"To me Andrew's request is for graphic interface changes with minimal to no changes in operation."
Nope. That is definitely how I don't see it. Why would you want transfer broken or half baked feature to new tool (panel)? It's poor planning at best, as you would have to go in at change that at a later time. Why would you want to do double work? That is the biggest issue with BIAB - addressing issues only partially. That's how we got here in the first place. For example, if a big push was made in 2016, when Minimalistic view was in works, addressing much (!) wider scope of UI/Workflow issues, we would likely not have these conversations.
RustySpoon#, You interpret change in look and functionality in this, " "This thread is for suggestions regarding the Toolbars, layout, menus, preferences and other. This is for specific suggestions only, not general comments." ?
You and I disagree on that point. But that's fine as that is what discussion is all about.
Now, if you were to ask me if I prefer your view, then I could answer yes I do. There are numerous functions I don't like how they work or believe they are not complete.
But I just don't see a request for "feature or function changes" in Andrew's request. I'm sorry we disagree on that point.
Functionality is a very subjective term. If these threads were aimed at just "the looks" I doubt that so many people would have participated in conversation. And I did not find anything in Andrew's post that says suggest only visual changes. So if a faulty, unfinished, or poorly executed function is hypothetically in line to be transplanted, it has to be brought to attention.
Great discussion! I'm glad to see Gordon Scott, musocity, AudioTrack, jpettit, MarioD and Rob Helms have joined the discussion.
I've been here all along, but mostly watching.
There are people here with much more experience than me at using BiaB. In many respects I only scratch the surface of it. Better that I watch and comment occasionally if something worries me.
I worry about complexity by way of "keep the old stuff as an option". Old stuff + new stuff + option make for complexity, makes for bugs. Better if PGM can to make a simplified interface that people will enthusiastically grasp ... "Yes, this is good!"
I worry a bit about the occasional "it'll only be a few lines of code", because I know the feeling when someone says that but the reality is that the "small" change means a very substantial rewrite due to some nasty inherrent limitation. I always try my darndest to avoid those, but I only succeeded 99% of the time.
Sometimes asking for something apparently challenging is actually surprisingly easy to do.
In my many years doing requirements capture I spent a huge percentage of the time trying to find out what the client actually wants, rather than what they think we can deliver, without them knowing what are our constraints and our opportunites.
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 .
What I really can't understand - the pushback against "DAW features" in BIAB... What exactly are people talking about? What NEW features that are being proposed are not part of BIAB already that few people are so afraid of? Please be very specific. No soap operas please.
The way I see it, 90% of what is asked by users is enhancing workflow - like moving away from labyrinth of pop up menus to non modal panels, consistency, finishing existing features to accepted standards - and flexibility of UI. Where is the evil DAW hiding?
Misha my friend in all do respect why reinvent the wheel? RB is a DAW without some of the the limitations of BiaB so instead of turning BiaB into a DAW why not add BiaB to a DAW, i.e. RB?
Yes those enhancing workflows are great suggestions. IMHO the "evil DAW" is hiding in the tracks view. I know PGM is trying to please everyone but adding that track view had invited many suggestions on how to improve it, thus leaning BiaB into a DAW. IMHO keep BiaB as the perfect backing track generator and let DAWs do the DAW stuff. YMMV
When you are at the checkout line and they ask if you found everything say "Why, are you hiding stuff?"
64 bit Win 10 Pro, the latest BiaB/RB, Roland Octa-Capture audio interface, a ton of software/hardware
Mario. actually that makes a lot of sense. kudos. i ssume the bb plugin vst could also be used standalone like bb is currently whereby i can just drag genned bbtracks into a daw that supports d and d which ive done lots of. eg bb to rb or bb to reaps. om
I suppose it could be used as a stand-a-lone program also but why? One could Drag n Drop from the VSTi into a DAW as you can do now with the VSTi.
Also if BiaB sans the DAW stuff were merged with RB one wouldn't need the VSTi with RB, or am I missing something?
When you are at the checkout line and they ask if you found everything say "Why, are you hiding stuff?"
64 bit Win 10 Pro, the latest BiaB/RB, Roland Octa-Capture audio interface, a ton of software/hardware
good points...i was just thinking im sure someone somewhere will want standalone...eg a new user who just wants to try out some song ideas and doesnt want the learning cycle of rb or another daw.
respect.
om
my songs....mixed for good earbuds...(fyi..my vocs on all songs..) https://soundcloud.com/alfsongs (90 songs created useing bb/rb.)
Mario, Ok now I see your point, but here is the deal. If I am correct, you are using about 20% RTs - rest MIDI. I am mirror opposite. To me, Track view combined with partial regeneration is a blessing / an indispensable tool working with Real Tracks. Most people (not all) use BIAB specifically for realistic sounding tracks.
I didn't ask for T.View. It arrived as a wonderful surprise. As of now its simply incomplete. Why castrate something that is not interfering with anything else? It just needs to be completed in the spirit of accepted standards, especially if 90% functions are already present, but not hooked up the right way.
....Misha my friend in all do respect why reinvent the wheel? RB is a DAW without some of the the limitations of BiaB so instead of turning BiaB into a DAW why not add BiaB to a DAW, i.e. RB?...
Originally Posted by musocity
....If any improvements are made to RealBand, NDE (non destructive editing) would be the biggest and best move by far. The BB Plugin now works like this, NO WAVs and instant Gen, even midi only styles are instant as there is no rending down to wav. So it just calls on bbw4_64.exe to generate up just the track data and plays that back direct as in this Ketron pic, RealBand on the other hand calls on bbw2_64.exe to generate up and render down to consolidated wav. I don't know why on earth the Delphi generate code from Biab was not put into RealBand's Delphi code rather than having bbw2 in the background, in the first place ??????....
Mario, Ok now I see your point, but here is the deal. If I am correct, you are using about 20% RTs - rest MIDI. I am mirror opposite. To me, Track view combined with partial regeneration is a blessing / an indispensable tool working with Real Tracks. Most people (not all) use BIAB specifically for realistic sounding tracks.
I didn't ask for T.View. It arrived as a wonderful surprise. As of now its simply incomplete. Why castrate something that is not interfering with anything else? It just needs to be completed in the spirit of accepted standards, especially if 90% functions are already present, but not hooked up the right way.
Misha, I now see your point. If you eliminate the RT charts from the equation my actual use of RTs is around 1%.
Unfortunately just about every new feature in BiaB is incomplete is one way or another, i.e. utility tracks, track views, the VSTi, etc.
I see and respect your views but I still think putting the entire BiaB into RB, modernizing and improving RB's GUI and putting the entire BiaB sans DAW features like the t-view into the VSTi are better moves. Just my opinion.
Have a great day my friend.
When you are at the checkout line and they ask if you found everything say "Why, are you hiding stuff?"
64 bit Win 10 Pro, the latest BiaB/RB, Roland Octa-Capture audio interface, a ton of software/hardware
Mario. good points...i was just thinking im sure someone somewhere will want standalone...eg a new user who just wants to try out some song ideas and doesnt want the learning cycle of rb or another daw. respect. om
Good points om that I didn't think about. Yes having the VSTi as a stand-a-lone like it is now is a good idea.
When you are at the checkout line and they ask if you found everything say "Why, are you hiding stuff?"
64 bit Win 10 Pro, the latest BiaB/RB, Roland Octa-Capture audio interface, a ton of software/hardware
Thanx so much Misha. I have to admit that I was wrong and that the track view is valuable. I didn't realize about the audio to MIDI function.
PGM's convoluted menu system messed me up. I viewed your video again, I did see it the first time, and got the track actions part of it so I went to the CTRL F7 menu, as I did previously. It also has a track action and erase function but it erases the entire track. I thought that it was just another PGM almost ready for prime time add on to BiaB. I had to view your video a couple of times to see that you were clicking on the track name to get to the correct erase function. Why are their two erase functions that have two different end results?
Also again the track names changes just like in drag and drop. Again why can't they keep the track names constant? I have included pictures.
I will change my stand and have the track view included to my BiaB RB merger and BiaB VSTi merger suggestions.
When you are at the checkout line and they ask if you found everything say "Why, are you hiding stuff?"
64 bit Win 10 Pro, the latest BiaB/RB, Roland Octa-Capture audio interface, a ton of software/hardware
Not to hijack the OP question, but Charts for RTs have been available in the plugin for 5 years. For example, using the charts to drive Drums or Keyboard VSTi's is a common approach especial if you want note by note editing in the DAW. Back to the OP.
Studio One (latest version), Win 11 23H2 , i9 -10940X 3.3 GHz, 32GB Mem, a 4K 40" monitor, PreSonus Studio Live III Console as interface/controller. secondarily test on Reaper, Cakewalk, and S1 on Surface Pro 3 Win 10 (latest versions).
And we're back from "BiaB PlugIn Does Charts". Just picking jpettit.
I thought Gordon Scott made a pretty interesting thought when he said "I worry about complexity by way of "keep the old stuff as an option". Old stuff + new stuff + option make for complexity, makes for bugs. Better if PGM can to make a simplified interface that people will enthusiastically grasp ... "Yes, this is good!".
I think a " simplified interface that people will enthusiastically grasp" is what everyone wants and hopes for. The devil is in the details and how PG Music approaches that goal.
Most DAWs have multiple windows with each focused on a main task. Normally the DAW windows are linked together so what a user does reflects in every window. Do you think Band-in-a-Box currently has windows linked together? If so, how can the link be strengthened?
Mario, Jeff. It's funny, but today somebody in Cakewalk forum asked a BIAB related question. RT>MIDI.
The standing problem is that while you can extract chart, it doesn't take further regeneration once RT is deleted. I've requested this feature before, but I don't believe most people understood what I was talking about.
To be able to work with RT underlaying MIDI by itself. So it not only responds to further chord changes, but does partial regens as well. That is quite a big chunk of MIDI content that can be used quite differently. Since the MIDI counterpart functions are already in the code and currently work in tandem with many RTs, we really (really!) need to ask PGM to have a way to toggle between the two the easy way. That is in my view falls under enhancing workflow of existing feature. Making process less complicated
Once you are done with your partial regenerations, just drag MIDI track to DAW directly from header.
This is what you can do now (Cakewalk adds extra tracks, I am not sure if it's specific to Cake) :
1) And we're back from "BiaB PlugIn Does Charts". Just picking jpettit.
2) I thought Gordon Scott made a pretty interesting thought when he said "I worry about complexity by way of "keep the old stuff as an option". Old stuff + new stuff + option make for complexity, makes for bugs. Better if PGM can to make a simplified interface that people will enthusiastically grasp ... "Yes, this is good!".
I think a " simplified interface that people will enthusiastically grasp" is what everyone wants and hopes for. The devil is in the details and how PG Music approaches that goal.
3) Most DAWs have multiple windows with each focused on a main task. Normally the DAW windows are linked together so what a user does reflects in every window. Do you think Band-in-a-Box currently has windows linked together? If so, how can the link be strengthened?
1 No problem just trying to help but maybe that is not what you want. Remember my opening statement to your OP was you are asking the wrong question. I do appreciate your keeping the Specific UI/UX pinned questions cleaner. 2) Don't we all really think this? 3) The point of my workflow conversations over the last 18 months.
Last edited by jpettit; 02/02/2509:44 PM.
Studio One (latest version), Win 11 23H2 , i9 -10940X 3.3 GHz, 32GB Mem, a 4K 40" monitor, PreSonus Studio Live III Console as interface/controller. secondarily test on Reaper, Cakewalk, and S1 on Surface Pro 3 Win 10 (latest versions).
1 The standing problem is that while you can extract chart, it doesn't take further regeneration once RT is deleted. I've requested this feature before, but I don't believe most people understood what I was talking about.
2) To be able to work with RT underlaying MIDI by itself. So it not only responds to further chord changes, but does partial regens as well. That is quite a big chunk of MIDI content that can be used quite differently. Since the MIDI counterpart functions are already in the code and currently work in tandem with many RTs, we really (really!) need to ask PGM to have a way to toggle between the two the easy way. That is in my view falls under enhancing workflow of existing feature. Making process less complicated
3) Once you are done with your partial regenerations, just drag MIDI track to DAW directly from header.
4) This is what you can do now (Cakewalk adds extra tracks, I am not sure if it's specific to Cake) :
1) Yes, is a MIDI Transcription of the current RT The plugin is simpler in that it mirrors the RT on each generation. 2) Isn't that is what Playable RTs do. (BTW they do not exist in the plugin YET) 3) True in all cases. 4) Split by note or split by channel? Yes, most DAWs can do that if wanted.
Last edited by jpettit; 02/02/2509:41 PM.
Studio One (latest version), Win 11 23H2 , i9 -10940X 3.3 GHz, 32GB Mem, a 4K 40" monitor, PreSonus Studio Live III Console as interface/controller. secondarily test on Reaper, Cakewalk, and S1 on Surface Pro 3 Win 10 (latest versions).
2) I thought Gordon Scott made a pretty interesting thought when he said "I worry about complexity by way of "keep the old stuff as an option". Old stuff + new stuff + option make for complexity, makes for bugs. Better if PGM can to make a simplified interface that people will enthusiastically grasp ... "Yes, this is good!".
2) Don't we all really think this?
Generally we do, but I also think sometimes it's a good idea to state it explicitly - to inform a focus.
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 .
Funny how the Band In a Box to RB subject comes up every now and again. Just a few years ago it was Band in a box to power tracks and that’s how RB became. RB while it has its issues is not that far from being complete. There are some cleanup, some powerful additions like non-destructive editing, few upgrades to the automation, an update the editing tools with like a split tool maybe a smart tool.
Last edited by Rob Helms; 02/03/2506:27 AM.
HP Win 11 12 gig ram, Mac mini with 16 gig of ram, BiaB 2025, Realband, Reaper 7, Harrison Mixbus 9 32c , Melodyne 5 editor, Presonus Audiobox 1818VSL, Presonus control app.
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 pour Windows est disponible en Français.
Le téléchargement se fait à partir du site PG Music
Pour ceux qui auraient déjà acheté la version 2025 de Band-in-a-Box (et qui donc ont une version anglaise), il est possible de "franciser" cette version avec les patchs suivants:
Band-in-a-Box 2025 für Windows Deutsch ist verfügbar!
Die deutsche Version Band-in-a-Box® 2025 für Windows ist ab sofort verfügbar!
Alle die bereits die englische Version von Band-in-a-Box und RealBand 2024 installiert haben, finden hier die Installationsdateien für das Sprachenupdate:
Update Your Band-in-a-Box® 2025 to Build 1128 for Windows Today!
Already using Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Windows®? Download Build 1128 now from our Support Page to enjoy the latest enhancements and improvements from our team.
Already using RealBand® 2025 for Windows®? Download Build 5 now from our Support Page to ensure you have the latest enhancements and improvements from our team.
PowerTracks Pro Audio 2025 is here! This new version introduces many features, including VST3 support, the ability to load or import a .FLAC file, a reset option for track height in the Tracks window, a taller Timeline on the Notation window toolbar, new freeze buttons in the Tracks window, three toolbar modes (two rows, single row, and none), the improved Select Patch dialog with text-based search and numeric patch display, a new button in the DirectX/VST window to copy an effects group, and more!
First-time packages start at only $49. Already a PowerTracks Pro Audio user? Upgrade for as little as $29!
Video: Summary of the New Band-in-a-Box® App for iOS®
Join Tobin as he takes you on a tour of the new Band-in-a-Box® app for iOS®! Designed for musicians, singer-songwriters, and educators, this powerful tool lets you create, play, and transfer songs effortlessly on your iPhone® or iPad®—anytime, anywhere.
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.
but maybe that is not what you want. Remember my opening statement to your OP was you are asking the wrong question. 
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean