PG Music Home
Things needed to make the plugin functional.

While we understand that the plugin is not supposed to have all the functionality of the main program, it needs to be able to render tracks to work well with live recorded and user made tracks in the DAW. It also needs to be able to open and play files made in BiaB and follow the basic instructions in those song files.

The following are known and confirmed issues not working with the current plugin:

Center Panned, Dry, (no EQ or FX). These are important for rendering to a DAW, as they allow the user to use tools in the DAW for processing rather than having them pre processed. A must have!

The 300 new MIDI RCs for Real Drums (Studio one, Cakewalk, and Ableton live not working) they worked last year when there were only 20 but are broken now. Also, a must have to allow much wanted multi-track drums.

Song Fold/Unfold bug. If a song is generated while the chord sheet is folded. It will generate all choruses. If you drag tracks to the DAW, play the song in the DAW then make any changes to the song, it will only generate the 1st chorus. Note: in the info bar (black area with blue lettering) if the chorus count looks like 1/2 or 1/3 etc generation of all choruses fail. If you hit the red stop button on the plugin or manually reset the count it will work.

Embedded Tempo, many DAWs can stretch the audio to follow a live tempo but the audio file must have embedded tempo first. MIDI tracks always have the tempo embedded.  If you want to have the plugin work with a live recording or want to add tempo changes in your DAW, the file needs embedded tempo.

Style changes in the Bar settings. This is a cool feature to add texture to the song. It only works when a file is brought from BiaB, not one created in the plugin.

The new in 2020 Harmony's or thickening this doesn’t work properly

Medley Changes are not working properly in the plugin.

Song Settings 2-4 Bar Ending only works with 4 bars ending.

RDs do not re-generate when generated on the Style page.

Direct Input versions of RTs are very important allowing a user to use amp sims to create the sound desired but are not working.

1/8 push, 1/16 push are still not working

This plugin can be a real power tool for DAW users. PGM needs to allot the resources to complete it at least this far for now not letting a second development cycle slip by with these vital issues unresolved. Please if you also feel that these issues need attention please add your voice. If PGM could spend some time and solve these issue we would have a solid working plugin.

Sure there are other requests, like GUI  and solo/mute/etc, however these do currently work as they are. Maybe there are better or more intuitive ways but we all probably agree basic function is vital to attract new users and enhance our experience. Since we know we are up against the Mac development cycle let’s ask for function first. If you see a rendering feature that was missing or still doesn’t work for Windows add it to the list.

Regards Rob.
Very well stated. Hopefully the next 50 new improvements will be on the VSTi. One can hope.
Originally Posted By: MarioD
Very well stated. Hopefully the next 50 new improvements will be on the VSTi. One can hope.


If that is the case we will not see these "improvements"crazy
until 2021.
Only the last two DT direct and pushes are improvements.

The rest are bugs. PGM has already released the feature and it does not work Properly
In the past 2.5 months, today back to Dec 1, 2019 when the V2 of the VST was launched, there have been 34 individual threads posted in this forum subsection. This resulted in 165 separate comments across all threads and 6, 628 views. I can't tell you exactly what percentage of all those metrics is made up of you, me, and pipeline with a recent surge by Masi and Brian but I would guess it would be substantial. My point?

We are not a significant enough demographic to change the course. The current version of the VST is working as intended and functioning enough for us to get by even with the limitations. New features will be added in V3 of the VST with pay-for-release in Dec 2020 and those will fix bugs and introduce new ones. At that time, God willing, we will all still be here. And if the year is good to us, as I hope it will be, we will be plucking down our CC for the next version.

That said, your points are well understood and well appreciated - you and pipeline are fighting the good fight. I do wish it would be different. I wish PGM was more capable and more responsive to the input and suggestions of their more vocal members in the forum. I wish they would have a more frequent revision cycle which addressed bug reports and feature requests. For their sake as well as ours, I wish the BIAB code was more up to day to permit the kind of flexibility needed to accomplish these wishes. I wish there were no Mac OS so programming resources didn't need to spend time on a niche market.

But to be honest I really wish above all else, that I had more musical talent so I did not need this program so much to make my music.

Maybe I should take some of this stuff over the the wishing forum, the black hole that it is.

<< all comments made with a sly smile and tongue in cheek >>
These are all reasonable fix requests and would go a long way toward making the plugin top notch. I've started working with the plugin more lately, but hesitate to fully embrace it for some of these needed fixed. Adar has done wonders with the plugin, but these fixes would really put it over the top.
All points have been really well put, with fairness for all parties involved.

I too wish that more attention was directed towards resolving well known issues.
I appreciate all who have added to this post. I hope many more will stop by and add their voice to this cause. I also want to say that I do not intend to bash Peter, PGM or anyone involved. This request is with the utmost respect for the company, and its product line. However, this product started two cycles ago, and many issues were never solved the first year. Some of this is understandable. All but two of the fix request here, are based in features offered this year, which all of us paid to upgrade for. It is only right that these bugs are fixed in this cycle. It is really not asking to much.

This what I am asking for, only what is fair. I would like to add that I ask this not in anger, frustration, or contentiousness . But respectfully and kindly. I have been a loyal user, and fan of the company. I will continue to be. Please handle theses issue and start next year fresh.
In all fairness: I asked PG probably already way back and just after in Atari days, when BIAB was still MIDI only, if they could incorporate a slave MidiClock, MTC or SMPTE mode for BIAB.
Never understood why they did not do just that.

I still think this VST makes the whole slaving thing far too complicated. Quite a thing to get used to BIAB and it's quirky interface and all those 'hidden' submenu-ed and sometimes quite useful functions. But you learn to live with that.

I've been trying to get things done with this VST, but still couldn't find an easy going & practical way of working with it.
A simple tempo or bar-count or key change, and off you go rendering the lot a gain, and so much slower compared to BIAB it seems. Call it the VST blues? This VST still feels like it's unfinished business. Sorry PG.
Thanks, Rob, for bringing these core rendering issues to light.

BiaB RTs, RDs, and RCs are the best-kept secret from the DAW world. “Professional Studio Musician playing your song's tracks!”

The DAW market is expected to reach $16 Billion by 2026. Hopefully, PGM sees the plugin as a potential “Game Changer” gateway product to this massive DAW market.

The plugin as a gateway offers the crème de la crème of BiaB “Rendered Pros” with a very low learning curve compared to a 675+ page manual.

However, this new DAW generation expects it to be intuitive, and simply work as advertised.

Because the plugin is at its core a "Front end to BiaB’s rendering engine", why would anyone bother to use it if it cannot match the core rendering capabilities of BiaB?

I am sure PGM is aware of these dozen rendering issues, but it is frustrating to both wait 15 months for them to be addressed and hold off recommending it to the world.



Originally Posted By: MusicStudent
The current version of the VST is working as intended and functioning enough for us to get by even with the limitations.

With all due respect I disagree. There are enough bugs present, so I wouldn't recommend it to anyone who is not a very loyal customer who is willing to accept glitches and hiccups.

There will never be any software without any bugs. There are just too many for the limited features set of the plugin.

Masi
I do not use the plugin at and haven't touch BIAB for a while. I've been mainly making my own tracks in Logic with my virtual instruments.
Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
Sure there are other requests, like GUI  and solo/mute/etc, however, these do currently work as they are. Maybe there are better or more intuitive ways but we all probably agree basic functionality is vital to attract new users and enhance our experience.
Although I agree that solo and mute buttons would be more obvious, the played selected process is not bad https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nq5b3YKgAic
Thanks Jeff, that is helpful. I also found that highlighting one holding shift allows you to choose several tracks in a row as you showed in the video. Holding control and clicking tracks allows you to choose several and skip tracks.
I tried plugin on a few occasions...
However, I will still use BIAB 99% of the time.

If a plugin is a "way" to rewrite BIAB, perhaps it is a good start. However with so many things that are missing that are in BIAB, I hardly find a use for it.

Ideally, I would want a single platform. For example like Halion Sonic (or Kontakt) You can use it as a standalone or as VST with almost identical interface and functions. With PG plugin it is another game that I have to learn. I am keeping an eye on it, but for now I still feel it is in very early stage. Maybe it is a good idea to slow down new features flow and focus on strengthening software, giving more time to consider suggestions and for beta users to test it thoroughly?

One more paragraph smile

I was very frustrated when I tried BIAB for the first time. One forum member suggested that I should approach it with "open mind". I am glad I did. Now, I want to give same advise to PG & staff. Talk to somebody who is ace in music software programming with "open mind". See what they have to say... especially what they would prioritize/focus on if it was their fish to fry. (I am talking about design+functions, not RT/RD/Midi content here)
Good thoughts RS, BiaB is a powerful program that most folks never scratch the surface of what it can do. The plugin however is and never was a rewrite of BiaB. It is a way to create BiaB type tracks inside a DAW. Allowing the DAW user to add instruments to an existing song or start a song track bed from scratch. As it sits now it can do that, but there are a few basic features that are not working properly. Once these are repaired it should be a nice tool in the box.

We should never expect it to replace BiaB, which is far too deep with features to try to put in a VST plugin. The best way to view the plugin is to imagine a simplified BiaB lite.
When a DAW users comes to the plugin for the first time the interface should be a no brainer to use. Look how much conversation and confusion there has been with playing syncing soloing muting. I should not have to nag every day since it's release. It was said at the beginning to give it it's own unique name, like Session Tracks Pro etc... like you have PowerTracks, RealBand, Band in a Box.
No one should have to come on the forum and ask how do I sync a track, how do I solo a track, how do I mute a track. It was the same thinking when RealBand was made, there was one blue solo button that you enabled then go and select tracks with Ctrl+ left click, then if you clicked on the chord sheet to play they would all become unselected. It is still the same thinking applied to the Plugin.

Like with ChordPotion how many users are asking how do I mute/solo tracks, where is the Big logo ?


Or with Ezdrummer or Superior Drummer, how do I get it to follow the Host, how do I solo/mute tracks, why is the Logo so big ?





Attached File
Ezdrummer.png  (246 downloads)
Attached picture VstStnthFont-S-M.png
Pipes, your point is valid. I agree that there needs to be some changes to the GUI regarding solo etc. maybe this can happen. Hopefully in the new version 3.0, maybe even before. What I am trying to focus on is feature advertised during the release cycle that do not work, or are core to proper function. Things like Real Charts for RDs, Tempo embedded, ability to render dry, flat centered track that the user can pan, FX, match up to either live or midi tracks. Harmonies and thickening were advertised as new features. All the above and a few more were why many bought the upgrade. I know that the PGM team want to fix all this, but there is limited time in each cycle. So I am asking for actual bugs and broken features be repaired before the cycle is over. Kind of a “give us what you promised” conversation.

Nothing would make me more happy if it included some form of mute/solo revision, I know that you have worked hard to point this out. I’m sure you would agree we need basic broken feature function fixed first before upgrades. The reason Jpettit posted the solo video was not to abandon the idea of refinement but to offer some clarity for users on how to use the current solo feature. So that the focus could remain on repair before update.

Thanks again for all you do here, you are a valued opinion’round these here parts!

Regards Rob
There is a DAW user in Bolivia that just got his Biab hard drive, he has no internet and can't work out the Plugin. If we had no internet we would be in the same boat still trying to decipher it to find the hidden features, I never had to get on the net to work out Ezdrummer.

Those Dry, Flat, Center, Normalize, ACID are all done in BBW4 that has to be done by Peter's side that's probably working on the Mac at the moment and will be for a while.
The graphics are there for Dry Flat...ACID and just waiting for Peter's side but the solo mute don't need Peter's side to be fixed.
I would say a lot of the other issues are BBW4 related.

Since giving up on RealBand for creating tracks for artists live session or studio sessions I have not got back into it due to the fact there is no EZ creative work flow with the Plugin.
Don't look at things from the perspective of using only one Biab Plugin, look at using more, then think about the work flow if it would be EZZZZZZZ.

But again at the end of the day there are so many hours and so many programming staff.
https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=581689&page=1

This article makes a point. For a decade you could drag and drop from the main application.

It also reiterates the point of this thread. Why would people use it if it cannot at least match the existing BiaB capabilities? Thus the need for parity and the reason this forum only gets .5% of the views.

Then one could ask why would they use it even if it had the same functionality?

In my humble opinion, the new or casual DAW-BiaB user does not have to sift through the 675-page manual.

Within a few minutes, the new DAW-BiaB user is getting "Pro Musicians" playing their song! They don't have to become a BiaB expert.

This is why I think it has great potential as a gateway product.
To that point why do some want certain feature added that are best done in the DAW. I have seen request for normalizing the tracks, why that would be done on final render in the daw. Volume sliders, those are standard fare in the DAW.
I think you need to look at sync playback of the generated tracks in the local folder.
You need to be able to adjust the vol and pan to preview those tracks with the existing tracks in the DAW.
If you are just using one instrument track at a time like DI MultiRiffs per plugin and sending that track to FX then you can use the DAW track vol/pan.
Same with midi channel if you are sending midi tracks from the Plugin if you can re-channel each track to the selected channel, at the moment you can't tell what channel the midi tracks are on, so if you had a simple track mixer like VstSynthFont it would handle everything.
Originally there was no sync playback it was the same as using the main BB and dragging tracks out into the DAW to see if they fit if not back to BB.
Quote:
Hopefully in the new version 3.0


This sums up my conclusions. Three months in and we will have to wait for the 50 new features. cry

And while we are just chatting between friends, since this is a very limited audience in the forum... how is that new Multiriffs feature working out for folks crazy ? I am not looking to stir the pot over in the other forums, but I recognized this as a clinker the first time I used it. Have to acknowledge that the glory days are behind us - there is always next year. Up to us now to keep the music alive.

I have been having a lot of fun with Scaler. Waiting anxiously for 2.0 which is running 6 months behind its claimed release date. grin
I worked out easy ways to do the MultiRiff/Bar to Bar regen using 2 instances of BB or using the BB Plugin in BB, BUT there are issues that need fixing like a padding or no padding option in BB for MultiRiffs so they play from that start of the section till the end with no early or late notes,
the sync is not working in BB if you play from the very start it's fine but if you play from any other bar the sync (BB Plugin) will start play from the very start.
If they fix these 2 issues then Bar to Bar regen will be possible.
Multiriff is hit and miss for me but I have learned to work them out. I get pretty solid results now. I usually start them early and end late use the comping capability of my DAW. I don’t think we can expect a feature like multiriff to replace a great lead musician. It is a tool to use to create and will require some learning, experience, and trial.
Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
Only the last two DT direct and pushes are improvements.

The rest are bugs. PGM has already released the feature and it does not work Properly


And PG sadly - infuriatingly - does this all the time.

I could have actually gotten on fine with BIAB as it was many years ago - before even plugin hosting was included - with just basic use for practice - generating real tracks. etc.

But I've now paid *specifically* for newer release when a particular **very desirable for me** feature was finally "delivered".

First it was ability to host AU /VST plugins. Delivered badly with both bugs and clear missing features - things that one would expect in an app that hosts plugin instruments but wasn't included.

Then came Piano Roll editing in Mac BIAB. Again - released a few months after the yearly release cycle - and delivered in a lets say sub-optimal fashion, making it - at the very least - no fun to use.

Lastly came the addition of a true BIAB plugin - and as everyone well knows - it barely resembleses what it needs to be - it was very buggy in its initial period, extremely slow to regen - and I haven't even begun to get onto the missing features that Rob Helms mentioned.

There is a pattern here. Franky I feel like I've merely been paying an upgrade fee in order for PG developers to carry on working. Subsidising them. Because the three features they "delivered" are delivered in a rushed state and with a grudging attitude towards making these fear polished.

I could forgive them for Piano Roll. I understand that apparently few people use it on Macs. But then thats hard surprising given how dreadful the GUI Implementatons of these things are.

I could also forgive PG once they introduced the BIAB VST/AU plugin. * if * the thing actually worked as one would expect... because I'm much happier using the Piano roll in my DAW to record my own parts than the built in piano roll.
But fact is the BIAB plugin isn't ready for prime time with DAWs either.

I hear you on this. The good news is if PGM would address these basic features the plugin would be a solid and useful tool for creating tracks in the DAW. I also understand the desire of some users to want to add other more powerful features. Like our Mr. Pipeline. He has worked hard to introduce many innovative ideas and concepts to light. For that I tip my hat to him. I also feel his frustration and have nothing but respect.

I do however think that many of these ideas, while undeniably interesting and possibly powerful. Should be considered as down the road upgrades. So I keep stressing the vital importance of fixing the already existing broken features and bringing the plugin to a solid stable and useful tool. Something as jpettit said, a new DAW user can employ without reading a huge manual.
DAWS Plugin; I am supposed to open the DAWS Plugin within Garage Band by selecting Plugins" + AU Instruments + etc... Problem is that AU Instruments takes it to Apple Music instead of PG music inc. ???????

How do I get the plugin installed if Garage Band can't locate it?

Jim
If it's not in the list it's not installed correctly.

Using the Band-in-a-Box for Mac DAW Plugin in GarageBand

Bringing the hijacked thread back and bumping. And yes it is okay to post a question regarding GarageBand here as we want folks to get answers to their questions.

Bump back to original conversation.
Originally Posted By: nonchai
Franky I feel like I've merely been paying an upgrade fee in order for PG developers to carry on working. Subsidising them. Because the three features they "delivered" are delivered in a rushed state and with a grudging attitude towards making these fear polished.

You don't need to feel like this, because this is the way it is.

PGMusic's business is based on the selling of upgrades at the end of each year. Naturally they have to deliver something, so the users gets more RealTracks. But as is this not enough they have to add features. Fixing bugs is great, but hardly usable for marketing.

Sadly the budget for the development teams seems to be insufficient at times. Then we get half-baked or buggy features that are cramped into the yearly release just for the sake of it. We're talking here of marketable features.

And if the developers have to fix bugs for a long time after the release they are late for new features of the upcoming release. For them it would be the best to get the code base in a stable condition before adding new stuff. Of course that's not possible because PGMusic cannot print money. So they need a release with new feature. Da capo in eternum.

Masi

PS: This year I thought about skipping a release. But the list of items they have done listening to the customer got me hooked. Plus the RealCharts for drums and the plugin. Neither the RealCharts are working for me (I hear others have good results) nor is the plugin usable. IMHO selling buggy software to loyal long-time customers is a dangerous business strategy in the long run.
Originally Posted By: Masi
.........................
PS: This year I thought about skipping a release. But the list of items they have done listening to the customer got me hooked. Plus the RealCharts for drums and the plugin. Neither the RealCharts are working for me (I hear others have good results) nor is the plugin usable. IMHO selling buggy software to loyal long-time customers is a dangerous business strategy in the long run.


Same here.

But selling buggy software to new customers is more dangerous. What if someone purchased BiaB a couple of years ago for the VSTi? I'd bet the lost a customer for life. I know that if that was me I would never look at another PGMusic product.

Each year I look at the VSTi and every year thus far I have determined it isn't for me. YMMV
Caught in an infinite loop:

Attached picture BBvst-Flow.png
I was really hoping there'd be more development at this point. Here we are heading into the end of the first quarter and many of these bugs still exist. They are not features we wish for they are actually bugs. This is a good comprehensive list and we really need to get these done.
Originally Posted By: MarioD
Originally Posted By: Masi
IMHO selling buggy software to loyal long-time customers is a dangerous business strategy in the long run.

But selling buggy software to new customers is more dangerous.

I put it wrong.

I meant relying on loyal customers to deal with quirks and bugs is dangerous. It's a no-go for winning customers unless you're prices are extremely low.

Masi
We all agree that the plugin needs some work. We all agree that it’s not right to continue to roll it out there and not complete it at least to the degree that it will be productive. That is the reason for this post not to suggest big changes, or complicated updates, but rather to fix the punch list items listed in the original post. These are not great ideas, they were advertised features. If they worked properly this plugin would be very useful.

So let’s as a collective group ask kindly but firmly that PGM move the needed resources to accomplish this NOW or at least very soon.

It serves very little purpose to continue to point out the problem, we need to as loyal and valued customers send a united voice for resolution.

So here is my request: To Peter Gannon, and the development team at PG music, both the BBW4 developers, and front end group, Please ASAP divert the resources required to complete this cycle, fixing the bugs in the list originally posted in this thread as well as send to you directly by email. This plugin is a gateway product that will generate many new customers for you when it works properly. But the core reason is that you promised these features as incentives for purchase in this release cycle, and we loyally supported that release.

Now to all users contributing to this post, please add your +1 to unite our voices.
+1
+1 But will it get heard.
+1

Rob, you should put this on the wish list if you haven't already done so. You could reference this thread.
+1

Masi
I am sure they have heard this but it doesn’t hurt to all speak up again in unison. The roar of a crowd is more Impressive than the squeak of a mouse!
After reading these and related threads my recommendation to PG: PULL the plugin altogether and either DROP IT COMPLETELY (PG stays with BIAB as BIAB) or only have alpha and SELECT expert-only beta testers use the VSTi until perfect, WHENEVER, and whatever, that is.

Obviously VSTi users are losing sleep and can't get real work done, so Peter please just remove the obstacle causing their misery.

Larry

+1 usually after the holiday break they work on bb and the plugin but they were on the Mac first maybe because of the delay it had last year because of stupid apple banning all 32bit apps.
Apple have no qualms about all the grief they cause developers because of their slackness, so developers need to come out of retirement and run behind them because just about every update some app don't work anymore or they have to spend $$$ going to 64bit.
Developers out there are still trying to get things to work on Catalina.

We have all this man/woman power but we are powerless to do anything but complain, we can't pitch in and help to get things done frown
Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
We all agree that the plugin needs some work. We all agree that it’s not right to continue to roll it out there and not complete it at least to the degree that it will be productive. That is the reason for this post not to suggest big changes, or complicated updates, but rather to fix the punch list items listed in the original post. These are not great ideas, they were advertised features. If they worked properly this plugin would be very useful.

So let’s as a collective group ask kindly but firmly that PGM move the needed resources to accomplish this NOW or at least very soon.

It serves very little purpose to continue to point out the problem, we need to as loyal and valued customers send a united voice for resolution.

So here is my request: To Peter Gannon, and the development team at PG music, both the BBW4 developers, and front end group, Please ASAP divert the resources required to complete this cycle, fixing the bugs in the list originally posted in this thread as well as send to you directly by email. This plugin is a gateway product that will generate many new customers for you when it works properly. But the core reason is that you promised these features as incentives for purchase in this release cycle, and we loyally supported that release.

Now to all users contributing to this post, please add your +1 to unite our voices.


+1
Originally Posted By: Larry Kehl
After reading these and related threads my recommendation to PG: PULL the plugin altogether and either DROP IT COMPLETELY (PG stays with BIAB as BIAB) or only have alpha and SELECT expert-only beta testers use the VSTi until perfect, WHENEVER, and whatever, that is.

Obviously VSTi users are losing sleep and can't get real work done, so Peter please just remove the obstacle causing their misery.

Larry


Sounds like sarcasm but I'm inclined to agree with you. If they can't/won't fix it they should drop it.
I also agree Rob. A big +1 from me.

Jeff
Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
We all agree that it’s not right to not complete it to the degree that it will be productive. These are not great ideas, they were advertised features. The core reason is that you promised these features as incentives for purchase in this release cycle, and we loyally supported that release.

So here is my request: To Peter Gannon, Please divert the resources required to fixing the bugs in the original post.
+1

BiaB backend Features advertised in the 2020 Plugin that don't work:
  • Center
  • Panned
  • Dry
  • Embedded Tempo
  • Normalize
  • The 300 new MIDI RCs for Real Drums
  • Style changes in the Bar settings
  • The new in 2020 Harmony's
  • Medley Changes
  • Ending only works with 4 bars ending.
  • RDs do not re-generate when generated on the Style page Center

To complete the basic rendering capabilities of BiaB:
  • Direct Input
  • Pushes


+1
+1
+1

Please fix those things
Nope really not sarcasm, I'll leave it at that.

I hope everybody gets the plugin they want.

Larry
+1
Here's the problem.

Nobody cares.

This minute as I'm writing this there are 134 viewers on the main Biab forum and 4 on this one including me and I don't care either. This 3 page thread has the same 10 to 12 users who post in the other big threads about this.

Unless PG has stats showing a whole lot more interest in the VST than the forums do this thing is a big bomb. Just mho, I don't think the bugs have anything to do with it. The vast majority of Biab users are not into DAW's and this VST means nothing to them, just look at all the posters who have never opened Real Band and have no clue about it. Typical Biab users like the basic simplicity of the program and go no further with it so to me this is the problem with putting a lot more resources into it.

Bob
Originally Posted By: jazzmammal
Here's the problem.

Nobody cares.

This minute as I'm writing this there are 134 viewers on the main Biab forum and 4 on this one including me and I don't care either. This 3 page thread has the same 10 to 12 users who post in the other big threads about this.

Unless PG has stats showing a whole lot more interest in the VST than the forums do this thing is a big bomb. Just mho, I don't think the bugs have anything to do with it. The vast majority of Biab users are not into DAW's and this VST means nothing to them, just look at all the posters who have never opened Real Band and have no clue about it. Typical Biab users like the basic simplicity of the program and go no further with it so to me this is the problem with putting a lot more resources into it.

Bob


Bob, I agree that the VSTi is a big bomb. I can see some value in it but as I have stated it is useless as it stands right now. Personally I don't care if it flies or not.

But I don't believe your "The vast majority of Biab users are not into DAW's" is a true statement. I believe they are into DAWs as I see a number of DAWs listed every day. DAWs like Cakewalk, Studio One, FL Studio, Reason, RealBand, etc, are some of what has been mentioned. Many of use don't use RealBand because we are already proficient in other DAWs. YMMV
It should of been marketed as a whole new product without the very old Band in a Box name.
If you are using it in a DAW you want session musician tracks and the name Band in a Box is associated with accompaniment that's been around since 1854 so it's not something new to get the interest of DAW users "oh Biab I tried that once could not work it out...too complex...".
Session Track Pro VST, Studio Tracks Pro VST whatever.. would of got attention and out of the Band in a Box mindset.
This was all suggested way back in beta.
Bob, Mario, your opinions are both valid. I have to respectfully ask why air them here. The whole point of this thread is for those who do care about the plugin. We all like it, and are excited to see it get fixed. Why you ask?

Well frankly there is a whole world out there of DAW users that are not crusty old BiaB curmudgeons. This plugin when working properly can be a true gateway product into those folks world. I know several here that have many friends in the DAW world that would like the product if it was fixed. I know at least three here in this thread that would promote this elsewhere.

So if you are truly against this why come in and rain on others parade, why not just either be supportive of others or move on and post where your interest lies. I for one would use this plugin on almost every project.
Rob, you're right and I'm sorry. I just reacted to Bob's message. My bad.
No worries my friend I always respect your opinion as I also do Bob’s.
I don't really use the plugin myself, but if my memory serves me correctly, PGmusic has demonstrated it at NAMM and other places, and the impression I got was it went well for them.

So I would imagine a new user to biab on seeing those demonstrations and probably buying biab on the strength of what he/she saw would be very irked if the plugin did not work correctly for them, as what they saw in the display, and buying biab on the strength of that.

Music lover your post is exactly why this thread exist. This needs to be fixed ASAP as is is being promoted as a viable part of the system and can cause problems when used and some features are broken so can we count you as a +1 in light of hoping this doesn’t hurt PGM.
Originally Posted By: MarioD
Many of use don't use RealBand because we are already proficient in other DAWs.

I'm in this camp. I don't care not so much for the plugin as such but for an easy way to integrate BiaB into my DAW worklflow.

In all the years I used BiaB I didn't even try RealBand once. There are so many really good, fully featured, all-purpose DAWs around I don't no why I should bother using one that comes as an add-on.

Masi
Well, I hope they fix the list of bugs/issues/etc, as I really want to use the plugin with a DAW. I see a lot of value, especially for easily generating parts and dropping them into a track (even just a few bars at a time, if you wish). I also don't have to worry about things like two apps concurrently open, both using ASIO, and I get to visually "stay in" the DAW while working.

I don't think anything that's been asked for here is unreasonable, and Adar (and company) has been pretty quick to get things working. I understand the effort is probably on the Mac 2020 version right now, but I'm fine if they get these things done by the end of the year (I'm patient).

I don't think anyone can say no one cares. Just because someone doesn't participate in the forum doesn't mean they aren't interested. In fact, only 252 people have logged into the forum this month (and then it drops back to January for the most recent login). Clearly, PGMusic has many, many more users than the regulars (or even irregulars) on the forum, or they wouldn't still be in business.
Originally Posted By: jford
I don't think anyone can say no one cares. Just because someone doesn't participate in the forum doesn't mean they aren't interested.

If I judged by the number of posts in their forums both Arturia and Behringer should be out of business. wink

Masi
Very good points guys.
That's always the question, isn't it? Do the forums represent a valid cross section of the actual user base or not? Is the actual user base roughly over 60 years old or is it younger? Is the base truly mainly interested in 50 year old classic styles from the 50's to the 70's? Is the base generally not very computer savvy? It's just my opinion of course but I strongly suspect the answer is yes.

Therefore, my generalized use of the term "nobody cares" stands. Of course some care but is it enough to matter?

And Masi, you're comments about already being a DAW user so you never even gave Real Band a look is part of the problem. Not blaming you because that's a logical point of view on your part. You already have a DAW and don't need another one. What you're missing is Real Band is not a standard DAW, it does much more than any DAW can do. If you were proficient with it I think you would have a different view of the VST concept.

From what I've seen so far, RB beats the VST so badly it's not even in the conversation. Anything you want the VST to do in a DAW RB already does so to me RB should be the thing getting developed further but it never has.

How many comments are there on these forums saying PG should finish developing and fixing things in Biab or RB before moving on to something new? RB has all the standard DAW functions but I agree some do not work as elegantly as the bigger name DAWs so yes it could use more polishing but so can pretty much any other piece of music production software.

Anyway, I'll leave it up to you guys to boost the VST concept and good luck with it.

Bob
Originally Posted By: jazzmammal
RB has all the standard DAW functions but I agree some do not work as elegantly as the bigger name DAWs so yes it could use more polishing but so can pretty much any other piece of music production software.

RB is so far from the modern DAWs available! You try to make it sound like it just needs a little polish when it is slow and clunky. It has one feature and that is the ability to use RealTracks. Without that single feature I cannot imagine anyone choosing it over any other DAW out there.
RB can be used successfully I did over 100 projects in it and it work pretty well. But it is not as smooth and quick as one of the top DAWs and lacks polish. With out RTs it is just powertracks.

Bob, as far as no one cares regarding the plugin, that might be at least partially true. Yet I think that initially people did care, but it was not working properly, and interest waned quickly. Yes a lot of the demographic here is Surley old curmudgeons like you and me. But that could change if the plugin were working properly. There are some people here lurking to see if that changes. I can think of three people off the top of my head that are very influential on other DAW sites and would be very likely to suggest even promote the plugin to many potentially new users.

I think Bob, you make a good, but sad and painful observation when you say no one cares. Therein lies the problem. In my mind PGM is locked into a very old and debilitating cycle of release hell. Each year they add new features and new RTs to a program created in the early 90 patching over old legacy code. Stuck in a never ending cycle of 6 months of windows release and fix, and 6 months of Mac release and fix. No real time or resources to truly develop a modern version with modern code. Hence the plugin never getting the time it deserves to become a gateway to DAW users tool.

RB is no better, trapped in the old code of Powertracks from the old days. Yes a decent product but the GUI and feature set reminiscent of cakewalk music creator from 15 years ago.

We all pour our money into this product each year expecting the offered features to work properly, and many times they don’t. We shrug our shoulders and say “just the way it is”. This time I and several others are asking that this cycle be broken and the promised features be fixed.

This is only expecting what we paid for, and no more. Maybe there is little interest in the plugin at this time, but it was an advertised feature of the core program, and its unfinished.

Rather than argue and debate whether there is interest in a feature why not expect, no demand that products not be offered for sale unless they are sale worthy, that being actually working as advertised.

I’m not being mean or hard, I love PGM products. I have been a user for years. I expect for my loyalty, loyalty in return.
Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
................Yet I think that initially people did care, but it was not working properly, and interest waned quickly. ..................


Exactly

Originally Posted By: Rob Helms

.............. Therein lies the problem. In my mind PGM is locked into a very old and debilitating cycle of release hell. Each year they add new features and new RTs to a program created in the early 90 patching over old legacy code. Stuck in a never ending cycle of 6 months of windows release and fix, and 6 months of Mac release and fix. No real time or resources to truly develop a modern version with modern code. Hence the plugin never getting the time it deserves to become a gateway to DAW users tool.


I completely agree.


Originally Posted By: Rob Helms

RB is no better, trapped in the old code of Powertracks from the old days. Yes a decent product bu the GUI and feature set reminiscent of cakewalk music creator from 15 years ago.


Again I agree.

Originally Posted By: Rob Helms

We all pour our money into this product each year expecting the offered features to work properly, and many times they don’t. We shrug our shoulders and say “just the way it is”. This time I and several others are asking that this cycle be broken and the promised features be fixed.

This is only expecting what we paid for, and no more. Maybe there is little interest in the plugin at this time, but it was an advertised feature of the core program, and its unfinished.

Rather than argue and debate whether there is interest in a feature why not expect, no demand that products not be offered for sale unless they sale worthy that being actually working as advertised.

I’m not being mean or hard, I love PGM products. I have been a user for years. I expect for my loyalty, loyalty in return.


Very well stated.
Ditto all that! cry
One more thought, PGM can’t rely on the older generation forever we are slowly going away. Mr/Dr. Gannon is from our generation, and someday he too will pass this company on to family and friends. I want to see his legacy continue to shine in the light of new users and products. Imagine the “50” new features in BiaB 2030 or beyond.

This product as is will not hold up to the expectations of the younger generations. It’s time to do two very important things.

1. Get this plugin to where it will bring in Dollars (Canadian) from the vast field of young DAW users. Revenue for development.

2. Begin to rewrite BiaB in a totally new coding that allows simultaneous release of Mac and Win versions. Like many of the DAWs out there, I.e. reaper, studio one etc.

This may take some capital investment but will allow this product to survive into the next generation of DAW users.
FWIW here is my idea of the perfect BiaB VSTi.

For the MIDI side I view the VSTi as an input device much like a MIDI controller. That is using it to drive data into your DAW. Thus you assign a VSTi in your DAW and each BiaB VSTi MIDI track would power each different DAW track. Again that is much like making zones on your keyboard controller. After you achieve the perfect BiaB VSTi track you would or could move it to your DAW. What you hear in the BiaB VSTi is exactly how it will sound in your DAW.

My reasoning for this is that GM is not used much outside of the PGMusic world. MIDI users usually would have much better sounding samples than what comes with GM so having to listen to a VSTi that only uses GM might be a major step backwards for them.

For the RT side the above isn't necessary. Just generate your RTs then move them to your DAW.

For styles with both RTs and MIDI a combination of the above ideas would come into play.

This is just my view and others may or may not agree.
Very interesting idea! So If you drag or open a midi track inside the plugin VSTi it could be assigned to a DAW track with a synth VSTi and play insync with the plugin RTs and other DAW tracks right?
+1 everything Rob said !

How many users have used more than one Biabvst in their DAW ??

That's why in the new GUI I showed midi channel choice so if you are using one instance you can set the channel of that midi track, so it will rechannel the midi tracks in the local folder to the selected channel so as it's sending to the DAW where you can route that channel to any track.
Guide: Using Multiple Biab Plugins
You can put a Biabvst on each track generating a midi track in each plugin with different virtual instrument after the Biabvst.
In Reaper I just set up the Biabvst on one track and load the chords,
now just duplicate the track as many time as you like,
set a virtual instrument on each track,
generate up a midi track in each Biabvst,
double click on each midi icon to set them to sync play
(in the new GUI you don't need to do this as it will play sync by default unless you click the mute button (yes a Mute button with an M that Mario will see no problem without having to distinguish colors) to mute tracks or hit the Host button to stop sync playback).
If track 4 don't sound right generate it up again or have a multiriff midi and use the S solo button in the new GUI to solo the riff you like.
Will that give you enough midi tracks now ??

The whole idea of the Biabvst is for this
Quote:
bowled over by 2020
Originally Posted By: justanoldmuso
now done several songs.
i couldnt do any better if i used a big studio ;like i used to.
wowser !!!!!!!

so to give those in the studio "Session Tracks Pro" vst not the old name "Band in a Box" that is associated with auto accompaniment from the 90's and a nightmare to workout and learn.
You can't tell a Studio using Mac to use RealBand !
Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
Very interesting idea! So If you drag or open a midi track inside the plugin VSTi it could be assigned to a DAW track with a synth VSTi and play insync with the plugin RTs and other DAW tracks right?


YES
It is my firm hope that as soon as Mac beta is completed, and Mac release begins that Peter and team will spend the time to fix the 11 promised features that don’t work, and bring this plugin product to where is needs to be, before any new ideas are implemented for 2021.

How cool that would be. If they do this let’s make a commitment in return to let everyone we know that dabbles in this area, that this is a great addition to their DAW creation process. Some might be on the fence due to the conversation around these part regarding the problems.
Originally Posted By: Rustyspoon#

Ideally, I would want a single platform. For example like Halion Sonic (or Kontakt) You can use it as a standalone or as VST with almost identical interface and functions. With PG plugin it is another game that I have to learn. here)




A better example would be Native Instruments MASCHINE - available standalone or as a plugin. Or REASON by propellerheads.
Rob Helms, - and so many others here..

I'm so relieved and encouraged that there are others here who share - not only my enthusiasm with BIAB - *and* its idea - but also the huge potential the plugin *could* offer if implemented properly.

So I can only add a gazillion of +1's to this thread. My amens.

I'm a Mac plugin user but this thread clearly has more traction than the Mac equivalent.

I am of course the person who dared to raise the heresy of PG considering outside sources of funding - buyouts even - in order to break the same old cycle that has been so well - even graphically ( literally ) illustrated here.

I recall Pete Gannon even piped in at one stage to say or imply that there was no issue with any lack of funds to support any additional developer resource for plugins etc.

Seems to me that now many many months down the road - and how things have panned out that this isnt the case. Far as I can tell its a single developer - no doubt overworked - who codes both the windows and Mac plugin.

Now of course it isnt necessarily the case that simply throwing more developers. (and cash ) on a software problem resolves things - sometimes it makes things worse. But something just isnt right.

I was clearly in a minority of one to dare to suggest "teaming up" with the Y-word.... And in the end those posts actually got deleted on the FR forum.

I think I'm vindicated now and its still imo a good idea.

But hey - if. things work out with the plugin in the next year all the better.

I note that theres nothing in the 2020 plugin notes that mentions anything about speeding up generation though. Thats a biggie for me. Not seen much talk bout it here. Are people fine with the huge rendering times?
I remember well the conversation
As for speeding up generation, considering that it generates useable tracks usually 4 or 5, in somewhere around a minute. I don’t feel that is too much of a wait time to crush creativity. I mean if you were having to program a drum track in EZDrummer, and then go program one in EZKeys, then piece together a bass track with another program, or loops, then add a guitar track from some guitar VSTi that might take hours not minutes. So 1 or 2 minutes is just not a big problem. I think sometimes we get sort of crazy with our expectations. If the plugin worked with all the feature list advertised would it be horrible if it even took 5 minutes to generate? Most likely not. So a couple minutes is really good.

I tried several files and most of my render times were around 90 seconds the longest was just under 120 seconds. Now these songs were 2 or 3 choruses and not real complicated, so if the song was super long it might take 3 to 5 minutes. Still not bad to get get a decent 4 or 5 part track base. We do have to take into consideration the speed and power of our personal computers. Some of the delay maybe on our end. I know my system is getting older and is not top of the line.
Originally it took ages to generate but then it was changed to use the same render method as Biab so it is the same render speed now (see pic below same song in Biab and the Plugin).

Moving all the code to the Plugin will take another 10 years.
If there was also a simple version of the Plugin that just had the code in it to generate up single tracks one at a time without the need for bbw4 and all the complexities of Band in a Box would give DAW only non Biab users a very simple no brainer Plugin like EZKeys.

The Plugin should of been targeted more to DAW only users that know nothing about "Band in a Box", it should of had it's own name like "Quick Tracks Pro" "Studio Tracks Pro" "No Brainer Tracks Pro" etc.. but because of the old name was still used "Band in a Box Plugin" long time users of Band in a Box thought they were getting Band in a Box in a Plugin so everything has been driven in the plugin over the last year to be that for them, so there was not much done with the GUI so users are still trying to work it out, where as EZKeys, EZDrummer are still in version 1 because they worked the first time from being well thought out and designed.



That's why I suggested a simple vst/au that will send VstTimeInfo play/stop/loop/pos etc from the DAW to the main Biab app so it plays back in sync to the DAW. This is what FL Studio and RapidComposer use to sync them to the DAW (see pic below).


Attached File
BB-BBvst-speed.gif  (166 downloads)
Attached picture RC-FL-Plugin-Mode.png
Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
As for speeding up generation, considering that it generates useable tracks usually 4 or 5, in somewhere around a minute. I don’t feel that is too much of a wait time to crush creativity. ............


I'm afraid I simply disagree. I find the current generation waits in BIAB standalone acceptable but absolutely not the much greater time in the plugin. As we know this is because in standalone generation gets done via RAM whereas in the plugin there is an extra step after this - namely writing the result to disk.

For me the creativity element is killed this way. And im on a relatively fast I7 Mac.

The waits incurred might be acceptable if one has firmed up the arrangement and isn't likely to be changing chords much - but if one is in early stages and trying out different progression or arrangement ideas this just hampers workflow to a point that frankly make me unwilling to use the plugin for actual production or composition in a DAW. But our disagreements on this point might as I suggest be more down to our differing approaches to composing or production etc..
Originally Posted By: Pipeline
Originally it took ages to generate but then it was changed to use the same render method as Biab so it is the same render speed now (see pic below same song in Biab and the Plugin).



hmmm - I'll be testing out this myself ( on Mac beta ) as I'll remain sceptical on your claim. But if true fantastic.
Pipeline you're simply wrong. utterly mistaken.

I took a song - Ave Maria using Trickle.sty - gave it 9 choruses and did a regenerate in BIAB standalone. took around 10 or so SECONDS. Then ready to play.

Tried doing this in the plugin ( Mac 2020 ). and its literally not finished yet. we're taking minutes.

Seriously - ive just tried this in Ableton - and

........ 22 MINUTES!!! and it still hasn't finished generating.


Versus 10-12 seconds in BIAB standalone.

And this is acceptable?

https://youtu.be/L_wHeSx1qU8
"10-12 seconds in BIAB standalone"
is that start play in that time or rendered all files to hard drive ?
The plugin should be using the same function in BBW4 as BBW that renders the tracks to files.
Originally it was using the drag export function.
I'm sure I told you ages ago that Biab is quicker as it's generating direct to RAM and starts playing the tracks while the rest of the bars are still being generated, and I suggested to the development team way back to do this with the plugin. Do you remember that ?
I don't know what more you want me to do ?
I made ReaTrak perhaps you can use that ?
If they had sold out to Yamaha you would not have RealTracks or a Plugin.
You didn't want them to spend time on Rewire cause you had to save it twice.
Originally Posted By: nonchai
Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
As for speeding up generation, considering that it generates useable tracks usually 4 or 5, in somewhere around a minute. I don’t feel that is too much of a wait time to crush creativity. ............


I'm afraid I simply disagree. I find the current generation waits in BIAB standalone acceptable but absolutely not the much greater time in the plugin. As we know this is because in standalone generation gets done via RAM whereas in the plugin there is an extra step after this - namely writing the result to disk.

For me the creativity element is killed this way. And im on a relatively fast I7 Mac.

The waits incurred might be acceptable if one has firmed up the arrangement and isn't likely to be changing chords much - but if one is in early stages and trying out different progression or arrangement ideas this just hampers workflow to a point that frankly make me unwilling to use the plugin for actual production or composition in a DAW. But our disagreements on this point might as I suggest be more down to our differing approaches to composing or production etc..

I agree with you! Every tool I use delivers results pretty much instantly. So 2 minutes is an extreme wait when I am just noodling and trying to be creative. Definitely not good enough!
When you say BiaB stand-alone I take that to mean the main core program and not the standalone plugin. If that is the case then I offer that is apples and oranges. If one wants to play around with different chords, styles etc that is always going to be faster and easier in the main program. Maybe the generation will speed up some day, we will see. Let me remind everyone the true reason for this thread:

This thread is not about complaining over things that may be needed in the future.

The thread is not about how little the plugin is getting used because it doesn’t hold a candle to BiaB.

The thread is not about the fact that nobody cares, or who cares.

What’s the thread about?

The customer ( Buyers) being sold on 10 or so features of the plug-in that do not work and having to wait a long time for a resolution.

PGM has clearly weighed the consequences of falling short on a new plug-in that has very few people using it YET. They have dedicated the resources to keep their biyearly release cycle of a Windows and Mac versions of 50 new features 200 new RT’s Because that is their bread and butter.

Ultimately this thread is to remind them that while understand their needs, and do want their continued success, this is not right. We expect when there is an advertised feature list with a price asked for those features, those features should be provided in full working order.

I see an add for the latest version of my favorite SUV on special sale this weekend. it says it has 1 year free satellite radio, free dash GPS, Bluetooth phone connection, heated leather seats. $35,995. I drop into the dealer and they tell me the sale version is being shipped but most of them have been preordered and the sale end this week there’s only 6 left. I sit down and guess they have one left in my color. It will be delivered to my home in three days. I write a check. Sign the paperwork and head home in anticipation.

Three days go by and sure nuff my car is delivered. I receive the keys and open her up. It looks great. The truck leaves, I decide to go for a drive to check it out. Buckle up and head out. Flip the radio on and FM works AM works but satellite radio does work, bummer I think. I decide to try out the GPS to get to a cool pie shop I heard about, touch the screen and there’s no setting for GPS. Huh, it’s kinda cold so I go to hit the button for the heated seated whaaaaaat! Now I’m upset so I hit the Bluetooth and you guessed it there is no phone connection in this radio model.

I get home and call the dealer they tell me that those features are not available YET. They will implement them but first the have another model that will be for sale next month and after that they will look into fixing my car!

This is why this thread was started. I still love the car but it should not have been advertised as having those features if they were not there.
Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
What’s the thread about?

The customer ( Buyers) being sold on 10 or so features of the plug-in that do not work and having to wait a long time for a resolution

....this is not right. We expect when there is an advertised feature list with a price asked for those features, those features should be provided in full working order.

You are 100% correct but PGM operates this way. They release broken features and some never get fixed. Custom track names that are not consistent throughout the program. UserTracks...an extremely cool feature that never quite got finished. VideoTracks that were DOA. The VST that was shipped completely broken and still has major problems a year and a half later. And this year...multiriffs. I have gotten excited about every one of these (except VideoTracks) and then saw that excitement fade away as they move on to the next year's 50 new features. What pisses me off the most is the denials, from PGM and their biggest fans, when something obviously broken is discussed here in the forums.

That paragraph sounds like I am an unhappy PGM customer, right?

But that is NOT true!

I remain completely delighted with the RealTracks and RealStyles so I send PGM almost $300 every year without fail! PGM consistently delivers extremely high quality music tracks and a really great tool in BIAB to use them.

I wish they would improve BIAB. I really do. But I honestly don't know if they can.

I grumble here and I expect I will continue but at the end of the day I remain thrilled with what I can create with BIAB, RealTracks and RealStyles!

And a huge THANK YOU to people like Rob Helms, Pipeline, VideoTrack, MusicStudent and others who help us all work around the BIAB bugs and who still push for improvements even when they seem slow in coming.
Amen.
Band-in-a-Box® 2020 for Mac is Here!
right now that's done where were we ?
JJJ, I deeply appreciate your thoughts. This must be particularly hard for you since you had a hand in the plugin concept in the beginning.

One bright light right now. We all know that PG does care about their customers. They have been kind of trapped in a tightly wound cycle of biannual release the last few years. It seems they have really picked up the pace this year as Mac came out in early March not June or July. I could be wrong but that seems to point to Peter wanting to make these issues right, and carve out some time early this year to fix issues.

If I am correct then let’s get ready to help in anyway possible when the update roll in let’s focus on the listed items in the beginning of this thread and not waste valuable time fussing about other issues that we might want, we can tackle those issues when the core promised functions are stable. That will also help PGM end the season strong and get ready for a promising 2021
Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
When you say BiaB stand-alone I take that to mean the main core program and not the standalone plugin. If that is the case then I offer that is apples and oranges. If one wants to play around with different chords, styles etc that is always going to be faster and easier in the main program.


I respectfully. ***strongly*** disagree. This is not apples and oranges. For starters the issue is present EVEN IF one isn't playing around with chord progressions but simply needs to move between different BIAB song file arrangements for whatever reason. Every time one needs to generate ANYTHING in the plugin this huge waiting time dispirity will occur.

This isn't some "luxury" nice-to-have feature in BIAB standalone that for some reason any user of the plugin - who really wants to begin focusing on working primarily in a DAW environment - for production reasons as opposes to just music practice purposes - can somehow live without or forego. Do you seriously think ANYONE WANTS these long regenerate times when doing work of any kind in a DAW?

Plugins are for DAW users. And you think somehow that waits for 5 minutes or so when working on a project are going to be acceptable? Is this kind of forgiveness and tolerance of a plugin developers excuses is going to pass any muster?

This plugin as currently sold and delivered to us DAW users is not fit for purpose.


Originally Posted By: Rob Helms

I get home and call the dealer they tell me that those features are not available YET. They will implement them but first the have another model that will be for sale next month and after that they will look into fixing my car!



And with regard to the generate times disparity - the analogy I'd propose is TESLA.

Imagine that TESLA had actually begun business making luxury full-features sports cars that ran on petrol air diesel. And then later on decided to launch this new fangled desirable thing. called Electric versions of the same car.

People who've grown too love and are accustomed to the petrol teslas put down orders for the electric versions.

Then the customers get their electric Teslas. But - not having read or been given the small-print..... the discover that yes - all the features of the old teslas are there................. except the Teslas only do a maximum miles-per hour of 12 MPH - and just like in early combustion engine days- they expect a man to walk in front of the electric tesla with a flag - for warning others - in case the batteries explode.

Originally Posted By: nonchai
Seriously - ive just tried this in Ableton - and

........ 22 MINUTES!!! and it still hasn't finished generating.


Versus 10-12 seconds in BIAB standalone.

And this is acceptable?

https://youtu.be/L_wHeSx1qU8


So as to not highjack this thread and get you better results I suggest starting a new thread to compare Mac vs Win rendering times and or to debug your issues.

Here are a few things to start your new thread.
- Have you contacted support to see if this is unique to your system?

- Do you have more than one DAW to compare results on your system?

- For example, a typical song will generate in less than a minute on the Windows plugin.

- To debug your issue you will need to have a song that is testable by many to verify the results.
I tested:
_CITRINE Demo - Citrine Nashville Heavy Ballad


Test that Song demo and let us know your results.



Originally Posted By: jpettit


............
Test that Song demo and let us know your results.
........



plugin: 27.959. seconds - vs
BIAB standalone. : 6.6. seconds.

Thats is........... 4.2 times slower.

This is for 2 choruses.

Now lets try this again with 9 choruses:

plugin: around 2 minutes
BIAB standalone. : 6.99 seconds


that is - about 17 times slower.



in CUBASE...

except this time around the plugin hangs in Cubase and I get the spinning wheel.

Will try again in Ableton.



Now just one comment - I prefer not to be dragging the audio files ( once generated in the plugin ) into the DAW. unless things are pretty finalised arrangement wise. So for most of the time with this plugin I will be using the audio streaming mode instead. but this makes no difference to the times. because either way the files get written to disk.

Also very noticeable is that the time for generating 9 choruses compared to 2 for this particular demo song is almost identical in BIAB Standalone.

Attached picture CE Arranger Chain 1.png
Here is the result for _CITRINE - this time in Ableton and only using 4 choruses:

BIAB Standalone: 7.15. seconds
BIAB Plugin: 63.154 seconds.

Ableton doesnt seem to hang though - compared to Cubase - which does. Often.

Attached picture 501Bass, Electric, NashvilleRadiol.png
Ok, there are at least four things to consider.

1) Mac vs. Win
2) Spec of the systems
3) How BiaB renders (in RAM or cached) vs how the Plugin renders (file-based)
4) DAWs

1) I don't think it is a Mac vs. Win issue (Need another Mac user to benchmark and suggest moving that to the Mac area to get more Mac users)
2) Your time BIAB Plugin: 27.959 seconds. vs mine 26.888 (basically the same so it is not your system or Mac vs Win)
3) The plugin has been and will continue to get tweaked to work the same in all DAWs. There are also some styles that will hang while rendering so it is important to always give test step specifics so others can verify and report the time benchmarks and hang issues to support so that they can track it down.




Originally Posted By: nonchai


...

This isn't some "luxury" nice-to-have feature in BIAB standalone ....


... This plugin as currently sold and delivered to us DAW users is not fit for purpose. ...




This thread is starting to compete with the record breaking off-topic JOKE thread, at least with respect to the number of posts (maybe content as well?).

While I'm here, I do not recall the plugin being sold separately - the rhetoric suggests otherwise.

Larry
Now that the Mac version is released we can hope that these fundamental issues get addressed.
Originally Posted By: jpettit
Advertised 2020 Plugin features that do not work:
  • Center
  • Panned
  • Dry
  • Embedded Tempo
  • Normalize
  • The 300 new MIDI RCs for Real Drums
  • Style changes in the Bar settings
  • The new in 2020 Harmony's
  • Medley Changes
  • Ending only works with 4 bars ending.
  • RDs do not re-generate when generated on the Style page Center

To complete the basic rendering capabilities of BiaB:
  • Direct Input
  • Pushes

I may be off base here, but I'll say it anyway. So, I've been following this thread and it does seem to me to that it's comparing apples to oranges.

As has been said, when BIAB generates a song, it starts playback shortly after generating the beginning of the tracks, and then keeps generating the rest of the song in the background while the song is playing. So, while it may seem to only take 6 or 7 seconds, that is just to have enough generated to start playback, but because BIAB will continue generating the rest of the RealTracks in the background, it's not enough to have fully formed tracks from beginning to end in that 6 second time period. Unfortunately, you don't see how long it actually takes BIAB to generate the track completely; you only see how long it takes until playback starts. When RT's first came out, you actually had to wait for all the tracks to be generated before playback happened. Then they figured out how to start playback before the tracks were generated, but that only reduced the time to start hearing the playback, but the tracks kept generating in the background.

Try regenerating a song in BIAB with a bunch of RealTracks and then immediately try to play on the last few bars of the song and see how long it takes to hear it play. BIAB has to generate all the tracks to that point to be able to hear it.

Given that the process of the plugin is to drag a track from the plugin into your DAW, even if you could hear playback happening more quickly (which is probably doable), you still can't drag in a track that hasn't been fully generated yet.

I'm not saying it can't be done faster (perhaps in memory), but you have to consider what is happening under the hood. I agree that if RT's could be cached into memory and processed there (as Pipeline has suggested), it would be a lot faster; that could even be applied to the main BIAB program, not the jut plugin (or the RealBand interface to the BIAB features). Maybe when you select a style file, it should just automatically load that content into memory (after checking for enough memory to do so) and process it there. Given that even though the files are WMA, BIAB processes them as WAVs, that means a 3 minute song with 5 tracks at 10 MB/min would only mean loading 150MB into memory, which should be pretty fast. And then it's there until you change styles or load a different RT or RD.
If memory was not available, then do it off the hard drive as it does now.

But to compare generation times for entire tracks versus just the ability to hear the beginning of the song playing is still apples to oranges.

Flaming can start now, if you wish. Doesn't bother me.
Originally Posted By: nonchai
Originally Posted By: Pipeline
Originally it took ages to generate but then it was changed to use the same render method as Biab so it is the same render speed now (see pic below same song in Biab and the Plugin).

hmmm - I'll be testing out this myself ( on Mac beta ) as I'll remain sceptical on your claim. But if true fantastic.

Originally Posted By: nonchai
Pipeline you're simply wrong. utterly mistaken......


Did you even look at this pic of the original render times ???
it's not wrong and it's not a mistake.
ps. I get faster render times on Mac than Win using the same hardware.
John you are right on with your analogy. That is as my point you just said it better.
I timed the render in the Plugin compared to exporting the same separate tracks for the above-mentioned test song in BiaB and the results are similar.
Back to fixing the OP issues.
https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=585534#Post585534
nonchai, let me also make a suggestion. Please carefully read John Fords post. It will help you understand the core differences between the plugin, and BiaB. The render times are actually behind the curtain very similar. Since the plugin waits for the generation to be completed, and BiaB allows the playback to begin while generation continues it gives the impression that it is slower. This is because they were made differently for different reasons.

Both allow for tracks to be completed to create music. BiaB was made to allow the music to be changed and altered quicklly. Keep in mind that drop and drag is a somewhat new feature in Biab. Drop and drag is the whole point in the plugin. Working in the DAW is its only purpose.

Suggestion, when tinkering with a song if want to make small changes like try a different guitar, or add a organ, and such this can be done in the plugin before dragging tracks, and just that track can be generated which is usually much faster. Chord and major structural changes will take longer. If you need to do that use BiaB. If I want to cut on 2x4 I use my skill saw. If I need to cut 100 pieces I get out my Chop saw, set up a stop block and start cutting.

Point being drag and drop was added to BiaB for this reason so folks could tinker and experiment and when they got precisely what they needed drag to DAW. The plugin was created for a different purpose some DAW users that didn’t want to use BiaB, or dig in and learn it, or just wanted to quickly add tracks to the DAW the plugin was created so they would have a tool for that.

I personally have done a ton of testing and multiple songs in the plugin. My usual regeneration time on my old laptop is maybe 2 to 3 minutes sometime 5 for a real big project. I’m not put off with that. Do I wish it was a tad faster, yes. But I can deal with it since I understand what it is doing for me. If I had to generated these same track with several other VSTis it would take far longer than 5 minutes. And if I had to make a change to the track due to added chorus, different chords or the like I would have to make those same changes in several different VSTIs then once again 5 minutes would be a blessing.

I appreciate where your coming from, but respectfully think you are not seeing the big picture. Until the plugin was added this had to be done either in BiaB, or done with various other plugins.

On a side note there are other programs that do the whole thing in one box. Captain chords, scaler, etc. and while they do a decent job, even a good one, they don’t have 10% of the capability of BiaB. Finally this thread was not started to hammer out these type issues but to garner support for the express purpose of encouraging PGM to fix the basic advertised and promised feature bugs in the plugin. We can discuss render times and how to work with that on another thread.
Quote:
Over 20 minutes vs 10 seconds to generate 9 chorus song in plugin vs standalone

9 x 72bars 4/4 @ 40bpm
what's that over an hour play time ?

Now in BB open that song again without play/generating it and go straight to Render tracks then time it until you have all the tracks as wav or aif
Great test to understand the render time differences. Thanks
Tighten your seatbelts guys now that Mac 2020 Is released, and wow really early this year. I expect to see some love for the backend features in the plugin.

I think it is appropriate to give PGM a round of applause. They really dug in and covered some ground. We and I really include myself in this comment rode them hard, and pressured for a fix. Well the PGM lead by Peter and the team put in some hard work, and really gave themselves some breathing room for this cycle. Now if they do what I think they are doing and address the plugin issues this could be one of the best cycles yet.

Thanks to everyone who posted here and kept this thread alive. We all really want PGM to continue to thrive into the next generation, and tapping into the DAW users market can help in that area.
It will be great when it works as advertised.

I.M.H.O. it will not only greatly improve the workflow between the DAW especially if they get the 300 RD to work and the direct input option to work, but will drive more impromptu desires such as regenerating bars for a selected region.
Originally Posted By: jpettit
I timed the render in the Plugin compared to exporting the same separate tracks for the above-mentioned test song in BiaB and the results are similar.

https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=585534#Post585534


Yes I agree that the export to audio times are Pretty much identical to BIAB stand alone. But thats not how I want to use the plugin. I want to have waiting times to playback - PLAYBACK be the same as in BIAB standalone. I don't want to be forced to be dragging ANY audio files into the DAW at all. I rely on the directly streamed audio. And just as for standalone - theres no reason this couldnt be done same as standalone eventually.

The whole heft of my points are concerting the simple task of making changes to the arrangement and then getting into a state where one can start to play with or use the result.

The basic implication behind what a lot of the people responding here all the "apples and oranges" talk... seems to be that the plugin wasn't "intended" to be so and so.... I find this to be a lame excuse.

Maybe for those putting forward these apples and oranges arguments they never had the intent or expectation to use the plugin with the same kind of M O as BIAB standalone - where the NON RENDERED TO DISK waiting times are fine and useable but RENDERED TO DISK waiting times are so slow that one only does it when everything is finalised. But here's the thing. When in BIAB standalone one gets the advantage of a rapid change-and-test cycle and then when ready do the slow export.

But people suggesting that one shouldn't also expect the same to be possible in the plugin clearly expect people like me to have TWO apps open at the same time - BIAB Standalone AND the plugin.

This is ridiculous. Specially after V2. since there are now enough features from BIAB standalone in the plugin to allow us to do a lot of song creation and arranging in just a DAW+plugin workflow.
Its just the waiting time that makes this M O impractical.

Think if any other plugin that exists out there which is some kind of music-arrangement creator - like Propellerheads REASON plugin - Native Instruments MASCHINE - and you will not see this artificial "apples and oranges" demarcation between their Standalone version of their technology and the plugin.

I might add that its a little disappointing that even in v 2.0 there's no multi-channel output feature in there yet. We are talking about a plugin that sits in a DAW that generates audio for multiple tracks - instruments - yet only provides stereo in the live real-time audio streamed into the DAW.

Name any other plugin where the producer-user would be expected to do this dragging and dropping of data ( whether audio or MIDI ) into the DAW tracks - for the plugin to work. It doesn't happen.
Yes many have drag and drop features typically for MIDI export. But its not the NORMAL method in which the user is expected to use the plugin.

PG Music have form in using words in a very loose fashion. Many years back they added a kind of "plugin-mode" to be able to drag audio file data into a DAW. That wasn't a plugin at all.
Now we have an actual plugin - but one which barely operates as any plugin that internally generates multiple parts of audio would do. Its a kind of half-arsed compromise.

You should of suggested all this years ago to give them heads up, I was the one that pushed for years for the Plugin as I was using RealBand that uses bbw2 in the same way for years so I suggested doing it the same way using bbw2 for the Plugin. After it was released I suggested play from RAM so all you can do is wait.
Nonchai, if you want to request things like this please start a new thread, either here or in the wish or request forum. This thread is for discussion and hopefully resolution of the previously promised items for this years and last years release. I understand what you want. So feel free to ask for it through the proper channels. There might be others that will support you. What we are trying to do here is get the things that have already been implemented to function properly, before requesting anything new.
Noted.
Nice, that help all understand what we asking for in fixes. Hopefully that’s what is happening behind the scenes.
FYI IMHO the priority of fixing the features that do not work based on how DAW users would want to work with the plugin renders.
1) MIDI version of the drums would be a big bonus to allow for Multitrack mixing/replacing of drums.
2) Dry (no reverb) mixes are important to use the more sophisticated reverbs in the DAW.
3) Adding embed tempo just saves a step of manually entering that data in order to adjust tempos after the dropping files into the DAW.
4) Center pan stereo tracks allow the DAW user to do their own positioning of the track.
5) Dry tracks allow DAW users to add their own AMp simulators to fine tun the distortion.
6) This allows the DAW user to work within the plugin to change the instrument mix for verses, pre-chorus, chorus, and bridges.
7) This allows the DAW user to work within the plugin to change the drum mix for verses, pre-chorus, chorus, and bridges.

The rest get us to a point where any song made in BiaB would play identical in the plugin.

+1 on all above
+++1 on above as well
This is why you need a Tempo Embedded (what PGM calls Acidized) in the Plugin Options to work.

MIDI files always have tempo embedded. (you don't get choice)
Audio files without tempo will not sync to each other if you change the tempo while in the DAW. (Studio One, Cakewalk, Reaper V6)

This is important to a DAW user as they continue to develop their song.

Because these Options still do not work the DAW user cannot make choices about panning or reverb.
It is also important to note that they can not try to make these changes in BiaB and Import the song to be Rendered.
At the moment you are stuck with PGM mix from the plugin.
These are some of the first things a DAW user is going to want.
Attention PGM development!!!! We have seen some work done on the front end by Adar, and thanks to him for that. But we have yet to see one single fix from the back end developers. I ask is this not going to happen? If there is going to be no further progress this year then please tell us. So we can stop asking and posting and hoping.

Several of us here have invested a lot of time and effort into figuring out, and detailing the base features needed to make this plugin totally useable. I for one have several projects that I want to do that will go much better if the features listed actually worked. I don’t enjoy having to “trick” the tools into doing what it should. I just wish you folks would break silence and let us know what is happening. Is it to much to ask for you to at the very least let us know what you intend to do about this. If you have no intention on fixing these things just say so, and we will save our virtual breath. Move on use other means to accomplish what we need and save frustration.

This down time for the world is the perfect time to accomplish this so many people are sitting around with time to create. You could pick up many new DAW users who have time to explore this option.

Finally please, just communicate with your customers.
Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
Attention PGM development!!!! We have seen some work done on the front end by Adar, and thanks to him for that. But we have yet to see one single fix from the back end developers. I ask is this not going to happen? If there is going to be no further progress this year then please tell us. So we can stop asking and posting and hoping.

Several of us here have invested a lot of time and effort into figuring out, and detailing the base features needed to make this plugin totally useable. I for one have several projects that I want to do that will go much better if the features listed actually worked. I don’t enjoy having to “trick” the tools into doing what it should. I just wish you folks would break silence and let us know what is happening. Is it to much to ask for you to at the very least let us know what you intend to do about this. If you have no intention on fixing these things just say so, and we will save our virtual breath. Move on use other means to accomplish what we need and save frustration.

This down time for the world is the perfect time to accomplish this so many people are sitting around with time to create. You could pick up many new DAW users who have time to explore this option.

Finally please, just communicate with your customers.

+1

Well said Rob. Maybe they are mostly done with it.
Originally Posted By: JohnJohnJohn
Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
Attention PGM development!!!! We have seen some work done on the front end by Adar, and thanks to him for that. But we have yet to see one single fix from the back end developers. I ask is this not going to happen? If there is going to be no further progress this year then please tell us. So we can stop asking and posting and hoping.

Several of us here have invested a lot of time and effort into figuring out, and detailing the base features needed to make this plugin totally useable. I for one have several projects that I want to do that will go much better if the features listed actually worked. I don’t enjoy having to “trick” the tools into doing what it should. I just wish you folks would break silence and let us know what is happening. Is it to much to ask for you to at the very least let us know what you intend to do about this. If you have no intention on fixing these things just say so, and we will save our virtual breath. Move on use other means to accomplish what we need and save frustration.

This down time for the world is the perfect time to accomplish this so many people are sitting around with time to create. You could pick up many new DAW users who have time to explore this option.

Finally please, just communicate with your customers.

+1

Well said Rob. Maybe they are mostly done with it.


Don't hold your breath whistle

PS - I do hope that they are working on this as it could be the wave of the future for PGMusic.
John to the third power, I couldn’t agree more I also hope they are working on this. I guess where I’m at is I have been hoping for that since December. I really do hope so, but I am frustrated that we can’t even get any confirmation as to “if”or “when” or ”not” or whatever.

Mario you are on the money.

I want to add that I don’t mean to be so negative but it is getting very frustrating. We finally get a new version it is more broken than the previous one. And I do not blame Adar for that. There is only so much he can do. Most of the feature fixes are backend development issues.
We can add one more to the backend fix/improve list.
EXTREMELY LONG file names.
The average length is over 70 characters!? If you actually look at the file names in the DAW cache or peek file names it can exceed 128 characters with the DAWS metadata attached to the file when drug into the DAW.
This is unwanted, annoying, and can hurt certain actions such as quick comping auditions.

No thanks

A DAW user just needs "Guitar RT 3030" at the most for the file name which the DAW will use as the Track label.



Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
Attention PGM development!!!! We have seen some work done on the front end by Adar, and thanks to him for that. But we have yet to see one single fix from the back end developers. I ask is this not going to happen? If there is going to be no further progress this year then please tell us. So we can stop asking and posting and hoping.

Several of us here have invested a lot of time and effort into figuring out and detailing the base features needed to make this plugin totally useable. I for one have several projects that I want to do that will go much better if the features listed actually worked. I don’t enjoy having to “trick” the tools into doing what it should. I just wish you folks would break the silence and let us know what is happening. Is it too much to ask for you to at the very least let us know what you intend to do about this? If you have no intention of fixing these things just say so, and we will save our virtual breath. Move on using other means to accomplish what we need and save frustration.

This downtime for the world is the perfect time to accomplish this so many people are sitting around with time to create. You could pick up many new DAW users who have time to explore this option.

Finally please, just communicate with your customers.

+1
It's important to note the 200 new RC for MIDI drums don't work in BiaB and the plugin in all DAWs except Reaper. So it is a digression from last year.
Thanks Jeff! There was a new build (v2.6.8) added to the pre-release forum today that includes many back-end fixes such as RCs for MIDI drums and plugin rendering options. Give it a try and let me know if you are still experiencing any issues.
Just adding to the discussion - I saw this mentioned in one post in a "to be fixed" list - hope it's on the map.Bar settings such as number of beats are not being loaded in plugin. I have measures of 3 followed by measures of 4 that load correctly in BiaB but all are 4 beats in plugin and the bar setting dialog shows count of "0" (default I guess).
Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
Things needed to make the plugin functional.
The following are known and confirmed issues not working with the current plugin:

FIXED
Center Panned, Dry, (no EQ or FX). These are important for rendering to a DAW, as they allow the user to use tools in the DAW for processing rather than having them pre processed. A must have!

FIXED
The 300 new MIDI RCs for Real Drums (Studio one, Cakewalk, and Ableton live not working) they worked last year when there were only 20 but are broken now. Also, a must have to allow much wanted multi-track drums.

FIXED
Song Fold/Unfold bug. If a song is generated while the chord sheet is folded. It will generate all choruses. If you drag tracks to the DAW, play the song in the DAW then make any changes to the song, it will only generate the 1st chorus. Note: in the info bar (black area with blue lettering) if the chorus count looks like 1/2 or 1/3 etc generation of all choruses fail. If you hit the red stop button on the plugin or manually reset the count it will work.

FIXED
Embedded Tempo, many DAWs can stretch the audio to follow a live tempo but the audio file must have embedded tempo first. MIDI tracks always have the tempo embedded.  If you want to have the plugin work with a live recording or want to add tempo changes in your DAW, the file needs embedded tempo.

FIXED
Style changes in the Bar settings. This is a cool feature to add texture to the song. It only works when a file is brought from BiaB, not one created in the plugin.
UNTESTED
The new in 2020 Harmony's or thickening this doesn’t work properly
UNTESTED
Medley Changes are not working properly in the plugin.
UNTESTED
Song Settings 2-4 Bar Ending only works with 4 bars ending.

FIXED
RDs do not re-generate when generated on the Style page.

NOT YET IMPLEMENTED
Direct Input versions of RTs are very important allowing a user to use amp sims to create the sound desired but are not working.

1/8 push, 1/16 push are still not working

Regards Rob.

Thank You!
Ditto it is working better in this new build.
Seeing this late, sorry. The plugins are useless. I write the arrangement in BIAB, audition and generate better tracks and solos in RealBand (crap as a DAW) and get the heck out of there for Acoustica Mixcraft, which is fantastic. I think BIAB is antiquated and RB is buggy. PGM should concentrate on great RealTracks and Drums, and optimize song generation with them, and get out of the DAW business. Once you have good WAVs, use the DAWs directly and leave PGM to do what they do well- song arrangements and tracks.
Welcome late is better than never. Good to see you again. Warren I do have to disagree on some points. BiaB is not a DAW in the simple view of things. RB has had its share of bugs, however it has come a long way. When you figure what it actually can do there is no DAW on the planet that has its track generation capability. That said it does need a few modernization options.

The plugin in my opinion is not crap, it actually works very well. It has had several very nice upgrades and while it is still being developed it is currently very useful. I pounded out 4 test projects yesterday, and it preformed very solidly. I have used it since the very beginning and it has really come along. Now it is a powerful tool inside a DAW. Certainly there are some things that still need attention, but it is a pretty good tool.
Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
RB has had its share of bugs, however it has come a long way. When you figure what it actually can do there is no DAW on the planet that has its track generation capability.

And except for that single feature it is a DAW that no one would ever choose to use. I would love to see it reviewed and compared to REAL DAWs.

Quote:
The plugin in my opinion is not crap, it actually works very well.

In my admittedly limited experience it does not work. Latest version crashed every time I tried to use it yesterday. It should be solid as a rock after all this time and effort has been put into it.
Sorry your having that experience but it is not mine. For me it is working. You are most likely using the latest forum release and it had a big feature added that made it unstable. The team is working hard to stabilize it. We had a very solid build not to long ago but everyone kept asking for more and more addons, and it has been a rollercoaster ride at times, but now many of those are being addressed. I have no doubt it will be stable soon. I hope PGM takes the wise course, and stops the rapid roll of added features in favor of solid function.

As far as RB not being used, well there are many here that would disagree. While it is not super popular, there are people here that have used it since inception, some in professional development. I have used it extensively and had great success. I do think they should upgrade a few features, but not at the expense of it not working properly.
Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
Sorry your having that experience but it is not mine. For me it is working. You are most likely using the latest forum release and it had a big feature added that made it unstable. The team is working hard to stabilize it. We had a very solid build not to long ago but everyone kept asking for more and more addons, and it has been a rollercoaster ride at times, but now many of those are being addressed. I have no doubt it will be stable soon. I hope PGM takes the wise course, and stops the rapid roll of added features in favor of solid function.

As far as RB not being used, well there are many here that would disagree. While it is not super popular, there are people here that have used it since inception, some in professional development. I have used it extensively and had great success. I do think they should upgrade a few features, but not at the expense of it not working properly.


So why do users use Studio One rather than RealBand ?
https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=612329
Quote:
Feel free to post feature requests about RapidComposer in this thread , or start a new thread.
We will implement every sensible request, as it happened in the past.

Thank you,
Attila

Things are just done, it's all so easy, no fighting, no stress, a total pleasure.
Originally Posted By: musicdevelopments

Originally Posted By: como baila

And this would be the 'BIG' feature that would propel your program to the top of the charts: create a midi VSTi plugin version that could run directly within a DAW like Cubase.

Harmony Improvisator or 7Aliens Catanya are examples of this approach ... but implemented at an infinitely inferior level compared to your program.

Como

Thanks for all the requests. The VSTi plug-in version would not be too much work...

Thank you!
Attila

NO BOARDROOM MEETINGS
Originally Posted By: Musicdevelopments

Thanks for your very kind comment smile , and for being so helpful and enthusiastic for so many years.
Definitely no boardroom meetings :uhuhuh:
Attila

Quote:
crossovercable wrote: ↑
Every few days since it's release 10 years ago there has been fixes and new features added.
The development decisions don't have to go up through a hierarchy to be discussed in a boardroom meeting.
I think we are actually communicating with a higher being from another planet that has tapped into our internet, Attila is just the earthly name smile


I don't want to get into politics like over in the USA but I do see the similarity, that someone comes in to change things for the better but the old guard hangs on blocking things to keep things in the past, that don't work. If things don't work you don't keep repeating them or you get the same results.
Pipeline it’s not about old guard or not wanting progress but progress with out stability is fruitless. I do appreciate the ideas and vision you and others bring to the table and also want to see things modernize. If you remember I totally agreed and echoed your vision of a redo similar to what Presonus did with kristal audio. Maybe using an open source daw.

Let’s take RB for example . What does it need? First to complete with Studio one or Reaper it needs to shed its 48 track skin and clean up the mixer view where the only tracks that show are the ones on the tracks view like ever other DAW. It needs to have the mixer moves feature brought up to the level of the automation features of other systems.

It could use a visual update and so it doesn’t look like the Powertracks it was built from very much like the early cakewalk days. But despite this it is still capable of delivering excellent results. I stopped using it not because it didn’t work but because it was resource heavy on my system and I liked a few features better in studio one. It has gotten better stability wise in my opinion. I would love to see it come all the way to where you and I envision it could be. But to just shred it and place it in a constant state of construction is not the answer, as there are people that use it every day. It needs incremental progress, that allows it to function. I would love to see parallel development of a new DAW. I think we talk about that a while back.

Case in point the plugin every time I’m they get a solid stable build the masses clamor for this feature or that feature PGM tries to add it and the next build is a train wreak. They scramble to fix it get it real close and add another feature bang the cycle starts all over. To your point a while back it should have cooked longer to start, but it didn’t.

I don’t want to stop progress just slow it down some to allow stability to catch up, lest many give up and move on. I really do appreciate what you try to do around here. You sir are a thinker, and have good vision. If I haven’t said it ,thank you !

One word of caution I offer, you come from a environment of fresh ideas that exist in the REAPER world. Rapid change. You know as well as anyone that BiaB is not Reaper. Reaper is a light weight, small footprint system that can sustain rapid development. BiaB is a complex, resource heavy old legacy code system slowly grinding forward adding multiple new features each year and every few years a major change. All this adds to the basic stability issues. Long time request don’t get handled due to new asks being implemented. PGM to its credit try hard to make all of us happy. Sometimes to hard. The plugin is one of those examples. What is in pre release beta right now is when done will be a very solid place to take a breather. Hopefully then RB can get some more love and become what we all think it can be.

Please don’t ever think you are not appreciated. New ideas and innovative thinking are vital to the future of this product. Careful implementation is also vital so that current users continue to enjoy using the product daily. Older users (old guard) want stable solid familiar function, innovative ideas thinkers want new fresh workflow based changes. Both want to make music. Both are important to PGM and both have the right to their views.
Peace to ya Brother,
Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
..........................

Let’s take RB for example . What does it need? First to complete with Studio one or Reaper it needs to shed its 48 track skin and clean up the mixer view where the only tracks that show are the ones on the tracks view like ever other DAW. It needs to have the mixer moves feature brought up to the level of the automation features of other systems.


For everyone whom wants RB to be compete with Studio One, Cubase,
Logic Pro, etc, are you willing to pay the same price as these DAWs charge? The only advantage RB has is in using RTs and that could be solved by using the VSTi. IMHO the VSTi is the future for PGMusic.

I have said it before and I will say it again I think PGMusic should get out of the DAW business, completely rewrite the VSTi and BiaB to include a lot of suggested improvements like real time signatures, more tracks (BiaB), bar by bar regeneration, etc.

I will add that BiaB is NOT a DAW so some should stop trying to use it as one. BiaB is an backing track generator. Use it like that then transfer said tracks to the DAW of your choice. This is my opinion.

On a side note if I were in charge of PGMusic I would try to work out a deal with Pipeline and incorporate a number of his add ons and suggestions.

YMMV




For me anyways a welcome development in RB would be,

1 a nice toolbox of options for the tracks that can be done with a signle click or so, such as split a track (scissors tool) mute a selection mute tool, a range tool and maybe a few more.

2 a nice big mixer not that pitiful little mixer that we have at the moment.
Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
.. We had a very solid build not to long ago but everyone kept asking for more and more addons, and it has been a rollercoaster ride at times,...

These were industry standard things that it never had in the first place, that cause it to be a flop as I said it would be in Beta.
Re: Plugin v2.0 Needed Improvements Solo/Mute No Brainer
Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
Pipeline, Brilliant in my opinion. Those improvements would get the plugin to where it would be a solid part of my daily workflow. 100000+ for me on all of it.


That's why I say about RapidComposer how the development works, it's so easy, no fighting, no stress, a pure joy. Every few days features are added.
I'll buy you RapidComposer and you can join the forum and see what a joy it is, NO HIGH STRESS CONSTANT FRUSTATIONAL AGGRAVATION over a decade mad
There is a constant open Beta, there needs to be something like this here:
v3 Beta Feedback And Discussion (Bugs, Features, Suggestions) We will implement every sensible request..

Not a 5 day beta test of the Plugin then released.
Adar communicates, gets things done quickly when he's allowed to, but his hands are tied as it goes through the hierarchy and board meetings.
Imagine if Adar was free to develop the Plugin and the BBW4 himself, you would have another Attila.
RealBand is what it is, if there was nothing else, I could do it all with that especially with the latest beta, that by the way has been given a good long test and not a 5 day rush.
Pipes, you are right about all of that. It should have cooked longer. It should have been made closer to industry standards. You are also right about the fact I agreed with you 1000% at that point. What I agree with now is that it has obviously struggled. But there have been times where it was pretty darn stable then an added feature blew it up again. Why I ask? Well the answer lies in things both you and I have discussed in the past.

This product (BiaB) was built decades ago with old legacy code. It has been updated patched added to for decades. It seems obvious just how close to broken or easy to break this old code is. To PGs credit they know their product, get it fixed. People keep pushing for new things, many that actually are good ideas. The problem is that until this software gets a major code upgrade continually adding feature just breaks existing ones.

So while you view me and a few others as “old guard” or whatever, we actually want the same thing. We want all of this to function at a high level. So I propose we all join forces as a team. You keep coming up with awesome ideas for PG to consider and I’ll keep reminding them to stabilize the current features. Together we along with many others here can enjoy the fruits of our labor.

Hopefully we can encourage Peter and his excellent team to take a look at a modern code rewrite with the focus on ARA2 plugin protocol. Imagine if the plugin, with many of your great ideas, interacted with the DAW much like Melodyne. Sharing chord/key/etc data seamlessly.

I have seen BiaB, RB, and the plugin flip flop from stable to unstable multiple times. I also recognize that While this is happening regular users are trying to use it. So I try to balance the need for improvement with the need for caution and stability.

I hope this explains my view and clears things up. Both viewpoints are vital in my opinion.
Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
...Hopefully we can encourage Peter and his excellent team to take a look at a modern code rewrite...

encourage ? I started out that way over a decade ago frown
I used to be really nice and respectful (and we all know how that ended).
I tried really hard
programming language upgrade delphi to c++
see, I don't mind joining forces as you say but I don't have much force left, I'm just so worn out and depleted from it all these days, sorry frown

Quote:
I also recognize that While this is happening regular users are trying to use it. So I try to balance the need for improvement with the need for caution and stability.
again if you look at RapidComposer there is a version for regular users and a version for public beta, the beta is not a release version until down the track when it's all good, not a 5 day test ! you get a better beta test if it's public, Reaper does that.
Sure you will still have the closed forum for the 5 day mad rush test of the new December version and spend all Dec-Jan fixing the bugs after it's release, so maybe there should be a closed beta testing in Oct-Nov for it rather than a mad 5 day rush.
I get that but this is not reaper, not rapid composer either and we have to play in the playground that’s offered. PGM does things differently than those other folks. Maybe some of it is for reasons we don’t know. Reaper while very slick and powerful DAW is nothing like BiaB. Rapid composer again while it is a composition app like BiaB is very different in approach and I am sure coding. These are great examples, but still PGM is going to do things according to there plan. We can ask, beg, scream, yell, but really the best course is to suggest changes and accept results. We all choose to use this, we choose to spend time testing and working with it.

If PGM chooses to ignore our ideas, or to take a different path, or even to do things different from our views that is their choice. My friend you should enjoy the journey and not invest so much it exhaust you. Many of your ideas have been used. Use what you like, and get back to making music, and doing projects. Take some time and enjoy what you do have.

Again thanks for your ideas, tip, work around and hard work.
Originally Posted By: Rob Helms
best course is to suggest changes and accept results

If folks like Pipeline did that we would have only the VST mess they first released when even the owner of the company stated it was working perfectly fine. And it would have served its purpose of being one of "49 New Features" never to be fixed or used by anyone. Kinda like UserTracks and VideoTracks.

Mr. Pipeline, thank you for continuing to request/demand/plead for useful features that actually work!
Originally Posted By: JohnJohnJohn
........................

Mr. Pipeline, thank you for continuing to request/demand/plead for useful features that actually work!


A big thank you from me.
Hi Everybody, first time here, hope it's the right place.
Is there a way to save the style and the real picker windows layout after resizing?
Everytime i open these windows it comes back the same way.
I tried to "save windpw size" in preferences but it just works for the main window.
Thanks
Originally Posted By: cop65
Hi Everybody, first time here, hope it's the right place.
Is there a way to save the style and the real picker windows layout after resizing?
Everytime i open these windows it comes back the same way.
I tried to "save windpw size" in preferences but it just works for the main window.
Thanks


You would get more responses if you started another thread.

Sorry I gave up on the plug-in completely so I can't answer your question.
This thread was back in 2020 when there was interest and enthusiasm to make the Plugin better but now it's all seems to have died in the *^%.
You now get a few post with 1 or 2 reply's.
I think a lot have given up on it like me. Let's hope all the functions and improvements recommended are now being implemented after the 4 months Mac programming.

Does anyone else have hope that we will see massive change in 23 and give us something that will generate tracks quicker than Biab main app without taking ages creating a whole lot of wav files filling up the hard drive ?
I hope it starts to do all it's supposed to do to begin with. For me, as yet, it doesn't.
Make the code stable then build on that former foundation I suppose.
I stopped using the LPUGIN for track generation yonks ago. I use it for the chord chart principally.
Exporting tracks from BIAB and importing into Reaper is faster than the VST in my experience.
Having to reset the tempo in the VST each time I open the Reaper project is annoying too.
LOTS of glitches but, as I mentioned, the chord chart is the reason I use it anyway.
Thanks for the feedback Ray! What version of the plugin are you using? The latest version of the plugin has the "tempo reset" issue fixed along with several other major stability improvements. Please install the latest update patch and if you are experiencing any more issues, please provide specific examples of what is not working to your expectations or what you would like to see improved, and I will make sure to fix it right away!
Adar, if you were given total control of the Plugin with the generate code it would sky rocket ahead as a whole new product leaving the Delphi 6 months Win 6 months Mac behind.
To rely on the old Biab Delphi app in the background holds it back in every way.
I know enough about how it all works to create a Plugin that would do all that or I could give that info to other developers, BUT I don't because I want to help PG get there though they a very stubbornly holding onto the past. Look how much time and effort I put into it for years, I don't get anything out of it, I do it from the goodness of my own heart.
PG, please get your finger out already, I'm dying watching this paint dry.
I understand and appreciate Rob Helms's point with this thread. It ended up being 8 pages long so though it may have had narrower participation and following it's just my view it was worthwhile. Just yesterday as a complete novice I was able to fairly quickly create an audio backing track for my song.

And it was really useful too as a resource for what the VST's shortcomings are and why maybe it's just simpler to use the stand alone BIAB program and export that to Reaper.

And though at times folks mentioned other products that seemed to hijack the thread's purpose I did appreciate guys mentioning those other products since I'm a neophyte to computer DAW music production and those mentions helped me with some interesting directions to consider.

That doesn't mean I'll be abandoning BIAB. I find it great for quickly creating a practice backing track for whatever song I'm either creating or wanting to learn. It seems every program has it's strengths .

On the other hand I think I also realized I'm probably good with whatever I've already acquired form the makers of BIAB since they hardly participated at all in responding to this thread plus for my purposes BIAB is good enough as of my 2022 version
© PG Music Forums