I've almost given up on the Style Picker. Most times I use a song or band to find a style I get a list where the constituents &/or the audition have little to nothing to do with "my" perception of the style.
I suspect getting additional Real Tracks to make the styles accurate would be more effective & efficient than creating additional styles that are more or less inaccurate.
Advertising additional styles is clever as well as effective as I always look/think about it but I now know it isn't going to result in accurate matches.
I half decided to buy the new styles packs but did a quick search again looking for the styles I like to write within in the 2022 package. There are styles galore & for many of my preferred things but the actual tracks within them, and sounds from them, really don't bear even a passing resemblance.
Cheers rayc "What's so funny about peace, love & understanding?" - N.Lowe
One StylePicker preview feature you might find useful is the "Play Using Chord Sheet for Song" area. This preview feature uses the style to playback your chord sheet instead of a premade demo file.
One gotcha' is it will create temporary audio files for the whole chord sheet which can eat up your time when you preview multiple styles. One way around this is to enable the 4 bar preview check box.
Enabling the 4 bar preview check box selects the first four bars of the chord sheet. These four bars likely are not the most interesting four bars of the song. Temporarily program the first four bars to mimic four bars of interest while previewing styles.
I find style demo songs rarely relate to my project. However the demo songs do highlight the strength of program features and instrument voicing.
The "Familiar Song Title" part of the SongPicker window is a relatively recent innovation. I believe it's greatest strength is to help people with little musical background find a tempo, feel and time signature that works with a well known song performance. Closely matching a well known performance arrangement has never been a strong point of Band-in-a-Box.
Here are some real life examples of the works well but not matching principle. The instrumental versions of well known songs heard in elevators (lifts) and doctor offices. Instrumental groups that cover hit songs.
I've almost given up on the Style Picker. Most times I use a song or band to find a style I get a list where the constituents &/or the audition have little to nothing to do with "my" perception of the style.
I suspect getting additional Real Tracks to make the styles accurate would be more effective & efficient than creating additional styles that are more or less inaccurate.
Advertising additional styles is clever as well as effective as I always look/think about it but I now know it isn't going to result in accurate matches.
I half decided to buy the new styles packs but did a quick search again looking for the styles I like to write within in the 2022 package. There are styles galore & for many of my preferred things but the actual tracks within them, and sounds from them, really don't bear even a passing resemblance.
Yeah, you're right about the less-than-usefulness of the song/band search feature. Every time I try it I typically get a huge list of styles that sound nothing like the song/band in question. And the 8 character filenames are not all that helpful. Even the genre tags are often bringing up lots of styles that seem not well suited for the selected genre.
About the best thing I have figured out is to listen to the style demo and if it sounds promising then demo the style with your chords. Jim's tips above might be very helpful with this effort.
As I see the song-based search, it looks for a set of simple rules that fit a song as performed by someone, not particularly to show a match to the style of that song.
In a way than seems perverse, but then if one wants to do, say, a funk or jazz version of a country song, it gives you more options to audition. Whether that's good or bad is probably in the eye of the beholder.
Jazz relative beginner, starting at a much older age than was helpful. AVL:MXE Linux; Windows 11 BIAB2025 Audiophile, a bunch of other software. Kawai MP6, Ui24R, Focusrite Saffire Pro40 and Scarletts .
A style is what it is and sounds like it sounds. It's a single component of a multi-component process to achieve closely matching and capturing the feel and groove of a song or band.
The original post mentions Using the StylPicker and filters along with searching by a band name or song title doesn't yield good results. I agree. It's too coarse and sparse to provide all the opportunities for an accurate match to a specific band or song.
More parameters are necessary for success. BIAB provides multiple tools and techniques for the user to add additional components to a BIAB style when attempting to match a style with a particular song or band. Adding a single application or combinations of a MIDI Song, Single MIDI Tracks, WAV/MP3 files/snippet sample, Loops, UserTracks and Artist Performance Tracks to an audition, allows someone to possibly get a near note perfect replication of a song or band sound from BIAB styles. That can become a template for a cover, Karaoke rendition or template for an 'in the style of' project.
Forum user Mr. Henry Clarke has several good video tutorials how he uses the ACW or MIDI Files to capture the feel of a song or band so he can use BIAB to create a cover or an original that's 'in the style' of a particular artist or song.
I've attached a screenshot showing some of the additional tools I use that some may not have tried in their workflow. These tools let me search and audition the Play over Current Chord Chart feature in the StylePicker dialog and hearing them in an 'in the style of' a specific song or band's unique sound. With these tools and techniques, I've been able to replicate accurate sound tracks for folks to perform with.
The Rolling Stones and Otis Redding were both blues/Soul genre influenced recording artists but each had their own identifiable sound. No one would mistake the Otis Redding cover of "Satisfaction" as the Rolling Stones version.
Lots of interesting stuff. I really enjoy using BIAB. I'm a little frustrated on occasion is all.
Jim, I'll try the chord sheet thing because it sounds like fun...thanks.
However when the machine pulls up a "lite pop bass" for Joy Division etc. then the limits to stylistic variation in the real tracks becomes the issue. Of course I understand the chances of having a Peter Hook style bass RT are nada and I used that example as an extreme but many styles are a case of mend & make do. Luckily I'm still able to do the bass line myself, or fumble through a guitar thing but not having a JD style drum part would kill off that idea within BIAB and send me to a drum program.
Charlie, You seem to mistake my wish for a lack of understanding of BIAB. I used to use ACW before it changed - it was a useful tool when needed. I do wish it could be more like it used to be OR the manual a little clearer on a) the changes & b) how to use it now. I don't like the Audio Edit function at all as, to me, it's neither intuitive nor a good GUI. I have a couple of other programs that work better for me. I've dabbled successfully with user tracks, my 1st option is always RDrums as many of the midi ones still sound "midi". I'm not too keen on BIAB Midi for the same reason though have had some success with Super Midi Tracks - in fact I used SMT strings, heavily rewritten, for my latest in the User Showcase as the RTs didn't fit.
I return to my point that the RTs used in styles are often not up to the style's needs.
Last edited by rayc; 07/22/2202:15 PM.
Cheers rayc "What's so funny about peace, love & understanding?" - N.Lowe
No. No mistake. I've listened to a lot of your User Showcase posts and read most of your forum comments. I know you understand BIAB and you make good use of the product. I agreed with you that the method you describe that you use give less than satisfactory results.
In my case, I frequently search and audition for "Styles that actually sound something like the style name &/or band/song title linked to it."
I simply shared some BIAB tools and techniques and BIAB tutorials I use that successfully help me quickly and reliably find these styles so that you or any user can try if you wish to. I never mention your understanding of the product. What I did do is offer suggestions of options you had made no mention of thinking you and others may find them useful.
Your response indicates you are familiar with most of the suggestions and they don't seem to work for you so you developed work arounds. That's reasonable.
(and NO i'm not trying to be a 'smartie'...just some methods i use)
imho its a catch 22 for pg, if they offered too few styles , people want more. if thousands then people want better search algos which often dont suit some folks , cos everyone is different. from my background in tech. cant please everyone. and search algos will only take one so far.
i notice that some pg users limit themselves to a certain genre or a few styles cos i guess they dont want to go thru a ton/thousands of styles. this is where things go 'pear shaped' for them and imho they miss a huge no of bb sound pictures they could use in a song. 'thars gold in thar hills pardner' lmao. i even completely ignore 'best rt's for this style' ie rt's suggested by bb. i'n not saying i know the depths of bb like charlie, but ive found over the years one needs to create ones own methods for getting best out of bb.
for example…….
once a year i pull out my trusty 3 ring binder with style comments on my fav styles. and once a year i go thru every single of the thousands of styles , including new styles, and update the binder. this way when i start a new song i go to my trusty binder and it helps me make style choices. for example even tho' i'm a 'rocker' in my binder might be a jazz style i particularly like. i do the same with instruments. in my binder are , in a separate section list after list of rt id's with comments categorized by instrument type eg acoustic guitar , or solo electric or whatever. each year i do the same for real drums including any new noting in the binder likes.
re the above i'm sure some will say 'he is nuts' or 'thats a crazy amount of work spending a week updating the stoopid binder' . to which my retort is 'i'm sorry but songs are a load of darn work'. in addition i dont have the budgets of the big 20 million dollar plus recording studios for instrument libraries etc with sometimes just one alone costing big money. particularly given the fact as i was reading recently some musos might be lucky to make 50 buks a year from streaming.
in conclusion my method above using the stoopid binder etc etc has led to the joy of getting many 'happy accidents' from bb style picker which i use extensively..
(what i do also is , once i have my song chord bb arrange down i test out a ton of styles useing stoopid binder which might lead to more happy accidents. bottom line…songs are hours n' hours of grinding work..and computer algorithms only can take one so far.
lets say i'm a new user this year to bb nd i wanna do a song ala doobies china grove and i expect to put into algorithm 'doobies china grove style//rt's//rd'..so all i have to then do is add my vocs. sorry aint gonna happen imho. i found in industry. ya gotta get down n' dirty in the weeds sometimes to get what you want. hth//ymmv//just things that work for moi and my stoopid binder..lol.) maybe my methods might help a new pg user somewhat.
happiness to all.
om
my songs....mixed for good earbuds...(fyi..my vocs on all songs..) https://soundcloud.com/alfsongs (90 songs created useing bb/rb) (lots of tips of mine in pg tips forum.)
<" ... bottom line…songs are hours n' hours of grinding work..and computer algorithms only can take one so far.
lets say i'm a new user this year to bb nd i wanna do a song ala doobies china grove and i expect to put into algorithm 'doobies china grove style//rt's//rd'..so all i have to then do is add my vocs. sorry aint gonna happen imho."> ↑ I think you're spot on except for this comment.
Whether one's attempting to make a unique cover, Karaoke track or accurate backing track, doing a song 'in the style of' or a 'nearly an exact sounding rendition', BIAB has techniques and tools and features to accomplish this in minutes, not hours.
For those that may have an interest in how to do this in BIAB, watch these videos by BIAB user, Henry Clarke or check out Joanne Cooper's web site. She also had a tutorial to do this.
In his video, he uses the drums and once he's located a style that works with the drums, he replaces the midi drums with a close RealDrums track and has an All RealTracks version of the song. (Note: Although there's a new bug in BIAB that causes Mr. Henry's exact method to not work correctly, PG Staff is aware of the bug and state a fix is in the works. Also, there's a work around that issue if you want to follow his instructions. And there's another method to do the same thing that avoids the move/copy command with the bug.)
Here's a link to a backing track I created in the 2017 version of BIAB of the Doobie Brothers "Listen to the Music" by combining a MIDI File, RealStyle and an audio file.
I watched the Henry video and the Doobie backing - thanks.
Henry's system is, more or less, what I do when I'm working from a Midi file...something I do very occasionally when doing a close style copy. HOWEVER it does, hugely, depend on the quality of the midi writing.
When auditioning the real tracks in the style he opted for Henry was listening to both the midi & RD tracks together...then said the drums were busy. Well, if they aren't identical they would sound "busy". Perhaps this was an error and not his usual process. It's probably problematic for new users to hear the drums being referred to as the melody as well but these are small things in the larger scheme. I did learn about splitting the midi though...pity that's the part that BIAB is causing grief with at present.
More "work arounds" that, in some ways, reinforce my OP. BIAB is pretty flexible and being able to track some stuff expands the potential enormously as well as removing some of the blandness that seems to haunt styles.
Cheers rayc "What's so funny about peace, love & understanding?" - N.Lowe
I've found the "find song" feature to be utterly pointless. Not once has it ever found a style that is even close to being remotely similar. The crazy thing is I can often find a style, that doesn't come up in the list, that is a far closer match. Unfortunately, manual search is just so unnecessarily difficult and time consuming.
Trying to find suitable styles and realtracks in BIAB is the single worst thing that lets this software down the most. It follows no logic and is just bad from start to finish. I thought the newer style picker might improve things but I actually find it worse than the old one in some respects.
To improve things instantly would be to simply label everything appropriately and allow the filter to actually "filter". Not "here's 30 styles that fit your search requirements plus another 200 which are as unrelated as possible - just adding noise and making sorting and further drilling down such a chore that you can't be bothered.
If I type "rock" I want to only see rock in the category list, if I want "blues" ... etc. I can then dig further by sorting feel, or tempo etc. None if this is possible in BIAB.
I generally audition styles manually to select one that fits the genre I require, using the category filters. Finding a style from inputting a song title rarely gets me in the ballpark.
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
Around 2014-15 when there were likely 1200-1600 less styles and a thousand less RealTracks, this was a common complaint on the forum. Back then, as it is still today, the forum blamed the StylePicker and the generic and bland RealTracks. Late one Sunday night the discussion turned to BIAB's StylePicker couldn't even produce a particular classic rock guitar song. Dr. Gannon was monitoring the forum that night and joined the conversation and quickly located a style, a guitar soloist RealTrack and completed a chord sheet that rendered a song he posted for the forum discussion. No cutting/pasting. Just a straight forward, stock RealStyle with a Solo guitar...
As I recall, at that time, no forum member had been able to successfully find a style that fit this particular song. Sound familiar?
RayC: "... the audition have little to nothing to do with "my" perception of the style. ... There are styles galore & for many of my preferred things but the actual tracks within them, and sounds from them, really don't bear even a passing resemblance."
JohnJohnJohn: "Every time I try it I typically get a huge list of styles that sound nothing like the song/band in question."
Lee N: "Not once has it ever found a style that is even close to being remotely similar."
AudioTrack: "Finding a style from inputting a song title rarely gets me in the ballpark."
Furry: "totally agree with this post. I wasted hundreds of hours over the years and seldom got rewarded. "
MarioD: "Same here!"
Shlind: "And here! I have wasted so much time over this."
This isn't about anyone's opinion. My point is today, as opposed to back then, there's thousands more Styles and RealTracks. The StylePicker has been given a major overhaul and upgrade. Therefore, why can't the StylePicker and RealTracks find a stock Style that is remotely similar, in the ballpark song without wasting hundreds of hours?
My take away from Dr. Gannon's post long ago was because one can't do something, doesn't mean it can't be done. Meaning forum users weren't accessing and using all of the tools, features and processes BIAB provided to get the results they were seeking. Dr. Gannon posted an example he presented as an acceptable resemblance to the style and song in question.
I happened to save Dr. Gannon's audio file from that discussion. Dr. Gannon produced his example in minutes using a stock style with a Soloist RealTrack and using the StylePicker filters and the 'Play over current chord chart' feature.
He didn't use the ACW, MIDI, an Artist Performance Track or a User Track. He didn't edit tracks.
How do you folks think Dr. Gannon's example song compares to sounding similar to the song in question? Is it in the ballpark?
If you achieved his same result from a StylePicker search today, would it be a waste of time?
AudioTrack: "Finding a style from inputting a song title rarely gets me in the ballpark."
Charlie, I appreciate you quoting me, but it's unfair and unreasonable to selectively quote only a fragment of my statement. My statement explained my technique in full: "I generally audition styles manually to select one that fits the genre I require, using the category filters. Finding a style from inputting a song title rarely gets me in the ballpark."
I can use the program whichever way I choose, and I can also make a fair statement about the methods I choose and why I choose them.
Your selectivity in only quoting a fragment of my total comment is quite unreasonable and could easily be taken out of context, which appears to have been the objective in such quoting.
Trevor
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 think it would be really useful to have a Video “step by step demo” on how to go about to set up a best match in BIAB for the feel of each of the two songs: Otis Redding cover of “Satisfaction” and the Rolling Stones version as mentioned in one of the posts above. The video to show each step from start to finish for each song with playback from each step so the viewer can see, hear and understand the impact of each step from start to finish, and also to see how close it gets.
There seems to a lot posts on this issue. Maybe PG Music could include such a video, it might clear out many questions relating to a workable workflow for this.
BIAB 2025, Studio One 7 Pro, Song Master Pro, Win11 Home. i7-9700K CPU, 32GB, ESI MAYA44eX, Guitar Pro 8, Transcribe, (EZKeys2, EZD3, SD3, EZBass, EZMix3) Amateur: fiddle, guitar, vocal, beginner on bass.
<< I can use the program whichever way I choose, and I can also make a fair statement about the methods I choose and why I choose them. >>
Absolutely! And so can each other poster quoted. Your quote and each of the other quotes are an unaltered complete sentence stating the results returned using the current or past StylePickers to find "Styles that actually sound something like the style name &/or band/song title linked to it."
So if you're saying in context, the method you choose to search "Finding a style from inputting a song title rarely gets me in the ballpark." isn't the result you meant. Post a correction. I merely quoted exactly the 'results' you and the others claim which clearly the results posted now are in context to my post of the similarities between 2014-15 and now.
Your method is different from all of the other posters methods and each of their methods is different from each of the others methods. All of you state similar 'results'. My context for your quote was the similar 'results' obtained. Your post and the others are available in their complete text as each of you initially posted for any reader to decide for themselves the context of how the results are reached.
The objective of my post is that posters today, seven or eight years in the future from a previous post with the same issue appears to yield the same poor 'results' even though PG Music upgraded and overhauled the StylePicker and adding thousands of new styles and RealTracks. I attached Dr. Gannon's example from the past post and asked that as clear example of a specific song, genre, title and band, if it was in the ballpark, similar resemblance.
Regardless of your response Charlie, you selectively only chose to publish one sentence from my two sentence comment. The other sentence was equally important to maintain the context of my statement. You should have included it if you intended to objectively maintain context.
I was objective and discussed both methods that I use.
Yes, of course there will be times when suitable styles can be found. You cited one event yourself.
Sigh...
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
XPro and Xtra Styles PAKs Special Extended Until August 31st!
XPro & Xtra Styles PAKs Special Extended Until August 31st!
The XPro Styles PAKs and Xtra Styles PAKs special offers are now available until August 31st at 11:59pm PDT!
Ready to take your Band-in-a-Box® 2025 experience to the next level? Now’s the perfect time! Expand your style library with XPro and Xtra Styles PAKs—packed with a wide variety of genres to inspire your next musical creation.
What are XPro Styles and Xtra Styles PAKs?
XPro Styles PAKs are styles that work with any version (Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition) of Band-in-a-Box® 2025 (or higher). XPro Styles PAKS 1-9 includes 900 styles!
Xtra Styles PAKs are styles that work with the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box® 2025 (or higher). With over 3,500 styles (and 35 MIDI styles) included in Xtra Styles PAKs 1-20, the possibilities are endless!
Get the XPro Styles PAKs 1 - 9 for only $29 ea (Reg. $49 ea), or get them all in the XPro Styles PAK Bundle for only $149 (reg. $299)! Listen to demos and order now! For Windows or for Mac.
Note: XPro Styles PAKs require Band-in-a-Box® 2025 or higher and are compatible with ANY package, including the Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, and Audiophile Edition.
Get Xtra Styles PAKs 1 - 20 are on special for only $29 each (reg $49), or get all 19 PAKs for $199 (reg $399)! Listen to demos and order now! For Windows or for Mac.
Note: The Xtra Styles require the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box®. (Xtra Styles PAK 19 requires the 2025 or higher UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition. They will not work with the Pro or MegaPAK version because they need the RealTracks from the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition.
Don’t miss this chance to supercharge your Band-in-a-Box setup—at a great price!
Mac 2025 Special Upgrade Offers Extended Until August 15th!
It's not too late to upgrade to Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac® and save! We've extended our special until August 15, 2025!
We've added many major new features to Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac®, including advanced AI tools like the amazing BB Stem Splitter and AI Lyrics Generator, as well as VST3 plugin support, and Equalize Temp. Plus, there’s a new one-stop MIDI Patches Picker with over 1,100 MIDI patches to choose from, all neatly categorized by GM numbers. The MultiPicker Library is enhanced with tabs for the SongPicker, MIDI Patch Picker, Chord Builder, AI Lyrics Generator, and Song Titles Browser, and the tabs are organized into logical groups. The Audiophile Edition is enhanced with FLAC files , which are 60% smaller than AIFF files while maintaining identical audio quality, and now ships on a fast 1TB SSD, and much more!
Check out all the new features in Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac® here:
Purchase your Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac during our special to save up to 50% off your upgrade purchase and receive a FREE BONUS PAK of amazing new Add-ons. These include the 2025 RealCombos Booster PAK, Look Ma! More MIDI 13: Country & Americana, Instrumental Studies Set 22: 2-Hand Piano Soloing - Rhythm Changes, MIDI SuperTracks Set 44: Jazz Piano, Artist Performance Set 17: Songs with Vocals 7, Playable RealTracks Set 4, RealDrums Stems Set 7: Jazz with Mike Clark, and more!
Upgrade to the 2025 49-PAK for just $49 and add 20 Bonus Unreleased RealTracks and 20 RealStyles, FLAC Files for the 20 Bonus Unreleased RealTracks, Look Ma! More MIDI 14: SynthMaster, MIDI SuperTracks Set 45: More SynthMaster, Artist Performance Set 18: Songs with Vocals 8, and RealDrums Stems Set 8: Pop, Funk & More with Jerry Roe.
Learn more about the Bonus PAKs!
We’ve expanded the Band-in-a-Box® RealTracks library with 202 incredible new RealTracks (in sets 449-467) across Jazz, Blues, Funk, World, Pop, Rock, Country, Americana, and Praise & Worship—featuring your most requested styles!
Jazz, Blues & World (Sets 449–455):
These RealTracks includes “Soul Jazz” with Neil Swainson (bass), Mike Clark (drums), Charles Treadway (organ), Miles Black (piano), and Brent Mason (guitar). Enjoy “Requested ’60s” jazz, classic acoustic blues with Colin Linden, and more of our popular 2-handed piano soloing. Plus, a RealTracks first—Tango with bandoneon, recorded in Argentina!
Rock & Pop (Sets 456–461):
This collection includes Disco, slap bass ‘70s/‘80s pop, modern and ‘80s metal with Andy Wood, and a unique “Songwriter Potpourri” featuring Chinese folk instruments, piano, banjo, and more. You’ll also find a muted electric guitar style (a RealTracks first!) and “Producer Layered Guitar” styles for slick "produced" sound.
Country, Americana & Praise (Sets 462–467):
We’ve added new RealTracks across bro country, Americana, praise & worship, vintage country, and songwriter piano. Highlights include Brent Mason (electric guitar), Eddie Bayers (drums), Doug Jernigan (pedal steel), John Jarvis (piano), Glen Duncan (banjo, mandolin & fiddle), Mike Harrison (electric bass) and more—offering everything from modern sounds to heartfelt Americana styles
And, if you are looking for more, the 2025 49-PAK (for $49) includes an additional 20 RealTracks with exciting new sounds and genre-spanning styles. Enjoy RealTracks firsts like Chinese instruments (guzheng & dizi), the bandoneon in an authentic Argentine tango trio, and the classic “tic-tac” baritone guitar for vintage country.
You’ll also get slick ’80s metal guitar from Andy Wood, modern metal with guitarist Nico Santora, bass player Nick Schendzielos, and drummer Aaron Stechauner, more praise & worship, indie-folk, modern/bro country with Brent Mason, and “Songwriter Americana” with Johnny Hiland.
Plus, enjoy user-requested styles like Soul Jazz RealDrums, fast Celtic Strathspey guitar, and Chill Hop piano & drums!
With your version 2025 for Mac Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, Audiophile Edition or PlusPAK purchase, we'll include a Bonus PAK full of great new Add-ons FREE! Or upgrade to the 2025 49-PAK for only $49 to receive even more NEW Add-ons including 20 additional RealTracks!
These PAKs are loaded with additional add-ons to supercharge your Band-in-a-Box®!
This Free Bonus PAK includes:
The 2025 RealCombos Booster PAK:
-For Pro customers, this includes 33 new RealTracks and 65+ new RealStyles.
-For MegaPAK customers, this includes 29 new RealTracks and 45+ new RealStyles.
-For UltraPAK customers, this includes 20 new RealStyles.
Look Ma! More MIDI 13: Country & Americana
Instrumental Studies Set 22: 2-Hand Piano Soloing - Rhythm Changes
MIDI SuperTracks Set 44: Jazz Piano
Artist Performance Set 17: Songs with Vocals 7
Playable RealTracks Set 4
RealDrums Stems Set 7: Jazz with Mike Clark
SynthMaster Sounds and Styles (with audio demos)
128 GM MIDI Patch Audio Demos.
Looking for more great add-ons, then upgrade to the 2025 49-PAK for just $49 and you'll get:
20 Bonus Unreleased RealTracks and RealDrums with 20 RealStyles,
FLAC Files (lossless audio files) for the 20 Bonus Unreleased RealTracks and RealDrums
Look Ma! More MIDI 14: SynthMaster,
Instrumental Studies Set 23: More '80s Hard Rock Soloing,
MIDI SuperTracks Set 45: More SynthMaster
Artist Performance Set 18: Songs with Vocals 8
RealDrums Stems Set 8: Pop, Funk & More with Jerry Roe
New! Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Band-in-a-Box 2025 and Higher for Mac!
Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Mac & Windows Band-in-a-Box version 2025 (and higher) is here with 200 brand new RealStyles!
We're excited to bring you our latest and greatest in the all new Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Band-in-a-Box! This fresh installment is packed with 200 all-new styles spanning the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres you've come to expect, as well as the exciting inclusion of electronic styles!
In this PAK you’ll discover: Minimalist Modern Funk, New Wave Synth Pop, Hard Bop Latin Groove, Gospel Country Shuffle, Cinematic Synthwave, '60s Motown, Funky Lo-Fi Bossa, Heavy 1980s Metal, Soft Muted 12-8 Folk, J-Pop Jazz Fusion, and many more!
All the Xtra Styles PAKs 1 - 20 are on special for only $29 each (reg $49), or get all 209 PAKs for $199 (reg $399)! Order now!
Note: The Xtra Styles require the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box®. (Xtra Styles PAK 20 requires the 2025 or higher UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition. They will not work with the Pro or MegaPAK version because they need the RealTracks from the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition.
New! XPro Styles PAK 9 for Band-in-a-Box 2025 and higher for Mac!
We've just released XPro Styles PAK 9 for Mac & Windows Band-in-a-Box version 2025 (and higher) with 100 brand new RealStyles, plus 29 RealTracks/RealDrums!
We've been hard at it to bring you the latest and greatest in this 9th installment of our popular XPro Styles PAK series! Included are 75 styles spanning the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres (25 styles each) that fans have come to expect, as well as 25 styles in this volume's wildcard genre: funk & R&B!
If you're itching to get a sneak peek at what's included in XPro Styles PAK 9, here is a small helping of what you can look forward to: Funky R&B Horns, Upbeat Celtic Rock, Jazz Fusion Salsa, Gentle Indie Folk, Cool '60s Soul, Funky '70s R&B, Smooth Jazz Hip Hop, Acoustic Rockabilly Swing, Funky Reggae Dub, Dreamy Retro Latin Jazz, Retro Soul-Rock Fusion, and much more!
Special Pricing! Until July 31, 2024, all the XPro Styles PAKs 1 - 9 are on sale for only $29 ea (Reg. $49 ea), or get them all in the XPro Styles PAK Bundle for only $149 (reg. $299)! Order now!
XPro Styles PAKs require Band-in-a-Box® 2025 or higher and are compatible with ANY package, including the Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, and Audiophile Edition.
New! Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Band-in-a-Box 2025 and Higher for Windows!
Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Windows & Mac Band-in-a-Box version 2025 (and higher) is here with 200 brand new RealStyles!
We're excited to bring you our latest and greatest in the all new Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Band-in-a-Box! This fresh installment is packed with 200 all-new styles spanning the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres you've come to expect, as well as the exciting inclusion of electronic styles!
In this PAK you’ll discover: Minimalist Modern Funk, New Wave Synth Pop, Hard Bop Latin Groove, Gospel Country Shuffle, Cinematic Synthwave, '60s Motown, Funky Lo-Fi Bossa, Heavy 1980s Metal, Soft Muted 12-8 Folk, J-Pop Jazz Fusion, and many more!
All the Xtra Styles PAKs 1 - 20 are on special for only $29 each (reg $49), or get all 209 PAKs for $199 (reg $399)! Order now!
Note: The Xtra Styles require the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box®. (Xtra Styles PAK 20 requires the 2025 or higher UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition. They will not work with the Pro or MegaPAK version because they need the RealTracks from the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition.
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