Originally Posted by Rustyspoon#
JJJ,
I have (strong) reservations about RB, but I will say this.
I understand people who used it for the past decade or so. If I had lets say ~40 projects in it, I would be all in for maintaining it and possibly even upgrading it. I can easily imagine some people have over 200 projects in it... and RB satisfies their needs. Peter Gannon in my view was/is VERY generous for maintaining and actually upgrading this piece of software for loyal group, which I don't believe added many new people from the time I've joined. Especially given choices like Cakewalk (Home) that was free at some point, even during Gibson days, or $60 Reaper - which is very powerful...

So I propose this. Those of us who dislike RB (I am including myself in this group), just chill and don't get into any hot discussions about the software we will likely never use. Mirroring this, I will kindly ask all those who care about RB not to derail / hijack / promote / lawyer with RB discussions in threads that are very specific to BIAB. Especially the input ones, created by PGM staff, that are very important, for us-mainly BIAB users, unless you want a particular feature transplanted to BIAB, or making a reference to particular feature in RB. Forum has many sections and focused threads that RB can be discussed in great detail.

Thank you!
I agree if someone has used RB and is satisfied with it then sure, why not? Keep using it. Just don't divert the precious few available resources from BIAB to work on a DAW that 1) most BIAB users probably don't use and 2) absolutely no one who is not a BIAB user would choose to use over the existing crop of high quality and inexpensive DAWs available.

And with that...I'll hush! smile (probably)