Recently i have been 'testing' RB 2018 v4. This as i haven't been using it much sofar compared to BIAB 2018.

I loaded a BIAB MGU file, which works OK there, and which has a few beat count bar changes. Imported in RB it has some issues (see picture}:

1) (a & b). a RT switches to a new track leaving a gap.
2) Gaps appear ...
3 and 3b) not all MIDI tracks are loaded completely.

What's up here? -F

Re: "Imported in RB it has some issues"
Can you describe the exact method used to 'import'? This might have some bearing.

Hi VT. tried various imports, MGU, Frozen MGU, SGU, and i guess the errors are popping up after a beat count change at a bar is far as i can see. Also some bars have a lot of internal chord changes; i like to steer the bass note at times. example:

IMO BEST WITH A DEDICATED DAW.

Just figured out why the tracks switched .... had some style changes set halfway through, style picker variations on a similar style in this case.

And the gap was ONE chord set to HOLD on a 3rd beat within a bar. And in Biab all this played smoothly.

So I guess REALBAND v4 cannot handle style changes, and you cannot approach them as set in BIAB on a certain bar in the chords layout page. Worse is that RB doesn't 'know' how to handle a hold - break.

Picture of the same BIAB MGU Songfile, and without the style changes and holds: looks normal ... Alas sounds quite boring now; guess i wont be using realband much LoL. Time for a huge set of fixes here .... - F

Fiddler2007; they are different programs.
RB is not BiaB. If you are content with BiaB that is great, but I always worry when people suggest they 'fix' RB to act more like BiaB ..
I worry one day that will happen and RB will stop being what it is.

Changing styles on a track in RB is easily doable, and many more variations can be layered, auditioned, etc.
It does many things much better than BiaB, but it is NOT BiaB, so yes there are some differences.
That doesn't mean RB is broke. Your statement that it is 'time for a huge set of fixes' implies that RB is broke.

There are trade offs due to the differences.

For my workflow I'd have given up on all the convoluted work to get a track to change styles in BiaB and simply generated different tracks to my heart's content in RB. Then sliced/diced the results if needed.

Like I said, they are simply different programs. Use whatever works for your workflow.

Sorry, thanks for your input; guess i am a rookie regarding Realband, and i will look in to matters a bit further ... F

Hi Fiddler

I think Rharv (and me too) are worried that one day there might be only one 'merged' product called something like: "Real Band In A Box".

I'm concerned (scared?) about the trade-offs that might occur if that ever happened.

I think the way RealBand and Band-in-a-Box approach a song project has a lot to do with what features can be implemented and how the features are implemented.

RealBand "sees" a song project as one long timeline while Band-in-a-Box "sees" a song project as intro, chorus, repeats and ending chunks. The different approaches require different solutions and lets both programs have distinct strengths and weaknesses.

Well, i must say that BIAB could use some of RB's features, like an extra audio track, and a visual overview of what happens 'down the tracks'. BTW, just installed and checked v5. Seems that the switching to different tracks at a style change has been fixed, but some hold files are still missing. Not all though it seems. - F

Hi Fiddler2007, Do you know although BIAB has only one Audio channel that it can be used multiple times? A second, third or a number of additional audio tracks are available in BIAB as either mono or stereo tracks as needed.

Not sure whether that would be useful to your project or not. Just letting you know the capability is there in the event you were not aware.

Charlie

Nope, i only thought that one can mix audio channels together to ONE mono or stereo mix audio track .. you got me curious now ... thanx, -F

Thread 1

Thread 2


Here are two forum threads that explain the procedures in greater depth. I'll be glad to answer any questions you may have.

Hello Charlie. Looks (sounds) promising ... never used a "performance" track, guess i have to get me a BIAB deep sea diving course now .... -F

RB is a dedicated DAW. The big difference between RB and a standard DAW is it will work directly with Biab files.

BUT, RB IS NOT SIMPLY ANOTHER VERSION OF BAND IN A BOX.

That phrase needs a second read.

If you treat RB as the DAW it is then when you open a Biab file all you really want is the chord grid. The first thing you do is check the box that says "Treat all Biab tracks as standard tracks". That means they will not automatically regenerate. You may or may not want to keep them but for now assume you want to keep them as is.

Now you have all the normal DAW functions PLUS the ability to add more Biab tracks but under your full control, one track at a time. You may not really like one of the Biab tracks you imported. Fine, generate another version using a different style if you want. Then generate another version using another style. And another, and another. You have 48 tracks to mess with, see what I'm talking about now? You can do that with every instrument from the original Biab file. You may wind up with a song that has ZERO tracks from the original Biab file. All you really needed the Biab file for was the chord grid. Opening a Biab file saves you from having to reenter the chords.

Now, this is the tip of the iceberg. Keep reading the RB forum and watch the RB vids. There's a whole lot more you can do with it like adding a midi file for example. Combining Biab tracks with parts of a good well made midi can do wonders for a song assuming you have a high quality synth. No, the Coyote Wavetable or the Forte Dxi are not high quality synths. I use Sampletank 3 others use Kontakt, Garritan or other softsynths. Those cost real money but the sound quality definitely compares with the Real Tracks so they blend in very well.

People have said that RB's midi editing capabilities are not that good. I don't know because it's all I've ever used and I think it's pretty good but like anything else you have to jump into the help files and mess with it yourself. I can do quite a lot with midi in RB. I've read that Cubase is great with midi and that could very well be but Cubase costs $700 while RB is free. Free works for me.

Bob

There are various versions, cheaper ones with more limitations, and some even come free, usually with some audio hardware combined. But the MIDI editing capacities are some of the best IMO. - F

True, but Cubase also requires iLok and mention that around these forums and see what most think of it.

A serious question for you though, do you know if the killer midi capabilities is included with all versions or only the higher priced ones?

Bob

For the 9.5 Elements version i think you don't need an eLicenser dongle, but it has a 'software' protection system, and it costs 100. I think the midi is on par with the more extended pro version, and the drum editor too. Strong point for MIDI is the 'logical editor', and i don't know if it's included. One of the very useful things for MIDI already included in the old ATARI pro24 midi only pre-cubase version. You can download a 30 trial version here (lower section): cubase trial download .F

What exactly does the 'logical editor' do?

Most users never get deep enough into MIDI to see how things like the Data Filter and other MIDI features of RB/PT work, so it may just be a matter of knowing how to do stuff in RB.
Like JM stated above, I have no trouble editing MIDI in RB, and sometimes bring MIDI into RB from other DAWs for editing .. maybe because I am familiar with it, but I haven't often been stymied using it.
RB also supports SYSEX, if you want to get deep into MIDI editing.
That was one of the features that first brought me to PT about 25 years ago.

If you do a lot of MIDI edits very useful:
-F

Why does everybody hate iLok? Plug it in and never look at it again. Some use iLok. PG uses a 24 character serial number. It['s just protecting software from piracy. That's not okay? I have an iLok in my music computer for Pro Tools. I haven't had to touch it since I installed it 18 months ago. I don't get it.

Same here. iLok works easy for me in PT too. I use it on 2 PCs as well and have Melodyne registered on it too.

Thanks fiddler2007,
To be honest, for me, that video shows quite a lot of steps to do a MIDI edit.
The attached image shows the Data Filter in RB/PT, where much can be done very quickly via most of the Edit screens, including MIDI-Randomize.

Maybe I'm set in my ways, or maybe this is just quicker for me.
There are parameters that seem to take lots of steps in the video, but in RB/PT just require checking a box in the MIDI edit screens.

Yeah, the UI isn't as nice, but the control is there. .. unless I'm missing something. In any Edit screen look for the Data Filter checkbox, then you get control of a lot of this data for any edit you need.

Well i use presets most of the time, abundantly present, and sometimes make one up or adapt another, and save it if it's useful. F.i. you can be very selective, like edit only notes above, equal or below a certain pitch, velocity or controller value or length, channel # or range of channels, give them a new value as such; channel, length, controller type or randomize a parameter. Or just select them to delete. F