PG Music Home Forums PG Music Product Forums Band-in-a-Box for Windows BIAB 2016: Do the new styles support MIDI?

Dr. Gannon are you sure about that? The packages page states that there are 2,300 MIDI stlyles in the UltraPak.

Thanx in advance for clarifying this.

Yes, please. I just upgraded to Mega because I thought that level would get me ALL of the MIDI styles.

I appreciate your generous offer to play middleman between other users and PGM, but no thanks.

I'll restate my initial comment:

I prefer to not see MIDI get left behind as RealTracks grow.

Q. When is "Mega" not mega and when is "Everything" not everything?

A. When a majority of the content is put into a bonus pack you have to pay an extra $49 for.

I realize there are some improvements in the base product, but those don't do much for me. If I bought it, it would be for the new MIDI styles, and that is mostly in the extra-cost pack.

My take:

1. I'm happy that PG has both MIDI and RTs so that people can use the tool that fits them best
2. I use both but I get much more use out of MIDI
3. I will continue to make new MIDI styles as I think you can't have too many, and my customers seem to agree

I think the Real Tracks are well done, and I'm amazed at the programming genius applied to make them work. It borders on magic.

There are times when the Real Tracks work out perfectly and I use them, there are times when I mix the RT and MIDI tracks, but most of the time I use pure MIDI myself.

So don't take the following as a reason to abandon RTs. It's not a balanced comparison, but simply a list highlighting the pros of MIDI and ignoring both the cons of MIDI and the advantages of Real Tracks

I admit, I'm not your average user so YMMV.

Why would I prefer MIDI to the actual sound of an instrument? After exporting as MIDI and importing to a MIDI sequencer (PTPro, Sonar, etc.):

• I have good MIDI sound modules that were made with samples of real instruments, so the sound is 90%-95% as good as the RTs - my favorites are the Ketron SD2 and the Edirol SD90, but there are so many more I haven't tried (I only have 7 synths and 2 hardware samplers. This gives me thousands of different instruments. Example: I can change the clean guitar sound from a generic 'clean guitar' to a Tele Rear (or front) pickup, Strat, 335, Les Paul, Electric 12 string (Ric), and dozens of others
• I can even change instruments, the piano might sound better as a Rhodes or even a jazz guitar for a particular song, the ride cymbal might sound better as a cowbell, the strings or horns as a s synth pad, etc.
• I can mix and match different BiaB styles for different parts of the songs, and if they use different instruments, I can change them so the same instrument plays both sections
• I can add song-specific licks using the very same instruments that play the other parts - no change in tone
• I can modify the endings (make them 8 bars if I like), clean up shots, make all instruments join the holds, and so on
• Transpose with zero artifacts
• Change the balance - there is a difference between recording balance and live performance balance. In live situations for all but traditional jazz it is often better to have the snare on beats 2 & 4 to be much louder than would sound good on a recording. Other dynamics should be exaggerated too
• For live performances, often the groove should be exaggerated as well, a little more swing feel, beats 2 & 4 a little more ahead or behind the beat (depending on the groove), eighth notes rushed or dragged a little more, a couple of clicks with a groove filter does wonders
• I can move things around, get rid of rolls, or swap them, make my own parts, etc.

But I like to play with Band-in-a-Box and the musical output. I like to try this and that, add this or subtract that, change this or that, and spend hours on a song. It's my favorite toy.

And I play live for a living. I also play pop/rock/country music (though I'd love to play jazz, it's difficult to make a living doing that around here). I want it to sound right for the audience, and the audience responds more to the feel of the song than they do the tone. Example 1: Good singers with bad voices like Dr. John, Stevie Nicks, John Lennon, and so many more. Example 2: The general public listened to music on 45rpm singles, cassette tapes, and today the low-fi equivalent, mp3 files.

Those are my needs, as I said, I might be a special case.

If I were recording demos for Nashville or LA, I'd probably use all Real Tracks - except for non-emulative synth parts. If I was making a record to self-publish and sell, I'd probably mix Real Tracks with MIDI tracks. For my duo backing tracks it's mostly or all MIDI sometimes with Real Tracks added.

But as I said, it's nice to have both RTs and MIDI, as they both serve different functions and it's good to use what is more appropriate and mix them when that sounds good.

While I don't use all the features of BiaB (some are for other users), It's nice to have so many tools and toys available to make music.

Thank you PG Music for providing me with my favorite computer tool and toy.

Insights and incites by Notes

Very well stated Notes. My BiaB usage pretty much matches yours. I use mostly RTs when doing clients' songs, most of which are covers they want to do for family and friends, thus I can not post them.

I use MIDI for most all of my songs for the exact same reasons that you have stated. Occasionally though I will use a RT if it fits properly.

My main concern is that if PGMusic continues to place MIDI as a kissing second cousin then other companies will take over the MIDI backing track business. There are some out there now but they are not as sophisticated as BiaB but their learning curve could be shorter as they have a company to learn from, PGMusic.

RTs are a fantastic for singers, composers and hobbyists as well as some pros, but they are not as versatile as MIDI. Note that I am in the hobbyists category. I just would like PGMusic to have as much emphasis on MIDI as they do with RTs. As we know the rest of the world works in MIDI.

Thanks for expressing my thoughts so clearly, Bob.



Still waiting to hear about the other 700 MIDI styles that "ALL" didn't include ...

I'd just lie to add a little bit to your excellent comments. First, I'm not sure who the "typical user" is for BIAB. I'm pretty sure who PGMUsic thinks it is, but I am not sure that is really correct. I know they are a small company that cannot afford to spend millions every year on market research, so this is not intended to be a criticism.

I do use BIAB in the "idealized" way -- using it as a "backup band" for a solo live performance. But that probably happens once a year. The rest of the time I play with live bands. Here are the things I REALLY use BIAB for -- and I absolutely agree it is an indispensable tool bordering on the magic:

1) Wood-shedding. That's at least 8 hours a week with some combination of BIAB songs and Jamey Aebersold tracks.

2) My own education. Studying these various styles has made me a far more complete musician. And I've only scratched the surface. Even styles I would never use in my playing or arranging, I listen to carefully. A person can never understand too much music.

3) Teaching. Repeat my point 2) for teaching younger students. I will take a simple, familiar song like "Itsy Bitsy Spider" and then put it into 8 different styles. I give the students a listening worksheet where they come up with a name for the style, identify the instruments, and try to describe what makes that style different from the others. Then we discuss/debate. BIAB is unbelievably powerful for that. These sessions might last 30 minutes, and every time, the students are 100% engaged -- because it really is magic. Music is magic. BIAB is magic.

All three of the above can work with MIDI or RT. Makes little difference.

4) I do play a duo frequently where we use a lot of MIDI. I tend to take the MIDI straight out of BIAB because I have become competent at jumps, hits, etc. My partner tends to push the MIDI into a DAW and edit it further. That has to be MIDI because he runs it through a synth live at the show and will adjust instruments and balance while we're playing.

5) My arranging work flow described above. That must be MIDI.

A final general comment, in case anybody thinks any of this is negative toward PGmusic or BIAB. In a 40+ year career, all of it was spent developing software professionally, managing software teams, doing systems engineering for hardware and software, or selling computer-based solutions. In all that time, there are only 2-1/2 software products that really amazed me. That is to say, there are thousands of really good software products, but in 99.9% of the cases, it is completely obvious how the software was developed and how its core algorithms work.

The two-1/2 exceptions are:

BIAB - From the very first version I saw until today, I am still amazed, and still don't fully understand the "intelligence" it contains.

Melodyne - Another amazing program. With Melodyne, I do understand the algorithms at a conceptual level, but the results are still amazing.

And the half-magic program is Izotope RX4 (or RX5 is now available). I understand it, but it is still genius.

You're career in music is pretty much mine too. All I was trying to say earlier is in the eight years I've been on this forum, the "average" user hates midi and the reason is all they've ever used for sound is the built in Windows synth and if they decide to purchase something like the Forte Dxi for $40 midi still sounds pretty weak especially the drums. They think that's what midi sounds like and simply do not know any better.

The percentage of folks who seem to really care about it might be five? That's just a guess but I'm telling you it's pretty low. But that's just what I've observed on this forum and of course the forum doesn't necessarily reflect the whole user base. That info is in PG's hands and since they've put all the emphasis on the RT's that seems to answer the question as to what they think the users want. This is just common sense analysis to me but of course...YMMV.

Also, nothing has been taken away in all these new versions as far as midi functionality is concerned. It's true they haven't expanded it any but everything from past years is still there. If you need more styles than what is already there then talk to Bob Norton. He has tons of very good ones.

Bob

Bump on this as I want to be sure that I get all of the MIDI styles.

I assumed that the 2000 and the 3000 numbers were both just approximations and whatever is shipped with Mega, Ultra and Everything is the full set, whatever number that happens to be.

But if there are another 1000 MIDI styles that slipped through the cracks, I'd like to have those also.

I am curious as the below is what I followed when I order my upgrade:




Are there are 700 more style somewhere? Surely Mr Gannon knows how many MIDI styles there are.

Being kind of dopey (I realise now!) that I sometimes have my Voicelive 2 harmonizing on midi rather than on my guitar, but actually, I only use Realtracks in my backing tracks. It seems to harmonize quite well, so I now assume that it was using the realcharts that load simultaneously because it can't use the realtracks. Is that correct? My question, how many Realtracks have these Realcharts? Can I rely on them? Sometimes I just want to sing and not strum or I'm soloing on guitar with vocals etc. I can get the Voicelive 2 to harmonize on audio, but I don't think it would be very good. I guess it would free up the midi for program changes etc.

Interesting thread, but I'm too impatient and useless for midi (1980's midi and I became acquainted!) except for playing sounds on a midi guitar, DX7s and Korgs etc. I guess I'm a Realtacks baby

Do a search on your entire c:\bb folder, you'll find .sty files residing in some subfolders like the c:\bb\CLASFAKE folder if you have the Classical FakeBook (77 styles to be precise).

2,300 is a conservative estimate - all told more like 3,000 MIDI styles. Most of the extra ones between 2,300 and 3,000 are just variations or utility styles. The stylepicker finds 2,619 MIDI only styles in c:\bb, and the rest are outside the c:\bb folder (as above)

I was right, you do know

My picker shows 2609 MIDI styles, 2699 all.

Thanx Peter.

IF we copy those hidden styles to the C:\BB folder will the stylepicker find them? I would think so but I just want to be sure.

I must be dense this morning. Maybe I shouldn't post before my first cup of coffee. But I can't find any reference "as above".

Are you saying there are another ~400 MIDI styles that don't show up in the style picker? Where are they? Why aren't they under the style picker?

I believe, Mario, that if you copy those .sty files to main folder, StylePicker should find them, but I'm guessing they'll show up as user styles with no memo or demo file. But at least they will be pickable.