Disagreement is part of fleshing out what the user base needs and not a problem. It helps PGM realize what it is going on out here. To me this is important. These things like looping are typical functions of any audio software. When working out a track even if you want to move it to a DAW is important in order to send over a complete working track.

I have said in the past if PGM took a year to completely fix many of the not quite done features and clean up functionality much like they cleaned up GUI this year they could position the software for the future. AI will work itself out as needed.

DC mentioned RB. It has been in the same boat for years, just short of being a true competitor to other DAWs. In the last two years it has come a long way. If PGM would add one new programmer to help Jeff Y. with RB and then focus on making BiaB respond to industry standards as Jeff Ps video details, they could have an incredible 1 - 2 punch.

Yes, i know there are many who do not like the RB idea and i understand why it does need attention, and PGMs reluctance to give that attention makes it hard to support. I am not suggesting that they slow down or inhibit BiaB progress but add some help to get where they need to be.

We all know the plugin after several years is still very lacking. The new Apps are a long way from really doing anything of great value. The flagship needs to be standardized, and the companion DAW needs to be FINISHED! What a package that could be. What was envisioned in 2008 when a marriage of BiaB and PTW conceived a Child.

The point of this is not to hijack Jeff's thread but to point out that completing things in the proper way help relieve user frustration.

Looping and a few other functions are important to take a hard look at how they work different from other software since many will come from those platforms and want to have a similar experience.

HP Win 11 12 gig ram, Mac mini Sonoma with 16 gig of ram, BiaB/RB 2026, Reaper 7, Harrison Mixbus 11 , Presonus Audiobox USB96