PG Music Home Forums General Discussion Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production Should PG Music Plan For You To Take It To A Daw or Take It To Band-in-a-Box

If you were charged by Peter Gannon to come up with a one year, five year or ten year plan for PG Music to follow what would it be?

User Musocity +++ mentioned +++ his belief PG Music should be concentrating on the Band-in-a-Box (BiaB) plugin to support working in a DAW.

User MusicVillian states his belief +++ HERE +++ that

There is no right or wrong and both workflows can be accommodated at the present time but what about PG Music's plan for the future? Where should PG Music spend it's development resources?

RB <grin>

jim.

all my dreams are in the wishlists for rb n' bb.
so i wont bore people by repeating.lol.

whether flac or some other non wav format.. m4a i think was mentioned by DR G. particularly i would love to see rb more nimble useing such an alternative.
any solution to waiting for waveforms to draw.

the new bb 23 ive been playing with l'm really happy with the near instant genn times i'm getting.
super duper.

happiness

om

PG Music should aim mainly to stay profitable, which means developing BIAB towards where their market and customers are heading.

So no thoughts about a 1 year, 5 year or 10 year plan for PG Music?

Rharv, how should RealBand fit in PG Music's future 1, 5 or 10 years from now?

Justanolmuso should your suggestions be implemented next release, within 5 years or even later?

Peter's Garage, PG Music can solicit feedback yearly as it attends the NAMM show in California. They also have a robust international distribution network to provide marketing feedback. Assume that while PG Music is taking advantage of these resources they are also seeking input from forum members to formulate long range plans.

My experience is a one year plan has pretty specific goals while five and ten year plans are more about what resources will be needed, what improvements made and new features developed?

Jim.

1..RE….Justanolmuso should your suggestions be implemented next release, within 5 years or even later?

my answer.

as i dont know what the internals of bb/rb are at the code level…i cant address that intelligently. all i can dream is for both bb n' rb be as nimble as possible.

(note so far really pleased with how nimble bb 23 is. but i'm in early tests.)
and as you know i would love to see a lossless environment for recording//playback//mixing in both rb n' bb.

2..RE… PG generally.

i like to support the 'little guy'. i'm a 'romantic' at heart..lol.

in the pg case i'm married to a canadian beauty so i'm sorta biased to wanting to see pg's continued success as a cdn company. so i post wishes.
(a bit of levity…if asked why she chose me…she says... 'well i met the big oaf in winter and i think i had a brain freeze at the time'...lol)


overall i DO think pg should move as quickly as they can with further product development in case one of the big money daw companies decides to get into pg's market etc.
(this comment is from my time years back as a tech product mgr. ie its all strategic aspects.)

happiness.

om

There is a lot that could be changed in a 1, 5, and 10-year plans. Here are a few ideas off of the top of my head:
1-a complete rewrite that includes all time signatures, streamlined menus, and a modern interface/GUI.
2-If no rewrite is in the future then streamline menus, like how many copy and paste options do we really need?
3-Become more like other software. By that I mean things like the horizontal bar in notation, the one like all other software has, except BiaB's doesn't work. You have to click on the little arrows.
3-Have the VST include all of the options in the standalone version of BiaB and when one does MIDI it doesn't clog up your HD with an audio version. This would combine both the Mac and Win versions of BiaB.
4-If #3 is implemented then do the same with RB, thus eliminate BiaB stand-alone completely.
5-Have multiple versions of BiaB, one for MIDI including all charts and MST, one for RTs and RDs, and one for both.
6-Have chord progression templates like rock, blues, jazz, new age, etc. The templates would be various chord progressions in each genre, i.e. 12 bar blues, 16 bar blues. Choose a template and the chords in the key of C would be implemented in BiaB where you would choose a key signature and style. This might help new musicians or musicians with limited chord progression knowledge.
7-Modernize all graphics and change the name to something like The Musicians Ultimate Accompaniment Software.

FWIW, I don't see a fundamental conflict between the two views for songwriting.
If the BBPlugin does the right things in the right way, one can "stay in BiaB" whilst also being in a DAW.

Where I do see a potential conflict would be if the consequence of a DAW-centric plugin broke the way I mostly use BiaB, and the way for which I believe it was originally conceived ... as a pseudo-band for me to play along with for practice. But I reckon that would not be broken, provided the BiaB-standalone supports that use case.

Something like that—no disagreement in any case.

I have never used BIAB for my own projects—maybe, someday but not yet.

I bought it for clients who want to do vanity projects and have made a nice little side gig from it. Sometimes, projects get larger and, for that, the DAW plug-in is nice.

Although I understand why RealBand for the Mac never existed, it would have been nice for me. The DAW plug has superseded the need—sorta' kinda' but RB would still be nice to have. Not holding my breath.

Mario's suggestions are well thought out and I can see their usefulness in the long run but I don't have a real problem with the way things are — assuming that the Mac version catches up with the Win in 2023.

Mario's idea list is more like the responses I hoped for when starting this thread.

Unifying the Mac & Windows versions into one release is a great example of a goal that likely will take more than one year to implement. A good time to combine the Windows and Mac version would be during a code re-write. I can also see that as a five year goal. The two versions sharing more features each year might be a stopgap measure until a consolidated version written in new code is released.

A good example of a one year goal is to streamline menus.

I find Gordon's comment intriguing. What's the right things in the right way? What are the minimum specifications the DAW plugin should meet?

Jim,

In my opinion best approach is taken with Steinberg's Halion
Which has two components: Halion, which has very deep features and smaller brother Sonic - a light weight plugin (or standalone) that can do many things Halion can, without deep editing features.

In theory, sure BIAB can become "all in one solution" without the need of "separate" DAW, and the Plugin could be used in the 3rd party DAW of choice with less of deep features. But a lot of work needed to make BIAB a DAW like program. No matter how close it can get to DAW workflow, it is very different in many ways, so it would require different kind of thinking in making the best of DAW like features integrated well with very specific BIAB features.

Ok....

"If you were charged by Peter Gannon to come up with a one year, five year or ten year plan "

One year plan -
BIAB:
Major cleanup which can start with:
1 Start integrating non-modal pop up box menus into the workflow and eliminating those modal boxes (not leaving them as a secondary "way") An example would be current Partial regeneration Modal and Non-modal box menus.
2 Consolidation, clear wording and position (priority) of Menus
3 Addressing known long standing issues (for example 255 bar limit, working with MIDI patterns, etc.)
4 GUI. Start thinking about making elements modular. High resolution icons and Dark theme. Touch audio / midi track navigation.
5 If 255 bar limit is broken, would start development of User Track console, which would accept complete template in a single BIAB session. End goal: User Track wizard / assistant for RTs or MIDI.

Plugin:
Stability across different DAWs and Compatibility with files shared between BIAB -> Plugin and wise versa.

RTs/MIDIs: Less of what is recorded, more of what is not.


Five year plan... That is a tough one. I will Try

Most of internal code is updated:
instant RT playback
accommodation of all time signatures,
GUI is well established and accepted by most: Fully customizable, resizable and modular.
Universal picker for all creative content. A single place / librarian.
Full DAW features, with no track limit.
Changing WMAs to FLAC or similar.
Chord / structure theory assistant.
Integration with future plugins, that may include AI.
Distribute 24 bit Audio
Bug tracking system.

Plugin:
Sold as a separate entity
Instant playback
Live Arranger
Hardware Live arranger module

RTs/MIDI/styles and other content sorted in a way, so it does not create confusion.
Expanding on current idea: "What add-ons I have"

Ten year plan..... Jim this is getting hard...

Flexibility. Being able to adopt easily to people's needs, yet being able to surprise with some features not available anywhere else. Record world class musicians.

Phew... that is short of it.

I'm afraid I'm going to duck that, at least for the present, because I don't presently use BiaB as a songwriting tool.

In a way, it's for PGM and the interested users explore, distill and refine.

I don't often do 'slopey shoulders', but I make an exception here.

Staff pizza.
What more can I say that I haven't already said a couple of times over 14 years.



Why is Biab allowed to generate quick but the BBPlugin and RealBand are not allowed to do that ?
Why can't Biab tracks be opened instantly in Reaper with one click ? as it's the most easiest thing of all to implement right now.

There are some great DAWs and they have become a pretty common tool among recording musicians and songwriters. As such, putting resources into RealBand doesn't make a lot of sense. Sonar is free, Reaper is $65, and they are both great. No reason to reinvent the wheel.

I use BIAB both as a standalone and as a plugin and am glad it can do both.

It's a bit of a champaign problem that I have with the style picker. After trying to filter I still have such a giant list of styles to sort through that it takes up a lot of time. Maybe it's just a user error on my part, perhaps I am missing something.

Frankp/All.

even tho' ive loved reaper from its inception i personally dont want to see rb disappear. because it has some features i havent seen in any other daw.
(see the loooong menu in rb.) that i find v useful .
yes there are rb features i would like, and have suggested in the rb wish forum.

but lets remember rb IS free. and in fact with just a few added features imho would be the daw market leader. (maybe i'm a hopeless romantic…lol i always root for the underdog.)

yes rb is a tad 'ugly' but if one takes time to delve under the hood and really persists for some time..and develop ones own work methods there is lots to like.

i just want to see rb continue.

happiness n' have a great 2023.

om

The best way to keep RB going is donate it to an enthusiastic Delphi programmers club where lots can chip in and add these features.
PG's numero uno enthusiasm is Biab. The Plugin and RealBand are just way behind in development and love.

The combination of RealBand and BIAB because they are linked together is a set-up that is ideal for beginning a recording in RB for any live recording of instruments, vocals, backing vocals and recording multiple inputs then moving the project into BIAB for the final arrangement and then doing a final mix in RB if necessary.

The operation of RealBand and BIAB is very similar to the new hybrid stand alone mixer/recorders like the Tascam Model 12.

RustySpoon#'s answer was pretty detailed and comprehensive. I find his initial comment interesting: How does Steinberg's approach differ from what PG Music is doing with the main Band-in-a-Box program and the plugin? The main program has all available features and the plugin is light on features.

The main omission I can think of with RustySpoons 1 and 5 year plans is I didn't see anything about merging the Mac and Windows programs into a single cross platform program.

Musocity suggests pizza, track injector and more development resources for the plugin and RealBand.

FrankP seems to suggest dumping RealBand and develop the (Band-in-a-Box or plugin?) StylePicker.

Justanoldmuso wants PG Music to keep RealBand.

Charlie Fogle suggests using the combination of RealBand and Band-in-a-Box together to emulate a standalone multi-track recorder. I'm sure the Mac users would like to be able to have RealBand so they could agree.

It looks like it's tough to come up with imaginary 1, 5 and 10 year plans. Hard game to play.

Ok I'll try and restrain so post don't get deleted again.

1. Keep developing Biab but you need to look at crossplatform as too much time is wasted doing Win then doing Mac.
2. The BBPlugin needs to have all the generate code contained within it so it will become a professional VST that can be used professionally in a studio same as Toontracks. If they don't want to do this it serves no purpose as you can drag n drop from Biab, so it should be dropped.
3. RealBand I don't know where the resources will come from to do anything but a few token tweaks as there is no Mac version so it's no fair for them.

There never seems to be any open discussion from PG at all.
I'm not sure if I serve any purpose here if the things I suggest are too advanced and too far into the future. I can't really dumb my thinking down to just look at basic things and remain in that technology period.
I seem to be the only one here that post this stuff yet it's just normal stuff in other forums.
PG might be better to ask "we are looking for a way to improve such n such", then we can pitch in with solutions.
But when you give stuff out and it goes under the radar, you don't serve much purpose and are basically wasting your time here that is physically and emotionally draining if the energy goes nowhere.

What did I just say about dragging from Biab ? then I go to the Reaper forum as I posted the RT to SFZ there. Yet I'm always the bad guy.

Peter wouldn't want to pay my hourly rate, but the answer is so simple he can get it for free:
Focus on what makes you unique in the world of music software.
For the next 1, 5 and 10 years.
There are tons of DAWs you can't compete with, millions of plug-ins that don't get noticed, but only one BIAB® with RealTracks.
No (real) competition. Focus your resources on your best product. The standalone app. Stop developing the VST plugin if it ties up too many resources. Same for RealBand.

• Bring your archaic WinXP UI into the 2020s to attract younger customers
• Record RealTracks. The more the merrier. Not cheap, but a good investment for the future
• Add modern styles. Listen to Spotify to get an idea.
• Did I mention to record more RealTracks?

Jim/All..

let me give the very tiniest example of why i wish rb to carry on rather than disappear.

many times on these forums ive mentioned in passing how one needs to 'dig' to discover neat rb 'tricks'.

SO heres a very tiny example which takes no time in rb i was reminded of yesterday..
cos i take many things for granted.

SCENARIO…

1..a user has a great 144 bpm 'kickin' drum trak happening…BUT…
2..wants to reinforce it with a repeating 'thrumming' or 'throbbing' sound. (dah dee dah dee etc etc).

HOW TO DO IT.

in a traditional daw prolly one would have to paint in midi notes or go thru a midi pattern lib or use a piano roll n' copy x times etc etc…lots of alt methods. including midi kbd entry.

the following took exactly 1 minute in rb.

1..i went to the rb *.dp pattern library n' selected a repeating pattern..then…

2..instantly (blink of an eye) genned a midi drum trak for as many bars as i wanted…
in this case 90 bars… huh!! people might say..is he off his rocker…lol.
bear with me !! lol.

3..then i loaded up the new synthmaster plug in n' selected a fav patch and job done.
THROBBING TRAK accompanying the genned rd trak….BUT MORE TO COME…

4..rb has a neat 'TRANSPOSE FEATURE' ! SOOOO…

5..i kept the original 'throbber' and started experimenting with different transpositions of the throbbing midi drum trak…instantaneous in rb.
ie up or down 1 or 5 or 12 or whatever WITH synth plugged in OR a different plug in. plus in rb i got oodles of traks to experiment.

in conclusion given the above one could get v intricate 'layers' of sound n' sound pictures to reinforce the rd trak.

infinite possibilities actually of 'throbbing sounds' depending on synths n' patches n' drum patterns n' transposition combo selected.

all i'm saying is lots of tricks in rb to discover if one takes some time.
rb (like powertraks) is extremely deep re midi features.

hopefully, and given the above is but one example of many…people might see why i like rb sooo much.
in fact yonks ago i used to amaze people in big studios as to what powertraks n' then rb could do. the typical response being 'your kidding me for such low quids/bucks !!)

as ive said before tho' ive loved reaps from its inception....i dont want to see rb disappear cos it lets me do some neat things 'under the hood".

happiness to all.

om

justanoldmuso, that is a good example of a unique RealBand feature. Maybe you can post it in the +++ What RealBand Feature You Can't Live Without +++ thread.

quantum leaps
Synonyms of quantum leap
: an abrupt change, sudden increase, or dramatic advance

Track Injector was a step this way to how Biab normally works.
This was made to show how to get the Biab track sections directly in a decent DAW instantly and play the source files direct without creating consolidated wav files giving way more editing control.
If RealBand worked this way it would be a totally different story, but that horse has bolted.
There is zero reason why the BBPlugin/BBPlugin Standalone can't work this way in any DAW, ZERO.
I have shown multitrack 32bit VST's like energyXT playing many tracks and many sections in the track same way as Track Injector.
If this can't be done NOW then I suggest drop the BBPlugin as how it is now it's potential is limited by 70%.
Peter needs to get away from PGmusic and spend all day every day on other modern DAW's & VST's like mentioned by MV, only then come back to PGmusic, then quantum leaps will be seen as experiential knowledge is brought back from the future.

Either that or get away to somewhere quiet out in nature, do some fasting and meditation, and get some direct spiritual experience to open channels up for ideas and creativity to flow.
Trust me.

I see all the bumped backlogs in the wishlists.
There needs to be a better ways to implement as it seems to be harder for PG compared to other software to implement improvements.
I remember Attila from RapidComposer telling me that he spent a lot of time on the programming library to make things so easy for implementing new things on Win or Mac at the same time.
Maybe put new features on hold and just do some releases with lots of content only while you are working on new ways in the background of doing things crossplatform new language as it looks like you have zero spare time to do anything else.

JUCE is the most widely used framework for audio application and plug-in development. It is an open source C++ codebase that can be used to create standalone software on Windows, macOS, Linux, iOS and Android, as well VST, VST3, AU, AUv3, AAX and LV2 plug-ins.

JUCE allows developers to focus on the most valuable parts of their software by taking care of the differences between operating systems (both desktop and mobile) and plug-in formats. With JUCE’s library of digital audio processing (DSP) building blocks you can quickly prototype and release native applications and plug-ins with a consistent user experience across all supported platforms. Using JUCE also future-proofs your products against operating system and plug-in host updates.

Operating System Compatibility
JUCE is a cross platform framework allowing a single codebase to compile to native applications and plug-ins with the same user experience on Windows, macOS, Linux...

Audio Software & Plug-in Compatibility
JUCE makes it easy to create both standalone audio applications or plug-ins that can be loaded inside digital audio workstations (DAWs) like Logic, Live, Pro Tools, FL Studio or Cubase. A single JUCE project can be used to create VST, VST3, AU, AUv3, AAX and LV2 plug-ins from the same source code, and also provides the functionality required to host these plug-in formats in your own software.

Audio Processing & MIDI
JUCE provides an abstraction for processing audio samples and MIDI from the native audio devices on each platform or a host DAW. With JUCE’s library of digital signal processing (DSP) building blocks you can rapidly prototype and deploy different audio effects, filters, instruments and generators.

User Interface & Graphics
JUCE provides a versatile UI abstraction that can run on any platform, with the option of hardware acceleration via OpenGL. JUCE handles the rendering of 2D and 3D graphics, and a selection of image formats and fonts. All JUCE UI widgets can be themed, allowing you to have a consistent user experience across multiple different products and platforms.

Are you sure about that? Where is the download link for a free Realband without buying BIAB?


I'll take a hit off of whatever you are smokin'!

This! This right here is 100% correct!

I'd kill Realband immediately.

I'd kill the plugin which was a great concept that is still not implemented properly several years on.

I recently referred a friend to BIAB (he then bought UltraPak) and I felt compelled in advance to inform him that 1) RealTracks are the absolute best thing to ever hit music software and the single reason to run don't walk to buy this product immediately and 2) this is one of the most out of date, hard to use, buggiest pieces of software you'll see among modern programs.

It is a damn shame that the sheer BRILLIANCE of RealTracks are buried in this mess.

The whole 49 new features marketing nonsense convolutes and sometimes even breaks the product annually and we, the customers, finish the beta testing until they redirect efforts to the Mac version.

And there is always someone who will point out how BIAB can do anything if only you will go through a Rube Goldberg series of actions. But that ain't fun at all! And it sucks the whole creative energy out of you while you are trying to make something cool! I actually enjoy using Reaper. I love using EZ Drummer 3. There are countless other programs out there that are fun to use and that aspect seems to be lost here!

So, after all my complaints, why do I even use BIAB? Simple! Peter and his team created something magical with RealTracks. Something not yet available anywhere else!

But it may not be long before companies like Toontrack figure out that a bundle of their EZ Drums, EZ Keys, EZ Bass, and some future guitar product is essentially BIAB!

I find the user interface of BIAB to be somewhat clunky and dated, but aside from a short time with Audacity, I started out using Cakewalk Sonar and eventually moved to Studio One.

What I want from PG Music and what I LOVE are the Real Tracks and the ability to create a song with BIAB. I do use RB to open a BIAB Song File and to generate multiple instances of the Real Tracks I want, but once I have all of those wav files exported to a folder I move to Studio One.


So, in answer to the subject line question, PG Music should plan for both users like me and for users that only use BIAB and RB for their productions.

JohnJohnJohn.

Tthere are things i would like in rb n' bb.

but at the same time i remind myself that i must be fair cos ive been on the other side of the fence dealing with a user base….and am aware of the various challenges for developers.

I also remind myself that the bb n' rb combo starts at 120 bucks.

https://www.pgmusic.com/bbwin.packages.pro.htm

with greatest respect J3 if one looks at the specs of above (with rb) plus consider that lots of people would like to do songs starting at a cheap price…the above is a great deal imho.

Do you know a better deal on the market that has so many featuresn/content ?
cos i dont mate at that price.

i look at various competitors products/features and their user forums and with any product one will see features that users would like and sometimes problems in use.
pg isnt alone in this.

when i was 'on the other side of the fence' we labored mightly to achieve a happy user base.
you have no idea how many sleepless nights...lol.
but it's the 'nature of software' that someone's needs wont be met. i'd like a buck for each time a user said to me 'why did you implement freds feature before mine'.

Do I get frustrated sometimes ? sure mate…but then i remind myself of all these great features/tools we have these days…and the above comments.

i'm just trying to be fair..
do i tear my hair out sometimes ? sure i do...but with various music software ive teared my hair out also and said to the pc 'why the hey did they do that feature that way' ? imho doing songs is work and involves lots of challenges no matter ones chosen tools.


if anyone on these forums thinks being a developer is easy ...take programming courses in C++ and assembler and dsp routines n' dealing with API routines to see first hand the challenges for developers of music production software..cos it aint trivial imho....and it will give one a feel for what challenges music software developers face.


happiness n' have a great 2023 John.

om

My observations come from two perspectives, 1) I'm a full-time professional software dev since 1994 and 2) I'm a demanding software user for even longer than that!

There is great software. And there is good software. You'd be hard pressed to find any great music software out there that has as old and quirky and convoluted UX as BIAB. And this is not news. We all know it.

Yet, at the same time, if you ignore the dated Win XP interface and convoluted menus and dialog windows, under the hood BIAB is truly GREAT software! The RealTracks and how the software assembles them is truly BRILLIANT! Almost beyond belief how great this aspect of BIAB is. And that is why I continue to use it and recommend it 11 years and counting! But there is no excuse for how out of date the UX is. "Software is hard" just don't cut it in 2023!

JohnJohnJohn.

I can't disagree with your gui comments n' i DO get what your saying.

but STILL its a unique great product.

I would be interested to see a graphic from you showing the gui that you would like to see.
(i'm useless at graphics cos i'm vision impaired..but i love some of MCitys graphic examples.)
maybe in the wishlist ?? maybe the pg devs will implement it.
if its fantastic i'll be the first to send you huge kudos.

as you know as your a dev…one of the challenges is how to present an app with lots of features….for example you mentioned menus. also maybe show how you would like the menus/features presented ?

from my experience with users menus are v difficult to get agreements on.
cos what one user might like…others might not.
(in fact ive seen in the past huge differences//arguments..)

we used to have user 'roundtables' and even FINALLY (as all good devs do) get users sign off's on interface designs/features….and in app features. but after getting into heavy coding STill the 'upper ups' would want changes n' waste a lot of coding time.

what do you think of user defined menus ?? so users can customise gui's n' menus to their individual needs ?? ive seen that done in the past to keep all users happy.


happiness n' have a great 2023 John.

om

This would be an extremely tough project to design. Based on what we know (or think we know) it seems like a rewrite from the ground up would be in order but that might be too large of a project for a company of PGM's size and skillset.

After decades of bolting on new features in a declining dev tool like Delphi Object Pascal this might warrant a reassessment of framework to use but again this sort of change might be too much. Don't get me wrong, as I understand it Delphi is still viable but the tool's current owner is more focused on C++ these days and there is a declining number of qualified programmers for Object Pascal.

I would def agree with your idea to have focus groups to streamline the UX substantially.

Before that even starts though they need to review everything the program does and prune away all of the fluff they've added over the years. For example, does BIAB really need a metronome? And if it does couldn't an optional plug-in approach for this sort of add-on serve to reduce complexity?

After the product functionality is fully outlined then work could begin on improving, modernizing and standardizing all of the menus, toolbars and popup dialogs.

That is only the start. It would be an enormous project and I understand why they've not attempted it.

They have to keep their company afloat while they do this and I would assume their income is very much dependent on the December and mid-year upgrade sales.

So how could this be done? This is only my own admittedly uninformed (at least regarding BIAB) opinion of one possible admittedly incomplete approach!

Quietly suspend further development of Realband and BIAB plugin to use those resources elsewhere.

Assign a small tiger team to start the redesign project and perhaps include several savvy customers who can make valid contributions (without simply poking the eyes like I'm doing right now!) Also include someone from marketing, customer service and support to balance the team with real-world experiences.

Prune heavy-handedly! Consider adding back in certain features later as add-ons to allow the basic program to be developed.

Study modern apps from companies like Toontrack, iZotope and Native as well as the popular DAWs that PGM customers already use.

Steal cool features like crazy from those products!

Stay with Delphi and
retain as much of the Object Pascal core as possible so the crown jewels (RealTracks) remain safe and sound.

Implement a completely new UI using modern standards for every toolbar, menu, dialog window, etc.

Heavily test the new UI with users (beginners and power users) BEFORE hard-coding it into the new software. Also test with customer support.

Test in a meaningful way with real users throughout all stages of development.

Put marketing to work on a new product name and marketing angles.

Put the music department to work on substantial new features and lots of new RealTracks focused on modern music so at launch it sounds as new as it looks.

Keep legacy BIAB around for a few cycles. Maybe freeze it so it could continue to be bought but only bug fixes would be done. And new RealTracks would require the new product.

Promote the new product as the KILLER music production product that it will be!

There! That is my unsolicited, uninformed, unqualified, incomplete, back-of-the-envelope plan for redesigning and developing and marketing TBD (the music software formerly known as Band in a Box).

Spotify???

RealTracks????????

Instruments??????????? Huh???

Hmmmmmmm.

Save yourself a lot of time folks. Just go here and scoop up some chill dope beats and you'll be trippin.'

Peace out yo.

https://www.bandlab.com/sounds/home

If I could do the below in Reaper on Mac and Win would PG still need to make RealBand for Mac ?
Everything RealBand generates is from calling bbw2 (Band In A Box) in the background that generates to wav in RealBand's temp folder.
Sure you could spend a lot of time making RealBand work like Reaper and a Mac version as well but what's practical ?

The most wonderful thing BiaB does is generate up a txt file with all the sections of source RT files it's pieced together, I really don't need anything else from Biab but that. I would still buy Biab for the content alone not for 49 new things. I have way more control in Reaper than Biab. Why is PG not letting Reaper users do this right now ? would it make things too easy for them ? Reaper implemented wma play direct for this very reason. It's a simple thing to giver users, is not as hard as implementing wma in Reaper.

I could go and make a VST that will just use the content PG has but instantly generate up the sections in the DAW of choice and play direct from the source file sections. I've shown it working with Sforzando but why do I have to do it and not PG ?
BB-Track-Data-To-SFZ-4-Tracks.mp4
Mixcraft-WMA.mp4
Studio-One-WMA.mp4
they are just playing the txt files that play the files sections direct from the RT/RD folder.
I could do it, other companies could do it, XLN Audio where advertising for C++ programmers and product designers for new ideas. I would much rather see PG get their finger out and do it not tomorrow, not the next day but now.

This is opening the txt files in Reaper but it will be instant if PG give the track data file in C:bb\Data\BBoutput.txt as at the moment it needs to go into BB menus and run functions and wait for txt file to read:
Zoom++

Interesting concept
PGMusic would only be developing a VST (hopefully VTS3 compatible) and the RTs would be the source of income .. much like Kontakt.
The plugin is cheap, but the sounds will cost you.
Of course, since they have already given us the ability to create User RTs, the competition could get larger for the RT content. So they would open a hole in their market going this way.
I still think it may be a good idea, since PG controls exactly how the RTs behave and thus could stay ahead of the curve.

Something to ponder

There has been no new response to this issue so I'm looking into creating a VST that will read the current track data in the main Biab and transfer that to the VST (same as I can do in Reaper), so the VST will be playing the source track sections back in sync to the DAW tempo map.
So any change in the main Biab can be updated instantly in the VST.
As you drag it will render the sections to wav.
This will give the same as I can do in Track Injector but in any DAW.

Update: So all of the above.









Keep the existing ones as they are sure, but once you start moving the generate code into the VST/VST Standalone this will rocket ahead being cross platform giving Mac users the VST and the same time using the same audio format for both. This will be more suitable for Mac Pro Audio users and Win users alike. As I have said I see the VST Standalone the new simple to use cross platform Band In A Box Lite® so a Linux version also while your at it.

You can use the bbw4 generated txt for now then once that's working smoothly start transitioning the generate code over and the tabbed multipicker within the VST.

The VST just needs to use elastique to sync playback as if it's playing back direct it will use eleastique to change pitch and tempo in realtime.

A message to the stunning and brave "technical justice warriors" in this thread who wanted to protest and start a movement: Don't be ungrateful!

"Ask not what BiaB can do for you, ask what you can do for BiaB."

"...this is one of the most out of date, hard to use, buggiest pieces of software you'll see among modern programs..."
True. But it's a good thing. It requires determination, perseverance, and a strong will to become a BiaB user. Mediocre musicians are not welcome.

"...It is a damn shame that the sheer BRILLIANCE of RealTracks are buried in this mess..."
There is no such a thing as free lunch. If you want to find the treasure of RealTracks, you need to go through a messy and cumbersome interface. That's the price you pay.

"...But that ain't fun at all! And it sucks the whole creative energy out of you while you are trying to make something cool..."
True. But it's a good thing. Because of this, young people are scared off. It is truly a software separates adults from teenagers, separates pros from amateurs.

"...The RealTracks and how the software assembles them is truly BRILLIANT..."
For many years I have been trying to avoid using BiaB due to its daunting interface, until I realized there were no alternatives to RealTracks. I had no choice but to come back and force myself learning this hideous interface, just for the sake of RealTracks.

"...I recently referred a friend to BIAB (he then bought UltraPak)..."
I have never successfully referred a single person to BiaB. It takes only one YouTube video, to frighten a potential new user. When a person sees this XP era interface with layers of commands in the right click menu, it's game over, no purchase, thank you.

"...Bring your archaic WinXP UI into the 2020s to attract younger customers..."
Impossible. It's called "Grafting". When PG Music introduces new features each year, the new commands were grafted to the software, meaning older commands were not removed. Over years, there are mountains of commands accumulated inside the software. For a new user, there's no way to know which functions are new, which are outdated.

"...BIAB can do anything if only you will go through a Rube Goldberg series of actions..."
BiaB is not a software meant for diversity and inclusion. BiaB's target user demographics are middle-aged to senior males, with a strong IT background. So, if you are a young, creative female, who isn't an IT nerd, then BiaB isn't for you.

"...But there is no excuse for how out of date the UX is..."
BiaB's tedious UX is actually an advantage. It is called "industry barrier". Because of this barrier, young generations, first time users, non tech-savvy musicians, ordinary hobbyists, are all excluded from using BiaB. Folks who managed to get inside this barrier, are indeed the "privileged ones".

"...ignore the dated Win XP interface and convoluted menus and dialog windows, software is hard just don't cut it in 2023..."
I have already invested so much time on binge watching YouTube videos and reading forum posts, in order to master my BiaB skills for professional work. If PG Music redesigns the UI/UX in the future versions and makes learning BiaB effortless and fun, personally, I would be so pissed off. The fewer young musicians using BiaB, the more proud I am. A streamlined, modern, self-explanatory UI would just take my pride away.

J3/MV/ALL.

A REAL LIFE CASE STUDY IN GUI's n' MENUS DEVELOPMENT.

ok looks like pg user base largely wants redesign // ease of use re gui's n' menus.
and I'm sure given the number of user comments on this topic…pg have been aware of the need for many many moons.

BUT NOBODY HAS SHOWN IN DETAIL VIA GUI/MENU GRAPHICS EXAMPLES HOW A HAPPY USER BASE COULD BE ACHIEVED !

SO…let's look at a real life case study I was once involved with.
and maybe pg users might comment as to whether this approach might keep pg users happy.
(cept there is a 'wrinkle' to come….lol)

A..SCENARIO.

I worked once for a large organisation with a v big user base….and the system development dept was bombarded nearly daily with criticism from users…tons of stress.
the techs were very talented n' professional n' inventive but the core legacy systems were developed yonks ago in a previous era.. in summary lots of old code…ring a bell ?

B. WHAT WE DID.

to reduce the daily stress on the systems dept/techs we made everything 'user centric.'
we set up 'user focus groups' n' 'roundtables' etc etc with the objective of the user groups providing to us a spec (signed off) of how THEY WANTED the new gui's n' menus to behave.
now to the 'wrinkle'...lmao.
ONLY PROBLEM WAS…
it was like a 'battle royal' had broken out cos the various user groups COULD'NT
AGREE. the only plus was less stress on the techs.
we even suggested flexibile 're-configurability' but the problem was some people took the attitude 'my way or the highway'. ….even snr user mgt was a problem and couldnt agree.
(office politics everywhere.)....just human nature.

perhaps the above gives people a flavor of the fact that when it comes to user needs often tech groups/coders are in a 'no win' situation cos the different user groups can't agree amongst themselves.

in conclusion the only suggestion i can make is to create a pg user group that submits a new finalised design for flexible GUI's//MENUS. (maybe user configurable ? like some companies have tried…).
BUT i guarantee even if today such a finalised user spec was agreed…in a few years future new users will complain about something…cos its the nature of the beast….lol.

peace out n' happiness to all.

om

Many good ideas in here. Interesting to see what gets done.
For my $.02


Focus on real styles and real tracks.
imo the greatest power of biab is its real stuff
midi output for real tracks will keep the midi folks around.

The UI is just too busy and too 1990's.

The plug-in has been a bit of a bomb so far. Fix it or lose it

Real Band only affects Win users. Kill Real Band

As mentioned by the Dr himself, Mac is now the majority of biab $$$.
But Win has ruled the biab roost for 3 decades.
As a 25 year biab win user and 10 year Mac User I've lived this lopsided product versioning for years.
Its time to give the Mac users a product equal (or superior) to the Win version.
We've paid our dues.
We do represent the future.

Support Apple silicon natively. Rosetta may be fine today, but not tomorrow.
separate cpu core track regeneration may be a solution to speeding up track regeneration.
That won't happen with Rosetta.

Faster track regeneration is the long pole in the tent.

As for wishing;

Some kind of drum beat groove maker for setting/modifying drum percussion parts would be fabulous.
Not a loop creator but tools to quickly vary the percussion parts.

The conundrum of too many styles yet not enough styles is an issue.
Not sure how to make progress there. Perhaps delete/Archive styles created before 2010, 2005, 2000?
Not all of them are bad, but many of the bad ones seem correlated to date.

All in all, BIAB works well for me.
I may gripe, but I still pony up my $$$ every year.

OK my before inflation two cents:

Although I quit trying to use the VST I still see it as the future for PGM. It would solve having two different programs, i.e. one for each OS. It is also a chance for PGM to modernize its product. BUT the VST would have to include all of the base BiaB features while adding other features like all time signatures, making all tracks equal, etc.

I would be happy for a year or two to purchase only RTs with notation and RDs while PGM works on the VST.

With a new VST RealBand could be eliminated however for those whom want it PGM could resume working on it after the above 1-2 year RT/RD only period. Or PGM could sell it to a third party along with a confidentiality clause.

YMMV

Somehow, someway it looks like this thread has ticked off almost everyone.

There is LOTS of discussion about RealBand or the lack thereof for Mac. There is LOTS of negative comments about the GUI interface.

Interspersed with all the negative are some REALLY GOOD suggestions. My hope is PG Music will read this thread and gain an understanding about what user priorities are and what timeline we believe it will take to achieve these plans.

Mr Geeze/ALL.

although i'm a win user who just got a new ryzen 7 mini pc (m.2ssd + 16 g) that has elated me so far (the next year will tell) for peanuts…for the first time…i'm very interested in apples offerings due to the apple M processors…(kudos to apple..)..
and am considering a m2 mini (prolly a refurb when the market goes m3/4.)..BUT .from my tech background i know 2 things.

1..amd and intel won't take losing market share without a fight, they WILL respond.

2..Apple has some challenges ahead due to limitations of semiconductor physics.and i'm very excited to see how they address these limitations as they ramp up future
more powerful M processors. particularly POWER CONSUMPTION AND HEAT.
talk to any semiconductor physicist and the other issue is also a question of how much can be crammed on a processor wafer.

although some here might think i'm biased towards win/amd/intel i really am not.
i'm biased towards computer solutions that offer fantastic price/performance for us poorer souls.

if tomorrow the 100 buk raspberry pi ran at insane speeds using quantum tech i would be all over it. I DO laud apple for this new silicon however.

right now on my new win pc i cant complain cos boot into win from cold or into biab or realband is blinkin fast taking a few secs. in addition genning rt's in biab is practically instant….tiny bit of time compared to my previous intel i5 refurb which was pretty fast.
now of course faster ssd n' memory play their part too.

i would be really interested in hearing from apple m2 users some stats like how to boot into the desktop from cold boot, and how long do logic n' biab take to appear from clicking on their respective icons etc. and how long rt's take to generate.

2 things i would have liked in the m2 mini are…allowing install of 2 m2 ssd's internally plus more hi speed usb ports.

nice ideas Mr G.

ps..re getting rid of realband correct me if i'm wrong but didnt Dr G say recently that exciting things were planned for realband ?? YIPPEE !


happiness.

om

Question 1: During installation, is there a way not to install RealBand but everything else?

Question 2: If RealBand is not installed, is BiaB going to encounter issues when running?

Reason: I want a clean computer and don't want RealBand installed if I don't plan to use it.

Story: RealBand is the most expensive DAW on earth. RealBand is pricey, not on money, but on time. So much time would be spent on digging and debugging this senile dementia DAW. Better off spend money buying a young and capable DAW than wasting your time on sleepy RB.

Excellent points.
+1
Except for the 3rd party sale idea. that rarely ends well for the user base

See with RealBand they would have to change it to non destructive editing, move the generate code inside RealBand, make a Mac version of RealBand.
But if you make a Mac version then it's gonna be the same story as Biab 6 months on Win then 6 months on Mac, that's why I say JUCE just like the VST it's released at the same time for Win and Mac and has identical features.
Again I see the VST/VST Standalone cross platform Win,Lin,Mac with the basic features like Mario said, It's a golden opportunity to start Biab all over again in the VST doing it the right way without all the bloated million and 1 features and old code limiting things.

After posting all this, I just got this in an email, that has to be a message ! it's like HELLO:

AATranslator can translate DAW session projects to other DAW's.

Villain,

Kind of a mixed martial arts comedy routine there, but some if it was funny.

So here is what confuses me. I too will strive to be humorous.

Say you want to WRITE A SONG. You get out your guitar or sit at the piano, sketch out something and then say, hmmmmmm would be great to have some bass and electric. You have BIAB 2023.

Exactly how dumb do you have to be to not be able to find the track menu in BIAB and look for any of 7,000 tracks that might work? And not understand how much easier that is than flying to Nashville to find a band?

Did you trip on the sidewalk as a child and have a pipe go through your head?

BIAB hard????? Too hard for young people??? Ever seen Ableton Live??

Entering in a chord progression and looking for an instrument to go with it is hard? In what grade?? Kindergarten???

Don't see any samples? Ever gone to bandlab.com and looked at the 70,000+ samples (it might be 150,000 by now) you can pull into Real Band if your IQ is at least above 50??

And finally, if Peter Gannon pulled put his wallet and spent 20 Billion dollars, exactly what features would you need in order to produce just ONE song in your lifetime. If he came to your house and generated the tracks for you, would that work, or would you still be complaining that BIAB has an outdated GUI and so you can't possibly write a song. Not yet. Not unless the software is rebuilt from scratch.

Or would there come a day in which you might look longingly in the mirror and say:

"Wow. Maybe the user error is happening inside my own brain."

That was MY joke of the day. Please no one get offended. I am JOKING.

I am being FUNNY.

Trying to make people LAUGH.

No germ of truth to it all.

Promise!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

@David Snyder

Please relax my friend. Take a deep breath. There is no need to become aggressive. Fact check: You and I share the same ideology.

If you go back to my post and read it again, you will realize there are two colored texts: black and purple. The black colored texts were quotes from other people, and the purple colored texts were actually my opinions.

If you read my post again, and pay attention to the purple texts, you will understand I meant no jokes. All I was saying was this: "BiaB is good as is, and can stay like this for another decade. Don't be ungrateful. No need to demand major changes in the next 5 or 10 years. If young people don't want to use it, that's their problem, they simply don't deserve it."

I think the actual person who hurt your feelings, is a forum user whose name is "JohnJohnJohn", because the black texts in my post were quoted from his/her opinions.

David my friend, please consider sharing your dissatisfaction with JohnJohnJohn. I am a person who is grateful with what BiaB currently is, and I will always be your side.

EZDrummer 2 was released in 2014 worked great no problems,
EZDrummer 3 was released in 2022.

Can we have that with the BBvst once it's all working good rock solid with the self contained code so we don't have to have added features every year for marketing, just rely on new content marketing:

New EZkeys MIDI pack available now | Synthwave EZkeys MIDI
BACK TO NOSTALGIA. A collection of ’80s-inspired synth sounds for modern pop songwriting.
Acoustic Pop EZkeys MIDI, available now!
Metal EZbass MIDI, available now! | November is Metal Month
Superior September: SDX deals and added value offer | New SDX announcement and more...
Ready to head back to the sixties? New EBX for EZbass, available now!

Also PG can sell their Midi Super Tracks as 3rd Party Toontrack Paks.

Villain,

I thought your post was funny and I liked it. I thought it was clever.

I too was trying to be humorous, but it was not directed at you, only referencing your jokes/comments. I call them jokes because I thought they were funny and clever, the way you phrased them.

My main point was, "I see people complaining and stuff. But I have never seen a song. Have you opened the box?? Did you look inside? Do you have ONE tune to share?"

And the answer always is:

Of course not.

David Snyder.

yes…you n' i put our songs out there.
(I laud you for doing that david....its obvious you have put an amzaeing number of hours into your songs kudos.)

as my sig says ive done 90 songs using pg's realband n' biab.
and god knows how many ruff demos…ive lost count…loads.
(but maybe people think my songs are 'doodoo'...lol. its just the enjoyment of doing it.)

re realband all i can do is detail little tricks using it i cant do in another daw (correct me if i'm wrong.) mainly due to the trak generation features for soooo many traks.

lets take the following scenario…..i wanna do a 'ruff demo' of a song..before doin' further development. ie wanna see if the song idea 'flys'.

so sometimes what i do as a time saver is lay out the chord sheet in rb n' just generate midi traks.
instead of rt's.
as an aside how many people know in rb midi drum traks can be genned gonzo fast eg using *.dp feature.
so as i have 48 traks i just stay in midi cos i can work fast. the objective being to see how well the song hangs together. ie step 1 is genning midi guide traks.
this also lets me sing against the 'ruff' n' see how well my lyrics hang n' also the song key that my vocs fit best.

if anyone can show me another daw that gens midi traks like rb does…i'm all ears.anyone ??
(and NO i dont mean loooong searches thru' midi pattern libs…which tends to frustrate me due the time it takes…'been there done that'...lol.)

as i said before is rb a tad ugly ? sure. does it sometimes annoy me ? sure…but so does every daw ive ever tried.

in conclusion i wonder how many people have plunged the depths of rb to discover its power.
(i like scuba diving..so for me its like diving around down into the ocean and finding something interesting. )

peace/happiness to all.

om.

No. The initial Band-in-a-Box executable file for Windows installs both programs. Update files are program specific.

The RealBand folder can be deleted without creating any adverse effects to Band-in-a-Box or the Band-in-a-Box plugin. To safely test this idea, rename the RealBand folder. Everything in Band-in-a-Box will work the same.

No. BiaB does not rely on RealBand to do anything.

There definitely some good points in this thread. But I'm wondering how much of the issues sited have to do with PG trying to make sure that its software runs on outdated machines? Just a thought.

Jeff

I'm not sure it is about the fact that "its software runs on outdated machines". I think it is because they are trapped in old code. I think PGM has done some really remarkable things with this old code but IMHO it needs a complete rewrite to stay competing in today's environment. YMMV

Mountain.

the prob is lots of people // newbs getting into doin' songs start off with an 'old clunker/hand me down pc'..
to 'dip toes in the water'...as it were.

rather than your level i7...n' then wonder why resource heavy need plug ins bring the pc to its knees.
you m' i know whats needed but lots dont...from folks ive helped in the past.

SO the prob if pg says ya gotta use this newer pc config
they might loose lots of revenue.
its a catch 22 i dont see a solution for.
unless than warning the user politely 'this pc is junk'...lol.

we used to have the same prob in industry.

best

om

You mean like Microsoft saying I can't update my i7 7700K processor to Win 11? I mean it's blazingly fast, allows overclocking and I still can't update it to Win 11?

Jeff

On one of his YouTubes, Rick Beato said most of the very best producers he knows say:

"You will have to wrestle this Windows XP machine out of my cold dead hands.

"Now leave me the %$#@@@ alone. I'm mixing a hit."

I think that was the same video when he threw almost all of his Apple stuff and iPhones into a garbage can and then flipped the bird.

I really think that's how it will go as you are not spending 6 months on the Win Plugin then 6 months on the Mac Plugin as you do with Biab, it's using cross platform released at the same time, same features Win Lin Mac. That's future proofing, I can't see how the current 6 months Win 6 months Mac will last down the track. They could use JUCE and spend the other 6 months in Hawaiian sunshine.

Hi Jim,

I think BIAB is perfect right now.

You have lots of options for rendering songs/tracks.

I choose to render multiple takes to .Wav, import into my DAW and do all mixing and mastering there. It gives you so many more creative options.

Best Regards
Nigel