PG Music Home Forums General Discussion Off-Topic "Wired Magazine" on the Future of Copying

Index

Print Thread

Go To

Re: "Wired Magazine Article with Reader Responses GDaddy #202404 05/05/13 05:15 PM Off-Topic
Joined: Nov 2008 Posts: 897 Homosassa , Florida GDaddy OP Expert
OP GDaddy Expert Joined: Nov 2008 Posts: 897 Homosassa , Florida	Some reader replys to this "Wired Article" 888888888888888888888888888888888888888 What about every other profession that is "real-time"? Why is it that every musician should have a buffer, but no salesperson and no engineer? Unless you start your own business, when you can't perform in those roles you lose your income as well. By entering the sphere of entrepreneurship you are fundamentally changing your occupation in the two examples that I have specified, whereas for a musician it's not. Agree with previous comment: article is deeply flawed in logic. 96 △ 1 ▽ • Reply • Share › Michael Lashinsky > Kir Birger • 11 days ago I agree. A hundred years ago, any performer could only get paid by performing. There was no such thing as a recording of a performance. Technology has brought that full circle. Now performers only get paid for their performances. (And tee shirts.) In the old days, minstrels often ended their show by selling medicinal tonic and other wares. (Then got promptly run out of town.) 26 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › lammot > Michael Lashinsky • 10 days ago But in the older days you couldn't also record music, and enjoy it without the presence of the musician. now the outreach of music is so much more since it can be recorded in a meaningful way and spread its reach irrespective of live performances. We need to value the money going into recording, for which we should remunerate the musicians and the parties involved. the fact that we don't has led to a surge in concert prices and bands spending time on ancillaries such as merch, that time in which they could've made more music. 9 △ 1 ▽ • Reply • Share › Álex Montoya > lammot • 8 days ago What about films? 1 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › bitrat > Álex Montoya • 5 days ago Many would argue that the film industry profiteers in various ways, eg the zone system of DVD's (a DVD for Africa won't play in the US, etc). And if I download a compressed lo rez movie, chances are if I really like it I'll go to netflix or even purchase a DVD. But if I download a so-so movie, watch it once & either never watch it again or throw it out, who cares? Now if you live in Asia or Africa it's another matter - every street corner includes vendors of pirated DVDs.....but considering the income of many of the buyers there, perhaps it's fair....what do you think? △ ▽ • Reply • Share › lammot > Álex Montoya • 6 days ago what about them? they do get pirated, which is a problem. compare it to theatre, which doesn't (afaik) face piracy issues. △ ▽ • Reply • Share › southernBolt > Michael Lashinsky • 11 days ago sounds like a rave 4 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Kyle Won > Michael Lashinsky • 10 days ago We also used to have slavery. Women and black people couldn't vote. I can't wait till technology comes back full circle on those things, too. 6 △ 2 ▽ • Reply • Share › Jim Britt > Kyle Won • 10 days ago Singers shouldn't make more to sing a song than a soldier, firefighter, or cop makes saving lives! 12 △ 2 ▽ • Reply • Share › Kyle Won > Jim Britt • 10 days ago Most probably don't, when you average them all out. Some lose money between paying for rehearsal spaces, equipment, and hiring back-up musicians. It's not cheap or easy. Also, if a performer can sell out a stadium or Madison Square Garden, who are you to decide how much they make? If someone can get tens of thousands of people to pay to come see them perform every year, they deserve to make however much they make. Nothing you say is going to change that. 12 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › bitrat > Kyle Won • 5 days ago Yes, but they shouldn't expect people to pay the same for digital reproductions either - let people put their money towards artists who are lower on the food chain maybe. Uh oh, I hear the mob screaming "Socialism!" ;p 1 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Kyle Won > bitrat • 4 days ago Oh, I agree. CD's would have a ridiculous mark-up, sometimes. The lack of a physical product or the need to have a physical store and physical distribution network should bring a discount. However, one could argue that there's added value in the fact that a service like iTunes will allow you to re-download a song/album if you lost it (i think), so you essentially are guaranteed a copy, even in the event of hard drive failure. They could also offer cloud-style services to your personal library (if they don't already). △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Michael Lashinsky > Kyle Won • 20 hours ago I don't think anyone is really saying that. If they can fill a stadium, more power to them! But performers shouldn't expect to record a song and live fat off of royalties for the rest of their lives. It isn't realistic. △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Nick Hoffman > Jim Britt • 9 days ago The market determines the value. While I certainly honor the work of the soldier, the firefighter and cop, as well as teachers, many artists create works that generate large amounts of revenue of which they are entitled to a large portion, are they not? By your rationale, everyone should earn the same amount, regardless of value generation. 3 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Aaron Wolf > Nick Hoffman • 7 days ago What you mean is "market determines the price" which is also false. Value is not price, but price also does not actually work the way market ideology presumes. It's complex. People charge more and then buyers think the product is better, people charge less because they are humble, etc. Market does not actually determine price although it has strong influence. Market certainly does not determine value. Either way, Lanier is making up nonsense here. 2 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Nick Hoffman > Aaron Wolf • 6 days ago No, what I meant was, 1 million people will purchase an album or show up at a movie based in large part to the artist that is singing or the actor that is headlining the film... the same cannot be said for the traffic cop making stops or the fireman that is working that night. While I believe that the work of emergency personnel and teachers, etc, is undervalued and they are underpaid, I believe that check that is written to the artist that drives the type of sales or box office that I'm talking about is based on a fraction of what their participation brought to the project. △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Michael Lashinsky > Nick Hoffman • 20 hours ago "...they are entitled to a large portion..." but they don't get it. The record labels get the large portion and the performers get peanuts. The labels are exploiting the artists that create the works. (And why any consumer is willing to pay the ridiculous retail price is beyond me...) Now we can hear and copy anything we want off of the internet, and the record labels are crying about it. Boo-Hoo! Artists can still perform to get paid, and the recording industry can fold and die for all I care. Artists that can sell enough tickets to fill a concert hall or stadium will make a living. The person playing third Viola in a 100 piece orchestra is probably going to need to keep a day job. (So is the lone performer at the indie coffee shop.) They aren't necessarily less talented, but that is how it is. Sorry about that. △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Brendan Kaplan > Nick Hoffman • 6 days ago also, if there were 1.5 million (size of active duty army) Jay-Z's/Madonna's/commercial superstars out there, they would probably make a lot less than current superstars. △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Michael Lashinsky > Jim Britt • 20 hours ago Exactly! Neither should athletes. △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Michael Lashinsky > Kyle Won • 20 hours ago I get the point you are trying to make, but technology had nothing to do with ending slavery or civil rights. 100 Years ago, there were no recordings at all. the tech didn't exist. Then Edison came along and we had a foil roll, then a Victrola, then record players, cassettes, 8-tracks, CD,. etc... A few big companies made a fortune off the backs of the performers, who got paid diddly squat! (Ever hear the song, "Do the Locomotion"? It was top of the charts in its day, but Little Eva got paid $20 if I remember correctly. Billy Joel is another one that got royally screwed.) A few popular and astute musicians negotiated better deals, but most musicians get paid for the performance, and that is all. Now, technology is at a point where it is incredibly easy to copy and share a recording, so the recording labels no longer have a lock on the recorded sound. It isn't locked onto the platter it is recorded on. The record label was a product of the technology of the 20th century, and they had a great run, but now 21st century technology has made their little kingdom fall apart. It was an artificial bubble, and it collapsed. Boo-fraking-who! And just like all of time before, performers get paid for performing live again. Back to normal. △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Entitled > Kir Birger • 11 days ago Indeed. We might say that musicians are "harmed" by piracy, in the sense that by letting it happen they would lose certain financial benefits that they have now, but these benefits are just rare priviledges, not fundamental rights that all workers in the word deserve. In the words of Jonathan Coulton: "It so happens that technological and societal blahbity bloos have conspired to create a situation where selling songs about monkeys and robots is a viable business, but for most of human history people have NOT paid for art." Sure, Coulton has interest in keeping up his own priviledge right now, but wanting it to go away and be replaced with more equality, is not a bad thing either. The problem with copyright, is that it's excessive: It rewards the workers of one particular field,with monopolistic control over data, with the right to tell what am I allowed to use my home computer for, what files am I allowed to put where, with the right to tell other artists coming after them exactly what new works are they not allowed to create and distribute, and so on. 26 △ 1 ▽ • Reply • Share › Kir Birger > Entitled • 11 days ago This article is also written under the misconception that poor, now-impoverished musicians think of record sales as their life-blood. Musicians that don't own their own album make a mere pittance off record sales. Homework: See where a musician's income comes from. 31 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Gary McDermott > Kir Birger • 11 days ago Most musicians make their money off of touring rather than album sales. Tthis is because the record labels have evolved the pinching of pennies and raping of talent to such a degree that there is no money left to trickle down to the artist. You can look at the avaricious way that the record industry took down MP3.com. MP3.com had a business model that allowed artists to sell directly to their audience. They had a rating system that pushed 'liked' music into the public consciousness and probably put bands into the public awareness that never would have seen the light of day in a world dominated by record labels. Unfortunately, they also had an online storage facility that allowed a person to store music that they owned to play remotely, and that resulted in UMG vs MP3.com. Ultimately MP3 just became an outlet for Vivendi, and the record labels re-established their dominance. Oh, yeah, out-right piracy (as opposed to a free-er business model) has now taken over and will (eventually) see the death of the record labels. This could have been a much better scenario, but IMO, the record labels forced the issue and deserve what they are getting 36 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › MightyMolecule > Gary McDermott • 11 days ago alas, the mpaa is proving much more imaginative at maintaining their status quo.... 4 △ 1 ▽ • Reply • Share › Jenny M. Raulston > Gary McDermott • 11 days ago uptil I lℴℴkėd at the rėcėipt 4 $9302, I didńt bėliėve that ṁŷ brℴthers friėńd cℴuld rėalŷ takińg hℴmė ṁℴńėŷ iń thėir sparė timė ℴn thėrė cℴmputar.. thėrė auńts nėighbℴur haz dℴńė this fℴr ℴńlŷ tŵėńtŷ tŵℴ ṁℴńths ańd bŷ ńℴw rėpaid thė lℴańs ℴn thėir ṁińi ṁańsiℴn ańd gℴt a tℴp ℴf thė rańgė Jaguar E-tŷpė. I ŵėńt hėrė, Lux14.com 1 △ 12 ▽ • Reply • Share › TypicalWiredReader > Jenny M. Raulston • 10 days ago I'LL GIVE YOU FIVE BUCKS FOR A HANDJOB 7 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › bitrat > TypicalWiredReader • 5 days ago Ha ha ha ha! △ ▽ • Reply • Share › bitrat > Jenny M. Raulston • 5 days ago Up until I looked at the picture, I couldn't believe this spam was written by a human being and not some kiddie-script bot in Romania :p △ ▽ • Reply • Share › bitrat > Gary McDermott • 5 days ago Yes.......many artists have decried the "record label system" for decades - just look at the history of out and out theft of music from black artists from the very beginning of the industry. Things are changing - I believe there will be a place for major labels, but they'll have to be much more responsive to digital distribution. But in the long run, diversification will (hopefully) lead us out of the current pop star cloning machine with it's "loudness wars" and absurd lack of musicianship. △ ▽ • Reply • Share › MightyMolecule > Entitled • 11 days ago "...The problem with copyright, is that it's excessive:..." exactly. for the last decade or so we have unequivocally witnessed the fundamental change of anonymity, neutrality, and privacy of the internet (globally) for the sake of protecting licensed wares. of course this goes without saying the better off consumers are to identity theft and cyber hacking, but those instances existed long, long, long before the riaa/mpaa demonstrated their influence at both the legislative and judicial levels, and those circumstances have been efficiently addressed for other national reasons. never was copyright meant to be that effective to subjugate the mere act of sharing into a definition war of the term with that of stealing. in 1998 you came to the internet as a venue to sell your product. in 2013 you come to the internet to buy products. take a minute to reflect on those last two sentences. 12 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Gary McDermott > MightyMolecule • 11 days ago In 1990 I came to the internet to find interesting information and argue with people, in 2013 I come to the internet to find interesting information and argue with people The fact that 'other' people are doing different things in the same space matters as much to me as whether 'other' people at the park are spanging or shopping 3 △ 1 ▽ • Reply • Share › MightyMolecule > Gary McDermott • 11 days ago fair enough. but if metrics are being used then whether you were arguing over a seinfeld episode on an aol site that took 15 mins to load back in '93 or pranking baud strikes with a hayes in '83 like myself, it is undenible that the internet is not the same in terms of either of the three things mentioned. the point is, commerce has changed the medium. this is unequivocal. whereas your analogy is right on, while it doesn't matter to you (or even per se), those actions of 'others' affects you nonetheless. and that effectivity is only increasing. which leads to the second point i only alluded to with my earlier post: the medium has changed to reflect real life because of commerce.... 2 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Gary McDermott > MightyMolecule • 11 days ago Seinfeld... funny To be honest back in the 80's I was 'talking' to eliza or guessing passwords on bbs's. And the 'internet' that I encountered in '90 was more telnet, usenet and gopher than anything we see today... We can certainly thank the billions of dollars that commerce (mostly [****], but some other fields are catching up) has induced companies to invest in infrastructure that can deliver up to 150MBs to my home. I am getting ready to dump all of my pricey cable toys for a fat pipe and hulu/netflicks, which should deliver all the media my kids demand at a significant cost savings. While I appreciate what improvement commerce brings (like paved highways in the west), I do not appreciate the speed traps and taxation districts that such 'advancement' bring with it 4 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › bitrat > Gary McDermott • 5 days ago ...and for some of us in overpriced rural areas, believe me, online shopping is a blessing. A mixed one, it's true - but like Gary above, I mostly access scientific information online and like the silly Mastercard ads....the value of that is "priceless" △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Jim Britt > MightyMolecule • 10 days ago How about the "artists" get REAL JOBS! 2 △ 2 ▽ • Reply • Share › Álex Montoya > Jim Britt • 8 days ago What's a real job? Is serving tables a real job? What happens when musicians, filmmakers, designers, writers, managers, agents, producers don't have money to go to restaurants? In a globalized world there are no 'real jobs'. Everything is interdependent and hurting a sector, hurts the whole economy. 2 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Cody Benowitz > Jim Britt • 8 days ago You would be surprised how many of us "artist" work multiple part time jobs just to pay rent, that doesn't include new gear. 2 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › bitrat > Cody Benowitz • 5 days ago Yes....half the work force in San Francisco is aspiring musicians/dancers/artists, etc ;p △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Michael Lashinsky > Jim Britt • 19 hours ago And athletes! Millions of $$$ to throw a ball through a hoop? To hit a ball with a stick and run around a square? People need entertainment. I get it. But it is way over priced and over rewarded. △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Clark Battle > Gary McDermott • 10 days ago No. You are wrong. ;^) △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Nick Hoffman > MightyMolecule • 9 days ago If in 1998 you came to the internet as a venue to sell your product, doesn't that mean in turn that someone was also coming to BUY your products? 1 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Michael Lashinsky > Nick Hoffman • 19 hours ago Now, Nick, don't confuse the issue with common sense! △ ▽ • Reply • Share › MightyMolecule > Nick Hoffman • 8 days ago indeed, but what is your point though? in two sentences I eloquently dissected the entire funneling process of capitalistic consumerism that has been shaping the internet, it's principles, and it's protocols for the last decade plus. △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Nick Hoffman > MightyMolecule • 6 days ago Well, no you didn't. I was pointing out that your statement, "at one point it was a place you could go to sell, now it's a place to buy" doesn't make as much sense as you think. If at one point it was a place to sell automatically suggests that at the same time someone was showing up to buy and visa versa. Perhaps you meant something different. 1 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › MightyMolecule > Nick Hoffman • 3 days ago sure, it requires some inference, perhaps eloquent wasn't the best word to use there. it's a simplified statement (poetic license if you will - in all honesty I didn't anticipate those statements being taken as a literal empiric) that summates the processes and variables listed above with regards to the internet, but retains consideration for the initial implementation of the such and how they've changed in lieu of commerce. the fact that someone was purchasing in the past is benign. the point is that same person could have shared a purchase with less invasion, evasion, and terminology obfuscation. we've come a long way from "don't copy that floppy" and much to the benefit as well as detriment to the medium. △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Kris Norvet > Entitled • 11 days ago For most of human history people didn't pay for food, either. Such a silly response. If you're referencing more modern history, you're still wrong. The Patronage system funded most art until the mid-late 1700s. Our copyright system most certainly needs a dramatic overhaul - I agree that it's excessive and anti-innovation as it stands - but to suggest that a living wage is somehow a privilege to creators makes you sound like the entitled one. 6 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Jim Britt > Kris Norvet • 10 days ago A "living wage" is $100,000 a year; not $10 MILLION! 6 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › zaxtervid > Jim Britt • 10 days ago Only a tiny handful of musicians make that kind of money. Check the article. 3 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Taylor Hawkins > zaxtervid • 10 days ago It's not unreasonable for two people to get by on $20,000 a year without welfare. It forces responsibility and lifestyle changes, but it is very doable. The problem would appear to be that many people who live off of $20,000 a year have a lifestyle of someone who makes closer to $100,000 a year. 3 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Albert Vargas > Taylor Hawkins • 10 days ago what an ignorant elitist statement. No one that I know of - EVER that makes or made 20k per year has come even close to living like they make 100k. This is the kind of ignorance that creeps into every discussion that even remotely deals with inequality. It has to stop if we ever expect to changing things 5 △ ▽ • Reply • Share › Last edited by GDaddy; 05/05/13 05:19 PM. Yamaha...Motif ES-8, Motif Rack, CS6X Korg...Karma,Triton Classic, PA-80, M-1+ AkaiSampler-S5000, Roland.. X5080 Rack/G-1000 Arranger Various Guitars/Basses Amps Pedals Rec.Equip. Plus, BIAB 2015 and Sonar Platinum 2015 Upgrade from Cakewalk's Sonar X-3

Go To

Entire Thread
Subject	Posted By	Posted
"Wired Magazine" on the Future of Copying	GDaddy	05/06/13 12:00 AM
Re: "Wired Magazine Article with Reader Responses	GDaddy	05/06/13 12:15 AM

Moderated by Andrew - PG Music, Callie - PG Music, Catherine, Jeff Yankauer, PeterGannon, pgmoderation

Link Copied to Clipboard

ChatPG

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.

PG Music News

August 22, 2025

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!

August 06, 2025

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!

July 27, 2025

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!

July 23, 2025

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®!

July 21, 2025

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.

July 21, 2025

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.

July 21, 2025

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!

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!

More News