|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 92
Enthusiast
|
OP
Enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 92 |
Did anyone read the BIAB review in the March issue of Electronic Musician (EM)? The author of the article did a decent job of reviewing BIAB but a couple of things I take offense to. The first thing is that he doesn't consider BIAB a serious tool for performance. I know many of you like myself use BIAB for gigs. Up until the economy went South, gigging with BIAB was my main source of income for the last 10 years. The other thing he mentions is BIAB sounding cheesy unless you assign is to external synths or VST/DXi. I might have missed it but I didn't see any mention of using BIAB's included VST/DXi in the article. Even without the DXi, BIAB sounds better than many other products out there. As I mention before I've been performing gigs with BIAB for 10 years. Actually, it's been almost 20 if I count the time I used it with a group when I was in Germany. Long before the real drums and instruments, musicians would come up to me while I was performing and ask me where did I get my sequences. They wanted me to do seq for them. If I were a crook, I could have just taken their money but instead I told them it was BIAB. I heard guys use top notch synths for their backing tracks and they sound "Cheesy" because the drums and the bass are playing the exact same pattern every four bars. That's what makes BIAB different, it doesn't do that. I know I'm preaching or should I say venting to the choir. I would have posted this on Face Book but I know they wouldn't let me post this many characters. Thanks to you Peter and your whole team for making it possible for an average saxophonist to make a living gigging solo!
Dell Studio 16 Laptop i7 with 256 gig SSD
BIAB, Reaper, Encore, Sibelius
Roland SD-50
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 85
Enthusiast
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 85 |
Just to play devil's advocate here, I do understand what the reviewer means. There are relative degrees of "cheesy".
For instance, Microsoft's GM sounds are "cheesy" when compared to ForteDXi.
However, ForteDXi, while being a fine product, has a MUCH smaller sample set than, say, Vir2's "Vi.One" or Stephen Slate Drums, both of which I use with BiaB.
So while ForteDXi sounds "good enough" for most applications, the two Kontakt instruments I mentioned sound significiantly better, so perhaps ForteDXi could be called "cheesy" in comparison.
It's all relative and depends on your point of view.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 12,672
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 12,672 |
And of course, BIAB doesn't actually produce any sounds, so it's really hard for BIAB itself to sound cheesy. It's the reviewer's computer that produces the sound, although an external synth was mentioned as sounding better (but we've known that all along). Using the computer's sound source as sounding cheesy, the same could be said for any other MIDI software (Sonar, for example).
Now, if he was saying that the style execution is cheesy (some styles are, but many aren't), then that's a different thing. It's not clear the actual meaning. And (not having read the article) did he review the Pro PAK or the EverythingPAK, along with RealTracks/RealDrums.
John Laptop-HP Omen I7 Win11Pro 32GB 2x2TB, 1x4TB SSD Desktop-ASUS-I7 Win10Pro 32GB 2x1.5TB, 2x2TB, 1x4TB SATA BB2025/UMC404HD/Casios/Cakewalk/Reaper/Studio One/MixBus/Notion/Finale/Dorico/Noteworthy/NI/Halion/IK http://www.sus4chord.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,926
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,926 |
Sounds like time for a letter to the editor. They should know better.
R.
"My primary musical instrument is the personal computer."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 484
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 484 |
Ok, has the critic listened to music lately? Recently, someone handed me an R&B song used as an anthem for this winter olympics. Although I thought the vocalist was truly talented. The music backing him up sounded like it was composed on a cell phone!! Bleeps, and beeps, and bloops, etc. The poor guy (the singer) was trying to bring soul into a ringtone. What would this critic say to that?
Jakob, I would encourage you to keep using BIAB for your gigs. I would be surprised if anyone should make negative comments about the sounds generated by BIAB as they whistle along to the bleeps and beeps coming from their cell phone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 603
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 603 |
Don't. Huffy responses to all criticism are the earmarks of amusing crank communities.
Besides, the criticism is not unfair. You know very well the reviewer is talking about the VSC. Since it's the only sound source included with BiaB, it's inevitable people after decades think of it as the Band in a Box sound. All the peoples of the earth have complained increasingly for years that VSC (as the current phrase has it) sounds "cheesy". They are correct. The general level of available synth sounds improved hugely; PGMusic stayed forever with the VSC and earned a cheesball image.
That sound is what somebody who installs a review copy is going to hear. He would be a a slack reviewer not to mention that it sucks. He has no obligation to supply better sounds to make the product seem better.
Larry
______
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,693
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,693 |
Sorry, I don't agree at all. The guy is a pro or is supposed to be. He knows full well that any midi capable program requires a sound source and the better that source, the better the sound. The VSC is simply included as a freebie to get a customer started if they don't have anything better sounding just like Cakewalk does with the TTS-1 with most of their programs. Does he say Sonar Producer sucks because the included sound is cheesy? This is worth a respectful letter.
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: Dec 2004
Posts: 603
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 603 |
Hi, Bob. I never intend to read the review, so I won't get into discussion much, but Jakob said:
"The other thing he mentions is BIAB sounding cheesy unless you assign it to external synths or VST/DXi."
That seems perfectly fair of the reviewer to note, and it addresses your complaint. It makes it clear he was talking about the included sound sucking, not the program itself. It also hints that he did give it a go with other sounds to be sure of his point.
You have a point yourself about the TTS-1 (another elderly Roland softsynth which is not much good any longer). It must mean something that many BiaB people have bought cheap Cakewalk programs to get the crummy TTS-1, since it's at least better than the VSC.
Larry
______
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 15,831
PG Music Staff
|
|
PG Music Staff
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 15,831 |
I think its a great review, one of the best we've ever had. http://emusician.com/software/pg_music_band_in_box_2009_review/index.htmlHis reference to "cheesy" was talking about the past, and then talks about RealTracks as an alternative to cheesy computer sounds. What's not to like, with lines like this... "Starting a song is an exercise in instant gratification."
Have Fun!
Peter Gannon
PG Music Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,021
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,021 |
As a long time reader of EM they tell it like it is. I thought this was a very flattering article. They said it sounds cheesy unless you use a VSTi/DXi, external synth or RT. So what's left? The built in sounds of Windows and yes they are cheesy. I think even Peter would agree to that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913 |
If you actually read the review, it is as Peter points out - a rather flattering review.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,193
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,193 |
It is a good review, but I do wish the reviewer wouldn't have given a 3 for the sound, although I realize that must be from things like hardware reviews.
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: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,815
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,815 |
That's a pretty solid review. Hard to argue with much that is there. Good one!
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 812
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 812 |
+1 to Peter's post. It was a good review. I spend a fair amount of time trying to convince musicians to give BIAB a try. A few days later, I always get the comment "Yeah, it's cool and all, but it doesn't sound real".......
Then I have the 30 conversation about VSTs, samples, the evils of the MS Wavetable, Real Tracks/Drums etc. After their eye's glaze over, I play a couple of tunes using first the MS wavetable, and then better sounds, etc. THEN they get it, and start to see that BIAB is a great program that CAN be hampered by bad sounds. Or sound totally pro.
Agreed that the reviewer should have done a little more digging to get facts straight on sound output in BIAB. Also, I use BIAB for most of my gigs....that makes it Professional to me.
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,251
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,251 |
Peter, That was a great review. I especially liked the way he ended it. Quote:
Band-in-a-Box is a deep program that fosters the continuing education many of us engage in throughout our musical lives. From ear training and chord analysis to harmony and simple play-along fun, it offers many ways to expand your musical knowledge.
It’s nice to see BIAB get the “kudos” it deserves.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913 |
I think that this is where the GM-centric approach of PG music tends to bite themselves in the behind - the 'cheesiness' comment.
What PG should do is provide some MIDI-only accompaniments rendered to audio included with BIAB, but where there's been choice VSTi selection done for all of the parts - perhaps this conflicts with Realtracks a bit, I don't know.
Some killer drum kits used - perhaps Steven Slate drums, Trillian used for bass lines, NI B4 or similar for organ parts, Pianoteq for piano parts, etc.
The problem there is that quickly the costs to have non-cheesy sounds rise far above what BIAB costs if you include the expensive VSTi or outboard gear. So, while some complain that the sound quality category got a low score, it is what it is unless one supplements with less cheesy sounding software/hardware.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,193
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,193 |
Scott,
The problem with what you suggest, in my opinion, is that BIAB can't do what you're asking of it. Not until Peter and Co. get around to allowing users to assign the different outputs to different synth devices. Yes, I know that you can drag and drop to a DAW, and even Real Band, something the reviewer didn't even bring up, but you are no longer working in the core program, so it's not applicable.
Furthermore, as is often the case, BIAB is aimed at the lowest common denominator, which basically means General MIDI. If Roland and PG Music come to an agreement to allow PG Music to package the TTS-1 or something similar (and I don't even know if that's being looked into or not) then maybe the opinion of some will go up.
In either case, I would like to see the option of individual MIDI outputs for each part, and would have preferred that over the editing an imported MIDI track, so that people do have a choice of where they want to send their parts.
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 2005
Posts: 1,992
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,992 |
my 2cents.
biab comes with realband. right ??
there was no mention of the synergy that can be obtained
useing both programs.
this was an important omission in the review.
the whole "cheesy" thing is a blind alley imho.
cos anyone who has even the most basic understanding of midi knows
if ya dont want cheese , ya either use softsynths and/or
external midi hardware to generate sounds.
(as well as realtraks if one wants.)
the problem is many folks look at biab the wrong way imho.
viz thinking of it as a full blown daw program.
whereas the right way to look at things is the biab/RB combo.
the reviewer omitted to point out the increased scope for creativity
useing the biab/RB combo.
eg getting the song idea down in RB , then fleshing out the rest of the song
in RB where one has 48 traks to doodle with.
retired puter engr....powertracks on amd......NICE !
"what is the black art of audio engineering ?"
my silly songs...motagator.com/bmanning
see my tips in the tips section.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 57
Enthusiast
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 57 |
Very fine review indeed.
My feeling about using BiaB - the better musician you are the better BiaB becomes. BiaB can also make you a better musician.
One great snowball!
George
Last edited by georgeptingley; 03/12/10 09:57 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,345
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,345 |
Great review! Congratulations.
If I didn't already own it, I would have bought based on that article.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Mac Videos
With the release of Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac, we’re rolling out a collection of brand-new videos on our YouTube channel. We’ll also keep this forum post updated so you can easily find all the latest videos in one convenient spot.
From overviews of new features and walkthroughs of the 202 new RealTracks, to highlights of XPro Styles PAK 8, Xtra Styles PAKs 18, the 2025 49-PAK, and in-depth tutorials — you’ll find everything you need to explore what’s new in Band-in-a-Box® 2025.
Reference this forum post for One-Stop Shopping of our Band-in-a-Box® 2025 Mac Videos — we’ll be adding more videos as they’re released!
Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Mac is Here!
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac is here, packed with major new features and an incredible collection of available new content! This includes 202 RealTracks (in Sets 449-467), plus 20 bonus Unreleased RealTracks in the 2025 49-PAK. There are new RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, “Songs with Vocals” Artist Performance Sets, Playable RealTracks Set 4, two new sets of “RealDrums Stems,” XPro Styles PAK 8, Xtra Styles PAK 19, and more!
Special Offers
Upgrade to Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac with savings of up to 50% on most upgrade packages during our special—available until July 31, 2025! Visit our Band-in-a-Box® packages page for all the purchase options available.
2025 Free Bonus PAK & 49-PAK Add-ons
We've packed our Free Bonus PAK & 49-PAK with some incredible Add-ons! The Free Bonus PAK is automatically included with most Band-in-a-Box® for Mac 2025 packages, but for even more Add-ons (including 20 Unreleased RealTracks!) upgrade to the 2025 49-PAK for only $49. You can see the full lists of items in each package, and listen to demos here.
If you have any questions, feel free to connect with us directly—we’re here to help!
Band-in-a-Box 2025 Italian Version is Here!
Cari amici
È stata aggerate la versione in Italiano del programma più amato dagli appassionati di musica, il nostro Band-in-a-Box.
Questo è il link alla nuova versione 2025.
Di seguito i link per scaricare il pacchetti di lingua italiana aggiornati per Band-in-a-Box e RealBand, anche per chi avesse già comprato la nuova versione in inglese.
Band-in-a-Box 2025 - Italiano
RealBand 2025 - Italiano
Band-in-a-Box 2025 French Version is Here!
Bonjour à tous,
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 pour Windows est disponible en Français.
Le téléchargement se fait à partir du site PG Music
Pour ceux qui auraient déjà acheté la version 2025 de Band-in-a-Box (et qui donc ont une version anglaise), il est possible de "franciser" cette version avec les patchs suivants:
BIAB 2025 - francisation
RealBand 2025 - francisation
Voilà, enjoy!
Band-in-a-Box 2025 German Version is Here!
Update Your Band-in-a-Box® 2025 to Build 1128 for Windows Today!
Already using Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Windows®? Download Build 1128 now from our Support Page to enjoy the latest enhancements and improvements from our team.
Stay up to date—get the latest update now!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums58
Topics84,304
Posts777,548
Members39,614
| |
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