Originally Posted By: Gordon Scott
Originally Posted By: AudioTrack
Totally agree with you. Even a suffix like 923a would be enough to differentiate.

Same here. I was quite shocked to find the "build number" didn't actually reflect the build.

If it isn't really a build number, then it should be be a release number or intended release number and the build number should always change whenever the software is built.

That will, of course, mean that build numbers released to the public will have larger jumps and that build numbers could become quite large.

Resetting build number to zero for the annual would be reasonable and would help stop the numbers getting huge.

PG Music historically used build numbers starting in the 600 range for 2019, 700 range for BiaB 2020, 800 range for BiaB 2021 and in the 900 range for 2022 BiaB. So if I understand correctly, I anticipate that 2023 version will have build numbers starting with a 10,000 offset.

Notwithstanding, both Matt and myself (and others) have always advocated that any change, even the slightest change to a previously released version, should similarly be accompanied by a new unique identifier. The inclusion of support for Xtra Paks 13 and XPro 3 in the public release of 923 would absolutely be considered to contribute as a significant change, and deserving of an update to the build number identifier.

This would have saved me a lot of valuable time and effort in investigating, decoding, testing and reporting.

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