|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
Songwriting
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,372
Veteran
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,372 |
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.comAdd nothing that adds nothing to the music. You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both. The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Songwriting
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 15,415
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 15,415 |
Can't read it there w/o creating an account but, wow, it’s all over the major news services. Get out the popcorn!
Bud
Our albums and singles are on Spotify, Apple Music, Amazon Music, YouTube Music, Pandora and more. If interested search on Janice Merritt. Thanks! Our Videos are here on our website.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Songwriting
|
Joined: Jun 2020
Posts: 2,574
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2020
Posts: 2,574 |
"But it’s “obvious” what their music generators were trained on, according to the lawsuits. Their models could only succeed in producing such realistic songs, the suits stated, if they had been trained on “vast quantities of sound recordings from artists across every genre, style, and era” — many of which remain copyrighted by these record labels."As I understand this litigation, I'm with the artists. But I think they face an up hill battle. They need more evidence than "It's obvious . . .". They need the training data to be fully and honestly disclosed. But unless a Judge orders it, such taining data will never be disclosed voluntarily. This site does not require a log in. https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/us-record-labels-are-suing-ai-music-generators-alleging-copyright-infr-rcna158660
https://soundcloud.com/user-646279677BiaB 2025 Windows For me there’s no better place in the band than to have one leg in the harmony world and the other in the percussive. Thank you Paul Tutmarc and Leo Fender.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Songwriting
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 15,415
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 15,415 |
The below quote from Billboard well summed it up. I would think a lawsuit from those companies given their resources would be a bit intimidating.
“Filed by plaintiffs Sony Music, Warner Music Group and Universal Music Group, the lawsuits allege that Suno and Udio have unlawfully copied the labels' sound recordings to train their AI models to generate music that could "saturate the market with machine-generated content that will directly compete with, cheapen and ultimately drown out the genuine sound recordings on which [the services were] built."
Our albums and singles are on Spotify, Apple Music, Amazon Music, YouTube Music, Pandora and more. If interested search on Janice Merritt. Thanks! Our Videos are here on our website.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Songwriting
|
Joined: Jun 2020
Posts: 2,574
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2020
Posts: 2,574 |
Sadly, and in the end, I think the artists will lose; here's my logic.
Just because a music-generating AI was not trained on an artist's songs does not mean that the AI is incapable of producing music very close to that of that artist . . . and "close" means close enough to be commercially successful in the marketplace. The technology might not be fully developed yet but it will be.
This is because even the developers of today's large AI models do not and cannot fully understand them. There are simply too many interactions between the layers and connections to be grasped by a human. In part, this is why AI models can "hallucinate". This attribute of hallucination (or unpredictableness) is being exploited in fields such as drug discovery where you are looking for unknown, unexpected and useful connections between molecules so that the chemistry of a novel drug compound that solves a particular problem is derived.
Let's say you train an AI on data that is restricted to the works by The Eagles, Tom Petty, Chicago, CSNY, SuperTramp and The Beatles. I claim that it is more than just theoretically possible for this AI to produce songs very close in sound and style to that of the Doobie Brothers.
So imho, the copyright laws will need to be restrictive enough to say "no matter what training data was used, the output of the AI cannot sound like copyrighted work". I don't know if that is even possible. Who decides the definition of "sounds like"?
https://soundcloud.com/user-646279677BiaB 2025 Windows For me there’s no better place in the band than to have one leg in the harmony world and the other in the percussive. Thank you Paul Tutmarc and Leo Fender.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Songwriting
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,612
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,612 |
The claim that the AI has been trained on copyright material has been verified by a number of people. Although Udio and other companies have made it difficult to ask for a song in the style of a specific artist, people have been able to write prompts to get around that limitation and get ABBA's harmonies, or Paul McCartney's voice.
It's the same sort of thing that happened when AI image programs didn't let you write "Mario", so people used "video game plumber" and got... Mario.
When an AI program is "trained" on a song, that song is stored in the neural network. Even if it's a fairly coarse copy, it's still enough of a copy that, if given the rights prompts, the original song could be reproduced.
AI programs aren't trained on just a handful of songs. They're fed millions of songs. That's why they are able to generate such a variety of material.
But you can feed in the works of The Eagles, Tom Petty, Chicago, CSNY, Supertramp and The Beatles and generate songs all day long, and you're still not going to get Michael McDonald's throaty vocals, or the chugging guitar on "Long Train Runnin'".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Songwriting
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 15,415
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 15,415 |
I intentionally skirt on the periphery of these AI issues even though I’ve had a lifelong interest in science. IMHO and FWIW we’ve no notion of where it’s going. When I was a kid in the 50’s I constantly read about how by 1970 we’d all be flying around mile high skyscrapers in our personal little jets. 😀 Perhaps my comment is not analogous but many predictions based on the best science at the time have gone ridiculously awry. That said this technology is moving stunningly rapidly.
Bud
Our albums and singles are on Spotify, Apple Music, Amazon Music, YouTube Music, Pandora and more. If interested search on Janice Merritt. Thanks! Our Videos are here on our website.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Songwriting
|
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,826
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,826 |
Like hell. This is just the latest step. One of the big problems is that the laws that need to be enforced are not on the books yet. Who decides the definition of "sounds like"? That’s easy. The US Congress and the EU. Some of us have been involved in this effort for over two years, now. There’s little enthusiasm for getting anything done as of yet. So far, all we have is the Librarian of Congress and the WGA & Equity agreements based on her decisions. The courts are treating that as law but it isn’t. When it really gets to be fun is when some clever law firm figures out that sound-a-likes are not a copyright issue because they aren’t. Like an artist’s image, this is trademark territory and there’s a lot of precedent in that field.
BIAB 2024 Audiophile Mac
24Core/60CoreGPU M2 MacStudioUltra/8TB/192GB Sequoia, M1 MBAir, 2012 MBP
Digital Performer11, LogicPro, Finale27/Dorico/Encore/SmartScorePro64/Notion6 /Overture5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Songwriting
|
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 438
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 438 |
I find this YT interesting. It says music companies and copyright owners making law suits to protect themselves, since they want to make their own AI models of their artists for themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Songwriting
|
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,492
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,492 |
...music companies and copyright owners making law suits to protect themselves, since they want to make their own AI models of their artists for themselves. I've been in the electronics and software business all my adult life and for a long time now companies have filed patents on things or principles that are sometimes so obvious that one would expect nobody would want to patent them, usually working on the "novel use" principle. There is essentially no value in the idea itself. The aim is simply to be a disruptor ... to make life difficult for the opposition. I expect it's the same in other businesses. Good video. I wonder if it'll make any difference.
Jazz relative beginner, starting at a much older age than was helpful.
AVL:MXE Linux; Windows 11
BIAB2025 Audiophile, a bunch of other software.
Kawai MP6, Ui24R, Focusrite Saffire Pro40 and Scarletts
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Songwriting
|
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 8,338
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 8,338 |
I can't believe that everyone does not see what's really going on here.
Has no one noticed the sudden proliferation of too-good-to-be-true synth voices on the band-in-a-box songwriters forum??
Has no one noticed Dr. Peter Gannon himself producing how to videos on using AI with band-in-a box?
Has it not occurred to you that random samples from Kontakt or the band lab samples page cannot reproduce the sound of the Doobie Brothers?
Has it never dawned on anybody that the best AI program in the world can only create a very bad parody of a hit song but not actually perform one because they don't have anyone who actually knows how to play anything?
Have you not understood that the only program in the world that can actually play a carbon copy of a stolen Doobie Brothers song with nothing more than a chord progression that has been cleverly ripped off is:
Band-in-a-Box???
And all those devil children who lurk on the Band-in-a-Box Forum with their AI generated Devil Songs???
Bu ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!
Welcome to AI hell my friends!!!!
You walked right in through the front door! Bu ha ha ha ha!!!
You can check in, but you can never leave!!!
Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Songwriting
|
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,826
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,826 |
Has no one noticed the sudden proliferation of too-good-to-be-true synth voices on the band-in-a-box songwriters forum?? Uh yea... Not sure that it's any worse than all of those songwriter demos from the '60s–'70s that sounded like Barry McGuire and Harry Nilsson or the '70s–'90s demos that sounded like Livingston Taylor. Of course, they were recorded by Barry, Harry and Livingston... Trivia: I once asked P.F. Sloan why there was no actual "pounding of the drums" as mentioned in his lyrics to the 1965 mega-hit, "Eve of Destruction" — I don't count the toms in the intro. He told me that it was a one-hour demo session and that the record company liked it so much, it was released within a week. Barry McGuire was just the demo singer after leaving the New Christy Minstrels; it was never shopped to any of the artists that Sloan had in mind. Hal Blaine never got a second bite at the drums to re-do or overdub his track to match the lyrics.
BIAB 2024 Audiophile Mac
24Core/60CoreGPU M2 MacStudioUltra/8TB/192GB Sequoia, M1 MBAir, 2012 MBP
Digital Performer11, LogicPro, Finale27/Dorico/Encore/SmartScorePro64/Notion6 /Overture5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Songwriting
|
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 8,338
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 8,338 |
I love this Rick Beato video. I think he nailed it.
The commercial music industry is profiting from the massive proliferation of music that epitomizes utter laziness sold to consumers who have no taste.
That is the truth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Songwriting
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,703
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,703 |
[quote]Trivia: I once asked P.F. Sloan why there was no actual "pounding of the drums..." Mike, nice bit of trivia. Sometimes "genius" is just a fortunate accident. I think Eve of Destruction is pretty near perfect, recognizing that it shouldn't be. Always enjoy your historical perspectives.
DC Ron
BiaB Audiophile
Presonus Studio One
StudioCat DAW dual screen
Presonus Faderport 16
Too many guitars (is that a thing?)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Songwriting
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,930
PG Music Developer
|
|
PG Music Developer
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,930 |
Are any of the AI sounds extracted directly from copyrighted material, or does it use different set of loops/synths/samples to create tracks that sound similar to the copyrighted material that it was trained on, without actually having directly sampled audio from the copyrighted material?
Jeff Yankauer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Songwriting
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,612
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,612 |
Are any of the AI sounds extracted directly from copyrighted material, or does it use different set of loops/synths/samples to create tracks that sound similar to the copyrighted material that it was trained on, without actually having directly sampled audio from the copyrighted material? Neither - the audio isn't stored in the way you are describing. AI is "trained" on the audio. The training process consists of the data (in this case, potentially copyright audio) being fed into a self-organizing neural network, and some output being created. The match between the output and the expected output is then measured to create an error value, and the weights in the neural network are adjusted so the next time the same input is given, it will be closer to the desired output. For the sake of creating an example, imagine that the AI was being trained to generate 4 seconds of audio. The input might be "lion roar", and the output would be audio representing the roar of a lion. But what would that audio actually look like? It reality, it probably wouldn't be the exact audio stream, because that's a lot of computation. Instead, it would likely be a series of 10ms frames, with each frame representing the audio as a spectral envelope. A spectral envelope is a coarse representation of the energy that exists within the frequency bands. There are various ways of converting spectral envelopes into audio. So right off the bat, the audio that's being generated is an inexact representation of the sound. The job of the AI is to predict what the energy levels in the spectral bands is going to be over the course of 4 seconds. At 4000 milliseconds per second, that's 1600 frames. It's likely to have some sort of "memory", so that network might keep track of the last 20 frames as part if its input. So the actual question to the neural network would be more like "Given this as the last 20 frames, and the target being "lion roar", predict the values for the 40 spectral bands in the next frame". The neural network is a self-organizing network, so it's anyone's guess what the innards of the network are going to be. But you're not going to find any "sampled audio" in the network. On the other hand, that doesn't mean that the network won't replicate the copyright audio that it was trained on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Songwriting
|
Joined: Jul 2019
Posts: 253
Apprentice
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: Jul 2019
Posts: 253 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Songwriting
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,122
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,122 |
Thanks, yes, the law will have to catch up. "(3) A person is liable to a civil action if the person “distributes, transmits, or otherwise makes available an algorithm, software, tool, or other technology, service, or device, the primary purpose or function of which is the production of an individual's photograph, voice, or likeness without authorization from the individual or, in the case of a minor, the minor's parent or legal guardian, or in the case of a deceased individual, the executor or administrator, heirs, or devisees of such deceased individual.” At the same time, concerns have been raised by some, including Vanderbilt Law School entertainment and intellectual property law professor Joseph Fishman, that the law is overbroad and could bar or chill legitimate conduct or speech. Interested parties should carefully monitor how the law is interpreted and enforced by courts in the coming months with the help of a team of attorneys competent in First Amendment, AI, personal rights, and intellectual property issues." It will be interesting to see how natural creation in a genre (The Beatles influenced by Beethoven or The Beach Boys) is any different than sampling, or technologies in BIAB and the new machine learning output.
Studio One (latest version), Win 11 23H2 , i9 -10940X 3.3 GHz, 32GB Mem, a 4K 40" monitor, PreSonus Studio Live III Console as interface/controller. secondarily test on Reaper, Cakewalk, and S1 on Surface Pro 3 Win 10 (latest versions).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Songwriting
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,372
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,372 |
Are any of the AI sounds extracted directly from copyrighted material, or does it use different set of loops/synths/samples to create tracks that sound similar to the copyrighted material that it was trained on, without actually having directly sampled audio from the copyrighted material? From what I understand, none of them are using any of the copyrighted materials, samples, or loops to make the music and lyrics. They were "taught" or "learned" on the songs that are copyrighted. I guess much in the same way a student of music might study the Beatles or the Stones and then use what they learned to write their own original music and lyrics. Chord progressions and structure are not copyrightable. The way I see it would be if I or any other writer would dare to listen to a song on the radio, study it, and then use what I learned to write my own song...could I get sued for that? Apparently so according to the premise of this law suit. We all need to watch out if that is the case. While messing around with the free version of one of the AI song creators, just for grins I asked it to compose a song in the "style" of AC/DC just to see what it would provide..... and it came back with a message that using the name of a band was not allowed.
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.comAdd nothing that adds nothing to the music. You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both. The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Songwriting
|
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,826
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,826 |
[quote=Jeff Yankauer]
…
While messing around with the free version of one of the AI song creators, just for grins I asked it to compose a song in the "style" of AC/DC just to see what it would provide..... and it came back with a message that using the name of a band was not allowed. Just yesterday, I was doing a little research and asked an ChatGPT for the lyrics of a particular Beatle song just to save time. I got a big pop-up that this probably violated the Terms of Service—ok... but it also displayed the full lyrics to the song. It wouldn't let me copy them, however. No big deal, plenty of places that would let me copy. BTW, nearly all of those lyric sites are run by Hal Leonard, largest music publisher in the world, and royalties are paid to the rights holders. I found this out by digging deep into MUSE Group's mission statement when they bought Hal Leonard last December. I digress... the project was to get lines from famous songs of the 1960s that used the word, Love. I would ask for a dozen lines from songs by the Beatles, Stones, Monkees, Kinks and so on. In each case, GPT used the name of the band in the reply. What was appalling was how often GPT got it wrong. I saw the same James Taylor line credited to both The Beatles and the Monkees. So I asked for 12 lines from James Taylor and the lines never came up. The lines? "I feel fine anytime she's around me now. She's around me now, almost all the time and I feel fine" (from Something in the Way She Moves). Artificial? Yes. Intelligence? Not that I have seen.
BIAB 2024 Audiophile Mac
24Core/60CoreGPU M2 MacStudioUltra/8TB/192GB Sequoia, M1 MBAir, 2012 MBP
Digital Performer11, LogicPro, Finale27/Dorico/Encore/SmartScorePro64/Notion6 /Overture5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New RealTracks Released with Band-in-a-Box 2025!
We’ve expanded the Band-in-a-Box® RealTracks library with 202 incredible new RealTracks (in sets 449-467) across Jazz, Blues, Funk, World, Pop, Rock, Country, Americana, and Praise & Worship—featuring your most requested styles!
Jazz, Blues & World (Sets 449–455):
These RealTracks includes “Soul Jazz” with Neil Swainson (bass), Mike Clark (drums), Charles Treadway (organ), Miles Black (piano), and Brent Mason (guitar). Enjoy “Requested ’60s” jazz, classic acoustic blues with Colin Linden, and more of our popular 2-handed piano soloing. Plus, a RealTracks first—Tango with bandoneon, recorded in Argentina!
Rock & Pop (Sets 456–461):
This collection includes Disco, slap bass ‘70s/‘80s pop, modern and ‘80s metal with Andy Wood, and a unique “Songwriter Potpourri” featuring Chinese folk instruments, piano, banjo, and more. You’ll also find a muted electric guitar style (a RealTracks first!) and “Producer Layered Guitar” styles for slick "produced" sound.
Country, Americana & Praise (Sets 462–467):
We’ve added new RealTracks across bro country, Americana, praise & worship, vintage country, and songwriter piano. Highlights include Brent Mason (electric guitar), Eddie Bayers (drums), Doug Jernigan (pedal steel), John Jarvis (piano), Glen Duncan (banjo, mandolin & fiddle), Mike Harrison (electric bass) and more—offering everything from modern sounds to heartfelt Americana styles
Check out all the 202 New RealTracks (in sets 456-467)
And, if you are looking for more, the 2025 49-PAK (for $49) includes an additional 20 RealTracks with exciting new sounds and genre-spanning styles. Enjoy RealTracks firsts like Chinese instruments (guzheng & dizi), the bandoneon in an authentic Argentine tango trio, and the classic “tic-tac” baritone guitar for vintage country.
You’ll also get slick ’80s metal guitar from Andy Wood, modern metal with guitarist Nico Santora, bass player Nick Schendzielos, and drummer Aaron Stechauner, more praise & worship, indie-folk, modern/bro country with Brent Mason, and “Songwriter Americana” with Johnny Hiland.
Plus, enjoy user-requested styles like Soul Jazz RealDrums, fast Celtic Strathspey guitar, and Chill Hop piano & drums!
The 2025 49-PAK is loaded with other great new add-ons as well. Learn more about the 2025 49-PAK!
Bonus PAKs for Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Mac!
With your version 2025 for Mac Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, Audiophile Edition or PlusPAK purchase, we'll include a Bonus PAK full of great new Add-ons FREE! Or upgrade to the 2025 49-PAK for only $49 to receive even more NEW Add-ons including 20 additional RealTracks!
These PAKs are loaded with additional add-ons to supercharge your Band-in-a-Box®!
This Free Bonus PAK includes:
- The 2025 RealCombos Booster PAK:
-For Pro customers, this includes 33 new RealTracks and 65+ new RealStyles.
-For MegaPAK customers, this includes 29 new RealTracks and 45+ new RealStyles.
-For UltraPAK customers, this includes 20 new RealStyles.
- Look Ma! More MIDI 13: Country & Americana
- Instrumental Studies Set 22: 2-Hand Piano Soloing - Rhythm Changes
- MIDI SuperTracks Set 44: Jazz Piano
- Artist Performance Set 17: Songs with Vocals 7
- Playable RealTracks Set 4
- RealDrums Stems Set 7: Jazz with Mike Clark
- SynthMaster Sounds and Styles (with audio demos)
- 128 GM MIDI Patch Audio Demos.
Looking for more great add-ons, then upgrade to the 2025 49-PAK for just $49 and you'll get:
- 20 Bonus Unreleased RealTracks and RealDrums with 20 RealStyles,
- FLAC Files (lossless audio files) for the 20 Bonus Unreleased RealTracks and RealDrums
- Look Ma! More MIDI 14: SynthMaster,
- Instrumental Studies Set 23: More '80s Hard Rock Soloing,
- MIDI SuperTracks Set 45: More SynthMaster
- Artist Performance Set 18: Songs with Vocals 8
- RealDrums Stems Set 8: Pop, Funk & More with Jerry Roe
Learn more about the Bonus PAKs for Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac®!
New! Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Band-in-a-Box 2025 and Higher for Mac!
Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Mac & Windows Band-in-a-Box version 2025 (and higher) is here with 200 brand new RealStyles!
We're excited to bring you our latest and greatest in the all new Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Band-in-a-Box! This fresh installment is packed with 200 all-new styles spanning the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres you've come to expect, as well as the exciting inclusion of electronic styles!
In this PAK you’ll discover: Minimalist Modern Funk, New Wave Synth Pop, Hard Bop Latin Groove, Gospel Country Shuffle, Cinematic Synthwave, '60s Motown, Funky Lo-Fi Bossa, Heavy 1980s Metal, Soft Muted 12-8 Folk, J-Pop Jazz Fusion, and many more!
All the Xtra Styles PAKs 1 - 20 are on special for only $29 each (reg $49), or get all 209 PAKs for $199 (reg $399)! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of the Xtra Styles PAK 20.
Video: Xtra Styles PAK 20 Overview & Styles Demos: Watch now!
Note: The Xtra Styles require the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box®. (Xtra Styles PAK 20 requires the 2025 or higher UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition. They will not work with the Pro or MegaPAK version because they need the RealTracks from the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition.
New! XPro Styles PAK 9 for Band-in-a-Box 2025 and higher for Mac!
We've just released XPro Styles PAK 9 for Mac & Windows Band-in-a-Box version 2025 (and higher) with 100 brand new RealStyles, plus 29 RealTracks/RealDrums!
We've been hard at it to bring you the latest and greatest in this 9th installment of our popular XPro Styles PAK series! Included are 75 styles spanning the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres (25 styles each) that fans have come to expect, as well as 25 styles in this volume's wildcard genre: funk & R&B!
If you're itching to get a sneak peek at what's included in XPro Styles PAK 9, here is a small helping of what you can look forward to: Funky R&B Horns, Upbeat Celtic Rock, Jazz Fusion Salsa, Gentle Indie Folk, Cool '60s Soul, Funky '70s R&B, Smooth Jazz Hip Hop, Acoustic Rockabilly Swing, Funky Reggae Dub, Dreamy Retro Latin Jazz, Retro Soul-Rock Fusion, and much more!
Special Pricing! Until July 31, 2024, all the XPro Styles PAKs 1 - 9 are on sale for only $29 ea (Reg. $49 ea), or get them all in the XPro Styles PAK Bundle for only $149 (reg. $299)! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of XPro Styles PAKs.
Video: XPro Styles PAK 9 Overview & Styles Demos: Watch now!
XPro Styles PAKs require Band-in-a-Box® 2025 or higher and are compatible with ANY package, including the Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, and Audiophile Edition.
New! Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Band-in-a-Box 2025 and Higher for Windows!
Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Windows & Mac Band-in-a-Box version 2025 (and higher) is here with 200 brand new RealStyles!
We're excited to bring you our latest and greatest in the all new Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Band-in-a-Box! This fresh installment is packed with 200 all-new styles spanning the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres you've come to expect, as well as the exciting inclusion of electronic styles!
In this PAK you’ll discover: Minimalist Modern Funk, New Wave Synth Pop, Hard Bop Latin Groove, Gospel Country Shuffle, Cinematic Synthwave, '60s Motown, Funky Lo-Fi Bossa, Heavy 1980s Metal, Soft Muted 12-8 Folk, J-Pop Jazz Fusion, and many more!
All the Xtra Styles PAKs 1 - 20 are on special for only $29 each (reg $49), or get all 209 PAKs for $199 (reg $399)! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of the Xtra Styles PAK 20.
Video: Xtra Styles PAK 20 Overview & Styles Demos: Watch now!
Note: The Xtra Styles require the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box®. (Xtra Styles PAK 20 requires the 2025 or higher UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition. They will not work with the Pro or MegaPAK version because they need the RealTracks from the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition.
New! XPro Styles PAK 9 for Band-in-a-Box 2025 and higher for Windows!
We've just released XPro Styles PAK 9 for Windows & Mac Band-in-a-Box version 2025 (and higher) with 100 brand new RealStyles, plus 29 RealTracks/RealDrums!
We've been hard at it to bring you the latest and greatest in this 9th installment of our popular XPro Styles PAK series! Included are 75 styles spanning the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres (25 styles each) that fans have come to expect, as well as 25 styles in this volume's wildcard genre: funk & R&B!
If you're itching to get a sneak peek at what's included in XPro Styles PAK 9, here is a small helping of what you can look forward to: Funky R&B Horns, Upbeat Celtic Rock, Jazz Fusion Salsa, Gentle Indie Folk, Cool '60s Soul, Funky '70s R&B, Smooth Jazz Hip Hop, Acoustic Rockabilly Swing, Funky Reggae Dub, Dreamy Retro Latin Jazz, Retro Soul-Rock Fusion, and much more!
Special Pricing! Until July 31, 2024, all the XPro Styles PAKs 1 - 9 are on sale for only $29 ea (Reg. $49 ea), or get them all in the XPro Styles PAK Bundle for only $149 (reg. $299)! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of XPro Styles PAKs.
Video: XPro Styles PAK 9 Overview & Styles Demos: Watch now!
XPro Styles PAKs require Band-in-a-Box® 2025 or higher and are compatible with ANY package, including the Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, and Audiophile Edition.
Video: Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac®: VST3 Plugin Support
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac® now includes support for VST3 plugins, alongside VST and AU. Use them with MIDI or audio tracks for even more creative possibilities in your music production.
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Macs®: VST3 Plugin Support
Video: Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac®: Using VST3 Plugins
Join the conversation on our forum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums58
Topics84,381
Posts778,508
Members39,638
| |
Most Online25,754
Jan 24th, 2025
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean