Quote:

Notes, you get award for longest post name!



I'd like to thank the academy, my booking agent, my fans, and especially my mom

Quote:

I know we've had this conversation before. But for my purposes, since the advent of Real Tracks, there is no comparison. <...>



Sounds like you need a better MIDI synthesizer. I have sounds that are 95% as good as the instruments they emulate, and with the editing ability of MIDI, I can easily surpass what the RTs offer.

Quote:

Notes, very well stated!

By the amount of midi requests that have appeared in Peter’s midi request thread there are lots more midi users of BiaB than I had imagined. I thought I was one of the last of a dying breed but it appears that I’m not alone.<...>



From the feedback I get, it seems like most professionals and dedicated hobbyists seem to prefer the MIDI styles for the reasons I describe here: http://www.nortonmusic.com/midi_vs_loops.html

The fact that MIDI has survived so long and is still used in so many contemporary recordings are credit to the versatility of the format and the insight and foresight of the developers. There have been entire major motion picture soundtracks done with MIDI, every modern synthesizer has MIDI at it's core, and I would guess the majority of major studio recordings include some MIDI.

Quote:

To sound good with midi, you have to be a good composer, take time with editing staff notes, have excellent soundfont libraries (which can be pretty pricey) -- all in all, the skill level and tools required to get midi to sound excellent is pretty high.<...>



I respectfully disagree. One good sound module is all you need, sountfonts or not, most sound cards are pretty lame by comparison. So with a good MIDI sound module you get 95% as good sounds as the RTs, and with some tweaking in a sequencer, you can surpass the musicality of the RTs by editing, adding song specific licks, etc. And didn't we buy BiaB to play with the music anyway? If all you want is a backing track like the record, you would be better off with karaoke files.

And without any editing at all, take one sound, clean guitar and one sound module, my SD-90. Say I am happy with the guitar part, but I'd like to change the sound. With a few mouse clicks and no editing skill at all I can choose between: Clean Rear Pickup ... Telecaster Rear Pickup ... Strat Rear Pickup #2 ... Old Clean Gt ... Clean Half ... Telecaster Front Pick up ... Chorused Clean ... Jazz Chorus ... Mid Tone Gt ... Telecaster Front Pickup #2 ... Gibson ES-335 ... 335 drive ... and that's just for the clean guitar patch. Other guitar patches have as many variations.

That doesn't mean RTs are bad. I'm awed at what PG has done with them. It's just that they cannot be edited and improved. Auto-accompaniment is generic by its nature -- and it has to be. A little editing in a MIDI sequencer can turn the good but generic output of BiaB into something song-specific and more musically satisfying.

Quote:

I am curious Which specific midi implementation would you like to see Mr Norton?<...>



Check out the link in my original post, they are listed there.

Quote:

Hi All,
I don't want to be rude or disrepsectful or detract from the superb work that Notes Norton have done with band in the box midi styles and fake books and improvements. But I do think Notes Norton are reliant on midi for sales of the packages they offer for sale and as I would too, tend to be a little biast towards wanting more developement and promoting of midi, so I do see the point.<...>



That's a fair statement and yes I do depend on MIDI sales. On the other hand, I have lots of software that can manipulate audio loops, and I have lots of loops. I spent some time playing with that format. But I found that loops are good for parroting what others have done, but you cannot take them any farther. With MIDI I can be much more creative, and I also can be creative by modifying what others have done to make it more personal and express my own creative insights.

Quote:

<...>The problem with MIDI...the sounds suck so bad. But for writing music without taking 1 day it's still the best way to go.



MIDI has no sound. The sound depends on your synth. So it isn't MIDI that sounds bad, it's the synth or soundcard synth you are using to play them.

Quote:

I'm wondering if one reason that real tracks seem to be the currently more popular "tool" is because of the expense of buying a hardware midi synth. <...>



Another good point.

However, through the life of a good MIDI sound module, they aren't that expensive at all. The synth modules I purchased in the 80s and have been under daily heavy use since then are still operating flawlessly. They worked under DOS all versions of Windows, Motorola Macs, IBM Macs, Intel Macs and all versions of the Mac OS. If there is a hard drive that has been used 8 or more hours per day since the 1980s, I want to see it. Those RT Loops take up a lot of hard drive room, and that hard drive will eventually crash, so you had better have a second hard drive as a back up, and it too will eventually crash. Although the initial expense of a good MIDI sound module can be a couple of hundred bucks, in the long run that can run less than $25 per year.

Now in conclusion to this lengthy post. I'm not dissing the Real Tracks. As I said this is a supportive post. PG Music has done some fabulous things with them. And there is more than one right way to make music. Some people will use all RTs, some with mix RTs with MIDI and some will use MIDI exclusively. I think the suggestions that I and others have made will help the latter two groups if they are and if they can be implemented.

There are features that I will never use in BiaB. Those features are for other people. I have no problem with them being there. On the other hand, the features I use involve MIDI and there is nothing wrong with me making suggestions to PG Music to improve the part of the program that I use most. Peter Gannon and crew have always been very receptive to the wishes of their customers, it's one reason why BiaB is still number one. I can't say enough good things about PG and BiaB.

But since PG has already put in place a lot of the innovations that we have asked them to, I think I correctly assume that PG cares what their customers want and is eager to satisfy their customers. I want PG to know what they can do to further increase the usefulness of BiaB to the core of MIDI users of the program. I feel confident that PG will listen to the suggestion of the MIDI and other users, and make decisions for the future path of BiaB according to the wants of all their customers.

If PG continues to develop both the core MIDI functions and the RealTracks, it becomes a win/win situation for all the BiaB users. So I feel it's important for all of us to tell PG where we want to go. That can do nothing but help PG Music keep BiaB as the number one auto-accompaniment app on the planet.

Insights and incites by Notes

Bob "Notes" Norton smile Norton Music
https://www.nortonmusic.com

100% MIDI Super-Styles recorded by live, pro, studio musicians for a live groove
& Fake Disks for MIDI and/or RealTracks