PG Music Home Forums PG Music Product Forums Band-in-a-Box for Windows Why is there no 64 bit Band In A Box?

All you guys talking about VST's are forgetting about hardware. There's many people who don't use software for sound period. I have a Roland Sonic Cell plus my Kurzweil PC3. I don't need no stinkin VST's.

I know for a fact that there are lots of folks who use the Ketron SD2 which also sounds great. Trust me on this, check out the many vids of those hardware synths, they all sound awesome.

I know folks on this forum who have Yamaha Motif's, Roland Fantoms, my PC3, one guy has a Tyros 4 a killer keyboard with truly awesome sounds and others.

As far as midi is concerned if you're using hardware synths it's instant gratification regardless of ram and nobody cares if it's 64 bit or not.

VST's are not the only game in town.

Bob

BTW, if you've a hardware synthesizer like Yamaha MOTIF series (or Korg, Roland, Kurzweil), BiaB works fine using the higher banks - great sounds, zero latency (it's how I use it) - course, it requires changing the style patches, and you see the program number for a GM instead of the right patch name.

Maybe a "cheaper" way around getting good sounds from your favorite VST would be for PG to implement REWIRE?

[Added] Funny - wrote this while jazzmammal was writing about the same thing...

Hi Bob,
You are correct VST's are not the only game in town. However, they are one of the games in town.
I note from your "signature" that you don't seem to use an Atari these days.
I'm glad PG Music moved on from the Atari in the early 90's, as I guess you are.
I'm just hoping that things keep moving towards platforms of the future.
However, I'm also pleased to have the new improved 2014 update.
Still, we most keep moving because we are now beyond VST2, VST3 is available, who knows what tomorrow, but it certainly wont run on the Atari.
Col

That's one of the 50 great features I had hoped to see in '14. It, too, has been on the list for quite a while. I wonder how practical it would be to write Rewire into BIAB as opposed to Real Band or Power Tracks. However, I believe there are also 32- and 64-bit versions of Rewire, which creates its own issues. (For one thing, the 64-bit version permits the use of exponentially more channels of MIDI and audio. Go to https://propellerheads.se for more information.)

The workaround for me has been to accept BIAB as a creation tool only and just use a basic-but-decent GM synth until I port my productions into Propellerhead Reason, which, being a soft synth as well as DAW, has effectively infinite voicing possibilities. If I ever begin using Real Drums extensively I may rethink that and spend some time in Real Band before porting my tracks into Reason first. But my compositions tend to be pretty complex (meaning having many tracks of audio and MIDI), so I don't know how long I could stay in the 32-bit environment myself.

So ultimately I agree with Mal and the many others. Because people have and want to use advanced, memory-intensive tools with BIAB and RB, they ideally shouldn't have to live under a 3.5 Gb RAM limitation and thus be forced to use other tools. A 64-bit version of PG Music products would seem to be the way of the future.

I use the AxiomPro 61 keyboard, also an old Samick KK1 fully weighted master keyboard (It's a beast and weighs a ton), ... plus an Oxygen 25.

These, as you can appreciate are not synths but controllers. They control any VSTi and many other facets within a DAW. The learning curve for these is gentle and the programming is automated by the DAW in a lot of instances.

I discarded Soundblaster Elite Pro a while back, it was adequate at best. I tried quite a few soundcards and settled with Asus Xonar Essence STX. It's stable and the sound is extremely impressive.

With a Large Diaphragm Mic and guitars, I feed into an Alesis, straight into the Asus. Once some tracks are layed down I get to work with the keyboards and pen lyrics.

That is where x64 bit VSTi's come in and the quality is paramount. This is also where the frustration kicks in because the invaluable use of using BB to assist with tracks goes without saying ..... BUT, from 32 BB, back to 64 DAW, back to 32 BB, back to 64 DAW ..... AD INFINITUM. It's a real PITA.

I understand that everyone cannot have it all.

I do want x64 BB though because it is unique. It makes writing a song an easier process and also, as backing, it's potential is astronomic, if the VSTi's can be utilised within the software.

Are you saying you've tried it and it doesn't work? I recently purchased a new laptop so I've been researching this some and I'm under the impression that it should work.

Have you tried adding those one at a time to see where it fails?

One thought in regard to Mal's last point as far as switching back and forth. BiaB is never going to have 48 tracks or unlimited tracks. That is the reason they build Rb. So ultimately you have to move out of Rb to complete a project. So that is the place to add the top flight synths and things that require power to complete projects. With the ability to use sampletank and such in biab we can get a very decent idea of what a project sounds like before the move.

With the drag and drop feature it is seamless to move it, and some of the big name daws today are so adept at importing. My new foray into Studio one has taught me some new tricks I can export from BiaB to a folder and literally drag the files in effortlessly. Once there i can mix edit, and poke at it till the cows come home.

Anyway folks have fun, i am loving the new stuff so far.

@jim111

It will work for one or two instruments Jim but sluggish and latency would need adjusting. Pulling in a large file, lets say Omnisphere, or LA Strings. On there own it has worked.

@robh

I have opened RB 2014 but not really delved in yet Robh.

Having a ball with the new RT's at the moment. I will stress test it momentarily.

:-)

Cool give a detailed report on how it is working. So far for me track generation is a bit faster now.

If you have not used RB much open that dog and grab your favorite bib file and open it give it a whirl.

Last year I took a midi file from the net, and did a shoot out, using reaper, sonar x-1, and RB the finished product was interesting I swear I got a better over all end result with RB. It certainly has less tools than Sonar, but there are ways to make it happen.

One cool trick is to take a midi drum track and hit "split midi drums" and separate the different drums sound on separate tracks mix and tweak to your hearts content. One track I did I used jamstix for snare, and high hats, Roland TTS for a percussion sounds, sampletank for kick drum, and got a great drum track.

When you dig in RB you find it has a lot of hidden gems. Plus the ability to blend in RTs at any point. Now with tighter automation I can generate a lead guitar track and weave it in and out.

This should be my last 64 bit message.

1-I owe Mac an apology. According to J-bridge’s web site their wrapper will allow 64 bit VSTis to use all the available ram when used in a 32 bit program. Unfortunately it does not work when bridging Kontakt to BiaB, it freezes the computer. But then again wrappers do not work in every situation.

2-Even it did work we would have another dilemma. Biab only allows for one VSTi or DXi. So if Dr. Gannon and the other fine people at PGMusic decide to write a 64 bit BiaB I hope they ask for suggestions. I have a couple already. One would be to open up all 16 midi channels for us to use and the other would be to allow a different VSTi on each channel.

MarioD,

Check Prefs->Channels inside BB.

You should find out that all 16 channels are already assigned.

The Guitar and Bass tablature and onscreen Guitar view are the reason, there is need for a channel for each string to make that happen.

Band in a Box is a great autoaccompaniment tool, but I think that because both BB and any Multitrack DAW both make music when played back, far too many view BB as being the same thing as the DAW. Its not. It is an Autoaccompaniment Program. I don't think you will find a single DAW software out there that can do that with the kind of sound BB can.

Ya might be able to seemingly get away with pounding a woodscrew in using a hammer, but it ain't right, it ain't good workmanship and in some cases could cause injury to others.

Pick the right tool for the right job.

All-In-One tools can never match the efficiency, abilities or craftsmanship possible with the good set of dedicated tools.

In the case of Band in a Box, I've noticed over the years that far too many view the program myopically, selfishly even, and thus wanting the program to only do the things that THEY use it for. And the others be damned. Believe it or not, I'd hazard a guess that far more users are using Band in a Box for learning purposes than are using it for production work.

BB has been found in every music school I've visited the past decade or so.


--Mac

Good point Mac. My friend Mark who has three music school locations is a high level pro with Biab. He told me he's used Biab since day one and he faithfully upgrades to each new version. He is fully as knowledgable as any of us here and all his teachers use Biab all the time with their students. For midi sound all he uses is the Coyote Wavetable and of course he uses the RT's for the rest. He doesn't care about high quality midi sound, he just wants a student to hear what a melody or solo part sounds like so he can help them with it. That's all.

I've mentioned to him he should start posting here, he could add a lot to these discussions but he's just not interested in that so that means the forum has no idea about how a music school owner uses Biab but you know PG certainly does because he probably has 20 teachers and all their computers have Biab on them. That's probably some sort of commercial license and he's a good customer for PG.

Multiply Mark by thousands of music schools large and small worldwide and for all we know music schools could be the single largest user base and all us individuals with all our concerns are in the minority. That would certainly shape PG's marketing priorities.

Bob

+1 on that thought. I've been horrified by some of the things I've seen put up in the wish list over the years. Not just because they seemed outside the scope of BIAB's main purpose, but because implementing those things would undoubtedly divert resources away from further development of the autoaccomaniment part of the program. A lot of what I see asked for is readily accomplished by moving BIAB files to other programs.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what you wrote, but BiaB allows one VSTi per instrument. For example, in the same song I can put a JABB upright bass on the bass track, Session Strings on the string track, Addictive Keys on the piano track, and so on.

You can also put multiple VST effects on an instrument track.

And in 2014, you can use Garritan instruments without having to worry about the mod wheel resetting the volume.

I agree with you Mac. I want BiaB to be better NOT to turn into a DAW.
That is why I said “So IF Dr. Gannon and the other fine people at PGMusic decide to write a 64 bit BiaB I HOPE they ask for suggestions. I have a couple already. One would be to open up all 16 midi channels for us to use and the other would be to allow a different VSTi on each channel.

I think it would be nice even today to have the option of adding different instruments to the five we already have via the other assigned MIDI channels. For me that would be a great option to have but I don’t think that is being selfish. It’s just my idea for a better product. Note I said option. Users who need the MIDI channels as they are now would also have that option.

Also being able to add better MIDI sound sources like ram intensive VSTis would be an improvement IMO. BiaB has made some movement in that direction by adding SampleTank. My suggestion would take that route even further.

I have the up most respect for Dr. Gannon and crew. They have put out a fantastic product that I use almost every day. It is an Autoaccompaniment program and I DON NOT WANT THAT TO CHANGE. This is one of the few companies that ask for suggestions and listens to them. Thus I add my two cents.

I do use Biab as a learning tool, both for my students and myself. There is no better music learning tool out there IMO.

Just my thoughts.

PS – I guess I lied about my last message on this thread being the last!

Plus I should add that I have the up most respect for forum members also.

Understood in the first place, my friend.

Its just that so many seem to read posts and take away, well, I'm not sure.


psst -- It's "utmost"




--Mac

Because when I buy something, it's more important that it's useful for other people, and not me.

I really do get your point. But ultimately, it's up to the PG Music to decide what direction they take their product, and the market is constantly changing. And if the product doesn't do what I need, I'm not going to buy the product.

And yes... BiaB works best as an auto-accompaniment tool. For everything else, I go to my DAW.

Good to know. Thanks for the reply.

I get myself in trouble everytime i weigh in on these things but here goes.

The problem with continuing down the path of adding into BiaB all these things that typical DAWs have like multitracks,Multiple VSTi, kitchen sinks (kidding really) is that it will end up like so many of the other programs out there. Spend 15 minutes on the cubase/sonar/logic/protools forums and you will see that they have grown to the point where they are buggy on so many systems.

When you take into consideration that every system out there is setup slightly different, it takes a lot of work to make a program "universal" BiaB is not sonar/cubase/etc you say. And you are absolutely right, no it is far different, and does 6 dozen things that those programs don't do, If you were to add all the features of Sonar per se to BiaB I would venture a bet that we would go through most likely a three or better year period of heartache. The forum would overflow with threads about how it crashes my system, blows up my car, eats my cat! you name it. Why do I say this, because those other program suffer from these very post.

Now most will at this point say well i just want one thing added! well once again you are right, but there are 3 dozen request for major features during the course of a years time. We all have sat right here and seen folks beg for this program to have so many features, that frankly darned near sank other programs like Sonar.

Now i agree that foward progress should continue, but my hope is mostly in refinement of the already in place system, and in the development of better more efficient tools for the in place stuff like super midi tracks, RTs, Rd, Artist performance tracks, loops and such.

If we want to see PG really develop a recording and VSTI/VST/Plugin rich environment please let that happen in RB. It was and always will be a DAW first , and auto-accompaniment tool second. We can add all the VSTi we want, and it seems they are headed in the direction of adding better automation tools, and if they would now concentrate on really upgrading the VST coding in the software (remember this was a DX based program just a short while ago) this system would be really unbelievable.

David, i hear ya brotha' We buy stuff because it works for us, but let's not lose sight of the fact if it is a bad thing for the majority it will set the development in backwards motion.

Anywho, I say none of this to in anyway discount anyone else's view, but I am sure none of us want this program to suffer the path of some of the other Big names out there.