TO REALBAND GURUS. need help.
i had an interesting morning.
heres what i was trying to do.
i have an old demo done on tape. (thus little tempo fluctuations.)
its a geetar instrumental i did years ago.
and its one of those situations where i tried desperately recording again useing big studio gear .. 2 inch mtr's //big consoles , but could never capture again the "mojo" i like on the demo.
sometimes lifes like that.
so the song has lain fallow in my archives for many years.
luckily when i did the original demo i did it minus bass and drums, thinking "ah its just a stoopid ruff". but then i find to my surprise people i showed it to liked it.
i thought it was just a simple rok song at the time. didnt think about it. threw it away.
(its sorta "headbanger-ish" lol.)

this morning i loaded it up in bb acw and mucked around with bb equalising tempo // running tests.. and was surprised to find bb did a nice job of i guess the "interpolating etc". and i was grooving on the song.
the demo was fluctuating around 106 bpm.
to my surprise i fixed it up useing bb.
so now i can hopefully add RT bass and drums to it.
as the song is no longer fluctuating in tempo.

BUT vaguely i remember that rb is better at chord interpretation of an audio file than bb ?.
can someone explain why ?
also i dont see equalise tempo in rb ? like in bb.
but is this cos i'm on 2020 ultrapak ? and not 21 ?
the song only needs bass and drums; and i would be soo happy to finally finish the darn thing lol as i rarely do instrumentals.

best
oldmuso

Today, the new (several years old but newer than the RB version) BIAB ACW is much improved over the RB ACW.

No head bashing necessary. Add your additional tracks in BIAB. You've already done the hard work.

Charlie

Hello justanoldmuso. We checked the 2020 versions of RealBand and Band-in-a-Box, as well as the 2021 versions for both. Band-in-a-Box for both versions has the Equalize Tempos button in the Audio Chord Wizard, and RealBand 2020 and 2021 does not have this button.

There is no reason to equalize tempo in RB in my mi nd.

RB can handle them down to the hundreds of thousands in decimals.

This is what *I think makes ACW better in RB; it gets a more exact tempo to the pre-existing audio. \
The image below is just to show how exacting it can get .. it is not an actual finished tempo map!

Charlie.
thanks for your comments.
yes bb did a good job.
i know the chords to the song obviously , but used acw
for chord test fun. only needed a few chord adjustments.
best to you.

Chantelle.
thank you sooo much for the version clarification ;
i was wondering if i'd lost my marbles lol.
best to you.
ps instead of pushes could you guys consider within a bar
a slide option. to easily reposition a chord after gen
where one wants it exactly.
(like some daws can do with midi or audio clips slide with mouse or via a dialog.)

Rharv.
could you please clarify your comments further ?.
so lets say you had a song (wav master) that had slight
tempo variations like mine around 106.
what method would you use in rb to clean the tempo up ?
thanks. cos i'm a tad confused how to use rb for this.

oldmuso
ps. one of the probs i have in rb is.some minor differences with bb.
eg in stylepicker in bb i can play a style useing my chords ive inputted in the chord sheet.

My point was; I wouldn't feel like I need to 'clean the tempo up' without a good reason.
The original wav didn't have a click or steady tempo.
Let the Generation try to match that original track Tempo Map.

Why try to force everything to some rounded off number?
RB is capable of generating to the existing (varying) tempo map (with great accuracy). See above image.
Why make RB simplify/Average things and get farther off the original when you can just use the original, variations and all?

Your whole premise was the original can't be recreated. So don't start off with trying to change the tempo map that matches the original; just use the original and keep working.
Otherwise everything you add will fight with the original. (IMHO)

doesn't RB have an align to 'click track' facility that sorts out timing variations?

must admit i'm not an expert on how it works but i have successfully added tracks in RB to an audio track sent by a friend that 'wandered' a bit on timing

Rharv.
re tempo mapping .
oh goodness i'm stupid. missed that. of course.
so what your saying is the mapping in rb is a far greater
resolution than bb.
one other little aspect is that because in bb i can audition style rt's in the stylepicker with MY chord structure ; i use often bb for auditioning often , write down the rt id nos but actually create the final traks in rb.
(in rb my 2020 version stylepicker can only audition with pg demo song chords would seem.)

this old (with little tape tempo variations ) song ive retrieved from the archives to fix up//add to would be looked down on.. i'm sure by advanced chord structure afficionados in advanced music schools with its simple rock chords ; but it was played once by accident over a pa and the heads started going from the headbangers in the crowd. and when i listen over hphones // earbuds i start grooving.
its sorta silly really. but the darn thing has a vibe to it. lol.

thanks for your comments rharv. much appreciated.
best
silly old muso that sometimes writes simple rock lol.

Bob Calver
i'll give that a try also. forgot all about it.
must be age catching up lol. thanks.

"so what your saying is the mapping in rb is a far greater
resolution than bb. "

In my experience yes, it's much more accurate in the Tempo Map for the ACW resolution.
Same is true in the MIDI resolution (which is huge, but a lot of people don't even think about it).

Being able to Edit/Generate down to 1/3480 of a single click compared to 1/120 is huge. That usually gets you down to a pretty small number of mS (and thus smaller 'sample' chunks in the audio edit area).

That same MIDI Resolution controls the From-Thru possibilities in both Audio Edit and Regenerate.

But back on topic, the ACW is more accurate in RB due to the Tempo Map accuracy in my opinion.
You can keep a more accurate tempo map and still generate to it.

Rharv. (and all)
thanks for your comments.
even though i have a lot of experience over the years useing RB and powertraks before it. i consider your obviously the guru of such.
your help is appreciated muchly.
frankly adding new traks to old tape based songs is a challenge...lol. i must be nuts lol.
but gradually i'm getting there.
luckily the tape drifts were minor.

i now have a new bass trak sitting where i want it with the old song. but to get it where i wanted it sitting ;
i still had to move bits of bass audio around in the daw.
just slight time adjustments etc. and subtle pushes/lags here and there etc.

frankly the realtraks in rb and biab have rescued me on this.
gonna work on drums next.
the old song dont need much and above all else its rawness/mojo is what cranks me up. so i gotta be carefull i dont overdo it with added instrumentation.
its not meant to be a "pretty song" so i gotta keep it rocking it raw lol.

thanks once again rharv.
best
oldmuso

Yeah, if you don't get the tempo map just right you can end up needing to nudge some of the generated tracks, which is also easy to do in RB, but I know some people prefer a different DAW for such work.

Use whatever you are comfortable with.
Barry and I have been going through our old song ideas that never made it to a CD also.
Working on a website to publish much of it just for fun, and we have a few old tunes with a bit of mojo ourselves.
I'll let you know when it gets farther along, in case you are interested.