The choice of development environment has little or no bearing on the resultant functionality.
Object Pascal is anything but a dated language. It has always been and is still under very active development. The latest RAD Studio is Seattle, released just a few months ago. It includes cross-platform capabilities, giving Multi-Device application support.
I understand your intentions are good, but porting to a different language won't deliver the results I think you are expecting. And certainly won't deliver anything quickly - far from it.
Could the User Interface do with some work? Well, yes. Like all active products, users expect to see regular enhancements.
BIAB & RB2025 Win.(Audiophile), Sonar Platinum, Cakewalk by Bandlab, Izotope Prod.Bundle, Roland RD-1000, Synthogy Ivory, Kontakt, Focusrite 18i20, KetronSD2, NS40M Monitors, Pioneer Active Monitors, AKG K271 Studio H'phones
If everything is in one big main unit and the GUI elements are being accessed from within the procedures which do all of the musical functions then yes it would be quite an undertaking and a nightmare to maintain.
Given the program's legacy this would be my guess.
johnjohnjohn " get the whole thing converted to a VSTi that I can use in my DAW!" that could not be hard to do as realband\data\bbw2.exe generates up the tracks then lays them in real band that is a daw - initializing accompaniment functions is starting bbw2.exe up that appears to be much the same as bb\bbw.exe band in a box.
videotrack "Object Pascal is anything but a dated language" is delphi the best to be using for this ? I just wonder why the other daw applications are using c++ and not delphi - is it the personal choice of the person programming since the 90's or is there a reason why c++ could not work for them ? is delphi easier than c++ ? there is a big forum somewhere on band in a box 64 where people are wanting a new interface rather than the dated one would delphi do this ok ? if so why is it not there yet as requested by many but the interface on the ones listed above using c++ are very modern.
videotrack "Object Pascal is anything but a dated language" is delphi the best to be using for this ? I just wonder why the other daw applications are using c++ and not delphi - is it the personal choice of the person programming since the 90's or is there a reason why c++ could not work for them ? is delphi easier than c++ ? there is a big forum somewhere on band in a box 64 where people are wanting a new interface rather than the dated one would delphi do this ok ? if so why is it not there yet as requested by many but the interface on the ones listed above using c++ are very modern.
Pieline, I think I see where you are coming from, but I really believe you don't quite grasp the programming side of things. I'm guessing that because you saw DAW's whose interfaces you liked better and noticed that they were written in C++, that the best/only way to write a good DAW is to use C++.
C++ doesn't produce better graphics or better programs than Object Pascal (Delphi). They're both high-level languages. Down in the nuts and bolts, they all utilize Graphics Objects, I/O routines, Metafiles and more that are exposed by the Windows Operating System.
Here's an analogy: An author wants to write a best seller. He can use a PC or a MAC to write it. Will the book be a better seller because he used a MAC? Of course not. It will only be as good as the author's writing style and creativity, not the editor he produced it with.
Hope this explains it more clearly.
BIAB & RB2025 Win.(Audiophile), Sonar Platinum, Cakewalk by Bandlab, Izotope Prod.Bundle, Roland RD-1000, Synthogy Ivory, Kontakt, Focusrite 18i20, KetronSD2, NS40M Monitors, Pioneer Active Monitors, AKG K271 Studio H'phones
I'm still unclear as to the reasons why they use c++ and not delphi ? - if you could give some examples of daw's that are using delphi with good interfaces and operation so I could compare and get an idea of what it is capable of it might help me to understand more than what I do. I don't think it is just about interfaces as said before there are many other problems. I'm just at a lost as to why they use C++ and not delphi.
Well, I would say you have it backwards. Go onto your DAW's forum and ask them why can't they be a slave to Biab's host?
My point is DAW's along with Biab have always been master host programs. They're not designed to be slaves.
Bob
Baloney!:) there is no need to ask a DAW to support my Kontakt instrument library because it is already designed to a standard! if PG designed the RealTracks to be a VSTi it would become something universal that would work with any DAW!
This is a brilliant idea! RTs could become as universal as MIDI and I would expect that PGMusic's sales would skyrocket!
Actually if they could produce a VSTi RT player where one would input the chords and it would generate RTs they could sell it as a separate product.
When you are at the checkout line and they ask if you found everything say "Why, are you hiding stuff?"
64 bit Win 10 Pro, the latest BiaB/RB, Roland Octa-Capture audio interface, a ton of software/hardware
Attack the new guy or welcome the new guy as there might be some truth that hurts a bit to hear ? that's why I said
""They could keep the existing band in a box how it is 32 for the older users that have been accustomed to it's interface for the last 20 years and make a new modern version that can be used like band in a box but in an audio workstation like real band in a new c++ 64 application""
Mike R "I believe that FL Studio is written in Delphi. It certainly used to be." It is strange what it is written in.
Well, I would say you have it backwards. Go onto your DAW's forum and ask them why can't they be a slave to Biab's host?
My point is DAW's along with Biab have always been master host programs. They're not designed to be slaves.
Bob
Baloney!:) there is no need to ask a DAW to support my Kontakt instrument library because it is already designed to a standard! if PG designed the RealTracks to be a VSTi it would become something universal that would work with any DAW!
This is a brilliant idea! RTs could become as universal as MIDI and I would expect that PGMusic's sales would skyrocket!
Actually if they could produce a VSTi RT player where one would input the chords and it would generate RTs they could sell it as a separate product.
In my opinion PG has one HUGE challenge and one HUGE opportunity!
The challenge is converting decades old code to something with a modern GUI abnd 64 bit. It will almost certainly require a major rewrite in logic, code, GUI, etc. Even if they accomplish this they only end up with version X of BIAB.
The opportunity is to build a VSTi version of BIAB! This would also require a large effort but they could leave out a ton a legacy features and functionality that would not be needed in a VSTi. If I could add BIAB RealTracks to individual tracks in my DAW...man oh man that would be heaven! In the pop up VSTi window there would be the ability to select a RealTrack instrument and enter chords in bars and generate/regenerate on command. Maybe the BIAB track(s) could even display chords in my DAW to serve as the "guide" track for the whole song!
This would be so cool and would instantly open up an enormous new market for PG! And they could continue selling the regular BIAB for those who love the classic interface!
Still shows delphi. What is the detector you are using to determine the code base, it might just be detecting a wrapper rather than the native code perhaps ?
FL may have changed to C++ but it certainly used to be coded in delphi for many years and has a neat and fast interface although non standard windows look and feel.
"The opportunity is to build a VSTi version of BIAB! This would also require a large effort but they could leave out a ton a legacy features and functionality that would not be needed in a VSTi. If I could add BIAB RealTracks to individual tracks in my DAW...man oh man that would be heaven! In the pop up VSTi window there would be the ability to select a RealTrack instrument and enter chords in bars and generate/regenerate on command. Maybe the BIAB track(s) could even display chords in my DAW to serve as the "guide" track for the whole song! "
What you are describing as a VST is how RB works with Biab. PGMusic can save a ton of R&D and money just by you learning RealBand and switching over to using it. Alternately, one can already click DAW Plug-in MODE in BIAB and drag ever how many files or regenerations of tracks that you want to into any DAW? What is the payoff to PGMusic to undertake such a huge effort that is at best, promoting a competitor's DAW over RealBand?
"The opportunity is to build a VSTi version of BIAB! This would also require a large effort but they could leave out a ton a legacy features and functionality that would not be needed in a VSTi. If I could add BIAB RealTracks to individual tracks in my DAW...man oh man that would be heaven! In the pop up VSTi window there would be the ability to select a RealTrack instrument and enter chords in bars and generate/regenerate on command. Maybe the BIAB track(s) could even display chords in my DAW to serve as the "guide" track for the whole song! "
What you are describing as a VST is how RB works with Biab. PGMusic can save a ton of R&D and money just by you learning RealBand and switching over to using it. Alternately, one can already click DAW Plug-in MODE in BIAB and drag ever how many files or regenerations of tracks that you want to into any DAW? What is the payoff to PGMusic to undertake such a huge effort that is at best, promoting a competitor's DAW over RealBand?
Well, first, they don't gain a single new customer by me "learning RealBand and switching over to using it"! Not one new customer there! I already use and love BIAB!
And second, let me blunt, RealBand is not a great DAW! I doubt it could even survive as a stand-alone DAW product without RealTracks. So again, very few new customers available to PG that are interested in giving up their modern 64-bit DAW for RealBand!
Third, the DAW plug-in mode you describe sounds interesting but there are so many inconsistencies and warts in BIAB that I would never bother when I can just as easily render my tracks to then use in my DAW. And again, no new customers for this feature!
So that leaves us with a new VSTi version of RealTracks. This would directly compete with huge sellers like Native and everyone else selling VSTi products. It would work in every DAW. Convincing someone to buy a new VSTi is certainly not a big task while convincing them to drop their DAW for an old one that supports RealTracks...well that is never gonna happen!
So there you have it. An almost unlimited supply of new customers who would buy a RealTracks VSTi for their DAW vs. just continuing to sell the DOS/Win3/Win95 patched up product to us old-timers (until we stop buying it of course!)
And also let me blunt, I considered going ahead in my initial comment to address the "RealBand is not a great DAW!" arguement. To be blunt again, I saw that one coming a mile away! Name a single mainstream DAW that has not undergone upgrades, rewrites and enhancements. Protools is up to version 12. Reaper did not use to be a very stable and good DAW. Sonar is ramped up Music Creator. There are folks out there making music as good as most anybody with Audacity. All of those programs are better today than they were in earlier years. Realband is getting better too. I've had Music Creator, Cool Edit, Studio One Professional, Protools 6, 7., Cubase and there have been stability or compatibility issues with each and every one of them at some point.
I didn't advance answer the RB not a great DAW for three reasons. 1. I saw it coming and decided to wait until now. 2. The post is about a VSTi version of BIAB. BIAB is not a DAW. Realband is only relevant because as poorly as you think it performs, it integrates superbly with Biab in the manner you want it to work with other DAW's as a VSTi. and is there for you to use. 3. Terms such as universal, plug & play and works with every DAW seem to be more marketing tools than absolutes. Think of the time setting everything up, drivers, asio, MME, latency, crashes, porting, firewire vs USB, USB2 vs USB3, dongles, activations, passwords and user accounts. Heaven is always just a sin away. The imagination much brighter than the reality. And the reality is that for many, the VSTi version may not be any more stable than RealBand is now.
"RealBand is not a great DAW!" arguement. To be blunt again, I saw that one coming a mile away!
cause you know it is true?
Originally Posted By: Charlie Fogle
Name a single mainstream DAW that has not undergone upgrades, rewrites and enhancements...Realband is getting better too.
not fast enough for me and the thousand of others who use more modern DAWs!
Originally Posted By: Charlie Fogle
Heaven is always just a sin away. The imagination much brighter than the reality.
Is that any reason not to dream and aim high?
Originally Posted By: Charlie Fogle
And the reality is that for many, the VSTi version may not be any more stable than RealBand is now.
Well that would be a real concern if I were PG. I have used dozens of plugins in several DAWs and for the most part they work quite well. The market would certainly not accept a RealTracks VSTi that is not stable.
My main point in suggesting a VSTi is to build on what PG has done best! Namely, RealTracks and the way they create them, time-stretch them, transpose them, integrate them into my chord progressions, etc. That is nothing short of BRILLIANT! It is far more brilliant than any DAW on the market that I have seen. It is far more brilliant than any VSTi I have used so far!
In their RealTracks, PG has something truly amazing that would set the music world on fire when compared to sample libraries where I still have to play the parts entirely! But they need a way to get this brilliance into the hands of people making music and I honestly believe yearly patches to the current GUI will never do that! On the other hand, a new VSTi version of RealTracks would be the product of the year or maybe the decade!
My main point in suggesting a VSTi is to build on what PG has done best! Namely, RealTracks and the way they create them, time-stretch them, transpose them, integrate them into my chord progressions, etc. That is nothing short of BRILLIANT! It is far more brilliant than any DAW on the market that I have seen. It is far more brilliant than any VSTi I have used so far!
In their RealTracks, PG has something truly amazing that would set the music world on fire when compared to sample libraries where I still have to play the parts entirely! But they need a way to get this brilliance into the hands of people making music and I honestly believe yearly patches to the current GUI will never do that! On the other hand, a new VSTi version of RealTracks would be the product of the year or maybe the decade!
RealTracks ARE awesome! But comparing them to a VSTi program is not a fair comparison. By definition VSTi is a sound generator and can only sound as good as the midi commands let it sound. RealTracks are a collection of audio phrases. The genius is not just the sound but the arrangement the musician follows, the recording and mixing engineers dedication to creating the right sounds AND the (BiaB) program's audio engine capability to compile the phrases into something that is both pleasing and coherent. To me that is truely magical.
Would a laser focused VSTi with the capability described above be great? You betcha'. Would it be the equal of megabucks VSTis like Kontakt? Perhaps but it would be a huge gamble for a small music company like PG Music. But, I don't think the VSTi program would be compared to another VSTi. I think it would be compared against audio loops and against loops RealTracks and a VSTi does not fare as well because loops and RealTracks both rely on audio phrases.
Compare RealTracks and BiaB against VSTi and PG Music "wins" because it is an apple versus oranges comparison. Compare RealTracks and BiaB against loops and you have a much more level match up. PG Music doesn't "win" but it doesn't lose either. They just get to compete against every other company that makes Acidized and Rex loops.
So we are all settled on a vsti version and a 64 bit c++ audio workstation version I will mark that as confirmed. The existing delphi32 version as stated will still be available for the older users and the 64 bit c++ audio workstation will also be ported to Macintosh.
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 pour Windows est disponible en Français.
Le téléchargement se fait à partir du site PG Music
Pour ceux qui auraient déjà acheté la version 2025 de Band-in-a-Box (et qui donc ont une version anglaise), il est possible de "franciser" cette version avec les patchs suivants:
Band-in-a-Box 2025 für Windows Deutsch ist verfügbar!
Die deutsche Version Band-in-a-Box® 2025 für Windows ist ab sofort verfügbar!
Alle die bereits die englische Version von Band-in-a-Box und RealBand 2024 installiert haben, finden hier die Installationsdateien für das Sprachenupdate:
Update Your Band-in-a-Box® 2025 to Build 1128 for Windows Today!
Already using Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Windows®? Download Build 1128 now from our Support Page to enjoy the latest enhancements and improvements from our team.
Already using RealBand® 2025 for Windows®? Download Build 5 now from our Support Page to ensure you have the latest enhancements and improvements from our team.
PowerTracks Pro Audio 2025 is here! This new version introduces many features, including VST3 support, the ability to load or import a .FLAC file, a reset option for track height in the Tracks window, a taller Timeline on the Notation window toolbar, new freeze buttons in the Tracks window, three toolbar modes (two rows, single row, and none), the improved Select Patch dialog with text-based search and numeric patch display, a new button in the DirectX/VST window to copy an effects group, and more!
First-time packages start at only $49. Already a PowerTracks Pro Audio user? Upgrade for as little as $29!
Video: Summary of the New Band-in-a-Box® App for iOS®
Join Tobin as he takes you on a tour of the new Band-in-a-Box® app for iOS®! Designed for musicians, singer-songwriters, and educators, this powerful tool lets you create, play, and transfer songs effortlessly on your iPhone® or iPad®—anytime, anywhere.
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.
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean