Suppose you are happy with the BIAB arrangement and you export the tracks to your DAW. For each track (bass, guitar, piano, etc), you may add your favorite VST instruments.
But will you double the tracks in order to have a fuller sound? I mean, should you duplicate so that you will have two tracks of piano, two tracks of drum, etc?
I will do it for lead vox, rhythm guitar, and occasionally backup vox if I am the one singing. Some artists use doubling as an in-your-face effect, but I tend to keep it subtle.
"My primary musical instrument is the personal computer."
I've done it on a part or two to emphasize a part. I've also detuned or put a little chorus on the doubled one and that can change the sound, sometimes making it sound fatter, sometimes just weird - experimentation is the key for me.
But I think if you did it to all the parts, it would sound pretty much the same.
I'm also talking MIDI here, I do most of my editing with MIDI because (1) it's easier to edit MIDI and (2) there are hundreds of edits you can perform on MIDI that you just can't do with audio yet.
Mostly.......NO! Doubling a track in that manner does nothing except make it louder and risk other issues.
You can use compression and level control to get a louder sound if that's what you're after.
But before you do anything..... ask yourself and answer this question. What do you mean when you say you want a "FULLER SOUND"? Is there anything wrong with the version you have with one track each? Does it sound OK or does it lack something? Could the problem be solved another way...such as with EQ and compression?
Figure out what it's lacking first. There may be a way to get what you want... in fact there is....and you don't need to double to get it.
Having said that: doubling, tripling, and more (aka layering) is a useful tool when it's used correctly and in the proper places. Doubling everything in the project is NOT the right way to get it. In fact, that will simply cause other issues to occur. I use it on vox and acoustic guitars..... but I NEVER copy a track to do it. I always ALWAYS record unique tracks for each track I want in the mix. Levels and EQ are critical to a successful double vs something that isn't.
Most of the lead vocals in my projects are triples..... main in the center up nice and loud... 2 additional leads, lower, and panned 100% L/R. In fact, you probably can't hear the other lower vox in the mix..... but in a soloed state.... they are audible. That's how it works best. The subconscious hears them and to you....they simply sound a bit fatter, or fuller.
Often, the desire to double the tracks to get a "fuller sound" is really a band-aide solution on something else that's really the problem. You should be able to get a nice full sound with relatively few instrument tracks and none of them doubled. If you can't..... you need to find out why you can't and work on that problem.
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.com Add 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.
Doubling is a fine technique to use if it helps you accomplish the sound you are looking for!
I have used it on vocal tracks to "thicken" my voice. And I have used it when I want a background of something like a strummed acoustic panned both right and left.
Of course you have to do a little more than just double the track...mainly add some delay to the doubled track. Check out these articles for more info,
If you are using BiaB, there is a special feature working behind the scenes to deal with the issue of doubling parts. It actually makes completely different parts, it doesn't try to just change one slightly from the other. This is for Realtracks.
If you put 2 or more of the identical Realtracks on separate tracks, BiaB will automatically generate different parts for each of them, so that there is no time in the arrangement that it would be playing the same thing - because if it did, it would sound like one player instead of two.
There is no setting needed for this, it just works, as long as you are generating them all at once by pressing the play button. We call this feature same-but-different.
Fwiw, in our tests, attempting to generate different parts by just offsetting the timing of an audio track, or panning doesn't work, and it often sounds worse. That's why we made the same-but-different feature, so that you actually hear 2 different parts play at all times.
If you are using BiaB, there is a special feature working behind the scenes to deal with the issue of doubling parts. It actually makes completely different parts, it doesn't try to just change one slightly from the other. This is for Realtracks.
If you out 2 or more of the identical Realtracks on separate tracks, BiaB will automatically generate different parts for each of them, so that there is no time in the arrangement that it would be playing the same thing - because if it did, it would sound like one player instead of two.
There is no setting needed for this, it just works, as long as you are generating them all at once by pressing the play button. We call this feature same-but-different.
Fwiw, in our tests, attempting to generate different parts by just offsetting the timing of an audio track, or panning doesn't work, and it often sounds worse. That's why we made the same-but-different feature, so that you actually hear 2 different parts play at all times.
This is really handy for the rhythm tracks. Use this on the acoustic guitars for example, in the background of the song. I simply set up 2 tracks and record my Taylor guitar 2 times playing the same thing. RB will also duplicate this quite easily and well.
I would not advise using this on a lead part for the attempted purpose of doubling the track since it does NOT play the same thing twice...... HOWEVER..... I use this unique function quite often on lead parts, not to double, but to choose segments from each part to create one awesome solo. Listen to the piano and the guitar solo in this song.
There are 3 piano parts rendered from the same piano in real band and there are 5...yes 5...count them.... 5 guitar tracks rendered from the same real band track and in Sonar, I used envelopes to allow the parts I wanted to play. The result is fills and a solo that sound like they are one simply amazing part/solo. Some of the piano fills, while very short, are in fact coming from 2 different tracks controlled by volume envelopes.
AS PeterG points out... the worst way to attempt doubling is the lazy man's way.... simply copying a track and delaying it or detuning it.... this method causes some serious phase issues as the frequency of the notes played a few milliseconds apart mix in the DAW. You get comb-filtering and that doesn't sound good. I've done it, we've all done it, it's just not the best or recommended way to do this.
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.com Add 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.
A lot of people have used double-tracking in hit records. It's an effect, and like most effects, it's probably best to use sparingly and only when it contributes something special to the song.
Here's another approach. Have you tried a BBE Sonic Maximizer? A little bit of processing with that gizmo can really liven up tracks. (they have a software plug in too).
Like most things, too much is too much.
The theory behind it is this (the way I understand their literature):
The voice coil of any loudspeaker delays the high frequencies more than the low ones. Coils resist changes in voltage. This results in the low frequencies hitting your ears first.
The BBE has a control (process) that delays the low frequencies so that they highs and lows can enter your ear in phase. Since no two voice coils are alike you use your ears to adjust the process control. Note: I find it best to adjust the BBE before equalization.
There is also a low contour that acts like the "loudness" button on an old stereo set. It boosts the presence of the low sounds, adding punch without adding mud.
I have the hardware unit on my PA set, and won't leave home without it
If you are using BiaB, there is a special feature working behind the scenes to deal with the issue of doubling parts. It actually makes completely different parts, it doesn't try to just change one slightly from the other. This is for Realtracks.
If you put 2 or more of the identical Realtracks on separate tracks, BiaB will automatically generate different parts for each of them, so that there is no time in the arrangement that it would be playing the same thing - because if it did, it would sound like one player instead of two.
There is no setting needed for this, it just works, as long as you are generating them all at once by pressing the play button. We call this feature same-but-different.
Fwiw, in our tests, attempting to generate different parts by just offsetting the timing of an audio track, or panning doesn't work, and it often sounds worse. That's why we made the same-but-different feature, so that you actually hear 2 different parts play at all times.
Peter, this is a wonderful feature of BIAB and I use it a lot!! But on a few occasions I have seen BIAB generate the exact same part for two different tracks on a few bars. In these situations I either regenerate or I export each track individually and manipulate them in my DAW. I noticed this because I had both tracks panned hard left/right and on some bars it would come back to the center as they combined! If I see it again I will save the file and send it to you. I do not think I have seen this in BIAB 2015 yet. And, as I recall it was a ukulele RealTrack in at least one case.
the worst way to attempt doubling is the lazy man's way.... simply copying a track and delaying it or detuning it.... this method causes some serious phase issues as the frequency of the notes played a few milliseconds apart mix in the DAW. You get comb-filtering and that doesn't sound good. I've done it, we've all done it, it's just not the best or recommended way to do this.
I am not sure if we are talking about the same thing here but I am talking primarily about doubling a single track for "thickening" a vocal where the singer cannot sing a double for whatever reason. In these cases this technique can work quite well.
IMHO it is silly to call a technique "lazy man's way". Did the Revolver album suffer because John and the others were "lazy" and chose to use ADT instead of actually performing doubles? If a technique helps you achieve the sound you want then use it!
I am not sure if we are talking about the same thing here but I am talking primarily about doubling a single track for "thickening" a vocal where the singer cannot sing a double for whatever reason. In these cases this technique can work quite well.
I thought that was the topic of discussion in this thread. If a singer can sing a track, certainly, they should be able to record a second (or more) track in a short time. Unless the taxi is outside honking the horn, in which case, you gotta work with what you got into that one track. I might have used this on "Give Me A Chance" because we recorded one take. I'd have to go back to the project and look to be 100% sure. The singer was not able to get back to record anther after that with her school schedule. So, yeah... sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do, or do without. When we did the original recording, I wasn't thinking about doubling the track. After the fact, I did. Too late.
Quote:
IMHO it is silly to call a technique "lazy man's way". Did the Revolver album suffer because John and the others were "lazy" and chose to use ADT instead of actually performing doubles? If a technique helps you achieve the sound you want then use it!
It is the "lazy" way to do it since doing it right means you have to take the time and make the effort to record a brand new track and get the phrasing 99.9% accurate.... vs simply doing a copy and paste then nudging the track a few milliseconds.
After all the goal of a double is NOT to have two or more audible voices but to simply make the one sound fuller, thicker, fatter. IIRC, the Beatles did use it quite a bit and it kinda became a signature sound so to speak. The Beatles invented lots of things and as a result of them being at the beginning of new concepts, had the levels set differently from what many producers use today. Not wrong, but just different...they were breaking new ground and learning about things as they went. I heard a story about Paul. It was said that he spent 2 days...and not 8 hr days, but much more than that, working in the Abby Road studio on ONE vocal track for a single song.... doubling the tracks by recording a new unique track and getting it perfect. He didn't copy it or punch it in or splice it.... he wanted it right. Beginnings of words, the consonants, the endings, the inflections.... everything had to be right.
But here's the critical thing.... while yes, absolutely, lots of hit records from every genre are using this, and have been for decades, it's critical to get it right and most folks who are using the lazy man's way to double are probably also a sure bet that in addition to being lazy, they don't really know how to get a decent double that doesn't sound obvious and have comb filtering issues in it. A good ear can almost always tell when someone is just starting out using this technique and quite often when the track is copied and nudged. I admit I have used the lazy man's double a time or two myself. Nothing's wrong with that...we all have to start somewhere and learn as we go.
Last edited by Guitarhacker; 05/14/1503:15 PM.
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.com Add 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.
I am not sure if we are talking about the same thing here but I am talking primarily about doubling a single track for "thickening" a vocal where the singer cannot sing a double for whatever reason. In these cases this technique can work quite well.
I thought that was the topic of discussion in this thread. If a singer can sing a track, certainly, they should be able to record a second (or more) track in a short time. Unless the taxi is outside honking the horn, in which case, you gotta work with what you got into that one track. I might have used this on "Give Me A Chance" because we recorded one take. I'd have to go back to the project and look to be 100% sure. The singer was not able to get back to record anther after that with her school schedule. So, yeah... sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do, or do without. When we did the original recording, I wasn't thinking about doubling the track. After the fact, I did. Too late.
Quote:
IMHO it is silly to call a technique "lazy man's way". Did the Revolver album suffer because John and the others were "lazy" and chose to use ADT instead of actually performing doubles? If a technique helps you achieve the sound you want then use it!
It is the "lazy" way to do it since doing it right means you have to take the time and make the effort to record a brand new track and get the phrasing 99.9% accurate.... vs simply doing a copy and paste then nudging the track a few milliseconds.
After all the goal of a double is NOT to have two or more audible voices but to simply make the one sound fuller, thicker, fatter. IIRC, the Beatles did use it quite a bit and it kinda became a signature sound so to speak. The Beatles invented lots of things and as a result of them being at the beginning of new concepts, had the levels set differently from what many producers use today. Not wrong, but just different...they were breaking new ground and learning about things as they went. I heard a story about Paul. It was said that he spent 2 days...and not 8 hr days, but much more than that, working in the Abby Road studio on ONE vocal track for a single song.... doubling the tracks by recording a new unique track and getting it perfect. He didn't copy it or punch it in or splice it.... he wanted it right. Beginnings of words, the consonants, the endings, the inflections.... everything had to be right.
But here's the critical thing.... while yes, absolutely, lots of hit records from every genre are using this, and have been for decades, it's critical to get it right and most folks who are using the lazy man's way to double are probably also a sure bet that in addition to being lazy, they don't really know how to get a decent double that doesn't sound obvious and have comb filtering issues in it. A good ear can almost always tell when someone is just starting out using this technique and quite often when the track is copied and nudged. I admit I have used the lazy man's double a time or two myself. Nothing's wrong with that...we all have to start somewhere and learn as we go.
Sounds like elitist BS to me! if a technique works and gets you the sound you want then by all means use it! John Lennon knew that as do thousands of others. I guess it is lazy to use pitch control or a digital reverb instead of building your own plate version? Must be really lazy to use BIAB instead of hiring studio musicians! It is always about the results, not whether you used this tool or that tool or took a route someone else considers "lazy".
Sounds like elitist BS to me! if a technique works and gets you the sound you want then by all means use it! John Lennon knew that as do thousands of others. I guess it is lazy to use pitch control or a digital reverb instead of building your own plate version? Must be really lazy to use BIAB instead of hiring studio musicians! It is always about the results, not whether you used this tool or that tool or took a route someone else considers "lazy".
That made me smile......
Yes, it's lazy when you simply copy a track to double it rather than recording it two, three, four or more times, taking the time to do it the right way when you have the option and the time to do it the right way. I don't think I have said "don't do it"....just that there is a better way to do it that takes more time, effort, and skill. It's not the easy path, but it does yield better results in the long run.
That's all.
Just as "nudge" is a tool that can line up a clip properly, pitch, reverb, and BB/RB are tools. Just as using a hammer to drive a nail is using a tool, rather then trying to use your hand or a rock..... tools make a job easier. It's not laziness to use a tool.
And if you want to use copy/paste/nudge & detune for your doubling .....all I can say to that is... be my guest. You will get out of it what you put into it.
Last edited by Guitarhacker; 05/15/1502:46 AM.
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.com Add 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.
Sounds like elitist BS to me! if a technique works and gets you the sound you want then by all means use it! John Lennon knew that as do thousands of others. I guess it is lazy to use pitch control or a digital reverb instead of building your own plate version? Must be really lazy to use BIAB instead of hiring studio musicians! It is always about the results, not whether you used this tool or that tool or took a route someone else considers "lazy".
That made me smile......
Yes, it's lazy when you simply copy a track to double it rather than recording it two, three, four or more times, taking the time to do it the right way when you have the option and the time to do it the right way. I don't think I have said "don't do it"....just that there is a better way to do it that takes more time, effort, and skill. It's not the easy path, but it does yield better results in the long run.
That's all.
Just as "nudge" is a tool that can line up a clip properly, pitch, reverb, and BB/RB are tools. Just as using a hammer to drive a nail is using a tool, rather then trying to use your hand or a rock..... tools make a job easier. It's not laziness to use a tool.
And if you want to use copy/paste/nudge & detune for your doubling .....all I can say to that is... be my guest. You will get out of it what you put into it.
Need my EBS filter for sure! You say doubling a track is lazy yet you use computer-generated backing tracks rather than hiring studio musicians! Gag at a gnat and swallow a camel much?
Everyone has their tools and techniques and shortcuts. One man's BIAB/digital reverb/ADT is another man's lazy technique. There is ALWAYS "a better way to do it" for everything in producing music (and life in general) but I choose the techniques that work for what we are trying to achieve in any given situation and ignore "authorities" who frown on such techniques. Because the end result is what I am after!!
Some do.....some talk. You talk a good game. When was the last time you posted some music you worked on?
Just wondering, because I took a few minutes to search back over 2 years to find and listen to something you actually recorded and posted to see and hear your skills in action.... sorry, but I came up empty handed.
Last edited by Guitarhacker; 05/15/1508:29 AM.
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.com Add 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.
Some do.....some talk. You talk a good game. When was the last time you posted some music you worked on?
Just wondering, because I took a few minutes to search back over 2 years to find and listen to something you actually recorded and posted to see and hear your skills in action.... sorry, but I came up empty handed.
I don't post my music here. Simple as that!
Care to elaborate on how you can say ADT is lazy while you use computer-generated backing tracks and that is not lazy? For the record, I don't think either one is lazy!
The first plug-in on ++ THIS ++ page should work. Here is a quote from the developer's page:
"ADT - Artificial Double Tracking The ADT technique was developed at Abbey Road Studios by engineers recording the Beatles in the 1960s. To free John Lennon from having to sing everything twice for real double tracking they came up with an artificial replacement: they sent the original signal to another tape machine and re-recorded it. Due to the physical distance between record and playback heads the new signal was delayed. The length of the delay depends on the tape speed (the slower the tape is running the longer it takes for the signal to travel from the record to the playback head). However, due to the machine's (small amounts of) Wow and Flutter the delay time was not fixed but varied slightly, giving an additional chorus-like effect. The ADT Plug-In takes a mono input signal and creates a stereo output. The original input signal will be output on one channel, the new ADT signal on the other. Blending the two is also possible. The Plug-In allows to control the delay time (10 - 50ms), Wow and Flutter (both with intensity in % and frequency). All values are based on the technical data of the tape machines that was originally used to create this effect."
By the way, this VST is free and is comparable to the $150(US) Waves doubler. There are 12 pages of comments on ++ THIS ++ KVR Audio forum.
You've done it again! This looks excellent. I'll have to give it a go.
It makes sense that the automatic doubling using a tape recorder is more effective than today's 'copy and paste' because of the mechanical variations that the machine naturally experiences. It's interesting to note that delay was also variable and a consequence of the electronics. Cool.
Last Chance! The Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac® Special Ends Today (May 31, 2026) at 11:59pm PDT!
Time really is running out! Save up to 50% on Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac® upgrades and receive a FREE Bonus PAK—only when you order by 11:59 PM PDT today!
We've added many major new features and new content in a redesigned Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac®!
Version 2026 introduces a modernized GUI redesign across the program, with updated toolbars, refreshed windows, smoother workflows, and a new Dark Mode option. There’s also a new side toolbar for quicker access to commonly used windows, and the new Multi-View feature lets you arrange multiple windows as layered panels without overlap, making it easier to customize your workspace.
Another exciting new addition is the amazing new AI-Notes feature, which can transcribe polyphonic audio into MIDI. View the results in notation or play them back as MIDI, and choose whether to transcribe an entire track or transcribe specific parts like drums, bass, guitars/piano, or vocals. There's over 100 new features in Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac®.
There's an amazing collection of new content too, including 202 RealTracks, new RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, “Songs with Vocals” Artist Performance Sets, Playable RealTracks Set 5, two RealDrums Stems sets, and much more!
Upgrade your Band-in-a-Box for Mac® to save up to 50% on most Band-in-a-Box® 2026 upgrade packages!
Plus, when you order your Band-in-a-Box® 2026 Mac upgrade during our special, you'll receive a Free Bonus PAK of exciting new add-ons.
If you need any help deciding which package is the best option for you, just let us know. We are here to help!
Band-in-a-Box® 2026 Mac Special Offers Extended Until May 31st!
Good news- we've extended our Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac® special offers until May 31, 2026!
Band-in-a-Box® 2026 is packed with major new features, enhancements, and an incredible lineup of new content! The program now sports a sleek, modern GUI redesign across the entire interface, including updated toolbars, refreshed windows, smoother workflows, a new dark mode option, and more. The brand-new side toolbar provides quicker access to key windows, while the new Multi-View feature lets you arrange multiple windows as layered panels without overlap, creating a flexible, clutter-free workspace. We have an amazing new “AI-Notes” feature. This transcribes polyphonic audio into MIDI so you can view it in notation or play it back as MIDI. You can transcribe an entire track (all pitched instruments and drums) or focus on individual parts like drums, bass, guitars/piano, or vocals. There's an amazing collection of new content too, including 202 RealTracks, new RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, “Songs with Vocals” Artist Performance Sets, Playable RealTracks Set 5, two RealDrums Stems sets, and much more!
There are over 100 new features in Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac®.
When you order purchase Band-in-a-Box® 2026 before 11:59 PM PDT on May 31st, you'll also receive a Free Bonus PAK packed with exciting new add-ons.
Check out the Band-in-a-Box® for Mac packages page to find the best package for you.
Today's the Last Day of the Band-in-a-Box 2026® for Mac Special!
Order before 11:59pm PDT today (May 15, 2026) to save up to 50% off your Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac® upgrade and receive a FREE Bonus PAK loaded with great new Add-ons to use with this new version!
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.
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)
One of our representatives will be happy to help you over the phone. Our hours of operation are from
6:00AM to 6:00PM PST (GMT -8) Monday thru Friday, and 8:00AM to 4:00PM PST Saturday. We are closed Sunday. You can also send us your questions via email.
One of our representatives will be happy to help you on our Live Chat or by email. Our hours of operation are from
6:00AM to 6:00PM PST (GMT -8) Monday thru Friday; 8:00AM to 4:00PM PST (GMT -8) Saturday; Closed Sunday.
Norton Music
You say doubling a track is lazy yet you use computer-generated backing tracks rather than hiring studio musicians! 
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean