< Is that a good thing or a bad thing? >



You've answered your own question. It's obviously a bad thing. The 'do it in Reaper' solution fails to accomplish the tasks requested.

With respect to the posted question, you've presented a complicated, sluggish process specific to Reaper that uses approximately 66mb of disk space to avoid creating a 3-4mb file. The process is dependent on using BIAB generated data and audio and with the power of Reaper's features, tools and the power of scripting, nothing on the list of BIAB tasks you posted apply to the post question. It does demonstrate Reaper can't edit a RealTrack as simple, quick and easy as BIAB can do them natively.

In the 2022 release, the whole idea is to not leave BIAB for a DAW because there's no longer (never was) 1,000 times more control and freedom to create tracks that are complex arrangements, not just random renders of a chord progression. Hard drive space is of no concern because BIAB projects and associated files can be stored on external storage.

The better solution is to record non-BIAB audio/midi tracks in a DAW and import those tracks into the BIAB project and take advantage of all the exclusive and unique capabilities the BIAB program.

You're correct saying the best thing about BIAB is it's wonderful content. But also it's features, tools and processes that are all contained in the singular BIAB program. Your years of struggle with RealBand is because RB has never been a full-featured BIAB product. The VST-Plugin isn't either. Reaper, Sonar, Logic, Pro-Tools, Studio One, Cakewalk, Ableton, Garageband, Audacity and all other DAWs have none of the BIAB capabilities embedded.

BIAB 2025:RB 2025, Latest builds: Dell Optiplex 7040 Desktop; Windows-10-64 bit, Intel Core i7-6700 3.4GHz CPU and 16 GB Ram Memory.