Peter, just in case you heed Trevor's excellent advice and revisit this thread, I wanted to pull out one particularly good post by a 35-year old BIAB user.
Originally Posted By: Tom0016

hello users

I am not a forum user really, but read this thread with interest. As a 35-year young casual but long-time user of biab (long for me, perhaps 7-8 years now) I thought I'd chip in a perspective. I write as someone in the UK, not a formal music student but in touch with a number of people who might use BIAB as students, or otherwise be appropriate audiences.

First, I've been so attached to the program I've used it constantly, if irregularly, that I considered creating one of the 'endorsement' videos people have made. However, I realised for all my basic instinctive enthusiasm for BIAB, I felt I'd end up being tempted to implore PG to do a number of the things raised in this thread. I don't think therefore that I'll go the extent of creating a video, but will instead throw in my reflections here.

Yes, the interface is a huge 'turn-off' even as someone relatively seasoned in using it. Especially so because I come to BIAB only once every often, when I have a specific task that I often end up struggling to figure out (e.g. finding a soloist that sounds appropriate to my tune has taken me hours recently). I'll come back to my instinct for what would help, bearing in mind the needs of the different user groups.

To me, the single most glaring oversight, should PG wish to reorientate at all to a younger or unfamiliar crowd, is to explain why the program exists. While it's clear what it can do (e.g. generate backing tracks), and how is does it (e.g. amazing quality realtracks) it's not necessarily obvious WHY you'd want this particularly, it seems to me - or how in various ways the product might be useful to a keen student.

In other words, I would think the videos and other marketing don't adequately answer the question 'What's the point of this product? How will it easily make me a better guitarist/singer'? Demonstrating exciting realtracks does not achieve this goal. Another way I've heard this put is the 'what's in it for me?' test for product description - I think biab could REALLY benefit from a series of vid tutorials showing off how e.g. a guitarist could strangely turn up to a band rehearsal with a new solo already learned for some chords, or a bunch of new rhythmic ideas. For that matter, given that the prog is much a swiss army knife of assisted practice techniques, I wonder what other inventive ways other users have. Would be great to emphaise the variety and creative possibilities I presume are out there (nb. can't claim I have devised creative/advanced ideas myself, but I do find BIAB very helpful to propose ideas to bandmates for example, and this kind of application would be a far stronger selling point than new features. With due respect, I wonder if new feature videos may be even be rather boring to some new or even existing users).

My background is in publishing, both editing text and graphics, and its interesting to consider how BIAB might be approached were it a book going out to market. I'd picture:

- the text content being scrutinzed for errors and consistency
- the text being scrutinzed for ease of use
- visuals being added that enhance the experience of using the content

In BIAB, as a youngish and mobile phone orientated person, there are whole areas I avoid due to its technical language or presentation. BIAB would come back with a lot of comments from our proofreaders. Take the addition of 'Xtrastyles' in the latest version. My issue is this is not a self-evidently descriptive word. It could mean anything really, and therefore is just an arbritary label, meaning its a missed opportunity to guide the user towards a feature (e.g. 'curated realtrack combinations' would do this, albeit in an excessively wordy way).

Same goes for the way the colours and underlining is used to indicate which instruments are 'real' or MIDI, or whether they have notation. In book editing practice, simple is always preferred, and compared to the standards of iPhone and even android apps, the colours/terminology PG has added over the years actually amount to a kind of foreign dialect of software conventions. The inclusion of odd, non-musical terms in the settings menu (like 'ASIO'/'MME' for example), only further force the user to confront alien techy language; personally I've got lost on the audio settings screen more than once, and it's taken days to establish what influence 'latency' and other gremlins might be having. This, I would suggest hugely detracts from the users basic expectation that they can achieve certain goals simply (e.g. record themself soloing over a backing track). And therefore is the stuff that risks causing people to walk away.

Perhaps it's unkind, but I would describe BIAB's visual presentation as 'terrifying'. BIAB has obviously evolved through many iterations, but like any project without a finite end, it risks obscuring the original and inspired ideas behind the product. With each new year, I think, this becomes a greater risk.

For whatever it is or isn't worth, my (yes, unsolicited) recommendations would be:

(in the following sequence)

1. to consider completely suspending development of new features and commit to delivering BIABs huge existing range of possibilites in the most accessible and direct ways possible.
> This could be part product design, part reinvestment in training videos or help functions (but no referring us to the manual, please)

2. to rationalize the primary applications of the product, and reorganise buttons and menus into hierarcies around very simple and basic uses (e.g. creating a backing track, or printing a tune).

3. to commision user experience testing, and to tackle design informed by this but independent of it

4. to embed 'classic' biab into the new design, perhaps with the use of skins, as has been proposed by others.

5. this may seem rather provocative but I even wonder whether 'band in a box' remains the best name for this product. following the principle of more self-evident language, i'd think 'Realband' is now the more descriptive name, and since that product (the existing realband) is bundled, that could simply become e.g. 'Realband Sequencer'. Of course this may be marketing suicide, and alienate many. I can't really comment on that - am just wondering what title might best incite someone in a music shop to take it down from a shelf to look more closely (or by parallel, look more closely online).

This may have seemed an odd way to endorse this product, but I write this much because I think of BIAB as one of the most imaginative and unique ways individuals at home can improve the ability and enjoyment of music. Thank you if you've made it this far. I don't expect to be on the forum regularly, but hopefully the post will suggest there are at least a number of us semi-devout younger people on board. (*although underpresented in the forum, I wonder if as a group we're simply less proactive in terms of posting online).

many thanks to all involved
Tom

London, UK