|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,926
Veteran
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,926 |
When the subject of AI has come up in regards to BIAB I have responded that BIAB is instead an Expert System. In reference to the Stylemaker this has been and is still true.
However, things have changed. With the addition of the Audio Chord Wizard, the Style Wizard, and perhaps other features, AI is definitely involved. Since I don't use many features outside of the Stylemaker and the Chord Entry function, I wonder if you could say more about AI in general, and specifically in regards to its use in BIAB and/or Real Band.
Who knows? Maybe I'll get out of my rut and find something new to do with BIAB. Thanks in advance for your time and attention and (as always) for all that you do.
Regards,
Richard
"My primary musical instrument is the personal computer."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502 |
In the past, I have said that it is, purists then come out of the woodwork and swear up and down that it isn't.
Being an old school robotics designer, whenever I see "weighting" I tend to think, "artificial intelligence" - which I still hold to be true.
The purists seem to want AI to apply only to self-learning machines.
--Mac
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 12,844
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 12,844 |
For the purists, then, it seems to me that you just need a means for providing feedback (which you need anyway for self-learning), and then adjust the actions accordingly. For example, if you use BIAB to generate a solo, but then did it again a few times, the soloist algorithm could learn from that and steer away from what it originally produced. If you save the file, it could assume that what it finally provided was something you liked and could start from there the next time.
But people need feedback in order to learn. So that must be a prerequisite for a computer system as well. If the computer is only generating output without a feedback mechanism in place, there is no way for the program to "learn".
Just my simplistic view about this. It can get very complicated and very convoluted very quickly.
John Laptop-HP Omen I7 Win11Pro 32GB 12TB SSD Desktop-ASUS-I7 Win10Pro 32GB 12TB SATA BB2026/UMC204HD&404HD/Casios/Cakewalk/Reaper/Studio One/Notion/Dorico/Noteworthy/NI/Halion/IK http://www.sus4chord.com (under rehosting/construction)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,167
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,167 |
AI is lagging far behind in my opinions as regards voice recognization. In this day and age you would expect software to take a sample of a person's voice (say an hour long) and then be able to speak in a natural voice of that person any type of text that can be input to it. I know you can get programs like dragon naturally speaking that will take a sample of your voice and then will be able to take notes while you speak, but why has the former not been invented as yet
Moving on from that I am totally surprised that we don't have software with famous custom voices installed and they will speak in a natural manner any kind of text that is input to it.
This hasn't happened, the robotic voices that we hear is just a reminder of how far we are behind as regards any sort of intelligent AI.
As regards biab or realband I don't think there is any sort of AI involved, the only intelligence needed is the end user who decides whether the realtrack samples and other things sound good or not, though at times its a nice feeling to really imagine and maybe even partly believe that there is AI in this program.
musiclover
Last edited by musiclover; 05/12/11 09:56 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 15,975
PG Music Staff
|
|
PG Music Staff
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 15,975 |
At most, Band-in-a-Box would be considered an expert system. People define AI differently. Some would include expert systems as a subfield of AI. Others would exclude expert systems, based on the lack of learning and adapting. FWIW, in my experience the public considers all of these types of programs AI. Around 1980, I was a Medical Student, and did a 3 month elective at U. Pittsburgh working on a great AI computer medical diagnosis program called Caduceus. The program was well known in AI circles, and is referenced here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CADUCEUS_(expert_system) . I wasn't involved at all in the LISP programming, just helping out with researching some disease symptoms/signs to add to the database. It was a great experience and I learned a lot from the team headed by Dr. Jack Meyers. But I see Caduceus listed in Wikipedia, and they even have to prominently append "Expert System" to the name. There was a lot of AI in the program, dealing with multiple diseases, inaccurate symptom reporting etc. This same debate "is it really true AI, or just a big expert system" was going on then. At that time, other debate topics were "What is AI", and "Can computers think" and I stopped following the debates when I saw the topic "Do humans think". In doing this Medical research, I found myself in Boston at Harvard Medical Library, and found an original copy of a clever manual device a guy made in the 1930's that diagnosed diseases from symptoms. It was a series of "symptoms" cards. On each card (e.g. fever) there were a bunch of circles with disease names, with the same diseases listed on every card in the same place. Each symptom card had holes punched out, if the symptom was present in the disease. So to diagnose your condition, you stacked up the symptom cards that had your symptoms, and then held it up to the light. For the diseases that had your symptoms, you could see right through the stack of cards, so you could quickly see which diseases you might have. SO if you had fever and a rash, you would take out those 2 cards, and whatever diseases you could see through to the light, you might have! So that was an expert system that pre-dated the computer era!
Have Fun!
Peter Gannon
PG Music Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,792
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,792 |
Now Peter the real question is when are you going to add that elusive Talent Plugin!
HP Win 11 12 gig ram, Mac mini Sonoma with 16 gig of ram, BiaB/RB 2026, Reaper 7, Harrison Mixbus 11 , Presonus Audiobox USB96
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 7,258
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 7,258 |
Ahhh, the biiiig question IS though how do we know for sure musiclover, that the software you mentioned HASN'T been invented ??? We've obviously no earthly idea what wonderful teccy secrets our governments are hiding from us. I'm pretty sure the world of computing is a heck of a lot more advanced than our governments would have us believe !
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,079
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,079 |
I remember my Dad, telling me about that card system as he was in University of London doing pharmacy in the '30's, and I thought, at the time he told me, that he was talking rubbish, sorry Dad! A precursor, I assume, of the far more complicated diagnostic triangle that I was supposed to learn as a Dental Student in the 1970's. I must find the BIAB file of the song I wrote in the 70's that when I put the chords in BIAB, (gossamer sty)and randomly generated a melody, produced, at the 1st generation, an almost note for note version of MY melody/me singing. One of the many many reasons I like BIAB!!! However Artificial Intelligence is no match for Natural Stupidity. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,217
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,217 |
.
>>>...People define AI differently. Some would include expert systems as a subfield of AI. Others would exclude expert systems, based on the lack of learning and adapting. FWIW, in my experience the public considers all of these types of programs AI...>>>
Human intelligence cannot be defined, so I am pretty sure that Artificial Intelligence will remain undefined for a while...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,217
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,217 |
How about a Turing test for BIAB:
Put two synthesizers in two rooms. Let one be operated by a human and the other be operated by BiaB's melodist and soloist functions. Put a listener in a third room.
Will it be possible for BiaB to create a song that a reasonably sophisticated listener cannot distinguish from a song created by a human?
I belive BiaB can do this. Would this, then, indicate that BiaB is thinking?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,296
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,296 |
Quote:
AI is lagging far behind in my opinions as regards voice recognization. In this day and age you would expect software to take a sample of a person's voice (say an hour long) and then be able to speak in a natural voice of that person any type of text that can be input to it.
musiclover
My reply will be somewhat OT, but will address the above:
I suspect that recording a voice, and using the recordings to make the voice say something natural sounding will take some time yet.
Perhaps the simplest instrument to sample/reproduce is the piano, and although there are some very good recordings, (samples of each and every note at various velocities), when the "bits" are put together, one can almost always tell the sample rendering from the real thing. There is no continuity or connectivity between the notes.
The problem is far greater with the human voice (or wind instrument or guitar) because there are variations in tone, pitch, and timing that make the real thing extremely difficult to emulate. Certainly much more difficult than emulating the piano with samples.
It may be possible to emulate from a theoretical point, but in practice, it's very daunting to say the least.
It might take a whole lot more than artificial intelligence.
Glenn
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,900
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,900 |
BIAB cannot be AI because it does not learn anything. I am not sure I would classify it as an 'Expert System', even though it is excellent software. AI is very closely connected to Cybernetics. If my copy of BIAB were to get up and walk out of the room when it got frustrated or did not understand, I would be MOST annoyed. Mind you, it is debatable whether a lot of musicians actually THINK before reacting though! 
Follow That Dream Sam Karaoke King -------------------- Turning that corner again - I have to keep following that dream, no matter what
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,926
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,926 |
Quote:
. . . it is debatable whether a lot of musicians actually THINK before reacting though!
Those would be Inexpert Systems. 
R.
"My primary musical instrument is the personal computer."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,926
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,926 |
My understanding of an expert system, stated without knowledge of the technical niceties--I'm a musician and PC tech, not a programmer or scientist--is that it is a multidimensional database. (I once suggested that BIAB was based on a spreadsheet and was told firmly that it is not.) I am not arguing that BIAB qualifies as an expert system, only that from my limited perspective it quacks like one. My point of comparison--and this was true before Peter presented the example--is that of the medical diagnostician. You present such a system with symptoms, it parses them through Rules and Filters, and it gives you a differential diagnosis (a medical term for a set of possibilities). Not so much rules, either; I am told that medicine is an art, not a science. In the case of BIAB I am speaking strictly about the MIDI Stylemaker. The "data" is the short sequences that are played/programmed into the Stylemaker. These are modified by Rules based on music theory, user-definable Filters ("play this sequence only during a dominant seventh chord," etc.), and perhaps other criteria. The more sequences that are programmed in, the more subtle the changes possible. The more Filters that are used, the more complex are the possible results. I swear there's a sense of humor built in, too. If it's not an expert system, I'm curious to know why not. What I do know is that Band-in-a-Box is the deepest, most complex software that I have knowingly had my hands on. It is a repository of the musical expertise of decades of musical experience, plus whatever meager skills I am able to to bring to it. It rarely fails to surprise me. Plus I think it could pass the Turing test when put up against, say, Barry Manilow.  Richard
Last edited by Ryszard; 05/19/11 10:47 AM.
"My primary musical instrument is the personal computer."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,900
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,900 |
It is COMPLETELY programmable, according to taste. That makes it a very advanced tool but it still does not reach the definition of AI
Follow That Dream Sam Karaoke King -------------------- Turning that corner again - I have to keep following that dream, no matter what
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,251
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,251 |
Usually, AI isn’t whether a computer or program can “learn”, but whether or not it can “think”. The Turing test is what’s frequently referred to in those regards, (as already mentioned by flatfoot). http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/609757/Turing-testAlthough I’ve read all of the posts, it was done in “real time” so forgive me if I mention something already stated. Since Peter has already given a definitive answer to the original question, we seem to be discussing AI in general. Most of what I’ve read about AI has dealt with computer gaming and refers to how well your computer “opponent” responds to numerous different attacks you make against your opponent at a given point in the game. If it always does the same thing regardless of your attack, the AI is bad. If it varies and responds well to different types of attacks, the AI is good. The ONLY computer program I’ve ever used that could “learn” was a PC game called Black & White. Here’s a short quote about it on an instructional site for game developers using this game for reference: Quote:
Black and White – Learning AI
Description: Black and White is a game in which you play a god sent to a planet to do good or evil. The path you choose shapes the land and the inhabitants. You are given a creature of your choosing to act as your visible avatar in the world. But you have limited control over this creature and they must be controlled somewhat like a pet animal.
System:
In Black and White you are given a creature which you can train to work for you. You can teach them to play and work but the use of a praise/ punishment system. When you show the creature something an action, you can then access the interface for the praise/ punishment. Then you can either encourage the action or discourage it by either beating the creature or petting it.
http://instructinator.com/marking/?p=130
The game won a lot of awards, primarily for the AI. The AI was so good, it was borderline creepy! (Highly recommended if you like strategy games). Your “creature” actually develops a personality based on your input and will exhibit different emotional and physical responses to what happens in the game.
So whether AI means to “think” or to “learn” remains debatable, but we’re obviously just on the cusp of both. We do live in interesting times.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,926
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,926 |
Sam,
I'm not sure whether you're responding to my post. AI and expert systems are not the same thing. I said nothing about AI.
R.
"My primary musical instrument is the personal computer."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,900
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,900 |
No, Richard, I was not. I was responding in general. I know expert systems and AI are not the same thing - my first university degree was in Business Computing Systems (my forte was Executive Information Systems) and I shared a flat with Professor Gordon Pask in the 80s who is/was widely recognised as one of the world's leading authorities on AI and Cybernetics. He's dead now
Follow That Dream Sam Karaoke King -------------------- Turning that corner again - I have to keep following that dream, no matter what
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,926
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,926 |
Sam--I'm officially impressed. (And I was pretty sure you knew the difference anyway.)
"My primary musical instrument is the personal computer."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 12,844
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 12,844 |
With "Artificial" Intelligence, how will you know when you're there? Or is it a never-ending pipe dream? Hmmmm... Of course, I think you probably will know it, however, when you end up having a conversation with a machine along the lines of: Quote:
Dave Bowman: Hello, HAL. Do you read me, HAL?
HAL: Affirmative, Dave. I read you.
Dave Bowman: Open the pod bay doors, HAL.
HAL: I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.
Dave Bowman: What's the problem?
HAL: I think you know what the problem is just as well as I do.
Dave Bowman: What are you talking about, HAL?
HAL: This mission is too important for me to allow you to jeopardize it.
Dave Bowman: I don't know what you're talking about, HAL.
HAL: I know that you and Frank were planning to disconnect me, and I'm afraid that's something I cannot allow to happen.
Dave Bowman: Where the hell'd you get that idea, HAL?
HAL: Dave, although you took very thorough precautions in the pod against my hearing you, I could see your lips move.
Dave Bowman: Alright, HAL. I'll go in through the emergency airlock.
HAL: Without your space helmet, Dave, you're going to find that rather difficult.
Dave Bowman: HAL, I won't argue with you anymore. Open the doors.
HAL: Dave, this conversation can serve no purpose anymore. Goodbye.
on Dave's return to the ship, after HAL has killed the rest of the crew
HAL: Look Dave, I can see you're really upset about this. I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill, and think things over.
John Laptop-HP Omen I7 Win11Pro 32GB 12TB SSD Desktop-ASUS-I7 Win10Pro 32GB 12TB SATA BB2026/UMC204HD&404HD/Casios/Cakewalk/Reaper/Studio One/Notion/Dorico/Noteworthy/NI/Halion/IK http://www.sus4chord.com (under rehosting/construction)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
XPro & Xtra Styles PAK Sets On Sale Now - Until May 15, 2026!
All of our XPro Styles PAKs and Xtra Styles PAKs are on sale until May 15th, 2026!
It's the perfect time to expand your Band-in-a-Box® style library with XPro and Xtra Styles PAKs. These additional styles for Band-in-a-Box® offer a wide range of genres designed to fit seamlessly into your projects. Each style is professionally arranged and mixed, helping enhance your songs while saving you time.
What are XPro Styles and Xtra Styles PAKs?
XPro Styles PAKs are styles that work with any version (Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition) of Band-in-a-Box® 2025 (or higher). XPro Styles PAKS 1-10 includes 1,000 styles!
Xtra Styles PAKs are styles that work with the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box® 2025 (or higher). Xtra Styles PAKs 1-21 includes 3,700 styles (and 35 MIDI styles)!
The XPro & Xtra Styles PAKs are not included in any Band-in-a-Box® package.
The XPro Styles PAKs 1-10 are available for only $29 ea (reg. $49 ea), or get them all in the XPro Styles PAK Bundle for only $149 (reg. $299)! Listen to demos and order now! For Mac or for Windows.
The Xtra Styles PAKs 1-21 are available for only $29 ea (reg. $49 ea), or get them all in the Xtra Styles PAK Bundle for only $199 (reg. $349)! Listen to demos and order now! For Mac or for Windows.
Note: 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.
The Xtra Styles require the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box®. (Xtra Styles PAK 19 requires the 2025 or higher UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition. They will not work with the Pro or MegaPAK version as they require the RealTracks included in the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition.
Supercharge your Band-in-a-Box today with XPro Styles PAKs and Xtra Styles PAK Sets!
Band-in-a-Box 2026 for Mac Videos
With the release of Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac, we’re rolling out a collection of brand-new videos on our YouTube channel. We’ll keep this forum post updated so you can easily find all the latest videos in one convenient spot.
Whether you're exploring new features, checking out the latest RealTracks or Style PAKs, this is your go-to guide for Band-in-a-Box® 2026.
Check out this forum post for "One Stop Shopping" of our Band-in-a-Box® 2026 Mac Videos!
Band-in-a-Box 2026 for Mac is Here!
Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac is here and it is packed with major new features! There’s a new modern look, a GUI redesign to all areas of the program including toolbars, windows, workflow and more. There’s a Multi-view layout for organizing multiple windows. A standout addition is the powerful AI-Notes feature, which uses AI neural-net technology to transcribe polyphonic audio into MIDI—entire mixes or individual instruments—making it easy to study, view, and play parts from any song. And that’s just the beginning—there are over 100 new features in this exciting release.
Along with version 2026, we've released an incredible lineup of new content! There's 202 new RealTracks, brand-new RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, “Songs with Vocals” Artist Performance Sets, Playable RealTracks Set 5, two new RealDrums Stems sets, XPro Styles PAK 10, Xtra Styles PAK 21, and much more!
Special Offers
Upgrade to Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac and save up to 50% on most upgrade packages during our special offer—available until May 15, 2026. Visit our Band-in-a-Box® packages page to explore all available upgrade options.
2026 Free Bonus PAK & 49-PAK Add-ons
Our Free Bonus PAK and 49-PAK are loaded with amazing add-ons! The Free Bonus PAK is included with most Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac packages, but you can unlock even more—including 20 unreleased RealTracks—by upgrading to the 2026 49-PAK for just $49.
Holiday Weekend Hours
As we hop into the Easter weekend, here are our holiday hours:
April 3 (Good Friday): 8:00 AM – 4:00 PM PDT
April 4 (Saturday): Closed
April 5 (Easter Sunday): Closed
April 6 (Easter Monday): Open regular hours
Wishing you an egg-cellent weekend!
— Team PG
Update to Build 10 of RealBand® 2026 for Windows®!
If you're already using RealBand 2026 for Windows, download build 10 to get all the latest additions and enhancements.
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac® users: Build 904 now available!
If you're already using Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac®, make sure to grab the latest update! Build 904 is now available for download and includes the newest additions and enhancements from our team.
Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Windows® users: Build 1237 is now available!
Already a Band-in-a-Box 2026 for Windows user? Stay up to date and download the build 1237 to get all the latest additions and enhancements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums57
Topics86,220
Posts802,029
Members40,070
| |
Most Online64,515
Apr 8th, 2026
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean