this forum, is the typical user, that maybe my comments don't even count. Anyway, here goes...

I bought the 2006 version of BIAB, and have used it on and off for my jazz play-along practice, and in this regard, it excels. Then for various reasons I stopped using it. I have recently started using it again after about a two-year break, and I have realised what for me as a relative newcomer are its greatest problems - how is it used, the user interface, and the learning curve/tutorials. In the meantime, I had upgraded to the 2008 version.

How is it used: The main problem is a failure to identify how will the product likely be used by various users. The product tries to cover its back by trying to be all things to all men, and ends up satisfying nobody, unless you are willing to invest the time the read all the tutorials, user guides, etc. I simply want to use the product as a play-along aid. I don't want the overhead of the huge options and features presented to the user. Better would be to prompt the user during installation what their typical usage patterns will be, and reduce the feature/option clutter accordingly.

User Interface: With all respect, the user interface seems to have been design by a software engineer for other software engineers. It is certainly not intuitive. The screen is completely clogged with feaures and options that probably no single user will probably ever use. All standard Windows applications have a toolbar option called "View", which is missing. Maybe the "Notation" toolbar option is meant to serve the same function. I can't see a great deal of change between the 2006 and 2008 versions, yet I have the impression that the latest UI has become more complex. In this respect, it suffer somewhat from the Microsoft disease - how to justify charging for user upgrades. In my case, in an attempt to simply the re-learning curve, I have downgraded back to the older version. The UI also makes use of colour codes for the Instrument Line (Bass, Piano, Drums, Guitar, Strings, Melody, Soloist). I am colour-blind and cannot easily distinguish between green and red.

Tutorials: To get back to speed, I have tried following the tutorials. Again, they give the impression of having been written by an engineer, who believes that we should progress in the straight-line sequence A-Z as the best way to learn. In lesson 2, we are prompted to load the song called " L_BOSMED.MGU", without knowing where the song is actually located. We learn that there is a Visible Metronome feature, without an explanation of how to invoke it. Further in the same tutorial, there is an explanation about the General Midi Patch List. Why should the user reading lesson 2 need to know about this level of detail? The tutorial explains that to pressing the spacebar pauses a song, and that pressing the spacebar releases it. Instead, pressing the spacebar twice restarts the song from the beginning. Also strange, the word "improvise" doesn't appear in the help index. Is it possible to display/print the notations for the improvisation versions rendered by BIAB?

Please don't get me wrong, I am also an engineer, and appreciate the technical achievements reflected in the feature list. I'm a firm believer in the concept that the project is finished, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there nothing more to be taken away.

Regards,
Paul

PG Music certainly does read these Wishlist posts, and responds with features, a few of which are suggestions from me. There may not be any such thing as a typical user, so whose requested features would you take away?

I do have sympathy for your comment about the red/green colorblind issue. I have a child with the same problem. Options, Preferences, Colors can change many of the colors but to my knowledge, not the instrument indicators. In the latest versions, even more colors are used. During beta testing, there was discussion of several alternatives, and PG Music requested our opinions. I suggest you post a specific request to be able to alter just these colors.

Thanks for the reply Matt.

I would like to see a wizard that would set up the UI based on a user's usage profile. In other words, prompt the user for how they expect to use the product, and then reduce the set of buttons, windows and menus presented to the user, based on that profile.

In my case, I want to use it as a play-along aid. So I would like to be able to
- display chord play-notation for playing along
- display print-notation for easy printing
- print the improvisation rendered by BIAB
- easily transpose
- display/play the metronome
- play some exercises
- use some other useful novice-oriented things I haven't thought of ;<)

I hope that no one here, either other users or the people at PM Music, takes my post personally. I just wanted to give my impressions from a novice, first-time user perspective.

Paul

PS: Is it possible to search these forums for posts older than one year? Looking at my profile, I noticed that I posted some other messages some years ago, but I cannot find them using the forum's search feature.

That's an interesting request, Paul - the wizard. There has been much discussion about the GUI in the past, but to my knowledge, not exactly that approach.

This forum software loses older posts. A tremendous amount of knowledge is regularly lost.

You can customize the toolbars. In the two rows to the right of the song title, I only have 6 buttons showing. Just the ones I use. Everytime I open BIAB, those are the only ones that show. Very convenient for me. Later, Ray

+1

I covered several of your points in an earlier thread that I started.

Quote:

You can customize the toolbars. In the two rows to the right of the song title, I only have 6 buttons showing. Just the ones I use. Everytime I open BIAB, those are the only ones that show. Very convenient for me. Later, Ray

Ray, I tried doing that for a couple of weeks but got really impatient with the slow loading of the program.
The program starts up **each time**, reads which buttons/icons should be showing on the main page, and then proceeds to adjust. That is poor programming.

I went back to the default.

Thanks BIAguy.

Can you post the URL?

Paul

Another source of confusion and complication for me:
What is the difference between the pull-down item Window -> Notation Window (ctrl-W) and Notation -> Notation Roll Mode (ctrl-alt-N)?

Anyway, I'll stop complaining now, and try to read the tutorials again.

The Roll mode gives us a "semi" staff view that has a vertical line and a horizontal line on each note.

Vertical line represents MIDI Velocity

Horizontal is MIDI Duration value.

Far faster than opening the manual Edit for each note one at a time, you can grab either line of any note visible with the mouse and reduce or extend those two critical values quickly.

--Mac

BIAB 2009 opens up in less than 4 seconds for me. If your's takes alot longer, then you may have a defect in the program. Try "Return to Factory Settings". Later, Ray

Quote:

BIAB 2009 opens up in less than 4 seconds for me. If your's [sic] takes alot [sic] longer, then you may have a defect in the program.

Ray, we discussed this issue in another thread, remember, a while back.

If it takes less than four seconds for you that's amazing.

I'd disagree than longer means a defect.

The average, I recall, seemed to be closer to ten seconds or so.

- Mark

Quote:

. . . what for . . . a relative newcomer are its greatest problems - how is it used, the user interface, and the learning curve/tutorials . . . The main problem is a failure to identify how will the product likely be used . . .

The product tries . . . to be all things to all men, and ends up satisfying nobody, unless you are willing to invest the time the read all the tutorials, user guides, etc. . . Better would be to prompt the user during installation what their typical usage patterns will be, and reduce the feature/option clutter accordingly. . .

. . . the user interface seems to have been design by a software engineer for other software engineers. It is . . . not intuitive. The screen is . . . clogged with feaures and options that probably no single user will . . . use . . .

Windows "View" option . . . is missing . . .

Tutorials: . . . give the impression of having been written by an engineer, who believes that we should progress in the straight-line sequence A-Z as the best way to learn.
In lesson 2, we are prompted to load the song called " L_BOSMED.MGU", without knowing where the song is actually located.
We learn that there is a Visible Metronome feature, without an explanation of how to invoke it . . .
in the same tutorial . . . is an explanation about the General Midi Patch List. Why should the user reading lesson 2 need to know about this level of detail? The tutorial explains that to pressing the spacebar pauses a song, and that pressing the spacebar releases it. Instead, pressing the spacebar twice restarts the song from the beginning . . .
the word "improvise" doesn't appear in the help index. Is it possible to display/print the notations for the improvisation versions rendered by BIAB?

. . . I am also an engineer, and . . . I'm a firm believer in the concept that the project is finished, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there nothing more to be taken away. [The engineering definition of "elegance". -R]

Anything that follows is written in the spirit of making the incredible BIAB easier to use for myself and others. O PG, may you live forever! Hear our plea! Let not your hearts be hardened against our desire to walk in your ways! He'p me, Rhonda! All we are asking is that our beloved BIAB be made easier to use.

Paul identifies two primary issues: Program complexity, reflected in deep and detailed menus and toolbars, and difficulty in learning BIAB and accessing program functions, caused by the complex menus themselves, the lack of "programmed learning", and inadequate indexing. BIAB's very strength as a musical "Swiss Army knife" becomes the greatest obstacle to its easy use. A third issue is the inclusion of errors which are confusing and offputting, especially to the newcomer, who is likely to think that they are doing something wrong.

Many years ago Aston Martin introduced the Lagonda. The introductory model had, in addition to the usual gauges, forty four indicator lights in a 4 x 11 block. To its credit, the Lagonda included an "essential functions" switch which cut those glaring indicators down to 12.

A similar approach would be useful here. Imagine the usefulness of a BIAB optimized for live use--or recording, or chord entry--with ONLY those controls needed for same visible, instead of the clutter of dozens upon dozens of commands not needed for the immediate task. (The complexity of the GUI is precisely why I would not think of using BIAB live. And if there are ways around that, remember that it is the interface which puts me off pursuing it.)

BIAB is many things, many of which I am unlikely to use (the Conductor, e.g.). Major functions could be identified and separated and user customization made possible. "Personalized Menus", which in Windows are an annoyance, come to mind.

I easily become distracted while attempting to learn a new function. At first I was gleeful about the expanding concept or "Easter egg" effect--the process of answering a question raises more, taking me in directions I would not have gone on my own--but after a time it became tedious. Sometimes I just want the answer to a question. The tutorials take me in directions I don't want to go. The index is missing references to essential or highly useful information which does exist, it is just very hard to find.

I just looked back into the index of the manual for Version 11, in which I have made handwritten inserts for easy reference back to topics which I find important. Between "Visual Metronome, 261" and "Voicings, 50, 182, 286" I have entered "Voice leading, 230". Under "Volume" there are the subheadings "Allowing Changes, Changes, Setting". I have added "Enhanced Control". (Why was this missing in the first place?) Ironically, I see that between "Short Filenames, 276" and "Sight-reading, 127" I insterted an entry for "Shortcuts, 256". Come on, guys! (Note that, if PG are not going to address this deficiency, a printed manual is essential in order that all users may do the same.)

Two solutions come to mind: a third-party manual, and programmed learning. Users have been clamoring for a "BIAB For Dummies" for years. This is not PG's responsibility, but perhaps PG could enlist the help of specialists in technical writing and programmed learning to help create or revise the existing manuals and the tutorials.

Alas, I live alone. The empty side of my bed is filled with manufacturer and third-party manuals for Nuendo, Reason, RealBand (which I had to print myself), and BIAB. I LOVE THESE PROGRAMS. I am willing to do what it takes to use any program of value. But I have felt utterly overwhelmed by BIAB since Version 7, which came on a couple of floppies! And I am beginning to feel the same about RealBand. NOTHING IN THE PROGRAM ITSELF IS AT ISSUE. It is all about learning and usage. HELP US HELP OURSELVES.

Richard

P.S.: Please note that in any areas in which I am capable of doing so, I am willing to put my money where my mouth is. I am a writer, a Level II copy editor, highly organized and highly motivated to see these suggestions implemented. If there is any way in which I can help, I will. -R.

P.P.S: What Matt refers to as a "wizard" is known in programming circles as an "agent"--a software routine whose job it is to learn the user's habits, make suggestions and adapt accordingly. (The Microsoft "Paper Clip" is a feeble attempt at this.) This is high-end stuff, off in MIT Media Lab territory--the exact people I would like to see involved in improving PG products. These are the people who define computing and user interfaces. Peter, would you consider approaching them about consulting? -"Archie"

P.P.P.S.: From the back of the box, BIAB Version 11: ". . . Dr. Peter Gannon began creating Band-in-a-Box after being frustrated by difficult to use music software programs." Jeez, Doc, what were you using then?

-Ryś

I recalled the last P.P.P.S. above by Ryszard :

Quote:

P.P.P.S.: From the back of the box, BIAB Version 11: ". . . Dr. Peter Gannon began creating Band-in-a-Box after being frustrated by difficult to use music software programs." Jeez, Doc, what were you using then? -Ryś

BIAB has "put on weight" over twenty plus years, most of it since Y2K. BIAB has build-in quite a collection of mini "applets". It is good that some newly added power features are placed separately in RealBand to keep things in focus. In the same vein, it is suggested that new stand-alone program be created that focus on core functionalities.
Hence, we can have a fresh new generation maestro GUI that will just accept chords and lyrics inputs for songleading or karaoke playback with modern pickers for styles, sets, instruments, etc.

I'm sure PG and PGmusic are very well aware and concerned about today's consumers demands, and at the same time sustaining business. Our demand for variety has fuelled the growing lists of sets and styles.

Quote:

Our demand for variety has fuelled the growing lists of sets and styles.

I think that statement best explains the situation.

Responding to customer "Wishlist" demands is something PGMusic does very well indeed.

That also goes towards the creation of all those toolbars, menus and buttons, hard-to-find and decipher.

BIAB is quirky, but well worth that price of admission as there really is nothing else that even comes close in end result if you bother to work with the program long enough to find that out.

Perhaps there will be a day when the program is "mature" enough to be rewritten with that nice shiny GUI.

I'm not holding my breath on that one.

--Mac