realband - PG Music Forums

I would agree in part with Bill that RealBand is not really a Daw, though it has some DAW features, but it is a good start to learning the process and its dead easy to get tracks together. C
reating orignal work where YOU want to control every drum hit, every bass line is not what its meant for.

Try KVR (website) for freebie DAWs if you find BIAB or RB limiting.

Real Band and BIAB are still fantastic though - I use BIAB more than anything else, unfortunately I can get RB working at all on my 64 bit system.
Be aware there that there are some areas of the handling of VST (virtual instruments) that really need updating and BIAB wont work with any VST.
Also setting up sound can be very strange, as they are still using (very) basic windows drivers for some tasks/set ups (where the world has moved on decades ago) although PG support is very good ( instant on line customer support). As i say, I cannot get RB working here at all - PG blame my sound card driver, but its a very upmarket sound device with no problems with other apps. There is a thirty day money back gauruntee though.

I feel both very dissappointed that PG have not provided proper sound card and VST support, and absolutely delighted with BIAB's flexibility and the authenticity of its RealTracks technology. I have got BIOAB working after a fashion and can platy along with a track but not record - using my piano VST. This alone is worth the moeny to me. Real Tracks are a huge leap forward from any other accompaniment program

Concerning the other question

With a basic sound card you will probably be limited to one (or perhaps two) mike inputs at a time. There is a difference in gain between instrument and mic inputs.

A keyboard can act as a MIDI dievice or you can input the audio out from the sound that the Keyboard is making - two different things. Think of a MIDI as a 'score', it makes no sound in itself, but it can instruct others (PCS) how to make a sound - just lioke a shhet of music. MID contains more info than a score and it related directly to the copmputer, without you having to see tghe notes. Hit a key and a 'note on' signal goes to hte sound device, take your finger off and a 'note off' signal goes. Ther are many more signals than these. Most people, though certainyl not all, use a keyboard as a MIDI device and keep their actual sound on the computer in the form of a 'virtual insrtument' of some kind.

You can use a mixer to input more than one mike simultaneously, this works after a fashion, but the signals are recorded as a whole so there are no ways to edit a particular sound.

DV247 is a good source of advice rfe particualr products

I still have a Gateway from 2002, XP home, Pentium IV, 2.0 with 768mb RAM and a C drive that's 40gb. I added a 250gb second internal drive. Audigy 2 card. I never did make that big RAM upgrade. I added 512mb when memory cost a fortune.
BIAB 2009.5, Realband and PTPA 12 runs fine on it.
The box is as big a Fridge and weighs a ton. lol

I run everything now on a 2006 Gateway Core 2 Duo 2.13, 2 gb Ram, SB X-Fi audiocard and 2X500gb RAID drive system.
Also bought 2 Acer 22" widescreen Monitors. They're still working great after 3 years. They were $149.00 each.

Wayne,
(I still don't know what RAID does)

Quote:

I did go into a music store today while I was in the "big city" (Pat - it was Jackson Music in W-S) and am now trying a TASCAM US-122mkII USB audio interface. And it came packaged with Cubase LE5. So I will see what that DAW does also.
Kenny

dang, Kenny! I was at Jackson Music yesterday too, buying strings for my guitars! You may have seen me.. I was the one with no talent...

;-)

There are different variations of RAID.

Basicly it copies the data over more than one drive (or partition) to make it so you can recover more data if one drives fails. Redundant writing. Done a few different ways, which is why there are often numbers after the term RAID.

My process is to create the basic arrangement in BIAB, import into RealBand where I can regenerate bits and pieces until I get every track playing what I want it to and then I save the individual tracks to wave and open in my DAW (Reaper)then I add my guitar, vocals and then mix

Quote:

My process is to create the basic arrangement in BIAB, import into RealBand where I can regenerate bits and pieces until I get every track playing what I want it to and then I save the individual tracks to wave and open in my DAW (Reaper)then I add my guitar, vocals and then mix

Why go through all that? RB can do the same. Sounds the same. The only reason would be some proprietary effects that I can see.

"Why go through all that? RB can do the same. Sounds the same. The only reason would be some proprietary effects that I can see. "

Speed, ease of use, staying out of anger management classes due to software.

...the koolaid of BIAB must be tasty. It does what it does well. But if you are in a "pro" environment, where knocking stuff out in a hurry is what is required, then Real Band is not the "DAW" for you. Genius. There are better programs out there to edit clips that are not linear. Cut a segment, move it where you want. Real Band is not that. Change pitch/tempo in real time with no artifacts and no useless set of confusing choices, Real Band is not that. Take a loop and stretch it to more measures or shorten it quickly, Real Band is not that. Etc, etc, etc. Real Band is very linear. It produces good quality linear tracks with high levels of realism. However, it is a resource hog that requires more than an off the shelf 500 dollar computer to do the basics quickly. Not being able to stop playback because of CPU usage is a programming issue, hot a system/hardware one. That stop button ought to have top priority in the program. It doesn't. So, if it doesn't "stop" playback, but stutters to the end, and the only way to stop it is to kill the process, that is a programming issue, and a very annoying one. The "stop" button is actually the "click and pray it stops, or wait 5 minutes" button. So, if I am a "troll", you can't handle the truth. Real Tracks is the only unique feature, and it is saddled with a windows 95 interface that almost makes it not worth using.

OK Bill I'll give you this. RB indeed is not all the things that Traktion or Acid are but those programs don't do what RB can do either.If you're into making a soup of 500 little cut and paste clips then indeed RB is not the tool.It's the same with any skilled trade. There are tools that are best suited for the type of work you do. Plumbers don't use the same tools as Electricians. Similar maybe but not the same.Only you can figure out what tools you need. I do believe though that you have no clue as to how to use RB and do not posses the skills to evaluate RB.
Take a look around these Forums. You'll see that there are a number of us using these programs and answering all the questions. We have learned how to use these VERY complex programs.We also have some very satisfied customers that once some of their mistakes have been corrected are totally delighted.There are many PROS here that know how to use these tools. We also know when to use another tool.We don't say" Oh RB/BIAB can't do this like Traktion can so it must be a piece of crap".Everything in life has it's uses and limitations.
So now I must say that if you've concluded that RB/BIAB is crap go somewhere else.
Thanks

RAID, Thanks rharv,
Wayne,

Quote:

"Why go through all that? RB can do the same. Sounds the same. The only reason would be some proprietary effects that I can see. "

Speed, ease of use, staying out of anger management classes due to software.

...the koolaid of BIAB must be tasty. It does what it does well. But if you are in a "pro" environment, where knocking stuff out in a hurry is what is required, then Real Band is not the "DAW" for you. Genius. There are better programs out there to edit clips that are not linear. Cut a segment, move it where you want. Real Band is not that. Change pitch/tempo in real time with no artifacts and no useless set of confusing choices, Real Band is not that. Take a loop and stretch it to more measures or shorten it quickly, Real Band is not that. Etc, etc, etc. Real Band is very linear. It produces good quality linear tracks with high levels of realism. However, it is a resource hog that requires more than an off the shelf 500 dollar computer to do the basics quickly. Not being able to stop playback because of CPU usage is a programming issue, hot a system/hardware one. That stop button ought to have top priority in the program. It doesn't. So, if it doesn't "stop" playback, but stutters to the end, and the only way to stop it is to kill the process, that is a programming issue, and a very annoying one. The "stop" button is actually the "click and pray it stops, or wait 5 minutes" button. So, if I am a "troll", you can't handle the truth. Real Tracks is the only unique feature, and it is saddled with a windows 95 interface that almost makes it not worth using.

Ok Bill, it's Christmas. I'll take your points in order.
One. what's with the comment about Biab kool aid? We're not talking Biab. The two programs are related but RB is not Biab.

Two. You're talking a lot about loops. True, RB is not going to compete with Acid but neither is Acid going to compete with the Real Tracks or adding brand new Biab midi parts, especially a soloist in any of several thousand styles.
This falls under the concept of using the proper tool for a given job.

Three. You speak about the time it takes to get something done. Let me talk about that a bit. I use Adobe Audition a lot. I used to think Power Tracks, now Real Band were really slow and clunky until I discovered that while the immediate workflow is much faster in Audition, the overall time to complete a project is about the same due to how both programs handle the temp project files. Audition keeps all the temp files until you go to save the project at the end and then goes through a very elaborate and time consuming "flushing temp files" thing. A complex project comprising say 17 tracks with a lot of cutting, pasting and waveform editing can take 10-15 minutes or more to do the whole flushing thing to finally save and close a project. Real Band does all that as it goes along so while the immediate workflow is much slower, there's none of the flushing at the end. You just save the project as normal and move on. I can't speak for other DAW's but that's my take on these two.

Four. This is the biggie. I have no idea what you are talking about when you say a $500 computer can't handle the program and it won't stop properly. Do you see anyone else complaining about this? Did you search the forum to make sure? The answer is no, nobody has that problem so what does that tell you? Instead of making these completely incorrect and inflammatory statements trashing the program (that's what a troll does)why not simply state your problem and ask for help? Everybody here including me is happy to sort it out for you.
You're new here so you don't know everybody. Rharv is one of our resident experts on this program, reread his answer to you. He has his own studio, does tons of recording using yes <gasp> Real Band and knows almost everything there is to know about all the editing functions and there's plenty of them. He is also a website designer and computer programmer. I know a lot of it too because I also use RB all the time. So does Silvertones. Is it the only program any of us uses? Of course not, different tools for different needs and all that.

It can most certainly be true that RB is not the best thing for you based on your personal needs and that's fair enough but to trash it like you did based on incomplete information and what appears to be a major configuration issue with your system is unfair. You're saying this: "The "stop" button is actually the "click and pray it stops, or wait 5 minutes" button".
This is definitely your problem not the program, something in your setup is causing this.

Bob

My main issues with mixing in RB is not being able to slide or nudge entire tracks with mouse and no envelope recording for pan,fades and volume, also recording multiple takes in RB is cumbersome. Dont get me wrong though, I love RB for what it can do.

Highlite what you want to move, Hold ctrl and click on a track and nudge (or slide) it all you want. Use the Audio edit window and zoom in for better results, but you can do it in the main view too.

Use the piano roll for creating graphic envelopes. Many of us here are wishing for the ability to draw in the tracks window.. here's hoping! Jump on the wishlist for this.

Not sure why recording multiple takes is cumbersome, can you elaborate?

RB - It's not perfect (none are) but it's very servicable. There isn't much I can't get done in it .. and if I can't, I use whatever I need to get it done. And keep on trackin'.

To everyone that may struggle with RB.
Did you know that there's a complete manual in the RB folder. There's a lot to read but may help give a better impression.

One thing i find is that people in general that use DAW type programs all have a favorite. That is normal for sure. I have three i regularly use, Rb being one of them. I find that one does one thing better and one the other. One thiong is sure, we all tend to get fiesty if someone disses our fav.

RB and PT get a bad rap alot, due to the older style GUI, and the fact that they are rather "Young" in feature sets compared to a apples for apples chart of some of the bigger names. But if you take a closer look you find that it is also more mature in other areas. Also that the methodology of how they handle some tasks is just a tad different from the main stream programs like sonar,cubase, reaper, samplitude, and so forth. The RT/Rd development is an area they have the competition cold, but not everyone likes that. If you come over from a platform like reaper with it's deep layered routing RB looks light weight. Fact is most of that is not really that necessary in the average tracking session.

RB does have buss routing, not as mulit layered but if you learn it it works fine. RB does not have Sonar, or Acids groove clip or looping ability, but it will handle audio very nicely, and has a few decent loop tools. I to have had RB lock up and studder to the end of the song, but each time that happen the problem was traced to a pluggin that when removed the issue went away. This is in part RB fault, since it does not handle plugs as well as other programs do. But there are certainly alternatives that can be used. I have also had Reaper lock up and crash on me on several occasion, and this is why i almost never use it.

Reaper in particular seems to have a rabid following. It is a powerful app, but not perfect either. But i think people who use it like the feel of being involved, much like some here do. The ability to have regular meaningful input and the ability to say things like " I like what Justin is doing with the program" it is a personal attachment sort of thing. Kinda like when a sports fan says we won this weekend!!!

I have had issues with RB, Reaper, and MC from cake, but i still own them, and use them. One application will never have every feature perfect, each will have it's angle. Whatever you love to use use! I do not think it makes Bill a troll since he has issues with RB, and voiced them, but he certainly is frustrated, and asking for help would be more productive. Hey if he wants to move from BiaB to RB to Reaper to Cubase to Sonar, to Traction, to Samplitude, to Audition and polish with a full dose of Sound Forge so be it. If one wants to start and finish in PT let it be! Heck some of the greatest songs ever recorded were on old 4 track tape machines.

Quote:

If you come over from a platform like reaper with it's deep layered routing RB looks light weight. Fact is most of that is not really that necessary in the average tracking session.

Reaper in particular seems to have a rabid following. It is a powerful app, but not perfect either. But i think people who use it like the feel of being involved, much like some here do. The ability to have regular meaningful input and the ability to say things like " I like what Justin is doing with the program" it is a personal attachment sort of thing. Kinda like when a sports fan says we won this weekend!!!

I do not think it makes Bill a troll since he has issues with RB, and voiced them, but he certainly is frustrated, and asking for help would be more productive. and finish in PT let it be! Heck some of the greatest songs ever recorded were on old 4 track tape machines.

I think you're right on with this post Robh. Apps such as BIAB/RB, Jamstix, Reaper, etc. are going to have a more rabid following simply because - besides being good programs - the creators of the program stay personally involved with their customer base and listen and respond openly to their customers' experiences with the programs. I agree that Bill is not a troll simply because he has issues with RB, but at the same time he will find that he will get more valuable help by not categorically ripping the program's worthiness and abilities. And when comparing RB's capabilities to other DAWs, I think the 80/20 rule applies. I certainly think that RB will do 80% or more, and do it well, of what most will require from a DAW. It's unique strengths lie in it's BIAB-related capabilites, as well as the superb help available from both the user community and PG Music itself.

Terry

Nice follow up Terry, I don't rip folks for liking other programs, or for mentioning them. I don't think it is cool to bash the home team, and offer something else as the holy grail on their own web site, nor is it cool to post links to other products on this or any other site as the answer to issues here.

We should however be less quick to rip back just because someone does not like some issues with PG. It is my personal view that PG needs to hear what others think, if all we do is tell them how great they are (and it is true) then the issues we want addressed will never be.

Let's take a quick look at business reality. If we do not complain, and PG doesn't slowly fix the problems, one version at a time, what would be the driving factor in the year to year profit bass they need to survive in the market place? If they went in and actually added all the things we want, completely upgraded the GUI, gave us twice the RT/Rd sets/ added twice the styles all in one upgrade, plus killed 99% of the bugs and overcame any real stability issues, packaged it on a hard drive for 2012 what the heck would we buy in 2013?

I am not suggesting for all the conspiracy theorist out there that PG holds back on us in some evil scheme, to suck out our hard earned cash year after year. But doing every fix known to man and every upgrade ever mentioned at one time would be a programming nightmare and not possible. Still timed release and development is a business plan. Give the user what you can reasonably add in a year version, and keep future development moving forward. Know what i mean Vern?

Quote:

...what the heck would we buy in 2013?

Basing a business model on "fixes" isn't good in the long run, and I don't certainly don't think that's how PG Music does things.

People make purchasing decisions based on what a product can do for them, not on it being less terrible than the prior release. If BiaB were feature complete and bug-free, there are many things that could be added that would make a yearly update attractive. RealTracks, MIDI styles, new time signatures - these are all compelling reasons for upgrading.

I suspect that PGMusic is fully aware of what the competition has to offer, as well as their strengths and weaknesses.

Since you can only get RB by purchasing BIAB, then as far as I'm concerned, it's a free add-on to BIAB. I think it's a pretty powerful piece of free software.

And when you get down to it, I think you're really just paying for the RealTracks, RealDrums, and MIDI styles, as evidenced by the point-five releases at mid-year where the update to the program is a free download, but you have to purchase the new RTs and RDs to take advantage of it.

But that's just my opinion.

Unless and until the "other" DAW applications develop and introduce Auto-Accompaniment features as good as the ones in BB and RB, I think that any comparisons lack the necessary common-denominator.

But I'm not one to ask for one tool in my toolbox that does it all anyway. The Swiss Army Knife or the Leatherman Tools are dandy little gadgets that can solve problems simply because they are compact and always available to those who carry them. And I love my Leatherman tool. But I wouldn't pick it to do a valve job...

From the beginning I have always viewed the various softwares available to us for music making as simply being tools and have purchased and used them as I saw fit and needed to accomplish goals and objectives. Some have stood the test of time here, getting updated, others have fallen by the wayside.

At the end of the day, nobody on God's Green Earth is going to be able to tell you which software tools you used to create your project if you did your job right.

It is all simply pcm digital audio.

--Mac

To me anyone who argues that this DAW or that DAW is the BEST is not very experienced at using digital Audio.
My biggest complaint is to come here and bash BIAB/RB. If these programs serve no purpose to you then leave the Forum. If they do serve a purpose but there are things you'd like to change put it in the wish list. If you need constructive help many of us will help. Just don't come here and bitch about something you know nothing about.

Quote:

Basing a business model on "fixes" isn't good in the long run, and I don't certainly don't think that's how PG Music does things.

People make purchasing decisions based on what a product can do for them, not on it being less terrible than the prior release. If BiaB were feature complete and bug-free, there are many things that could be added that would make a yearly update attractive. RealTracks, MIDI styles, new time signatures - these are all compelling reasons for upgrading.

One thing that is abundantly clear in the various responses here is that all of us tend to buy whatever software solves the specific problem we want to address. Each software has many features common to the competitors, but that's never why we buy it... we buy for the UNIQUE features.

When you look at the wish list, MOST of the requests involve asking for features that will make BIAB/RB more like other programs. However, when you look at what PGMusic has done as opposed to what people have asked for.. they have consistently introduced features that enhance their core uniqueness first. I think that's just good marketing. Why reinvent the wheel? If there's already a product that does XYZ, why would anyone spend new money to buy another product that does the same thing but in a different way? And why would developers spend development time and money to "catch up?" ... it only makes sense to "stay ahead" in the areas where they are already leading the pack.

As stated in another thread, if I had to choose today between everything I asked for on the wish list last year and what PGMusic delivered, I'd take version 2011 in a heartbeat. Why? Because what they served up was a mega leap in improving the usefulness of everything that is unique to their products. The whole time I was asking them to be more like Sonar, They were working on improving everything that will never be available in Sonar or anywhere else but in PGMusic products..

FWIW, I upgraded RB but not Sonar this year.

John (S), Mac this is my point, that it takes more than one program, and that those programs that try to be everything fall woefully short. Reaper tries to be the best DAW with routing architecture, Sonar tries to have it's center points, and the same is true of others. It is obvious that RB, and BiaB for that matter is aimed at the development of the RT/RD plan. This is part i imagine why the VSTi issue has been a back burner one.

John (F) and David, don't get me wrong, read my last paragraph in the last thread, i am not suggesting PG bases their business on slowly fixing bugs to get us to buy again, but that fixing everything at once is impossible since each new feature adds an element of danger for new bugs. Software by nature is buggy, and difficult to develop as every system is different.

If PG stopped releases and waited unitl every feature on the wish list was added, and every bug squashed, they would never release another version. For two reasons, 1. you can't complete de bug until the program runs on many different setups, and 2. you can never please everyone with the new feature list. Oh and #. some users can't setup to save their lives and have false bugs that tie up time!

Also I don't think we should be too hard on folks that come here and "bash" as you say the product, as it is just a sign of frustration on their part in the inability to get the thing working. The also spent there money on it and are just venting. Certainly not the best approach, but one everyone has taken at one time or the other. Where I personally draw the line is where someone comes in "bashing" as a means to promote another product as the answer to others problems. The old "This product suck, and if you had DAW XYZ it would never do that, you should go to this link www.perfectDAW.com and download it" To me that is the wrong use of a companies user forum.

David, what i meant by "What the heck would we buy" is that IF and that is a BIG IF PG actually killed all bugs, and added every thing on the wish list in one release there would be little to sell. Even though we are really paying for the RT development, I doubt people would pay as much for new RTs as quickly as new technology to run them. Sales would suffer a bit cause some might reason i can get by with the RTs i have, and wait a while. The new release with new features that make the RTs work better is the carrot that lures new sales. I bought because of the fact i did not buy in 2010.5, and there was 202 new RTS and a elastique engine to make them better. The only software i upgraded this year was BiaB on HD. So i am a true fan.

Pat Marr,

Kenny Danner here in Hickory, NC. You mentioned once about how it would be nice to have a North Carolina users group. Have you given any more thought to that idea? Please email me at kennydanner@hotmail.com if you would like to discuss getting together sometime.

Thanks,
Kenny

Quote:

Pat Marr,

Kenny Danner here in Hickory, NC. You mentioned once about how it would be nice to have a North Carolina users group. Have you given any more thought to that idea? Please email me at kennydanner@hotmail.com if you would like to discuss getting together sometime.

Thanks,
Kenny

I almost missed this post! (check your mail!)