|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,629
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,629 |
"Realtime" plugins are non-destructive because they can be removed and remixed. Or changed and remixed.
Effects in the 'Edit' pulldown (for audio) are destructive. They get hard wrote and replace the original data.
Realtime effects play through the effect every time it plays (or mixes down)
But RB does contain some destructive FX out of the bos in the Edit-Audio Effcts menu.
I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome
Make your sound your own!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,815
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,815 |
Quote:
Quote:
Destructive editing, applying plugins etc all involve either resampling, dithering, etc and that introduces digital artifacts ...
Now, in a previous thread, I was told that onboard, plug in effects, are NON DESTRUCTIVE editing because they can be reversed by removing them from the track and the original will remain intact. So which is it? Destructive or non destructive?
Plugins are non-destructive (meaning you can go back to the source) -- but the output of them "involves either resampling, dithering, etc..."
Maybe he should have said "Destructive editing or applying plugins"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,366
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,366 |
Quote:
applying plugins etc all involve either resampling, dithering, etc and that introduces digital artifacts
Really sorry, Bob, but we're still some way off a meeting of minds here. Re-sampling and dithering occurs only when there is a change in bit rate or frequency and this isn't the case with the trim plugin to which you refer.
The basic trim plugin is just another volume control and has no more effect on the signal than moving the channel fader. It is the digital equivalent of the gain control and pad switch which sit at the top of the channel strip of an analog mixer. These are there because the mixer is receiving signals from an external source, not necessarily the tape recorder and they allow the channel to be calibrated for optimum efficiency.
In a DAW, the mixer is an integral part of the recorder and it's not possible to record anything onto a track which that track's mixer channel is unable to play back. That is, a track which has been recorded and normalized will still not overload the input to that track's mixer channel. The sum of the channel outputs can overload the master buss, which is why watching the meters is so important.
Dithering will occur when a recording is made in 24bit, but the end result is destined for CD at 16bit. This is why some engineers prefer to work in 16bit for CD, particularly as the majority of recorded music doesn't require the extended dynamic range of 24bit. Whether or not the artifacts caused by dithering can be heard is the subject of another debate.
ROG.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,629
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,629 |
you replied to me and quoted someone else there ROG
I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome
Make your sound your own!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913 |
Popping in here again.
I can't speak for RB's internal audio mix engine, but as far as I know, with most DAW software, when one renders the project to .wav, the output faders are very often automated and by golly they have an effect on how much a particular track contributes to the overall mix level.
I record at 24 bit because it lets me be lazy. I used to sweat the details when all I had available was 16 bit. I would almost always record as close to zero dB on the meters as possible, because on each and every track, that gave me the best signal to noise ratio. With 24 bit A/D, there's an additional 48 dB (6 dB for every bit) of quantization signal to noise ratio available over recording in 16 bit. If I can't make good use of somewhere in that 48 dB then I kind of shouldn't be in the hobby.
The output mix VU meter in any DAW software should tell you if you are into digital output clipping territory. Go red=bad. Stay out of the red=good. It's really that simple. If the render to .wav option inside of RB doesn't simply map this to whatever bit depth and sample rate you choose, then there's a problem.
You should be able to mix to your heart's content inside the PG software. If you have to mix in a different software than what you record, either one of three things is happening: the record software needs some work, or you need to learn how to mix properly inside of it, or there is some feature in your other DAW you should be pounding on PG to include inside RB.
RB, as far as I can tell, is pretty capable to handle the mixing task. Mixing is one of the simplest functions of any DAW software. Why one should have to go outside of it is a bit beyond my comprehension, to be honest.
I think I'm really missing something here. Also, for nearly all intents and purposes with computing power and capability of the last 5 years, you should be able to mix entirely without destructive editing. All of this discussion about the destructive edit aspect of things is one of those things that should quickly fade to the past in your toolbox - that is my experience. It's faded into memory as computing power has increased and DAW software takes advantage of multiple computing cores.
Used to be I did alot of rendering of individual tracks and effects to audio to keep the CPU load down in a project while mixing. However, with my track counts of normally under 12 or so, it's rare that I'm killing the CPU on my lappy which has a quad-core processor, with several VSTi and VST all saying to the CPU "Hey, I need to use you for a second" simultaneously. Keep in mind the effects that are nearly always most CPU hungry are time-based modulation effects like reverb and delay. This is because they require CPU calculation not only on the current sample, but all of those previous samples that are still in the 'tail'. Very CPU hungry. Learn how to bus them to keep CPU happy. Fader changes are just about the least amount of CPU churn that's possible. If I remember my rudimentary digital arithmetic from way back in about 1987 or so, fader changes are simply a gain change which is simply a multiply or divide operation. Bit shifting, I believe. Way simple for the CPU. Guess why multiply and divide were on some of the first digital calculators? It's simple for the calculator. Doing a destructive gain change is just not a good spending of your time and it's destructive. You can't ever change it back - not saying that going back and changing one's mind is always productive - usually it's not.
I read on here lots of folks that say something like: I use RB to record and compose, then I take all my tracks over to XYZ for mixing (insert your 2nd DAW of choice here for XYZ). What a pain in the bum! What is it about program XYZ that is so much better than RB, or PTPA?
I haunt KVRaudio quite a bit and there there are folks using everything from tracker type sequencers to ginormous ProTools rigs and all manner of stuff in between. It's a VERY rare occurrence to read anything there about people regularly transferring projects from one DAW to another just for mixing purposes. Here, it's talked about often. There you'll read more arguments about folks doing tape transfers into ProTools or Logic or something, or mixing using purely outboard busses like the Dangerous audio summing boxes and such, but rarely are there project transfers from one DAW to another simply to mix and render to either 2 track or whatnot.
You must have your reasons for keeping your head wrapped around two different DAW softwares. I have a hard enough time learning one deeply. I'd like to hear what your reasons are because that transfer of a recording project from DAW to a different DAW as at the very heart of this discussion.
For what it's worth, I've collaborated with folks sending me rendered audio from these DAW softwares in the past and used them with zero issue with me providing tracks back to them:
PowerTracks Pro Audio
Mastertracks (I think that's what it was called - it's the other DAW Mac uses also)
ProTools
Cubase
Reason
FL Studio
Tracktion
Garageband
Logic
there may be others, I just don't know. It's never been an issue. Never been a signal to noise ratio issue importing or exporting.
You must have your reasons for doing this. If one is simply just using RB to generate the band tracks, then I can understand the appeal of this specific use, and then using the workflow of a different DAW software. But if you are doing ANY mixing in RB, and then moving to a different DAW, then I don't get it.
Just curious to hear reasoning from anyone who has bothered to read this rather long sermon.
-Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,366
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,366 |
Quote:
you replied to me and quoted someone else there ROG
Sorry about that, rharv. It was after midnight at the end of a long day and I forgot to click on the reply box, so it defaulted to you. It was just coincidence that the quote was from another Bob.
I wouldn't try to involve you in a discussion involving dithering - I seem to remember it not being your favorite subject! (Not mine either, actually.)
ROG.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,697
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,697 |
Didn't someone write a song "dithering the day away"?
I'm finding this discussion fascinating. I still wonder then why all the advice from all these pros about recording at such low levels? I completely believe you guys that it's fine to record as hot as is appropriate for a particular part and simply adjust the faders for mixing. I threw out my comment about resampling or whatever just as a guess but apparently that's not it either.
I just did an experiment in RB. Starting with a new blank project I put in one chord on bar one then in track view highlighted the first 12 bars. I then generated a rock Real Drum part and it generated very low, I got one bar at the bottom of the VU meter about -24db. Then I generated a strong RT guitar track, a Brent Mason solo and it came in at -18, much louder on the meter. Now here's where a problem can be, the edit window shows individual peaks at 0 for the drums and -3 for the guitar but that is not reflected in the VU meters. They never went above -18 or -24 and that's where the recording person has to know what they're doing because I saw the exact same thing on my live remote band sessions using my Akai HD recorder. These meters are not sensitive enough. Another example of getting bit by consumer level gear and not pro level gear. I'm sure there's remote equipment with good meters that cost triple what I paid.
These levels that RB generated for guitar and drums are exactly correct per these websites so RB is doing it right. For drums RB is making sure the peaks are not going above zero even though that makes the overall track almost inaudible because the dynamic range on live drums is so high. This is also why a lot of live recordists put a compressor on the drum inputs. I never did, I just applied compression later. RB "knows" that as far as raw tracks are concerned an engineer doesn't want any manipulation going on the he didn't specifically ask for.
In conclusion to all this for Eddie, if you've already laid down some live tracks like your vocals, keyboards and sax and then have RB generate new tracks don't get upset that RB is generating them too low, understand it's actually doing it right. You need to first turn up your monitoring system and then use the mixer faders to pull down your prerecorded tracks, not manipulate the new ones up. At least not yet. A good engineer is going to want to hear what those new tracks sound like in the mix with no changes at first, just raw. Then he'll decide what to do, apply compression, EQ, all of that stuff. And for the future record your live tracks lower to avoid this. In other words follow RB's lead, it turns out Jeff knows what he's doing. And, it looks like I just answered my question at the beginning of this post.
I have to say these discussion with me throwing in some correct stuff and getting others wrong, I've learned a lot.
Bob
Last edited by jazzmammal; 10/26/12 01:36 PM.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Okay so now I get to the climax.....
Let's say for sake of saying that I have recorded drums, bass, guitar, piano, organ, strings, vocals, 2 tracks of BGV, and a guitar solo. As I solo those tracks, they are all this hot on the VU meter.
| |
| |
|X
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
When I play them back together, will that level stay right there or will the level with all tracks summed become X x 10 and go off the charts?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,366
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,366 |
Bob. I think we're getting there!
Just to expand on your comments about VU meters, all music contains what are called instantaneous peaks which can last for milliseconds, but will effect the overall level. The VU meter is designed to give a more average view of the perceived volume and has a damping factor which ignores these peaks. In effect, anything which lasts for less than about 300 milliseconds won't register on the meter. Some "posh" desks have meters which will switch between VU mode and PPM mode (Peak Program Mode) to enable the engineer to get a more comprehensive view of what's going on.
A small amount of upward limiting can be applied to most tracks to get rid of the instantaneous peaks and increase volume without overly effecting the sound. As you correctly say, RealTracks are recorded to give the engineer the option of treating the track, or not.
ROG.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,366
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,366 |
Eddie.
It's good to have the tracks recorded hot, but yes, if you push all the faders up full you'll have the main VUs off the scale. Just ride the faders and keep an eye on the meters. Alternatively, use the main subgroup fader (A1) to bring down the overall level of the mix before it hits the main output buss.
ROG.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,629
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,629 |
Quote:
I wouldn't try to involve you in a discussion involving dithering - I seem to remember it not being your favorite subject! (Not mine either, actually.)
ROG.
http://izotope.fileburst.com/guides/Dithering_With_Ozone.pdf
Good basic explanation
I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome
Make your sound your own!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,026
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,026 |
Ouch, me brain are sore from reading dat! Glad it twere only bay-sick! Me use Dithering but only because it is a default setting in Logic Pro 9. What me know won't hurt I! I go nappy now. Peas Oot!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913 |
Page 11 in December issue of Electronic Musician magazine addresses this in a concise answer to a reader question. Assumes 24 bit recording, says record at around -6 dB peak on your DAW's input meters. Also says to mix to -6 dB on the output bus meter to leave a little headroom for changes in mastering.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,697
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,697 |
To address your question Scott about why would someone move a project from RB to another DAW for mixing.
It's workflow for me. Audition does edits much faster than RB does. Example, cutting, pasting or sliding audio tracks. RB does that just fine but does it slowly while Audition does it almost instantly. I could not figure that out until I realized Audition creates some kind of temp files and is working with those initially. When you're finished with your project in Audition and save it that's when you discover it. Audition will ask you what do you want to do with all those edited temp files. You could save each and every one of them into a separate directory if you wanted to. If you don't and just want to save your result as your primary project then you click "no to all" and it will go through a very elaborate "flushing temp files" thing that can take 10-15 minutes depending on how many edits you did. For me working with live band recording tracks it was a ton of edits and one song would take maybe 20 minutes to save. RB apparantly does not do that, it handles the edits in real time so it "appears" to work much slower but then saves the project in a few seconds. In reality when you include the save time in Audition, I think both programs are about the same in the total time it takes to edit, mix and save the same project. It's just that the initial workflow is much, much faster in Audition and I like that.
There's other things like the audio edit window is full screen in Audition, you have much more control over it with the mouse than you do in RB, stuff like that. So, bottom line I stopped importing those projects into PT/RB and started with Audition several years ago.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913 |
Bob, that makes sense. Feature requests submitted?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I think I may have stumbled on to something that has been at the root of a lot of this conversation. We have different schools of thought, but I think there has been a lot of "cross conception" going on here.
I believe we need to differentiate between RECORDING hot and MIXING hot. It seems like different responses are using those two terms interchangeably and that is not what the original question was about.
My past practice (and present practice for that matter) is to RECORD tracks with a good deal of gain on them, so they reach a top level of about -3db. So the gain stage when recording is rather hot, but not reaching 0 or clipping at all.
However, when I MIX those tracks, I pull them down until the channel slider is totally off and then bring them up to where they rarely go beyond -6db or -4db. I record them hotter so there is some meat there if I would want to go any higher when I mix.
Once again I restate this thought and maybe it hasn't been presented in proper context. When mixing down, I can always cut a hotter track, but I can't boost a weaker one. When the slider is as far up as it can go, it's done and then I have to start looking to pull down the other 9, or 12, or 16. Why pull down 9 or 12 or 16 channels because one is weak when, recording that one hotter would prevent that? Digital, analog, digilog or anatal (I made those up!!)... whatever. As long as there is no clip anywhere it is fine.
Thing is, if I mix something down and dump it into a merged stereo wav file, as soon as I get it into Audition I am going to use the gain feature anyway and make it swell up to the full size of the window and see if the VU meters clip or not. I can handle some yellow. Orange is pushing it, but I never go so far where I see any red.
Is that just restating what has been said here or has there actually be a terminology gap about recording hot vs mixing hot?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,815
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,815 |
Quote:
... Once again I restate this thought and maybe it hasn't been presented in proper context. When mixing down, I can always cut a hotter track, but I can't boost a weaker one. When the slider is as far up as it can go, it's done and then I have to start looking to pull down the other 9, or 12, or 16. Why pull down 9 or 12 or 16 channels because one is weak when, ...
I thought we covered this one in the other thread. There are three or four ways to boost a "weaker" track. In most DAWs you can also group tracks together and by moving one fader, ALL the faders will move with it. Can RB do that? It is a quick and easy way to bring down a bunch of tracks at once to start off with a more balanced mix.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,021
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,021 |
Quote:
I think I may have stumbled on to something that has been at the root of a lot of this conversation. We have different schools of thought, but I think there has been a lot of "cross conception" going on here.
I believe we need to differentiate between RECORDING hot and MIXING hot. It seems like different responses are using those two terms interchangeably and that is not what the original question was about.
My past practice (and present practice for that matter) is to RECORD tracks with a good deal of gain on them, so they reach a top level of about -3db. So the gain stage when recording is rather hot, but not reaching 0 or clipping at all.
However, when I MIX those tracks, I pull them down until the channel slider is totally off and then bring them up to where they rarely go beyond -6db or -4db. I record them hotter so there is some meat there if I would want to go any higher when I mix.
Once again I restate this thought and maybe it hasn't been presented in proper context. When mixing down, I can always cut a hotter track, but I can't boost a weaker one. When the slider is as far up as it can go, it's done and then I have to start looking to pull down the other 9, or 12, or 16. Why pull down 9 or 12 or 16 channels because one is weak when, recording that one hotter would prevent that? Digital, analog, digilog or anatal (I made those up!!)... whatever. As long as there is no clip anywhere it is fine.
Thing is, if I mix something down and dump it into a merged stereo wav file, as soon as I get it into Audition I am going to use the gain feature anyway and make it swell up to the full size of the window and see if the VU meters clip or not. I can handle some yellow. Orange is pushing it, but I never go so far where I see any red.
Is that just restating what has been said here or has there actually be a terminology gap about recording hot vs mixing hot?
You are 100% correct in what you're saying here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,629
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,629 |
Quote:
I thought we covered this one in the other thread. There are three or four ways to boost a "weaker" track. In most DAWs you can also group tracks together and by moving one fader, ALL the faders will move with it. Can RB do that? It is a quick and easy way to bring down a bunch of tracks at once to start off with a more balanced mix.
Yes, RB has subgroup routing ..
I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome
Make your sound your own!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac - Special Offers End at 11:59pm PDT on Friday, May 15th, 2026!
Order before 11:59pm PDT on Friday, May 15th and SAVE up to 50% on most Band-in-a-Box® version 2026 for Mac Upgrade packages... and that's not all! With your version 2026 for Mac purchase, we'll include a Bonus PAK full of great new Add-ons FREE! Upgrade to the 2026 49-PAK to receive even more NEW Add-ons including 20 additional RealTracks... that's 222 NEW RealTracks available with version Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac!
Upgrade to Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac® today for as little as $49! Check out the Band-in-a-Box® packages page for all available purchase options.
Learn more about the Free Bonus PAK and 49-PAK here.
If you have any questions about which package is the best option for you, just let us know. We're here to help!
202 New RealTracks Released with Band-in-a-Box 2026!
With Band-in-a-Box® 2026, we've released 202 incredible new RealTracks (in sets 468-488) in a variety of genres—featuring your most requested styles!
Jazz, Funk & World (Sets 468-475):
Our new jazz, funk & blues RealTracks include a groovin’ collection of RealTracks and RealDrums! These include more requested “soul jazz” RealTracks featuring artists Neil Swainson (bass), Charles Treadway (organ), Brent Mason (guitar), and Wes Little (drums). There are new “smooth jazz” styles (4), which include a RealTracks first: muted trumpet, as well as slick new smooth jazz brushes options for drums. Blues lovers will be thrilled—there are more “classic acoustic blues” styles, including guitar (5), bass (4), and drums (10) with blues master Colin Linden, featuring understated and tasty background acoustic soloing, plus brushes drums and acoustic bass. There are also new electric blues RealTracks, including electric blues with PG favorite Johnny Hiland (3) and soulful electric slide guitar from Colin Linden (4). If you love funk & gospel, there are great new options this year, including gospel organ (3) from Charles Treadway, as well as new funk, tango, and rock ’n’ roll drums (3) and bass (1). And for big, bold arrangements, we have uptempo soul horns (4) featuring a three-part hip horn section with options for a full mix or stems of each individual horn — plus an accompanying rhythm section (4) of drums, bass, guitar, and electric piano!
Rock & Pop (Sets 476–482):
Our new rock & pop RealTracks bring a powerful mix of requested favorites, fresh genres, and modern chart-inspired styles! We have more of our popular “Producer Layered Acoustic Guitars (15)” featuring Band-in-a-Box favorite Brent Mason. We’ve continued our much-requested disco styles (10), and added new Celtic guitar (5) with a more basic, accessible approach than our previous Drop-D or DADGAD offerings. There are also highly requested yacht rock styles (17), inspired by the smooth, polished soft-rock sound of the late ’70s and early ’80s — laid-back grooves, silky electric pianos, warm textures, elegant harmonic movement, and pristine production aesthetics. Fans of heavier styles will love our new glam metal (13), capturing the flashy, high-energy sound of ’80s arena-ready guitar rock. We also have a set of rootsy modern-folk rock (18), with a warm, organic sound combining contemporary folk textures and driving acoustic strumming. And we’ve added lots of new modern pop styles (16) — the kinds of sounds you’re hearing on the radio today, featuring exciting new drums, synths, and cutting-edge RealTracks arrangements.
Country, & Americana (Sets 483–488):
Our new country & Americana RealTracks deliver a rich collection of acoustic, electric, and roots-inspired styles! We have new country pop (9) with legendary guitarist Brent Mason. There is also a potpourri (14) of bouzouki, guitars, banjo, and more, perfect for adding texture and character to contemporary acoustic arrangements. We’ve added funky country guitar (5) with PG favorite Brent Mason, along with classic pedal steel styles (5) featuring steel great Doug Jernigan. There are more country songwriter styles (8) that provide intimate, rootsy foundations for storytelling and modern Americana writing. Finally, we have “background soloing” acoustic guitar (12) with Brent Mason — simpler, but still very tasty acoustic lines designed to sit beautifully behind vocals or act as a subtle standalone solo part.
Check out all the 202 new RealTracks (in sets 468-488)!
And, if you are looking for more, the 2026 49-PAK (for $49) includes an impressive collection of 20 bonus RealTracks, featuring exciting and inspiring additions to add to your RealTracks library. You'll get new country-rhythm guitar styles from PG Music favorites Johnny Hiland and Brent Mason, along with modern-pop grooves that capture today’s radio-ready sound! There are also new indie-folk styles with guitar, bass, 6-string bass used as a high-chording instrument, acoustic guitar, and banjo. Plus, dedicated "cymbal fills" RealDrums provide an added layer that work very well with low-key folky styles with other percussion.
The 2026 49-PAK is loaded with other great new add-ons as well. Learn more about the 2026 49-PAK!
2026 Free Bonus PAK & 49-PAK for Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac®!
With your version 2026 for Mac Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, Audiophile Edition or PlusPAK purchase, we'll include a Bonus PAK full of great new Add-ons for FREE! Or upgrade to the 2026 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 2026 RealCombos Booster PAK:
-For Pro customers, this includes 27 new RealTracks and 23 new RealStyles.
-For MegaPAK customers, this includes 25 new RealTracks and 23 new RealStyles.
-For UltraPAK customers, this includes 12 new RealStyles.
- MIDI Styles Set 92: Look Ma! More MIDI 15: Latin Jazz
- MIDI SuperTracks Set 46: Piano & Organ
- Instrumental Studies Set 24: Groovin' Blues Soloing
- Artist Performance Set 19: Songs with Vocals 9
- Playable RealTracks Set 5
- RealDrums Stems Set 9: Cool Brushes
- SynthMaster Sounds Set 1 (with audio demos)
- iOS Android Band-in-a-Box® App
Looking for more great add-ons, then upgrade to the 2026 49-PAK for just $49 and you'll get:
- 20 Bonus Unreleased RealTracks and RealDrums with 20 RealStyle.
- FLAC Files (lossless audio files) for the 20 Bonus Unreleased RealTracks and RealDrums
- MIDI Styles Set 93: Look Ma! More MIDI 16: SynthMaster
- MIDI SuperTracks Set 47: More SynthMaster
- Instrumental Studies 25 - Soul Jazz Guitar Soloing
- Artist Performance Set 20: Songs with Vocals 10
- RealDrums Stems Set 10: Groovin' Sticks
- SynthMaster Sounds & Styles Set 2 (sounds & styles with audio demos)
Learn more about the Bonus PAK and 49-PAK for Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac®!
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums57
Topics86,301
Posts802,961
Members40,086
| |
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