|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,085
Veteran
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,085 |
This a well written great read whether you are personally on the fence or on either side of it with this subject. Especially notice the section "The Beatles Actually Suck". And I love how she ends the article with "... But then it gets you wondering. How many insecure artists with “annoying” voices will retune themselves before you ever have a chance to fall in love?" Quite thought provoking. http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/27/3964406/seduced-by-perfect-pitch-how-auto-tune-conquered-pop-musicJosie
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,869
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,869 |
Yes, thought provoking Josie. I often cruise the news on utube, recently I have been finding that there are more videos with synthetic voices, a robot reading from a word document. We are still a little way off, but before long we shall be able to produce singers with no actual human being at all I think there is already software, I remember an offering from Yamaha that did this. Maybe a "vocalist in a box?". There is not just autotune, there is melodyne and I know Cubase does this built in.
Last edited by ZeroZero; 10/05/14 11:48 AM.
Win 11 64, Asus Rog Strix z390 mobo, 64 gig RAM, 8700k
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,673
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,673 |
Auto tune is one thing.... Melodyne is another. Apples to Oranges.
Autotune goes for the robotic "Cher" effect.
Melodyne is designed to "fix" vocals AND AUDIO, that are off pitch or out of time. And it's designed to do it and leave no artifacts behind to tell it was done. You can make it do the "Cher" effect but it's not a natural state of affairs.
I use Melodyne on ALL my vocal tracks.... not just mine, but every singer on the stuff I work on. I don't often use it on the entire track, sometimes it's just to fix one or two little places.... almost never on BGV.
SO..... my challenge to you is to pick a song of mine...any song, and point out to me the exact spot(s) where I did in fact use Melodyne Editor to fix the audio. If I can hear the artifacts in the editing, I scrap it and start over.
Yup... Dylan, Young, Jagger, would all have problems trying to start a career today. The Beatles didn't have any of the digital goodies we have. However, I heard a story that Paul would spend several days if that's what it took to get his vocals absolutely perfect....and he often doubled them in real time.
Very few people like their singing voices when they hear themselves. The common giveaway that a person is this kind of person (usually a beginner in recording) is when they come in and have FX all over their vocals in an attempt to make them sound better..... or more accurately, to hide what they perceive to be the shortcomings in their voice. 9 times out of 10, if I, or anyone else can convince them to simply sing straight up with a nice mic, their vocals sound 10000% better then covering them in FX.
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.comAdd nothing that adds nothing to the music. You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both. The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,085
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,085 |
I don't think the article was putting down anyone. I think it was very balanced showing both sides. So Herb if by "you" you mean me then I decline your challenge because... Personally, I don't mind the technology. I liked Cher's song Believe which started it all. Until it was copied so much it became boring. In fact there's a long time Country artist who shall remain nameless that since pitch corrected in the early 90's sounds 1000 percent better to me. When it's done right and with care so it doesn't suck the character, emotion and life out I think it sounds good. I think that's her point of it being so seductive - regardless of the program that's used. Best article I've seen on the subject. I thought the sign on the door in that studio she mentioned was really funny. The only thing I would've added is that there are still a few genres other than pop and country where it's more about vibe than touchups - at least according to Taxi and it's their business to know. How long that will that last is anyone's guess. Music always changes - reverb is making a comeback thank God. So who really knows what the future holds. I think a great mic makes a big difference. But I think the biggest newbie mistake is trying to sing thrown together mediocre lyrics with a boring tossed off melody that's not going to move anyone emotionally whether their voice is pitch corrected or not. JMHO. YMMV.  Josie
Last edited by Sundance; 10/05/14 08:34 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,085
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,085 |
ZZ, I don't care for the robot speakers or singers. I think they have a place for people who can't talk or sing due to a physical limitation but that's about it for my taste. I'd get bored really fast listening to music that reminds me of the automated voices that already work my nerves on the phone. Josie
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,673
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,673 |
Yes..... when Cher used AT it was fresh and cool and exciting and it sounded really good..... just like when Frampton and Walsh used the voice box..... after that, it became yesterday's news pretty quickly. Yes, I have heard AT on country records..... there was even a George Strait song with slight hints of AT on the vox.... I can just imagine THAT conversation..... I think the compromise was it was used but very lightly. As far as other folks using AT... I know that folks who dare to use AT in the Sonar forums are chastised for using it. And if there are artifacts showing.... yup, they let you know. If you've ever heard Taylor Swift live.....fingernails on a chalkboard is a nice comparison..... you know they use Melodyne on her studio stuff. This may have been Swifty's first or second studio session..... caught on tape: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ig1E9WhVi44I don't know that Melodyne could have fixed that.
Last edited by Guitarhacker; 10/06/14 04:36 AM.
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.comAdd nothing that adds nothing to the music. You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both. The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 24,080
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 24,080 |
I have Melodyne Editor that I rarely use. I prefer a good raw first or second take. I try to go for the emotion and not total perfection, you know like the good ol' days, i.e. learn your parts then record. I think a lot of AT is used due to the fact that everyone wants perfection immediately and AT gives it to them. If you are a singer or instrumentalist practice, practice, practice and then record. An occasional use of AT on a couple of bad notes on an otherwise good performance is ok but to rely on it is something else.
I tried to sing once. It was so bad that Melodyne gave me this error message "just shut your pie hole and play your guitar - I quit!"
I'm in a fitness protection program. I'm been hiding from exercise.
64 bit Win 10 Pro, the latest BiaB/RB, Roland Octa-Capture audio interface, a ton of software/hardware
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,673
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,673 |
I have Melodyne Editor that I rarely use. I prefer a good raw first or second take. I try to go for the emotion and not total perfection, you know like the good ol' days, i.e. learn your parts then record. I think a lot of AT is used due to the fact that everyone wants perfection immediately and AT gives it to them. If you are a singer or instrumentalist practice, practice, practice and then record. An occasional use of AT on a couple of bad notes on an otherwise good performance is ok but to rely on it is something else.
I tried to sing once. It was so bad that Melodyne gave me this error message "just shut your pie hole and play your guitar - I quit!"
Melodyne doesn't erase the emotion and feel.... it simply makes the track easier on the ears. One of my pet peeves is to hear a really nice instrumental bed with a singer that's slightly sharp or flat in some places. I'm fairly sensitive to pitch and can hear things that others miss. That stuff bugs me. AT is not so much about "perfection" as it is "effecting" the vocals..... Melodyne is about "perfection" in a transparent way. More that one time, I have run ME on a track, corrected a vocal to pitch and in the playback after the fix realized that "perfect" wasn't good enough. I went in and added a few cents to the note because that's what made it sound the best. Ultimately, it's about the ear, not mathematical perfection in the track. Talking about the "good old days"..... we glorify those days but in reality, the reason singers were singing raw tracks was not about the art so much as it was that they didn't have Melodyne or anything else like it back then and most of the artists were on record company defined budgets and didn't have the time or the money to spend endless hours in a studio doing retakes to get a part pitch perfect. It was a rare artist who had the luxury of huge studio budgets back in the day. So they did the take, and lived with it. My official 3 cents on the topic.....
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.comAdd nothing that adds nothing to the music. You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both. The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,815
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,815 |
... I use Melodyne on ALL my vocal tracks.... not just mine, but every singer on the stuff I work on. I don't often use it on the entire track, sometimes it's just to fix one or two little places.... almost never on BGV. ... Ha, ha -- I never (rarely) use melodyne on the lead vocal, but I always use it on my backing vocals. I really have a tough time singing harmonies in tune, so that's why I do it. I am not morally opposed to using melodyne on the lead vox, I just don't do it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,330
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,330 |
I tried to sing once. It was so bad that Melodyne gave me this error message "just shut your pie hole and play your guitar - I quit!" Ha....I can relate. Having to work solo for so long I've always been extremely self conscious of my vocals (in my case, figure of speech only) unless one likes the sound of a dull chain saw. I'm waiting for a similar prompt from soundlick. Guitarhacker: RE: Melodyne (I'm on X3) I've only tried to correct a few specific vocal bad notes on one of my BIAB tunes ( Retired on s/c, no lead axe yet) and it seems to work as I listen and hopefully I'm using is correctly. Are you saying you apply it to a whole vocal track/clip? Thanks....just curious. Carry on....
Last edited by chulaivet1966; 10/07/14 10:30 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,251
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,251 |
I’ve held off commenting on this for obvious reasons since I’ve been called a “purist” on here several times.
The article itself is well written and manages to firmly straddle the fence in regards to the use of Auto Tune, at least until the author relates a personal experience of using it with friends and family on a recording and she is amazed at how much better they all sound with the application of AT.
So is sonic perfection the goal of music, even if it’s achieved by artificial means through the electronic alteration of a bad performance in order to make it sound like a good performance?
If we accept that electronic alteration, then why should anyone bother developing the skills needed to execute a good performance? Being close to the proper pitch and time should be enough, … especially since we can fix both electronically.
After all, since a tone deaf little cutie like Taylor Swift can sell gazillions of records by using AT or another type of electronic alteration, why should we put all of the time and effort into learning to sing or play our instruments? There’s an electronic “fix” for all of our mistakes!
No more sweating those scales, chords and arpeggios! No more working on timing with that incessant CLICK-CLICK-CLICK of a metronome!
Who needs REAL musical skills when we have electronic alternatives and an ignorant populace who can’t tell the difference?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,853
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,853 |
Interesting article Josie! My thought is...use whatever you want if you like your results! And just ignore those who long for the good ol' days when all mixing boards were steam-powered! And a big "So What!" if Swift uses Melodyne! Folks around these parts have been known to use a computer program to generate their music! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
"Folks around these parts have been known to use a computer program to generate their music!" Agreed. I find it hard to grok people who embrace some technology, but denigrate other tech. In the near future, all music will be written, performed and recorded by machines. It will be technically perfect music, and with it, you will be absorbed into The Collective. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,109
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,109 |
That was an interesting article.
To put this in perspective, its worth pointing out that thousands of new products are introduced every year, and most of them don't catch on. When something catches on, its because it satisfies an unmet yearning or need. When it catches on BIG, it's because it meets multiple needs on multiple levels.. and I think that's what drives the overuse of Autotune.
I think the summary statement on the article was "It saves a ton of time"
The studio owner needs to wrap up the project and move on to the next paying job. He embraces it because he can fix more in 30 minutes with Auto tune than his clients could fix in two more weeks of session time.
The studio owner also needs to satisfy his clients. If the song sucks, they won't blame themselves, they'll blame the studio and undermine its reputation in order to justify their dog recording
The musicians embrace it because "everybody wants to go to heaven, but nobody wants to die". Everybody wants the reward without the work.
The audience accepts it because nobody really wants to hear out of tune singing.
The record companies embrace it because it's easier for them to find beautiful wannabes who can't sing than it is to find beautiful people with talent. And these days, unless you're beautiful, you don't stand a chance in pop music.
In the final analysis it has turned into an audio Ponzi scheme that nobody can afford to stop for fear it will cave in on everybody.
Bottom line, it's a trend, and all trends come and go. Talent will never completely lose out to marketing, though it certainly looks that way in the short run. The pendulum eventually goes as far as it can in one direction, then reverses.
My 2 cents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,109
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,109 |
another trend that fits into this is the proliferation of singles acts.
Like it or not, there are so many alternatives to live music that even talented people have had to get creative in order to make any money playing music. One or two people can still get gigs if they have a pleasing sound. But that puts a lot more pressure on those two people than in the old days when one person had one responsibility in the band.
A good lead guitar player who could easily hold his own in a band may find that now he also has to sing, play bass, find a way to generate drums, keyboards etc... and all that is above his pay grade.
The good musician who is a so-so singer can make a good show for an audience with just a little help. His overall contribution is much more demanding than if he just played lead, and with practice and experience he'll probably end up being a much more accomplished performer who doesn't even need autotune anymore.
Likewise, products like BIAB help flesh out the sound in ways the guitar player alone could never do. Audiences are accustomed to hearing music that's in tune. In fact, an audience of non musicians is likely to respond positively to a live performance that sounds like the same autotuned song they hear on the radio every day.
We've had this discussion many times: do we perform for ourselves or for the audience? Each person gets to decide that for him/herself. There are advantages and disadvantages to both.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
“do we perform for ourselves or for the audience?” You perform for the restaurant or bar owner, not any 'audience'. They are not interested in providing music as an art form. They are in the food and booze business. They would hire Bozo The Clown if he could sell booze.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 6,452
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 6,452 |
Pardon me for not reading all the posts in this thread. I just got back from a vacation in the Czech Republic and there is a lot to catch up on and so little time (and here I am 'wasting' some). I am anti-auto tune for a few reasons, most importantly: - It sounds bad to my ears
- There are thousands of singers out there who have practiced, worked, and honed the ability to sing in tune - auto tune allows people who cannot sing to take their jobs away - I know there isn't any fairness in the world, but it's like letting only a few athletes use steroids to beat the ones that don't
- Music is expressive because of the nuances - the god is in the details so to speak. Many of those nuances involve toying with pitch - hitting a note a little flat to express angst, or a little sharp to be bright - slowly or rapidly sliding to pitch, falling off or rising the pitch up at the end of a note, varying both the intesity and speed of vibrato - and so forth - Auto Tune takes that expression out of the music - For a great example, listen to Otis Redding sing the line "You are tired, and you want to be free" on the song I've been loving you too long. He hits "Tired" flat, gradually pulls it up almost to pitch and it expresses his pain. If he hit it perfectly it wouldn't sound like pain. I manipulate pitch on my voice, sax, guitar, synths, and even my backing tracks.
Of course it isn't going to go away any time soon (if at all), so I'll simply listen to something else. While on vacation I went to concerts by the Czech Philharmonic and the Prague Symphony orchestras and attended a Dvorak Opera with non-auto-tuned singers and a live orchestra in the pit. Real music. The auto-tune people won't get my dollars, but then, they don't need mine, it's obviously easy to fool most of the people most of the time. Insights and incites by Notes
Bob "Notes" Norton Norton Music
https://www.nortonmusic.com
100% MIDI Super-Styles recorded by live, pro, studio musicians for a live groove
& Fake Disks for MIDI and/or RealTracks
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,697
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,697 |
“Understandably, Swift isn't perfect. She fails to hold every note on key, and her vocal ability is less than impressive. But Swift was also dancing and remembering choreography. She was in a loud venue where she could barely hear herself. That's not the most conducive environment for a stellar vocal performance.” It's easy to take shots from the peanut gallery. Anyone care to post some of their own raw vocal tracks? Exactly, even the best are not perfect. I remember watching a really good concert that was part of Obama's first inauguration. One of the performers was Dianna Krall and she was way out of key yet we all know she's an awesome singer. I can only chalk that up to bad monitoring. If you can't hear yourself as a vocalist, you're dead. I also agree with the comments about saving studio time and giving an artist what they want. Most studios are not recording big names, they're recording the gazillions of wannabe's who managed to scrape up a couple grand to buy some time for a decent demo. Most need all the help they can get. Most people are not good singers. I hear that all the time with user's recordings posted here. Not going to name names but when I hear a mix where the vocal is buried, that says the person knows their singing isn't that good and they don't want it out front. Unfortunately that also says to any experienced listener that it's an amateur recording. It becomes a chicken and egg thing, people use this software to try to create a decent pro level recording yet a pro recording has the vocals right out there front and center, in your face. The user suddenly realizes their vocals don't stand up to that so they deliberately bury them in the mix which just makes the whole mix muddy and amateur sounding and voids the whole reason for using this software in the first place. 'Round and round it goes. Enter the high tech toys to try to fix that. Or... Time for some vocal coaching and lots of practice. 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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Season's Greetings!
Wishing everyone a happy, healthy holiday season—thanks for being part of our community!
The office will be closed for Christmas Day, but we will be back on Boxing Day (Dec 26th) at 6:00am PST.
Team PG
Band-in-a-Box 2026 Video: The Newly Designed Piano Roll Window
In this video, we explore the updated Piano Roll, complete with a modernized look and exciting new features. You’ll see new filtering options that make it easy to focus on specific note groups, smoother and more intuitive note entry and editing, and enhanced options for zooming, looping, and more.
Watch the video.
You can see all the 2026 videos on our forum!
Band-in-a-Box 2026 Video: AI Stems & Notes - split polyphonic audio into instruments and transcribe
This video demonstrates how to use the new AI-Notes feature together with the AI-Stems splitter, allowing you to select an audio file and have it separated into individual stems while transcribing each one to its own MIDI track. AI-Notes converts polyphonic audio—either full mixes or individual instruments—into MIDI that you can view in notation or play back instantly.
Watch the video.
You can see all the 2026 videos on our forum!
Bonus PAK and 49-PAK for Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Windows®
With your version 2026 for Windows 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)
- Android Band-in-a-Box® App (included)
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 PAKs for Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Windows®!
Video: New User Interface (GUI)
Join Tobin as he takes you on a tour of the new user interface in Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Windows®! This modern GUI redesign offers a sleek new look with updated toolbars, refreshed windows, and a smoother workflow. The brand-new side toolbar puts track selection, the MultiPicker Library, and other essential tools right at your fingertips. Plus, our upgraded Multi-View lets you layer multiple windows without overlap, giving you a highly flexible workspace. Many windows—including Tracks, Piano Roll, and more—have been redesigned for improved usability and a cleaner, more intuitive interface, and more!
Watch the video.
You can see all the 2026 videos on our forum!
Introducing XPro Styles PAK 10 – Now Available for Windows Band-in-a-Box 2025 and Higher!
We've just released XPro Styles PAK 10 for Windows & Mac Band-in-a-Box version 2025 (and higher) with 100 brand new RealStyles, plus 28 RealTracks and RealDrums!
Few things are certain in life: death, taxes, and a brand spankin’ new XPro Styles PAK! In this, the 10th edition of our XPro Styles PAK series, we’ve got 100 styles coming your way! We have the classic 25 styles each from the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres, and rounding out this volume's wildcard slot is 25 styles in the Praise & Worship genre! A wide spanning genre, you can find everything from rock, folk, country, and more underneath its umbrella. The included 28 RealTracks and RealDrums can be used with any Band-in-a-Box® 2026 (and higher) package.
Here’s just a small sampling of what you can look forward to in XPro Styles PAK 10: Soft indie folk worship songs, bumpin’ country boogies, gospel praise breaks, hard rockin’ pop, funky disco grooves, smooth Latin jazz pop, bossa nova fusion, western swing, alternative hip-hop, cool country funk, and much more!
Special offers until December 31st, 2025!
All the XPro Styles PAKs 1 - 10 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 10 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.
Introducing Xtra Styles PAK 21 – Now Available for Windows Band-in-a-Box 2025 and Higher!
Xtra Styles PAK 21 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 Xtra Styles PAK installment—the all new Xtra Styles PAK 21 for Band-in-a-Box version 2025 (and higher)!
Rejoice, one and all, for Xtra Styles PAK 21 for Band-in-a-Box® is here! We’re serving up 200 brand spankin’ new styles to delight your musical taste buds! The first three courses are the classics you’ve come to know and love, including offerings from the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres, but, not to be outdone, this year’s fourth course is bro country! A wide ranging genre, you can find everything from hip-hop, uptempo outlaw country, hard hitting rock, funk, and even electronica, all with that familiar bro country flair. The dinner bell has been rung, pickup up Xtra Styles PAK 21 today!
In this PAK you’ll discover: Energetic folk rock, raucous train beats, fast country boogies, acid jazz grooves, laid-back funky jams, a bevy of breezy jazz waltzes, calm electro funk, indie synth pop, industrial synth metal, and more bro country than could possibly fit in the back of a pickup truck!
Special offers until December 31st, 2025!
All the Xtra Styles PAKs 1 - 21 are on special for only $29 each (reg $49), or get all 21 PAKs for $199 (reg $399)! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of the Xtra Styles PAK 21.
Video: Xtra Styles PAK 21 Overview & Styles Demos: Watch now!
Note: The Xtra Styles require the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box®. (Xtra Styles PAK 21 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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums57
Topics85,428
Posts791,892
Members39,884
| |
Most Online25,754
Jan 24th, 2025
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean