Been reading this thread with interest. I can see all sides of this but to me it boils down to what exactly is someone like Alan trying to accomplish here? Is it originals or covers? We've all known for years that Biab is not what should be used to create an exact cover of anything. It's an autoaccompaniment program used to create backing tracks, not covers. If it's originals then again it's primarily used as a sketchpad to help someone get the structure, basic chords and melody. Once that's done it's time to play it for a producer and whatever musicians you want to use and start paying for studio time. Or transfer it into your high end DAW and start putting it together for real.

As for me, I'm sort of with John I do a lot of jazz and rarely run into that and I never use Biab for really complex tunes. I admit that's because I can never get them to sound good which is what Alan's point is. Maybe it could be made to do that sort of thing better but for me Biab would not be my first choice anyway, I would use Real Band or Sonar.

I completely understand the wish for Biab to be more functional, more professional and be able to generate a polished, studio quality product that's fully ready for marketing. To date, it's never been that and I personally doubt there are enough users that would appreciate that level of technical sophistication. There's enough comments/complaints that Biab is too complex as it is and this kind of thing could make that problem worse.

Perhaps PG could create two versions, Standard (what we have now)and Pro? Would they make enough money from selling the Pro version to warrant the development costs? Who knows, that's above my pay grade. Maybe with all the enhancements they keep coming up with twice a year they may already be on a long term path to create that Pro version.

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.