|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,075
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,075 |
+1 excellent article. (That means you're about to be deluged by objections. I hope everyone with good sense supports you publicly. All that's necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do and say nothing.) We should reward common sense when we see it. Heaven knows the opposition is quick to ridicule it... and when the oppositions point of view is the only one we're allowed to see or hear, shame on us for allowing that to happen. But we're almost (if not totally) there already. This has been around a long time, but it is a wakeup call when you see how long the agenda has been in existence and how thoroughly it has succeeded http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/comgoals.htmWhile searching for this, I was somewhat surprised (yet, not really) to see that 99% of the articles were oriented toward character bashing the author in hopes of undermining the message. But the message stands on its own two feet regardless of how anyone may perceive the author's personal perspective.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
Thanks Pat. The reaction so far has been positive, but then, AT readers tend to be conservative types, so I'm just preaching to the choir.  Regards, Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,815
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,815 |
Politics is politics and I am not that interested in discussing your views, whether or not I agree -- except to say a) to every complex problem, there is always a very simple solution -- and most of the time it is wrong; b) This generational viewpoint of "they" has been present in every generation. However, the one thing that really bothers me was this one: Quote:
"They started awarding trophies to every player in school team sports, winners and losers."
I don't why folks keep throwing that up as if it is destroying the competitive fiber of our youth -- 'cause it is crock of crap.
This sound-bite is tossed about by those who don't really pay attention any more to kids in sport. Kids know who wins and loses, winning trophies are for winners and the competitive spirit is alive and well. I am not sure how recognition for participation in an activity has somehow led to the downfall of our society.
Don't like the movies -- don't go see them, they have always been bastions of liberal, corrupt individuals and corporations. Don't like the way schools are run, vote in a new school board. Your simplistic rant about what is wrong with America is misinformed and as dangerous as the yea-hoos on the left.
Isn't there anyone in the middle anymore?
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
Kevin, For someone “not that interested in discussing your views “, you do have quite a bit to say.  “Your simplistic rant about what is wrong with America is misinformed and as dangerous as the yea-hoos on the left.” Your response sounds more like an expression of personal antipathy than a rejection of my views. For that reason, I will not bother to refute any of your points. Thanks for reading the article and commenting. Regards, Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,075
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,075 |
before we get a flame war going here, I'd just like to say that intelligent people should be able to express highly volatile ideas peaceably and without resorting to character assassination.
The old expression is that "He who runs out of arguments strikes first", so resorting to personal attacks in forum discussion is generally regarded as an admission of ideological defeat.
In my experience you can get away with almost any statement in discussions of this sort, as long as you say it in a way that preserves the dignity of those on the other side of the discussion. Failing to do that pretty much always leads to a fight rather than a discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
I agree Pat. It was not my intention to start any controversy.
Regards,
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Kids know who wins and loses, winning trophies are for winners and the competitive spirit is alive and well. I am not sure how recognition for participation in an activity has somehow led to the downfall of our society.
Sure they know. But do they care?
And I am against giving losers trophies because it teaches kids that they will be rewarded for just showing up, like most people do at their jobs when they get older. If your life is just about showing up, I pity you. I do everything 100% and 100 miles per hour. That's because I was raised in a generation that taught me that the hardest workers succeed. Of course that means I also crash hard when I crash. Life is to be lived, experienced and enjoyed, not just endured. That kind of comment usually comes from paents who were eggheads and bookworms and never experienced the joy of working with a team and achieving a common goal. If they do choose sports, the goal is to excel. If not, that is fine too. If they choose arts, music, dance, carpentry, plumbing... do it 100% and excel at it.
Trophys to losing teams is a bad thing. A trophy is supposed to represent excellence, not participation. Little doughy kids like "Chad" and "Cameron" do not deserve trophies just for showing up in their uniform to please their yuppie parents.
Yes, I am an old school inner city kid who grew up scuffling on the streets. I did not have permissive parents, and many times during on field confrontations my father stood and watched me get the stuffing beat out of me. Rather than stepping in, he allowed it to be motivation for me to become better at defending myself so it didn't happen. And it resulted in my being Northast Ohio Golden Gloves runner up 2 years in a row, at the same time helping me realize that fighting outside of organized boxing is stupid and pointless. After Golden Gloves, I never got into a fight where it wasn't to rescue someone from an outnumbered beating. However, once I step in, it's a battle to the death.
You don't learn that being rewarded for nothing but showing up.
All these parents now jumping on the "my kid won't play football because he might get hurt" bandwagon should just put them in dresses and eye makeup and prepare them for the gender change surgery. Planes crash too. So your kid will never fly because there that chance? How about driving? Cars crash more often than planes. You may not have noticed from your position, but life is tough. Wear your helmet.
Remember. Conceive it, perceive it, believe it, achieve it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,726
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,726 |
before we get a flame war going here, I'd just like to say that intelligent people should be able to express highly volatile ideas peaceably and without resorting to character assassination.That's an excellent thought!  I hope everyone with good sense supports you publicly.All that's necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do and say nothing. Bob, the gist of the article is good (at least, in terms of intent), but I think it simplifies things a bit much. You repeatedly say We grumbled, but did nothing. I don't think this is accurate. Quite a bit has been done by people on these issues, and continues to be done. To say otherwise does discredit to those who have worked long and hard for their causes. You say "In true Alinsky fashion, they batter us with labels.", but your own terms - "Marxist/communist/socialist/progressive world movement" - seem to be exactly what you are complaining about. But what I find most problematic in pointing to a group of "them" is that they are conveniently not "us".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
Quote:
before we get a flame war going here, I'd just like to say that intelligent people should be able to express highly volatile ideas peaceably and without resorting to character assassination.
That's an excellent thought!
I hope everyone with good sense supports you publicly.
All that's necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do and say nothing.
Bob, the gist of the article is good (at least, in terms of intent), but I think it simplifies things a bit much.
You repeatedly say We grumbled, but did nothing. I don't think this is accurate. Quite a bit has been done by people on these issues, and continues to be done. To say otherwise does discredit to those who have worked long and hard for their causes.
You say "In true Alinsky fashion, they batter us with labels.", but your own terms - "Marxist/communist/socialist/progressive world movement" - seem to be exactly what you are complaining about.
But what I find most problematic in pointing to a group of "them" is that they are conveniently not "us".
David,
Thanks for reading the article. While I agree that “quite a bit has been done”, I submit that it has not been enough. I don't believe that stating that fact does any discredit to anyone. A failed effort is still a failure, regardless of the good intentions of the people making the effort.
“You say "In true Alinsky fashion, they batter us with labels.", but your own terms - "Marxist/communist/socialist/progressive world movement" - seem to be exactly what you are complaining about.”
I respectfully disagree. These terms are political, not epithetic. Terms like “Xenophobe”, “Homophobe”, “Racist “ and “Misogynist “ are epithets, not legitimate political descriptions, such as “Marxist”.
“But what I find most problematic in pointing to a group of "them" is that they are conveniently not "us". “
Actually, that was the point of the entire article. Everyone blames “Them”, while in fact, WE are “Them”, not by commission, but by omission.
Have you any argument on the content of the article, or just a problem with the way it was presented? Your comments have not made that very clear to me.
Regards,
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 826
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 826 |
Well I won't comment on that since political discussions are not permitted on this site. I did, however spot a big error in one of your claims.
They created a federal bureaucracy answerable to no one, with pay and retirement benefits triple those of the general populace
The source you cite, whether accurate or not, claims 44% greater pay and benefits. That's not even close to the triple (300%) you claim. The problem with this type of error is other people read it and assume it's correct.
BiaB 2013 b366, RB 2013 b4, WinXP Pro SP3, Toshiba M70, 1.8GHz 2GB RAM 100GB HD. Focusrite Saffire 6 USB, Ketron SD2. BiaB Wiki
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
Quote:
Well I won't comment on that since political discussions are not permitted on this site. I did, however spot a big error in one of your claims.
They created a federal bureaucracy answerable to no one, with pay and retirement benefits triple those of the general populace
The source you cite, whether accurate or not, claims 44% greater pay and benefits. That's not even close to the triple (300%) you claim. The problem with this type of error is other people read it and assume it's correct.
Point taken. I stand corrected.
That said, I still submit that a 44% difference in pay and benefits is egregious. Actually, it's closer to 50%, or twice that of the private sector.
http://www.cato.org/pubs/tbb/tbb-0605-35.pdf
In future, I will pay closer attention to my statistics. Good catch.
Regards,
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,726
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,726 |
You imply that there's some sort of concerted Marxist/communist/socialist/progressive world movement ideology behind all the changes. But it's more a given than a proven point. And (to my mind) you don't make a very compelling case. For example: They created a federal bureaucracy answerable to no one, with pay and retirement benefits triple those of the general populace.The basic premise - federal bureaucracy is answerable to no one - is a large claim, and not really true. Bureaucracy by it's definition is answerable up the chain, and ultimately the folk at top are as well. It's slow and insulated, but it is accountable. As for pay benefits, are you comparing apples and oranges? When you say "general populace", it doesn't sound like you're comparing the same benefits for the same type of jobs. Considering that we're in the middle of a massive recession, I suspect the comparison is even less balanced, given the level of unemployment. They created an imperial presidency and made the Congress inconsequential.Wikipedia says Imperial Presidency goes back to the '60s and Nixon, with another big push by Reagan. That's not exactly overnight, and those aren't generally seen as folk on your list. Congress is many things, but not inconsequential. They fostered the destruction of our manufacturing and agriculture bases.The flight of capitalists based on cheap manufacture and labor isn't by folk on your list, either. They permitted the invasion of our country by illegal aliens, and chastised anyone who objected.I'd argue that the people who paid the illegal aliens bear the brunt of the blame here. Statistics says that's driven by the demand for cheap labor for agriculture. In any event, the people who support the idea that workers having some level of rights aren't generally Marxist/communist/socialist/progressive world movement. They legalized and promoted the systematic murder of millions of the innocent unborn.Clearly a hotbutton issue. The Jane Does in Roe vs. Wade now say they were reluctant and blame their lawyers. But I doubt the majority of abortion supporters were socialists. While Margaret Sanger was a socialist, and a believer in eugenics and racial superiority as well. But it's an unsupported leap to claim that of everyone who believed that abortion was a reproductive rights issue has the same set of values. You claim a lot, but rely on the reader to agree with you, assuming they also lump everyone other than them as having the same set of Marxist/communist/socialist/progressive world ideology driving them. That's just not the case. The argument is an emotional one, not a logical one. "We revered Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and all of those who gave us this great nation." Why were these people "revered"? Most of what people believe about Washington is myth (although stripped of the myth, he's still pretty awesome). Jefferson was a brilliant thinker, but very much a flawed man. Lincoln is often admired because he "freed the slaves", but that's simply not true, and distorts what the American Civil War was about in the first place. From the historical documents I've seen, I wouldn't agree. We've never been the sort of homogeneous group that school history texts seem to present us as. And history has never been quite as squeaky clean as we're often led to believe. "But we weren't the morally, sexually, politically ambiguous creatures that now inhabit much of America."I heard an story a while back on NPR, where people talked about this sort of thing. Invariably, they would cite the time when they were growing up. What was interesting is they they would talk to someone who was an adult at that time, who quickly debunked this idea that "things were so much better". They kept pushing back the the prior decade, and that before, but never did find such a time. So - in my view - you paint with a wide brush of generalizations and rely on appealing to your reader's sense of nostalgia and shared moral outrage. An it worries me, because in the process of simplifying the problem to a Marxist conspiracy of some sort, it overlooks assumptions, such as the existence of that mythical better time. It also feel it encourages a "tribe" mentality, which seems to be hardwired into us. It seems very easy to put someone in the "not our tribe" category. We knew that actions had consequences, and that hard work would be rewarded."The sad thing is, that's not necessarily true. Good people suffer, evil people live out lives of luxury. People take credit for the work of others, and sometimes people get away with murder. I appreciate people standing up for what they believe is right. But having someone disagree with you doesn't make them a Marxist/communist/socialist/progressive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,726
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,726 |
If you look through that paper, you'll also see that there's no clear agreement as to what the measure of over/underpayment is. It finally bases the conclusion that federal workers are overpaid because "Just 1 in 5,000 federal nondefense workers is fired for poor performance each year."That's the metric for wages? At a minimum, they could at least try to show those non-fired workers underperform their private equivalents, but they don't even try. Further, it argues that top federal positions shouldn't be paying comparable wages because "it draws talent away from high-valued activities in the private sector", which is an interesting argument: we essentially should pay less for government to ensure we get worse government.  All in all, an odd paper. Oh, I see it's written by the Cato Institute: Quote:
The Cato Institute is a public policy research organization — a think tank — dedicated to the principles of individual liberty, limited government, free markets and peace. Its scholars and analysts conduct independent, nonpartisan research on a wide range of policy issues.
The bottom line is that even this paper admits it's not an apples to apples comparison.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 8,333
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 8,333 |
It's grand to live in Canuckistan.
Where the pucks fly through frozen stands
And the docs are on the dole.
We cut the wood for bats, popsickle sticks and studs,
Where the true north stands proud and free.
Strong arms hold our blades
And our crosses burn bright on verdent hills
You get the idea.
I don't.
John Conley
Musica est vita
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
Quote:
You imply that there's some sort of concerted Marxist/communist/socialist/progressive world movement ideology behind all the changes. But it's more a given than a proven point. And (to my mind) you don't make a very compelling case.
For example:
They created a federal bureaucracy answerable to no one, with pay and retirement benefits triple those of the general populace.
The basic premise - federal bureaucracy is answerable to no one - is a large claim, and not really true. Bureaucracy by it's definition is answerable up the chain, and ultimately the folk at top are as well. It's slow and insulated, but it is accountable.
As for pay benefits, are you comparing apples and oranges? When you say "general populace", it doesn't sound like you're comparing the same benefits for the same type of jobs. Considering that we're in the middle of a massive recession, I suspect the comparison is even less balanced, given the level of unemployment.
They created an imperial presidency and made the Congress inconsequential.
Wikipedia says Imperial Presidency goes back to the '60s and Nixon, with another big push by Reagan. That's not exactly overnight, and those aren't generally seen as folk on your list.
Congress is many things, but not inconsequential.
They fostered the destruction of our manufacturing and agriculture bases.
The flight of capitalists based on cheap manufacture and labor isn't by folk on your list, either.
They permitted the invasion of our country by illegal aliens, and chastised anyone who objected.
I'd argue that the people who paid the illegal aliens bear the brunt of the blame here. Statistics says that's driven by the demand for cheap labor for agriculture. In any event, the people who support the idea that workers having some level of rights aren't generally Marxist/communist/socialist/progressive world movement.
They legalized and promoted the systematic murder of millions of the innocent unborn.
Clearly a hotbutton issue. The Jane Does in Roe vs. Wade now say they were reluctant and blame their lawyers. But I doubt the majority of abortion supporters were socialists. While Margaret Sanger was a socialist, and a believer in eugenics and racial superiority as well. But it's an unsupported leap to claim that of everyone who believed that abortion was a reproductive rights issue has the same set of values.
You claim a lot, but rely on the reader to agree with you, assuming they also lump everyone other than them as having the same set of Marxist/communist/socialist/progressive world ideology driving them.
That's just not the case. The argument is an emotional one, not a logical one.
"We revered Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and all of those who gave us this great nation."
Why were these people "revered"? Most of what people believe about Washington is myth (although stripped of the myth, he's still pretty awesome). Jefferson was a brilliant thinker, but very much a flawed man. Lincoln is often admired because he "freed the slaves", but that's simply not true, and distorts what the American Civil War was about in the first place.
From the historical documents I've seen, I wouldn't agree. We've never been the sort of homogeneous group that school history texts seem to present us as. And history has never been quite as squeaky clean as we're often led to believe.
"But we weren't the morally, sexually, politically ambiguous creatures that now inhabit much of America."
I heard an story a while back on NPR, where people talked about this sort of thing. Invariably, they would cite the time when they were growing up. What was interesting is they they would talk to someone who was an adult at that time, who quickly debunked this idea that "things were so much better". They kept pushing back the the prior decade, and that before, but never did find such a time.
So - in my view - you paint with a wide brush of generalizations and rely on appealing to your reader's sense of nostalgia and shared moral outrage.
An it worries me, because in the process of simplifying the problem to a Marxist conspiracy of some sort, it overlooks assumptions, such as the existence of that mythical better time. It also feel it encourages a "tribe" mentality, which seems to be hardwired into us. It seems very easy to put someone in the "not our tribe" category.
We knew that actions had consequences, and that hard work would be rewarded."
The sad thing is, that's not necessarily true. Good people suffer, evil people live out lives of luxury. People take credit for the work of others, and sometimes people get away with murder.
I appreciate people standing up for what they believe is right. But having someone disagree with you doesn't make them a Marxist/communist/socialist/progressive.
I began a rebuttal to your points, but realized that it would be futile, and a waste of time. I'm afraid we will just have to agree to disagree.
I appreciate your reading the article and taking the time to comment.
Regards,
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,726
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,726 |
Quote:
I began a rebuttal to your points, but realized that it would be futile, and a waste of time. I'm afraid we will just have to agree to disagree.
Astonishingly enough, that's exactly the same reason why I initially decided not to give a detailed response.
But you asked...
Quote:
I appreciate your reading the article and taking the time to comment.
And thanks for taking the time to read and consider my response!
I suspect any additional responses would just devolve, sort of like John's free verse. I'm sure there's some rhyming scheme embedded somewhere in his lyric - I'm just not clever enough to grok it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,110
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,110 |
I admire your well thought out views David. Its good to seee someone who can cut through the crap without getting down in the muck.
Keith
2025 Audiophile Windows 11 RYZEN THREADRIPPER 3960X 4.5GHZ 128 GB RAM 2 Nvidia RTX 3090s, Vegas,Acid,SoundForge,Izotope Production,Melodyne Studio,SONAR,3 Raven Mtis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,726
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,726 |
Thanks! But... Since I called Pat out on his terminology, I'm now morally obligated to point out: Quote:
Its good to seee someone who can cut through the crap without getting down in the muck.
Cheers!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,075
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,075 |
Man, there are a BUNCH of things about this discussion that bother me: I'll preface my replies with the admission that I speak opinion. I'm not professing my point of view to be absolute truth. having said that... IMO, most of the rebuttals above make the same logical error they claim to be correcting in the original article. Quote:
to every complex problem, there is always a very simple solution -- and most of the time it is wrong;
that is, in itself, a simple summary of a complex problem. "WRONG" is the simple summary bandied about most often when there is no opposing argument offered, but the current argument is rejected.
The greatest affront to common sense (IMO) is to suggest that any conclusion that is not perfect is therefore wrong. Conservatives don't claim to have perfect answers. We shoot for RATIONAL answers. The definition of a rational decision is that it is not based on what makes us feel good, but rather it is the least-cost max-benefit solution
I didn't see ANY rebuttals above that offered anything more tangible than a rejection of the ideas offered because they aren't perfect. Nobody can win that game because no matter how much time is spent considering the cost and benefits, the opposition can just reject it without offering a better option.
(thoughts divided into separate posts for clarity of reading)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 and Xtra Styles PAKs Special Extended Until August 31st!
XPro & Xtra Styles PAKs Special Extended Until August 31st!
The XPro Styles PAKs and Xtra Styles PAKs special offers are now available until August 31st at 11:59pm PDT!
Ready to take your Band-in-a-Box® 2025 experience to the next level? Now’s the perfect time! Expand your style library with XPro and Xtra Styles PAKs—packed with a wide variety of genres to inspire your next musical creation.
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 1-9 includes 900 styles!
Xtra Styles PAKs are styles that work with the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box® 2025 (or higher). With over 3,500 styles (and 35 MIDI styles) included in Xtra Styles PAKs 1-20, the possibilities are endless!
Get the XPro Styles PAKs 1 - 9 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 Windows or for Mac.
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.
Get Xtra Styles PAKs 1 - 20 are on special for only $29 each (reg $49), or get all 19 PAKs for $199 (reg $399)! Listen to demos and order now! For Windows or for Mac.
Note: 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 because they need the RealTracks from the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition.
Don’t miss this chance to supercharge your Band-in-a-Box setup—at a great price!
Mac 2025 Special Upgrade Offers Extended Until August 15th!
It's not too late to upgrade to Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac® and save! We've extended our special until August 15, 2025!
We've added many major new features to Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac®, including advanced AI tools like the amazing BB Stem Splitter and AI Lyrics Generator, as well as VST3 plugin support, and Equalize Temp. Plus, there’s a new one-stop MIDI Patches Picker with over 1,100 MIDI patches to choose from, all neatly categorized by GM numbers. The MultiPicker Library is enhanced with tabs for the SongPicker, MIDI Patch Picker, Chord Builder, AI Lyrics Generator, and Song Titles Browser, and the tabs are organized into logical groups. The Audiophile Edition is enhanced with FLAC files , which are 60% smaller than AIFF files while maintaining identical audio quality, and now ships on a fast 1TB SSD, and much more!
Check out all the new features in Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac® here:
Purchase your Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac during our special to save up to 50% off your upgrade purchase and receive a FREE BONUS PAK of amazing new Add-ons. These include the 2025 RealCombos Booster PAK, Look Ma! More MIDI 13: Country & Americana, Instrumental Studies Set 22: 2-Hand Piano Soloing - Rhythm Changes, MIDI SuperTracks Set 44: Jazz Piano, Artist Performance Set 17: Songs with Vocals 7, Playable RealTracks Set 4, RealDrums Stems Set 7: Jazz with Mike Clark, and more!
Upgrade to the 2025 49-PAK for just $49 and add 20 Bonus Unreleased RealTracks and 20 RealStyles, FLAC Files for the 20 Bonus Unreleased RealTracks, Look Ma! More MIDI 14: SynthMaster, MIDI SuperTracks Set 45: More SynthMaster, Artist Performance Set 18: Songs with Vocals 8, and RealDrums Stems Set 8: Pop, Funk & More with Jerry Roe.
Learn more about the Bonus PAKs!
New RealTracks Released with Band-in-a-Box 2025!
We’ve expanded the Band-in-a-Box® RealTracks library with 202 incredible new RealTracks (in sets 449-467) across Jazz, Blues, Funk, World, Pop, Rock, Country, Americana, and Praise & Worship—featuring your most requested styles!
Jazz, Blues & World (Sets 449–455):
These RealTracks includes “Soul Jazz” with Neil Swainson (bass), Mike Clark (drums), Charles Treadway (organ), Miles Black (piano), and Brent Mason (guitar). Enjoy “Requested ’60s” jazz, classic acoustic blues with Colin Linden, and more of our popular 2-handed piano soloing. Plus, a RealTracks first—Tango with bandoneon, recorded in Argentina!
Rock & Pop (Sets 456–461):
This collection includes Disco, slap bass ‘70s/‘80s pop, modern and ‘80s metal with Andy Wood, and a unique “Songwriter Potpourri” featuring Chinese folk instruments, piano, banjo, and more. You’ll also find a muted electric guitar style (a RealTracks first!) and “Producer Layered Guitar” styles for slick "produced" sound.
Country, Americana & Praise (Sets 462–467):
We’ve added new RealTracks across bro country, Americana, praise & worship, vintage country, and songwriter piano. Highlights include Brent Mason (electric guitar), Eddie Bayers (drums), Doug Jernigan (pedal steel), John Jarvis (piano), Glen Duncan (banjo, mandolin & fiddle), Mike Harrison (electric bass) and more—offering everything from modern sounds to heartfelt Americana styles
Check out all the 202 New RealTracks (in sets 456-467)
And, if you are looking for more, the 2025 49-PAK (for $49) includes an additional 20 RealTracks with exciting new sounds and genre-spanning styles. Enjoy RealTracks firsts like Chinese instruments (guzheng & dizi), the bandoneon in an authentic Argentine tango trio, and the classic “tic-tac” baritone guitar for vintage country.
You’ll also get slick ’80s metal guitar from Andy Wood, modern metal with guitarist Nico Santora, bass player Nick Schendzielos, and drummer Aaron Stechauner, more praise & worship, indie-folk, modern/bro country with Brent Mason, and “Songwriter Americana” with Johnny Hiland.
Plus, enjoy user-requested styles like Soul Jazz RealDrums, fast Celtic Strathspey guitar, and Chill Hop piano & drums!
The 2025 49-PAK is loaded with other great new add-ons as well. Learn more about the 2025 49-PAK!
Bonus PAKs for Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Mac!
With your version 2025 for Mac Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, Audiophile Edition or PlusPAK purchase, we'll include a Bonus PAK full of great new Add-ons FREE! Or upgrade to the 2025 49-PAK for only $49 to receive even more NEW Add-ons including 20 additional RealTracks!
These PAKs are loaded with additional add-ons to supercharge your Band-in-a-Box®!
This Free Bonus PAK includes:
- The 2025 RealCombos Booster PAK:
-For Pro customers, this includes 33 new RealTracks and 65+ new RealStyles.
-For MegaPAK customers, this includes 29 new RealTracks and 45+ new RealStyles.
-For UltraPAK customers, this includes 20 new RealStyles.
- Look Ma! More MIDI 13: Country & Americana
- Instrumental Studies Set 22: 2-Hand Piano Soloing - Rhythm Changes
- MIDI SuperTracks Set 44: Jazz Piano
- Artist Performance Set 17: Songs with Vocals 7
- Playable RealTracks Set 4
- RealDrums Stems Set 7: Jazz with Mike Clark
- SynthMaster Sounds and Styles (with audio demos)
- 128 GM MIDI Patch Audio Demos.
Looking for more great add-ons, then upgrade to the 2025 49-PAK for just $49 and you'll get:
- 20 Bonus Unreleased RealTracks and RealDrums with 20 RealStyles,
- FLAC Files (lossless audio files) for the 20 Bonus Unreleased RealTracks and RealDrums
- Look Ma! More MIDI 14: SynthMaster,
- Instrumental Studies Set 23: More '80s Hard Rock Soloing,
- MIDI SuperTracks Set 45: More SynthMaster
- Artist Performance Set 18: Songs with Vocals 8
- RealDrums Stems Set 8: Pop, Funk & More with Jerry Roe
Learn more about the Bonus PAKs for Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac®!
New! Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Band-in-a-Box 2025 and Higher for Mac!
Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Mac & Windows Band-in-a-Box version 2025 (and higher) is here with 200 brand new RealStyles!
We're excited to bring you our latest and greatest in the all new Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Band-in-a-Box! This fresh installment is packed with 200 all-new styles spanning the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres you've come to expect, as well as the exciting inclusion of electronic styles!
In this PAK you’ll discover: Minimalist Modern Funk, New Wave Synth Pop, Hard Bop Latin Groove, Gospel Country Shuffle, Cinematic Synthwave, '60s Motown, Funky Lo-Fi Bossa, Heavy 1980s Metal, Soft Muted 12-8 Folk, J-Pop Jazz Fusion, and many more!
All the Xtra Styles PAKs 1 - 20 are on special for only $29 each (reg $49), or get all 209 PAKs for $199 (reg $399)! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of the Xtra Styles PAK 20.
Video: Xtra Styles PAK 20 Overview & Styles Demos: Watch now!
Note: The Xtra Styles require the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box®. (Xtra Styles PAK 20 requires the 2025 or higher UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition. They will not work with the Pro or MegaPAK version because they need the RealTracks from the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition.
New! XPro Styles PAK 9 for Band-in-a-Box 2025 and higher for Mac!
We've just released XPro Styles PAK 9 for Mac & Windows Band-in-a-Box version 2025 (and higher) with 100 brand new RealStyles, plus 29 RealTracks/RealDrums!
We've been hard at it to bring you the latest and greatest in this 9th installment of our popular XPro Styles PAK series! Included are 75 styles spanning the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres (25 styles each) that fans have come to expect, as well as 25 styles in this volume's wildcard genre: funk & R&B!
If you're itching to get a sneak peek at what's included in XPro Styles PAK 9, here is a small helping of what you can look forward to: Funky R&B Horns, Upbeat Celtic Rock, Jazz Fusion Salsa, Gentle Indie Folk, Cool '60s Soul, Funky '70s R&B, Smooth Jazz Hip Hop, Acoustic Rockabilly Swing, Funky Reggae Dub, Dreamy Retro Latin Jazz, Retro Soul-Rock Fusion, and much more!
Special Pricing! Until July 31, 2024, all the XPro Styles PAKs 1 - 9 are on sale for only $29 ea (Reg. $49 ea), or get them all in the XPro Styles PAK Bundle for only $149 (reg. $299)! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of XPro Styles PAKs.
Video: XPro Styles PAK 9 Overview & Styles Demos: Watch now!
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.
New! Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Band-in-a-Box 2025 and Higher for Windows!
Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Windows & Mac Band-in-a-Box version 2025 (and higher) is here with 200 brand new RealStyles!
We're excited to bring you our latest and greatest in the all new Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Band-in-a-Box! This fresh installment is packed with 200 all-new styles spanning the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres you've come to expect, as well as the exciting inclusion of electronic styles!
In this PAK you’ll discover: Minimalist Modern Funk, New Wave Synth Pop, Hard Bop Latin Groove, Gospel Country Shuffle, Cinematic Synthwave, '60s Motown, Funky Lo-Fi Bossa, Heavy 1980s Metal, Soft Muted 12-8 Folk, J-Pop Jazz Fusion, and many more!
All the Xtra Styles PAKs 1 - 20 are on special for only $29 each (reg $49), or get all 209 PAKs for $199 (reg $399)! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of the Xtra Styles PAK 20.
Video: Xtra Styles PAK 20 Overview & Styles Demos: Watch now!
Note: The Xtra Styles require the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box®. (Xtra Styles PAK 20 requires the 2025 or higher UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition. They will not work with the Pro or MegaPAK version because they need the RealTracks from the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums58
Topics84,621
Posts781,828
Members39,703
| |
Most Online25,754
Jan 24th, 2025
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are no members with birthdays on this day. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean