I heard that BIAB's RealTracks are great but the MIDI sounds, if you're recording direct form a keyboard, are rather weak. Would I do well by upgrading my Reason to the new Reason 6 and be able to use the sounds/synths there to use for the MIDI tracks to combine with the RealTracks? I also own Reaper but discovered that it doesn't have good synths/sounds for your MIDI work.
The better the synth, the better the "sound" expression of the midi algorithm.
If you use the MS Synth, then it will sound like it.
You'll have a lot of answers here shortly. I don't know how good Reason is.
Personally I use an XG Synth card.
Welcome to the Forum by the way.
Cheers - Ian
Quote:
I heard that BIAB's RealTracks are great but the MIDI sounds, if you're recording direct form a keyboard, are rather weak. Would I do well by upgrading my Reason to the new Reason 6 and be able to use the sounds/synths there to use for the MIDI tracks to combine with the RealTracks? I also own Reaper but discovered that it doesn't have good synths/sounds for your MIDI work.
Well, I don't believe you can use Reason in BIAB as it is not a GM instrument and BIAB will only output to one instrument sound at a time. 
So unless you want all your instruments to sound like a piano you are out of luck. There is no Rewire support in BIAB (it has been on the wish list for several years). Some folks have discussed using something like MidiYoke to send to multiple channels - but alas that is not readily accomplished in BIAB. See here: BIAB with Reason
So you have either Reaper or RealBand ( both should work well with Reason) which will readily output each track to any midi instrument in Reason.
Hope I am not stearing you wrong here. 
Others will chime in to correct me if I am wrong. Have you tried some of the softsynths (e.g., Coyote Forte) for better midi sounds?
Welcome to the forum. 
Quote:
I heard that BIAB's RealTracks are great but the MIDI sounds, if you're recording direct form a keyboard, are rather weak. Would I do well by upgrading my Reason to the new Reason 6 and be able to use the sounds/synths there to use for the MIDI tracks to combine with the RealTracks? I also own Reaper but discovered that it doesn't have good synths/sounds for your MIDI work.
As we know, BIAB has no MIDI sounds per se. They are dependent on whatever synth, hard or soft, that you have available.
Possibly like you, I am primarily a MIDI guy and love the array of sounds available in external programs and modules. I went a long way with GM sounds for a long time, but was introduced to Reason 3 by a good friend about five years ago. (I also love the noises in my Roland JV-1010 external module.) Since then then I have been porting songs created in BIAB into Reason and enjoying the infinite racks of synths and effects, then porting the results back into either Nuendo or Real Band.
Reason 6 takes Prophead to a new level by combining synth and audio in a fully integrated package. I am taking a hard look at it as well since I have not yet found a DAW package that fully satisfies me. As you know, though, PG Music's products are unique in their music creation paradigm. I consider BIAB as something akin to a co-composer, so I don't see myself giving it up for a long time.
Like many of us, you may find that a combined approach gives the best results. Welcome to the community. Expect great things no matter how you accomplish them. We look forward to hearing from you soon!
Richard
My thought was as follows:
I don't know how good of a MIDI editor BIAB is. My gut feeling is that it generates MIDI files but editing the individual tracks is better in a dedicated MIDI editor. I'd import the MIDI files and the associated RealTracks files into something like Reaper or Reason 6 - which has audio and MIDI editing and synths, to be able to get the sum of much of my song and add in vocal tracks, tweak the MIDI and add addition MIDI/audio tracks.
At this point I have a choice between Cubase 6 and Reason and I'm moving towards Reason 6 upgrade since it seems to have a lot more value and you don't have to deal with Steinberg, poor support and horrible copy protection manacles that have plagued me all too often with Cubase. Reaper is a great low cost app that I may end up using too, at the very least.
I don't think that buying any hardware is necessary (I've got an i7-2600K and 1.5 TB 6 Gb/s hard drive) along with an old MIDI interface that I may not need since my Roland piano has a USB input. I may only miss the pitch bend, if needed.
Richard - too funny. I just posted the above after you posted. I have an offer to upgrade Reason to 6 for $170 ($195 with shipping) and figured that with BIAB with RealTracks, I've got an amazing studio. At the very worst, I also own Reaper, which is amazingly well priced if you're just doing this for fun as I am. I think we're onto something.
PS - I also have Sony Vegas for video editing and it came with SoundForge, which adds a few nice things of its own. My guess is that I'll only need Reason 6 as the be all end all. I'll end up selling the Cubase version I have to someone who loves it and I'll have a solution.
Don't forget about the other DAW you already own, Realband. It is a very capable audio and midi editor, much more so than BIAB, and also can do many of BIAB's song/track-generating tricks.
Terry
Quote:
I heard that BIAB's RealTracks are great but the MIDI sounds, if you're recording direct form a keyboard, are rather weak.
Biab has no midi sounds, repeat, NO MIDI SOUNDS. It will sound like whatever you route the midi output to. If it's a new $5,000 Korg Pa3x keyboard then it will sound like a $5,000 synth. In other words it will sound absolutely amazing. If you route the midi output to your el cheapo on board RealTek soundchip it will sound like a freebie soundchip, in other words it will sound like crap.
You're asking the wrong question. Reason is a fine program and all that but it's not a plug in synth that you can use with Biab. It's a stand alone host that you can take a Biab midi file and load it up but as far as playing Biab directly you're still stuck with whatever you're using for your live midi sounds. Biab is designed to be played so you can try out different styles and instruments in order to decide what you want your arrangement to be. If all you're using for that is a cheap synth you won't be happy. Reason is what you use after you've put your arrangement together in Biab. All the synths in Reason are great but you can't use them directly to play Biab without jumping through some very geeky hoops. It can be done but you need more 3rd party software and some clever internal midi routing and it's just not worth the hassle for me anyway. Most of us will use something like the Forte DXi softsynth for that or a hardware sound module like my Roland Sonic Cell or the Ketron SD2. Both sound excellent. After I work up my arrangement in Biab using the Sonic Cell then I put the song into a stand alone DAW like Real Band or what you're thinking of Reason, to load up all my other soft synths and/or keyboards to get the final best sound for each track.
This is a two step process if you don't want to finish your songs up in Biab only. Some are perfectly happy with that but it sounds like you're a bit more experienced with editing midi files and creating some of your own tracks so yes, I agree you also need a DAW. Don't overlook Real Band. RB is one of the best midi editors around and it's free with Biab. It also creates Biab midi parts and reads and creates all the same Real Tracks/Drums that Biab does. Many times I won't even use Biab, I start off in RB because it does almost everything Biab does plus it's a full DAW. It has 48 tracks with 32 midi output ports so I can load up all kinds of VSTi's and other plug ins. It's pretty powerful but it's completely different from Reason. Only you can decide if you really need Reason or not. I don't use it but I've heard good things about it.
Bob
I understand what you guys are saying but now I guess I'm very confused about what RealBand is versus Band in a Box. In fact, I'd say that now I have no idea what RealBand actually is capable of doing versus BIAB except for the fact that the latter doesn't use any audio sound samples.
(1) If every note in RB seems to be shown on the screen, couldn't and shouldn't that also correspond to MIDI data? I'm assuming that while it's audio, associated MIDI data should be present so you can, e.g. trigger an external module to double the track. Following this:
(2) Why are these two programs different? Yes, I've seen a number of questions about the confusion but the website doesn't make it clear at all. It just says "RB is real sounds, not MIDI" I guess meaning not MIDI data triggering a sample. With BIAB, you can add notes using MIDI but RB is basically the manipulation of audio files and not the same as hitting notes in MIDI that would trigger a sampler.
(3) How flexible is RB v. BIAB? I would think that the latter should be more appropriate for certain things, e.g. chord inversions since if it's audio, there should be less you can do with such discrete data. In BIAB if I play inversions I think BIAB will put together a chord structure that matches my playing. But what about in RB? Do you just put in chords and some predefined rhythm plays? What if you want to move upwards in the scale, e.g. C to F to G versus C to F to low G - how does RB track this and how can you control it to make each sound right for the direction of the music? What about solos? How are these created? Are they predefined riffs that will result in pretty much the same solos time and time again, e.g. if you have the same C-F-G progression for 1 measure each you'll get the same solo in two songs?
(4) While I'm sure RB is a pretty good editor, I see too many people going elsewhere with the data to master it in something like Reaper. Why is this? The reason I am questioning going with a tool like Reason 6 is because they will provide you with numerous additional plugins and effects, e.g. voice manipulation, etc. Some have pitch correct (which still doesn't sound right to "correct" but great for a certain vocal effect in current pop music.)
I apologize that I may be asking beginners questions but this is addressed nowhere in the FAQ or seemingly elsewhere. Thanks again to everyone for your answers.
I assume that you are familiar with BIAB, except that you don't seem to be aware that you can use so-called Real instruments there, too. Real Tracks are digitized clips--loops, if you will, except that you don't have the same control as you would in, say, Acid--that are manipulated in the same way as BIAB's MIDI data. You can do time stretching and change keys, so you are not limited in tempo or pitch.
Most of us can't play the range if instruments, don't have access to the recording gear, and/or don't know other people who do or have this stuff that are willing to come to your place and record. If you like the idea of using real axes played by real musicians in your work along with the MIDI, I think you'll be impressed.
Real Band is an entry-level sequencer designed to import up to eight tracks created in BIAB and give you 40 additional tracks which can be used for MIDI or audio. What sets it apart from any other sequencer/DAW is that you can use Real Tracks in ways that you can't in BIAB, or in any other sequencer. You can have multiple instruments. You can regenerate tracks, or sections of tracks, until an instrument is playing what you want it to.
I've only v.2009.5 and haven't used RB much. Others who are much more knowledgeable will chime in and amplify me remarks. I'm also told that RB is a pretty good MIDI editor. Again, I haven't tried that; I have used Reason for that. But it comes bundled with BIAB, so you essentially get it for free. Try it, you'll like it! I have been mightily impressed by the results I've gotten with my feeble experiments.
R.
My answer is probably too simplistic but my workflow is:
1. BIAB to generate the song that I want - with the thin instruments ==> Save the song
2. Open the song in RB (freeze the tracks so they don't re-generate)
3. Change the tracks' VST(s) to one of my choice e.g. GPO for orchestral / soundfont player / Syntheway choir etc. This replaces the 'thin' sound
4. Add some realtracks / realdrums if appropriate
5. Add any effects such as reverb
6. In the audio menu - mixdown everything to a stereo wave or individual waves / tracks
6a. Sometimes I open the wave(s) in FL Studio and do some further refinement for mastering
7. Enjoy the rewards that come from having a chart storming piece of music
It helps if you can visualise (or is that auralise ?) the final piece with the better sounding instruments at the time you create it in BIAB. The thin sounds are then more of a sketch.
I haven't managed number 7 yet by the way but I'm working hard on it and having some creative fun along the way.
Enjoy.
Regards.
Quote:
Richard - too funny. I just posted the above after you posted. I have an offer to upgrade Reason to 6 for $170 ($195 with shipping) and figured that with BIAB with RealTracks, I've got an amazing studio. At the very worst, I also own Reaper, which is amazingly well priced if you're just doing this for fun as I am. I think we're onto something.
I suspect that you have never really looked into Reaper if you make the statement that at worst you can use Reaper if doing this just for fun. I'm not trying to be snotty or anything but that is one very powerful program. Reason won't work with this but you could use Reason as a VST in Reaper and import your BB midi and audio into Reaper then assign your individual midi tracks to whatever Reason instrument you want. It won't be GM but you don't really want GM anyway. The patches associated with the GM standard never sound that good.
I hope that would work for you. Since you have Reason already test it and see if it works for you. If it does then you can choose to use your current version of Reason or upgrade. Hope that helps.
I made a mistake with earlier post. I meant use Reason with Reaper via rewire. Not VST. I was in a hurry. Sorry.
The freebe versions of the popular synths are pretty good, and they work just fine in realband. They might go a long way in meeting most of your needs and you can purchase more sounds for them as you want. Well worth checking out imo.
Hink, you're missing some very basic points about midi. Forgive me since this is just an internet forum but it seems like you really don't understand midi at all. You inferred that Biab doesn't use any audio sound samples. Audio sound samples are part of most synthesizers. If you have a synth/sampler that uses nothing but audio sound samples, Biab will play it just fine. Look at my sig below my name. Do you know what Garritan JABB or Sampletank is? JABB a collection of jazz big band samples of all the instruments and Sampletank has over 4,000 other instruments separate from just big band. Note I said samples. If I happen to choose one of those synths for Biab, no problem that's what Biab will play. My Sonic Cell is also sample based so your comment makes no sense.
You said this:
Quote:
If every note in RB seems to be shown on the screen, couldn't and shouldn't that also correspond to MIDI data? I'm assuming that while it's audio, associated MIDI data should be present so you can, e.g. trigger an external module to double the track.
Yes! That's exactly right. Understand though that not all Real Tracks display notation on the piano keyboard. Those don't have underlying midi information. Some RT's like strumming guitars don't lend themselves to doing a midi transcription so no midi for those.
You mentioned you saw something like "RB is real sounds..." Not sure where you saw that, I haven't seen it. I think what you saw is Real Tracks are real sounds. Real Band can generate RT's just as well as Biab can but one thing is Biab does it faster. Don't ask me boss, I don't know why, it just does so if you're working with 5 or 6 RT's at a time it's much faster to do them in Biab then drag them over to RB.
You asked why are they two different programs. That's a very complicated thing and it would take me all night to fully answer it. Just know that RB started out as Power Tracks and basic 48 track audio/midi sequencer and that's it. People had been complaining for years about the lack of midi output ports in Biab so you can only use one synth at a time etc. Rather than rewrite Biab, PG decided to put some Biab functions into Power Tracks and call it Real Band. There's have been many threads talking about why it would be a good idea to incorporate both programs into one. Most people including me think that's a bad idea but some like it. So far PG seems to want to keep them separate. Since they started out as two completely separate and distinct programs written by two different development teams it's probably impossible to fully integrate them anyway.
You also asked why do so many people use other DAW's like Reaper, Sonar etc instead of RB? Probably familiarity and the fact if someone has used Sonar Producer for years and just paid $500 for the latest upgrade that person is not suddenly going to dump all that money and experience just to use RB. But, if someone is relatively new to this and does not already have a lot of money and time invested in another DAW then RB is a perfectly good DAW. Others like to advertise unlimited tracks and other stuff but really, when's the last time you used more than 48 tracks? RB really does a lot, if you want to know more about it do a forum username search using the name Rharv. Bob Harvey is one of our resident experts on Power Tracks and Real Band. He's a producer, computer programmer and website designer. He knows what he's talking about and he uses RB for multitrack live recordings. He will record 6, 7, 8 or maybe more tracks live at a time using his PC, he will do all the editing, mastering and final producing just using RB and many different plugins and he gets some great results.
Read some of Eddies posts in the RB forum. He just learned RB in the last couple of months. He started from nothing, had his share of problems which you can read about and now he's well on his way to becoming an expert with it. Pretty impressive because he stuck with it when he was really getting frustrated.
You have to learn how to use it before we can really discuss it in detail. Just jump in and start doing things with it, when you have questions come back here.
Bob
I got Powertracks when Cakewalk was still cakewalk (not sonar). Back at version 2.1 or so of PT. So I've seen them both develop, and others like Reaper jump into business. Reaper is a different way of going about things. Powerful but it takes some thinking to understand. For me, since I was weened on PT, RB is a very comfortable DAW. Digital audio is digital audio.. so once the soundcard converts the sound to digital audio it will sound the same in any DAW as raw audio.
What you do with plugins and routing after that will make a difference, and I can assemble those aspects in RB quickly and efficiently while still leaving the options open for either incorporating another synth (sampler) sound or adding more realtracks. This alone tends to keep me in RB until I find something I need that it can't do (which isn't very often). And even then I'll often do what I need in the other software, and export it back to RB to keep on working. That's just how I work. Many others get the job done in various other ways. Do what you are comfortable with.
For me, the help available on this forum removed a lot of the frustration I found when looking for help on other products/forums. So that's another reason to consider learning RB.
I own Reaper 4.02, sonar X1, Cakewalk MC5, Powetracks 11, Biab 2011.5 with RB, ansd Multitrackstudio 5.0. They all work, each has different twist. I can do almost anything that Sonar and Reaper can do in RB, and many things they can't. Both Sonar and Reaper have a real deep feature set, and one leans one way, the other another way. Reaper tends to tout having a gazillion customer defined options in the way the mouse clicks work, and the way each feature is structured, plus a very flexable routing system. Sonar has deeper and richer midi tools, and a more conventional routing system. RB on the other hand has all the basic tools, and then some, plus the BiaB generation tool set.
A lot of cool stuff to use. For me i like to build backing tracks to play over in RB, original material in BiaB, and route through Sonar. (Sorry Reaper nuts, i find Sonar just a tad better for my workflow.) I have to hunt down features in Reaper that i know where they are in Sonar. BiaB, RB, and Sonar work well for me. sonar gives me a Synth rich environment that works with so many synths that RB stumbles a bit on.
That synth stumbling you mentioned is one of theings I was referring to as far as using another product, then exporting back to RB.
It would be nice if tempo lock could some day be incorporated. Not sure where the difficulty lies, since we can send tempo over MIDI very easily.
I understand about audio sound samples - but it's the way they are used and some things just don't work and thus there is a need for a different method. You can sample an instrument up and down the range but it doesn't mean that it sounds natural when used, e.g. rhythm guitar. Most of the time I think they sound poor for obvious reasons. My understanding is that Real Tracks works a little differently in that it takes little phrases and pieces them together smartly so things sound much more natural than the "endless loop" style that you hear with most sample rhythm guitars you get. In this way you'll get phrases you'd expect to hear, differences in the play that breaks up that "repeat loop" sound and feel. Now I understand that I can use those guitars and then take the MIDI that is created for the other instruments and assign them to whatever digital instrument I want. I think a wish list is that the RT data is also recorded as "MIDI" or accessible in the same way that other tracks are. After all, if you can see the notes in the window, it would help to have the data, even if the actual RT track can't be manipulated. For example, I could take those notes and double the notes using some other instrument and triggered via MIDI.
RB is a DAW and it's easy to confuse RB with RT and then not be sure what is what. They probably should change the name of RB to something else, IMHO.
I went with the 30 day for the megaultrapak or whatever it is called. I'm using it now and it is darn confusing. I see that I'll need to learn more and figure out how to also make changes I want in certain parts of the song, e.g. where I want a different fill than was provided. I guess the utility of BIAB is that you can just pop in chords and style and generate all those tracks that sound good ASAP. I don't know of any other software that does this well. Hence, this is a useful tool.
As far as Reaper, Cubase, Reason and Presonus come in, I guess I was looking at something that had more to offer than what RB seems to provide. Perhaps its the ancient looking interface that seems awkward to manipulate. In addition, the other DAWs seem to have offered a good amount of additional tools and plugins that would make it worthwhile, although you guys may be right. I'll have to see what works.
Some realtracks have charts (notation and therefore MIDI)
Spend a little time with it and ask some specific questions when you get stumped.
Quote:
I went with the 30 day for the megaultrapak or whatever it is called. I'm using it now and it is darn confusing. I see that I'll need to learn more and figure out how to also make changes I want in certain parts of the song, e.g. where I want a different fill than was provided. I guess the utility of BIAB is that you can just pop in chords and style and generate all those tracks that sound good ASAP. I don't know of any other software that does this well. Hence, this is a useful tool.
hink,
It is not clear to me that you understand completely what these programs do or how they do them. (That's okay--neither do we!) Thus you may achieve unexpected results. That can be both a good thing and a bad thing. I suggest one of two approaches:
1. Make a decision to learn a particular function or perform a particular task. Make like a pit bull and don't stop until you achieve your goal. Go on to the next thing.
Or:
2. You WILL get unexpected results. You WILL make "mistakes." You WILL realize new possibilities. Make like a being in the crystal river in "Illusions" and abandon yourself to the process. Let go and follow where you are led. This will take a while. BIAB is a unique and wonderful toy, and very deep. RB is more straightforward, but you need to have an understanding of BIAB to fully appreciate its possibilities.
There are advantages to each approach, or a combination of the two. You need to understand the basics--chord entry, key selection, the difference between Styles and Real Tracks, and, in your case, how to do MIDI editing.
But above all, NEVER GIVE UP. This is an incredible community of musos and geeks who are knowledgeable, as a whole, about the gamut of music, computers, and software. We are here to help you. Be patient with the product, with yourself, and with us. One way or another you'll get where you want to be--or somewhere you never imagined possible.
Richard
Quote:
I think a wish list is that the RT data is also recorded as "MIDI" or accessible in the same way that other tracks are. After all, if you can see the notes in the window, it would help to have the data, even if the actual RT track can't be manipulated. For example, I could take those notes and double the notes using some other instrument and triggered via MIDI.
RB is a DAW and it's easy to confuse RB with RT and then not be sure what is what. They probably should change the name of RB to something else, IMHO.
You're getting it Hink. That's a close enough explanation of how the RT's work. As for the midi part, the midi data is there you just have to jump through a hoop to use it. These RT's had to be manually transcribed the old fashioned way from the original audio files in order to create the notation because the program has to get the notation from midi data. But, it's note data only no program change for an instrument, volume or velocity data. If there were velocity data then the program would play it along with the RT and that would cause mass conflicts. So, you have to take the midi data and play with it a little bit in order to hear it but people do it all the time. I can't tell you exactly how that works because I have no interest in that and haven't done it.
As for the names of this stuff, I think the only reason it's confusing is because we all love to use abbreviations because we're internet geeks . RB instead of the full name Real Band. If we used Real Band and Real Tracks all the time instead of RB and RT, no confusion. And don't forget the Real Drums or commonly known around here as RD. So now you have RB, RT and RD. What's the problem with that, you can't read? Jeesh
Here's an experiment I want you to try. Take a favorite midi file and open it in RB, not Biab, RB. We don't know what you're using for synths but figure out how to assign different synths to the tracks or if you have one good one then just use one synth for all the tracks. Hit "edit" to the left of each track and assign some plugin's for effects. Play around with that stuff a little. Now, go into the chord grid and correct the chords because RB will analyze any midi file and give you what it thinks the chords are. It's usually fairly accurate but it won't be perfect because of the instrumentation on some midi files. Note, chord info is not part of the midi standard, this is a bonus you get with both Biab and RB. Anyway, put A and B part markers where you want drum fills on the chord grid. Then go to an empty track and generate a Real Drum part using a style that's compatible with your song. Then go to another empty track and generate another RD part using a different style, then do it again for a third style. Doing this you can stack, layer or cut and paste parts from all those RD tracks and come up with a killer drum track plus you still have your original midi drum track too. You can't do that in Biab. If you have a good midi synth, the midi drums will blend in pretty well with the RD's. I use Jamstix for this. A basic midi drum kit part layered with a couple of latin percussion RD's really sounds great with some songs I've got. The reason for keeping the original midi drum part is it usually has those song specific fills and punches that the RD's won't have so I will use those punches and fills only layered with the RD tracks. All this can get tedious but you can really create a studio quality drum track with some effort.
Since drums are one of the most difficult things to create in a midi file and make them sound good, the RD's were the first Real Tracks PG came up with and they caused a sensation around here. Just that, a RD track in an otherwise mediocre midi file can transform it. Just play around with various RD tracks in RB for now, you'll see what I mean.
Bob
Hi hink,
Welcome to the fun!
The one thing about Band in a Box that no other music making program I know emulates is that BiaB is much more like picking up a musical instrument that is new to you than any of the rest of the programs.
If you view the program in that fashion, then all the same caveats apply. A person brand new to a brand new guitar is not going to be very likely to sit down and rip off "Giant Steps" on their new flattop guitar, but they may indeed be able to memorize three basic open string chord patterns and strum along to accompany the singing of a simple song. As they practice daily, perhaps take some lessons or at least study using printed materials and the internet, of course their ability with the instrument should improve.
Band in a Box is an instrument.
When first confronted by the program, the ease with which one can get something up and running belies the fact that it will take some time exploring and experimenting with the program to become someone who can bring the best out of it.
Don't get in a hurry and don't get discouraged.
One of the best things a new user can do is to open up the Stylepicker, pick any style that interests you at the time, for whatever reason -- and use the Play Demo Song button to load the pgmusic supplied Demo songfile for that Style into the main chord grid and then watch BiaB perform while listening to the song. A very good way to see how things like Shots, Holds, Rests, Fills, Repeats, First and Second Endings, Choruses vs "One Long Song" (durchcomponiert), and many other things are implemented.
And always keep the sessions short enough that you can enjoy Peter Gannon's infamous BiaB motto:
Have Fun,
--Mac
Oh no!!! My rather long post to you all somehow didn't make it here despite it seeming like it did with a confirm page. I'll respond yet again later - thanks much to all of you for GREAT suggestions.
Quote:
Oh no!!! My rather long post to you all somehow didn't make it here despite it seeming like it did with a confirm page. ....
I hate when that happens! 
I notice it getting long, I highlite and copy it just in case ... been there myself.
Bob that sounds a bit like a personal problem!
OK... this forum does not work as well as others in my experience. I have no idea why it doesn't refresh and show you the post instead of have a "you posted successfully!" page, which is eventually followed by a "NOT!"
What I was saying was that I've heard all sorts of sampled rhythm guitar and it seems that nothing approaches the realism of RealTracks, at least IMHO. There are some great loops but that is all they are. RealTracks is far more than a loop and provides the slight variations and subtleties that one might expect in a real player. No, it's not perfect and there are times that I want to use it exactly as some of you suggested -- muting out the autogenerated track and replacing it with my own, e.g. a specific fill for four bars that may go to a cappella.
I was originally told that you cannot access any MIDI from any Real Tracks because they aren't MIDI - even though there are charts. I said I didn't understand this at all since the data seemed to be there. I guess there is a convoluted way - but it is useful (even though I know I can't edit the Real Tracks as if it were MIDI.)
Anyways... I thank you guys so much for helping me understanding how to approach BIAB and RB. It seems like the perfect tool for musicians to do "rapid development" and then fine tailor the parts to your need after generating what you need. Much in mastering will be in the approach. All these great tips so very welcome.
Quote:
I was originally told that you cannot access any MIDI from any Real Tracks because they aren't MIDI - even though there are charts. I said I didn't understand this at all since the data seemed to be there. I guess there is a convoluted way - but it is useful (even though I know I can't edit the Real Tracks as if it were MIDI.)
The MIDI note data found along with RealTracks that are underscored in their trackname to indicate that notation is available, was placed there merely for the notation ability. The Velocities and Durations may be quite a bit off from what the actual RealTrack plays because all that is needed or originally intended are those notes on the staff. This was really done so that players could read along and play along with the RealTrack players, as in a practicing aid.
While it may be possible to load the MIDI created for RealTracks into a sequencer and assign a Patch to the thing, be careful there, it may not sound like the original RealTrack does. Might, might not. Might work as you suggested above, as a source of Note On data for layering along with a RealTrack for an interesting sound occasionally, but that is the type of thing that I would place under the "specialty" heading, meaning I don't think that it is someting that one should do very often but reserve for special occasions as an effect.
--Mac