|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,223
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,223 |
Quote:
John, Did you ever hear the interview Neil Tenant did for the BBC, when he described what it was like recording with Dusty Springfield?
He got the Pet Shop Boys track all set up, gave her the lyrics, adjusted all the monitors etc. Dusty sang the first word of the first line and promptly moved back from the mic. Devestated, Neil went to find out what was wrong, bad key? bad balance in the phones, hopeless song?...
Dusty said everything was fine, but that was just how she recorded - one word at a time!
Now if its good enough for Dusty....
Charge her by the hour.. and let her listen to each word on separate playback before proceeding.
I try to save people money by recording as many tracks at a time for them as I can (etc), the method above has got to be one expensive way to record..
I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome
Make your sound your own!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,110
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,110 |
Quote:
.....that was just how she recorded - one word at a time!
I've seen that Neil Tennant interview ( here on youtube for those who haven't ) and though Neil says it without cracking a smile, I felt that it was a total put on. Especially after he goes on about Dusty's incredible phrasing and gives an example of her recording not just word by word but syllable by syllable sometimes. When something sounds too incredible to be true, it usually is.
Keith
2025 Audiophile Windows 11 RYZEN THREADRIPPER 3960X 4.5GHZ 128 GB RAM 2 Nvidia RTX 3090s, Vegas,Acid,SoundForge,Izotope Production,Melodyne Studio,SONAR,3 Raven Mtis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 378
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 378 |
Quote:
Like I said it's my opinion & actually it's not really an opinion. Yes many "pros" do this I guess but they are in a different boat sometimes. Differing circumstances may dictate that they do this. To me ,at the level of experience of most of us here I surmise, I wouldn't be proud of something I had to piece meal together because i couldn't do it otherwise.What's the point in that?
I think 'pro' and 'talent' shouldn't be defined as the same thing these days, that's for sure. And I think it's a bit silly to call out vocal comping as something to be ashamed of, considering we're using biab software that that fits the same mold- a prefabricated performance we had nothing to do with in the first place. A bit hypocritical there. At the very least we're SINGING our vocals. It's all just tools to help modestly talented people have fun and get good results, and it gives seriously talented people another tool to get them where they're going. Why use it? Because we can! I'd bet a ton of money that someone like Sinatra, who cut vocals in one take, would love to have the ability to cut a couple of different tracks if he were still around. In fact he probably did many a recording where he could later on in his career and he probably did it. A lot of the one takers did it out of sheer necessity, not by choice, back in the day. And you need to be talented to do that. Not taking that away from anyone and generally I agree- someone who can cut a vocal in one take is a hell of a lot more controlled and skilled than someone who can't. Where I see things more of a lie is using auto tune. That's really lying about a skill you should have as a prerequisite to being not only a vocalist, but a professional vocalist. But the industry went and made itself perfect notes with all the technology available, and not just with vocals either and not just notes, but timing too. The performance has taken a hit because of it all. Now when you hear a variable pitchy vocal it's called into question, even if it's an awesome performance. But if you want to put people at 'levels' it's at this level where I most expect this stuff and comping techniques to be used. At the pro level, I expect the vocalists to be able to sing without all the help. But we all know, it just ain't so. Oh how we know that.
Dan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 657
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 657 |
When I start I recording nowadays I never play or sing anything all the way through. I'm writing the song as I'm recording. I may record a verse or two, rewrite something and then change the song up completely. I may leave a bridge or chorus out cause I'm waiting to find a riff that turns me on. I may think I'm finished then add something else.
It's hard to play a song all the way through when you don't even know where it's going. I never play live anymore and if I had to reproduce what I've done I'd have to rehearse and learn the song. I record them and that's it. They are gone and on to the next one. Fewer and far between as time goes on.
Damn, that's a good line.... As time goes on, o o on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913 |
Quote:
I think 'pro' and 'talent' shouldn't be defined as the same thing these days, that's for sure. And I think it's a bit silly to call out vocal comping as something to be ashamed of, considering we're using biab software that that fits the same mold- a prefabricated performance we had nothing to do with in the first place. A bit hypocritical there. At the very least we're SINGING our vocals. It's all just tools to help modestly talented people have fun and get good results, and it gives seriously talented people another tool to get them where they're going. Why use it? Because we can! I'd bet a ton of money that someone like Sinatra, who cut vocals in one take, would love to have the ability to cut a couple of different tracks if he were still around. In fact he probably did many a recording where he could later on in his career and he probably did it. A lot of the one takers did it out of sheer necessity, not by choice, back in the day. And you need to be talented to do that. Not taking that away from anyone and generally I agree- someone who can cut a vocal in one take is a hell of a lot more controlled and skilled than someone who can't. Where I see things more of a lie is using auto tune. That's really lying about a skill you should have as a prerequisite to being not only a vocalist, but a professional vocalist. But the industry went and made itself perfect notes with all the technology available, and not just with vocals either and not just notes, but timing too. The performance has taken a hit because of it all. Now when you hear a variable pitchy vocal it's called into question, even if it's an awesome performance. But if you want to put people at 'levels' it's at this level where I most expect this stuff and comping techniques to be used. At the pro level, I expect the vocalists to be able to sing without all the help. But we all know, it just ain't so. Oh how we know that.
Dan
It is quite ironic that people that are perfectly happy to use pre-recorded midi files and audio files, look down their noses on vocals being comp'ed!!
At least I'm playing my guitars, keyboard parts, bass parts, and even programming drums sometimes (when Jamstix isn't working out). I'm not ashamed one bit to comp a vocal track. I'm doing this for fun for goodness sakes. Why not use the capability?
Do we look down our noses for folks doing editing on other tracks; guitar parts, etc.? If so, why even bother multi-tracking? Get the whole band in the room with an x-y pair and give it a go!
I don't get it.
-Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 657
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 657 |
As far as I'm concerned vocal comping is like typing. If you can't type the whole document out perfectly, without a mistake, you shouldn't even be typing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,085
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,085 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 657
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 657 |
Thankd, Sundance.
Addendum: Actually, thanks to modern technology and wurd processors, you can type it out perfectly. If you know how to spell, that iz.
Hey, that's sort of like recording, isn't it. Damn!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,021
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,021 |
Before this turns ugly let me make this perfectly clear:
I AM NOT LOOKING DOWN MY NOSE AT ANYONE.
It's just my opinion that time, in a lot of cases, would be better spent on your vocal/instrument chops verses your compilation skills.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 23,504
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 23,504 |
Quote:
It is quite ironic that people that are perfectly happy to use pre-recorded midi files and audio files, look down their noses on vocals being comp'ed!!
At least I'm playing my guitars, keyboard parts, bass parts, and even programming drums sometimes (when Jamstix isn't working out). I'm not ashamed one bit to comp a vocal track. I'm doing this for fun for goodness sakes. Why not use the capability?
Do we look down our noses for folks doing editing on other tracks; guitar parts, etc.? If so, why even bother multi-tracking? Get the whole band in the room with an x-y pair and give it a go!
I don't get it.
-Scott
Very well said Scott.
I don't get it either.
Last edited by MarioD; 11/10/10 07:10 AM.
The fitness trainer asked me, "What kind of a squat are you accustomed to doing?" I said, "Diddly."
64 bit Win 11 Pro, the latest BiaB/RB, Roland Octa-Capture audio interface, a ton of software/hardware
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 378
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 378 |
Quote:
Before this turns ugly let me make this perfectly clear:
I AM NOT LOOKING DOWN MY NOSE AT ANYONE.
It's just my opinion that time, in a lot of cases, would be better spent on your vocal/instrument chops verses your compilation skills.
Quote:
Like I said it's my opinion & actually it's not really an opinion.
Now hold on John, is it your opinion or not your opinion. I'm getting confused. LOL!
Nothing is getting ugly, it's just different ways of doing things. Comping a vocal does not necessarily mean you're not an accomplished vocalist. It doesn't automatically mean you're not good enough. Should everyone practice their instrument and be the best they can? Absolutely. Should everyone who is used to endless choices of multi tracking do an excercise of commiting to one track as opposed to many? Absolutely. The technology isn't actually at fault but it allows you to be lazy and non-commital. It can render you almost incapable of making a desicion, or as you are suggesting John, uncaring to actually getting better in the first place. There is a time and place for everything.
But if you've ever done one punch-in in your life John, you may want to hold onto them stones. And if you always hit the mark every time in one shot, I take my hat off to you and I'm sure there's a long line behind me that will do so as well. I agree though, working on your chops and getting better should always be priority one. But there are many who ARE skilled that punch-in sometimes and do multiple takes sometimes. Nothing wrong with that either...in my opinion.
Dan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 12,675
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 12,675 |
The thing is, it's not only pitch. It's tempo, plosives, background noise, dynamics, enunciation, feeling, breathing, etc. There are lots of reasons to have multiple takes.
I'll buy into vocal perfection when I hear professional orators complete their spiel without an "uh", or an "err", or when posters on this forum stop making spelling errors (and if you used the backspace key, you made a spelling error).
I can sing a song just fine all the way through without any obvious errors, but that's live, and it's transient. If I'm laying it down for others to listen to multiple times and perhaps to scrutinize, then it's never going to be right the first time (or the second time or the third time).
Just saying....
John Laptop-HP Omen I7 Win11Pro 32GB 2x2TB, 1x4TB SSD Desktop-ASUS-I7 Win10Pro 32GB 2x1.5TB, 2x2TB, 1x4TB SATA BB2025/UMC404HD/Casios/Cakewalk/Reaper/Studio One/MixBus/Notion/Finale/Dorico/Noteworthy/NI/Halion/IK http://www.sus4chord.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,021
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,021 |
Well when I say it's not my opinion it's because it's just my work goal. As I've said before I know it's done on a regular basis. Dan I've done a fair amount of recording and I won't do punch ins. I'll re-due the whole track but of course I'm not getting paid so usually have the option. For me I just don't get that euphoria I get from nailing a track all the way through. There's disappointment for me if I miss it. This self imposed pressure has made me much better at what I do. I hear way too much "Oh we'll fix it in the mix". I'm like bobflatpicker I don't type so well so sometimes I don't get my point across well. I should have just answered the persons question instead of trying to give side advice. It can be way too easy ,with the tools we have, for a new person just learning the trade to get caught up in the compiling of bits and pieces. My piano teacher always said learn the rules then you can break them. Not until. Strive to do complete tracks then if need be compile. BTW I had to punch in 6 times so this post is a compilation of my best typing. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,251
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,251 |
John, Quote:
Dan I've done a fair amount of recording and I won't do punch ins. I'll re-due the whole track but of course I'm not getting paid so usually have the option. For me I just don't get that euphoria I get from nailing a track all the way through. There's disappointment for me if I miss it.
I've always felt the same way. The old stuff I've recorded doesn’t have any "punch ins", it was do it right or do it over. Especially since it was recorded on an old Tascam 4 track and you had to "bounce" tracks to make enough room.
But if I ever get back into recording, I'm sure I'll be more open to doing this because at my age, with the fingers slowing down, it would be more difficult to pull off the "perfect" take.
A lot of the songs I'd like to record are extremely difficult arrangements of my own that I used to use in the flatpicking contests. Each person’s performance is supposed to be their own arrangement, although a lot of the guys "cheat" and use other peoples solos. They get disqualified if the judges notice.
We're talking about an intro, 4 times all the way through the song of nothing but solos of very technical and difficult instrumentals, and then a tag, while playing on stage in front of several hundred to a few thousand people and having 3 judges critiquing every note. The only way I could pull that off was to practice 3-4 hours a day, every day. I just don't have that drive anymore.
The point is, try recording that stuff in one take!
Since all of the music we hear today has “punch ins”, overdubs, pitch correction, etc., I don’t think I’d feel guilty about “fixing” something without totally redoing it. When playing live, you have to live with the occasional miscue. When recording, I think it’s okay to avail yourself of the same “tools” the pros use.
I think of a recording kind of like a “painting”. If an artist makes a bad brush stroke, he doesn’t chuck the whole thing and start over. He fixes it.
When I start recording again I’ll play my best and “fix” the rest. LOL. It will definitely take some pressure off each take. JMHO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,021
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,021 |
Quote:
John,
Quote:
Dan I've done a fair amount of recording and I won't do punch ins. I'll re-due the whole track but of course I'm not getting paid so usually have the option. For me I just don't get that euphoria I get from nailing a track all the way through. There's disappointment for me if I miss it.
I've always felt the same way. The old stuff I've recorded doesn’t have any "punch ins", it was do it right or do it over. Especially since it was recorded on an old Tascam 4 track and you had to "bounce" tracks to make enough room.
But if I ever get back into recording, I'm sure I'll be more open to doing this because at my age, with the fingers slowing down, it would be more difficult to pull off the "perfect" take.
A lot of the songs I'd like to record are extremely difficult arrangements of my own that I used to use in the flatpicking contests. Each person’s performance is supposed to be their own arrangement, although a lot of the guys "cheat" and use other peoples solos. They get disqualified if the judges notice.
We're talking about an intro, 4 times all the way through the song of nothing but solos of very technical and difficult instrumentals, and then a tag, while playing on stage in front of several hundred to a few thousand people and having 3 judges critiquing every note. The only way I could pull that off was to practice 3-4 hours a day, every day. I just don't have that drive anymore.
The point is, try recording that stuff in one take!
Since all of the music we hear today has “punch ins”, overdubs, pitch correction, etc., I don’t think I’d feel guilty about “fixing” something without totally redoing it. When playing live, you have to live with the occasional miscue. When recording, I think it’s okay to avail yourself of the same “tools” the pros use.
I think of a recording kind of like a “painting”. If an artist makes a bad brush stroke, he doesn’t chuck the whole thing and start over. He fixes it.
When I start recording again I’ll play my best and “fix” the rest. LOL. It will definitely take some pressure off each take. JMHO.
Bob,
I totally agree. You've learned the rules, you've put in the time now you have a right to use the tools. And I bet you're not piece mealing a measure at a time either.
If you watched the CMA last night did you catch George Strait's performance? he choked up on a phrase and it looked like he hacked up a lunger & spit it on the stage. Happened very quick. Bet he wishes he could redue that one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 123
Apprentice
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 123 |
Everyone is free to use the tools at their disposal as they see fit. Its just a fact of life that nowadays EVERY album that comes out has used AUTOTUNE & COMPED VOCALS, that isn't the end of it, every track is multi-taked & comped, they employ people especially to edit these. Get over it, like it or not it is here to stay & like someone said earlier on in the thread BIAB is exactly the same thing!
Last edited by bupper; 11/11/10 11:02 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 657
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 657 |
I'd like to say something about BiaB that a few are referring to. If you went into a studio and cut a song you would hire musicians (most folks don't play every instrument) or bring your band. This is BiaB, your studio musicians. No difference at all. If you play no instruments (vocalist) or many instruments while using BiaB, the rest is your studio musicians. If you go on stage to play that song, using BiaB, you will take your band with you. BiaB is not the same as comping at all. IMO.
But I have nothing against comping or using modern technology to record a song in the studio. If you put it together, and didn't steal the material you're recording, the 'end product' is what matters and what people will listen to. And 99% of what we record (may be more than that) is going to be listened to very, very, very infrequently.
"The desire for fame is the last infirmity cast off even by the wise."
Cornelius Tacitus
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,251
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,251 |
John' Quote:
If you watched the CMA last night did you catch George Strait's performance? he choked up on a phrase and it looked like he hacked up a lunger & spit it on the stage. Happened very quick. Bet he wishes he could redue that one.
Here in WV, we call that "hockin' a lugie". Oddly enough, I've never watched a CMA program in my life, even tho I'm a fan of a lot of the old and some of the new country music. No particular reason, other than I never notice it's on.
Quote:
I bet you're not piece mealing a measure at a time either.
I definitely might do one solo, (32 measures), at a time. Playing 128 measures, plus an intro and ending, of that stuff is way out of my reach at this point in my life. The wrist of my right hand couldn't handle it. That wouldn't have been acceptable to me before, but it would now.
Now if I was playing a "standard" song, and not some ridiculously difficult 128 bar solo, then a "one take" track isn't out of the question.
The tools available today could be "abused" by someone without any real talent, but they can also be "used" by real musicians.
We don't need to make recording a song any harder than it already is, especially if you're playing all the instruments and singing all the vocals and writing the songs, which is what I usually do. But I can't play drums, although I might take a crack at one of those "cajon's" Scott talked about. Look's like fun.
EDIT...................................
And you don't have to be playing and singing all of the parts to justify using the tools now available. It's just a recording, .... or a "painting", if you will. The tools were made to be used, and or abused. Let's lighten up and contribute whatever each of us have to contribute. Then people can listen to it, or as Charlie mentioned, Quote:
99% of what we record (may be more than that) is going to be listened to very, very, very infrequently.
so THEY will probably NOT listen to it. (Wow! That part sucks, ........ all that work and nobody wants to hear it ??? ................ Yep).
Unless we look like Taylor Swift, most people don't want to hear us sing or play. We do it for ourselves and other musicians. (I kinda hated to post that last part, but it's true, whether we want to admit it or not.) That's why I've always said that I write and play for myself. If anyone wants to listen, they can. If not, that's okay too. That's why I rarely do covers. My music, or no music. No requests. LOL.
Obviously, this isn't a good approach for a "working" musician. So you have to choose between playing stuff you don't like, and playing what you want to play.
Last edited by bobcflatpicker; 11/11/10 06:40 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 378
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 378 |
Quote:
Dan I've done a fair amount of recording and I won't do punch ins. I'll re-due the whole track but of course I'm not getting paid so usually have the option.
There isn't a label footing your studio COSTS, so you have the luxury. Me too. I think it's fair to say 100% of us here have the luxury too. For the record, I've been a professional guitarist and vocalist for 30 years. I recorded tracks for other people and my own work back in the tape days- 8 and 24 track studios. I did my own material on four track cassettes too, where you'd better get it right because 'ping ponging' only degraded the sound more as you did it and punches always had a click sound when you dropped into record. That'll never do! On to Sony four track mini disc recorders- better but a compressed and lossy format. Then a Korg 16 track digital recorder- much better. Now an Akai 24 track recorder- heaven. Years of playing and recording, back when it wasn't easy to do so and now when it's a whole bunch easier to do so. Does that give me the right to use multi tracking and punching too now? I typically go for redo's when it's a guitar part. I consider it a punch-in, only longer ;>) Sometimes I'll drop in a phrase. Many times I'll fix a vocal with a punch or redo, or have multi tracks. Recordings are forever- they have to be as good as they can be.
That was my stance from the very first note I recorded- it has to be right. The better I became, the less I had to noodle about in the recording process. After so many years, I got tired of recording and programming EVERYTHING myself for my own material, so I got biab. That's another step in taking advantage of technology progress. We're all here on this board because we're willing and HAPPY to take advantage of the advancements made in software. PG has an absolute winner here, blending in the power of software with real performances. That's a technological LEAP! So just to be clear, we all pick and choose how far we'll go with all of this for ourselves.
This whole thread went off a bit because someone took issue with comping tracks- as though it makes you less competent. Something to be looked down on for doing. That's too global a rational I think. I think in some instances where someone can't sing well at all but a performance is pieced together with comps and auto tune then yes- that's nothing to be particularly proud of. Maybe be proud of the software that got you there, but not of yourself. We older guys who've been around the block a couple thousand times are always gonna say the youngins have it easy- about ANYTHING. I get that. We have the stories of the glories to back it all up too. But aside from how easy newbies have it these days and the obvious abuses because of how powerful recording, editing, and mixing tools have become, one thing is also true- talented people also punch-in, edit, and comp at times. Nothing to be ashamed about. During the thousands of gigs I've played and the thousands more to come, God willing, I lay it down as best I can with NO redos. But a recording is forever and I'm more than happy to do what it takes to make it perfect. If all that means is pushing record and sitting back and capturing perfect performances in one shot, myself included, then that's a damn fine day too!
But that's me ;>)
Dan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,021
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,021 |
This is exactly what I was trying to say. I sometimes, well most of the time, don't express myself properly so others can understand and they get mad. Quote:
The tools available today could be "abused" by someone without any real talent, but they can also be "used" by real musicians.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ask sales and support questions about Band-in-a-Box using natural language.
ChatPG's knowledge base includes the full Band-in-a-Box User Manual and sales information from the website.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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!
New RealTracks Released with Band-in-a-Box 2025!
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
Check out all the 202 New RealTracks (in sets 456-467)
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!
The 2025 49-PAK is loaded with other great new add-ons as well. Learn more about the 2025 49-PAK!
Bonus PAKs for Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Mac!
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
Learn more about the Bonus PAKs for Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac®!
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!
Learn more and listen to demos of the Xtra Styles PAK 20.
Video: Xtra Styles PAK 20 Overview & Styles Demos: Watch 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!
Learn more and listen to demos of XPro Styles PAKs.
Video: XPro Styles PAK 9 Overview & Styles Demos: Watch 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!
Learn more and listen to demos of the Xtra Styles PAK 20.
Video: Xtra Styles PAK 20 Overview & Styles Demos: Watch 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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums58
Topics84,630
Posts782,025
Members39,709
| |
Most Online25,754
Jan 24th, 2025
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are no members with birthdays on this day. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean