Quote:

Quote:

I can't see why anyone needs to insist on midi-only or realtrack-only. They are compatible.



EXACTLY

Both are different tools for us to use or not use as we see fit. Personally I use both but the majority of my music contains MIDI generated parts. I like midi for the exact same reasons as Notes does. However I have some clients who just need backing tracks for their songs, mostly copies of songs they want to have for their children/grandchildren and friends. For this purpose RTs are perfect. Fast with a great sound, i.e. I don’t have to put a lot of time into creating MIDI parts. My clients are very happy with the results, as I am.




I agree that midi and real-track are simply different tools that can work together as needed. When realtrack first appeared I thought it was simply a memory hog that I'd never use. But the support and implementation of realtrack has continually improved and I really value realtrack for those instruments that are very difficult to do well on midi. I'm also pleased that there is an option where someone new to the software won't listen to the default windows midi sound and close their mind to the program.

At the same time the midi capabilities are far more important to me than the real-track capabilities. There was a time when every annual upgrade there would be a ton of new midi styles and some new melodists as well. It was during those good times when I decided I was going to upgrade every year if at all possible.

Among some of the BiaB users who have been using the program far longer than I have, there is a feeling of abandonment, that PG music has left them behind to concentrate on realtracks. This is a point of view I can sympathize with, without particularly agreeing. For one thing PG music has made some very significant improvements in their midi related capabilities. But those improvements haven't been hyped like the real-stuff has been. Indeed some of them have been in place for a couple of years before I even realized they were there, and I'm a person that actually reads the manual.

I'm less affected by the lack of new midi styles than most because of taking the plunge into tweaking existing styles and even creating my own. But it's a moderately steep learning curve to do at all well. There are also other sources of styles, notably Bob Norton. I miss the annual gift of tons of new midi-styles, but I personally can survive just fine.

The lack of new melodists probably has more impact on me. I've come to abuse the melodiists in ways that probably weren't intended. Using the existing databases, I've tweaked my own melodists of course. But it's been quite a while since we've seen a new underlying set of data for the melodists. And of course there's no way for us to just create our own. I would trade a ton of real-styles for the ability to create a melodist that would use my own underlying melody patterns and translate them across chords. I've tried to do the same thing with a family of special purpose midi-styles that you apply one after the other, and you CAN -- it's just not a very efficient process. Painful in fact.

So no, I don't want no-real-track, I just want MORE midi. :-)