In my short experience working with BIAB, I can only think of one item I would like to see; a process where I can highlight the selected range of measures I would like to regenerate. The reason I believe this is something of value is often times as I am composing I will really like a particular part that was generated but not another. As it stands now, I must make the decision to lose the section I do like in order to try and achieve something for the section I don't like.

If I can highlight a range of bars and hit "regenerate" and it only modifies that range it would make the overall project more to what I desire. In the days when I used JAMMER, I was able to do that. Would it be possible to see that in BIAB?

Thanks,
RickeG

+1 great idea.

There are workarounds, but yes, this is a frequent request. +1

ps Jammer was just MIDI. It was easy and fast to snip and replace in MIDI.

Another vote of support:

+1

Another +1

<< There are workarounds,... >>

Utility Tracks will do this.

+1 for request

-1 for <<workarounds>>

The Request:

<< In my short experience working with BIAB, I can only think of one item I would like to see; a process where I can highlight the selected range of measures I would like to regenerate.>>

The Process: Using the current feature of BIAB's Utility Tracks.
. Select any Utility Track 1-16
. Select any RealTrack and generate it
. Open the Audio Editor and select the Utility Track to be edited
. Highlight any range of measures (if nothing is highlighted, BIAB generates the whole track the same as a Legacy Track. Otherwise, this feature will regenerate a single beat of a measure if desired. There's no limitation set for a minimum range that can be highlighted.)
. Select the Edit Button and select Generate | Select and generate RealTracks...
. From the RealTrack Picker Window that opens, Select the same RealTrack or choose any RealTrack to generate into only the highlighted region. Click OK and the highlighted region will be regenerated and the remaining RealTrack content will remain intact.

Yes, Utility Tracks can do this requested action.

Highlight the desired range of measures, Open The Edit Menu, select generate and the Utility Track generates just the highlighted region. Not satisfied with the generation, Undo it or just generate it again (undo is not necessary) and repeat until satisfied with a generation.

To substantiate this is a feature versus a workaround, from the BIAB Mixer, use the included shortcut by Rt clicking on the Utility Track and select generate from there.

That sounds like a clean, third decade of 21st century approach...
How about just generating and exporting mixes and chopping them in DAW? also a very doable "workaround"

----------------------

RickeG, stay focused

"I would like to see; a process where I can highlight the selected range of measures I would like to regenerate."

+1

For a 2010 post by RickeG it fell on deaf ears. There are many gems like this if you take a trip back in time. Here we are 11 years later.

"They would not listen, they did not know how. Perhaps they'll listen now." ?
"They would not listen, they're not listening still. Perhaps they never will." ?

pipeline,
I am sure (given more recent posts) that this feature was considered, and maybe even in works. It is definitely not a deal breaker to me, but something I would like to have and use. I am not sure what the story was before I started using BIAB, but I do see a lot of progress being made while I was here: 64 Bit, VST, User Interface (minimalistic view), Utility tracks just to name few big ones. Do I want to see a things happen faster - absolutely! But, if similar progress path of last 3-4 years stays on track, I can totally live with that too

P.S. I am more worried about those who have less patience, new folks... I believe if more attention was given to ergonomics and ease of use, software would be more inviting / appealing to someone who uses it for the first time. They definitely will not be very happy with workarounds or deep menus. Just my view.

If you're saying PG Music had deaf ears, I somewhat disagree. Partial bar/bar to bar regeneration of RealTracks has been possible just using BIAB and no external software since 2014/15 in PC and Mac versions with the introduction of recording audio, editing audio and the Performance Track. With the introduction of recording audio in BIAB, BIAB functionally became a digital multi track recorder and its Audio Editor was as advanced and complete as the editing firmware included with the top end stand alone digital recorders like the Tascam DP-008, DP-03, Dp-24 and DP-32 units and more comprehensive than their hand held recorders. The same applies to Zoom brand units like their R-8, R-16 and R-24 that I've owned in the past.

As you hear at the 0:22 second mark in the 2015 Mac new Record Audio feature introduction, PG Music states BIAB is an "easy to use multi track recorder." In regard to audio editing, and its inclusion into BIAB, existing multi track recording techniques, limitation 'work arounds' and principles used on hardware devices could also be able to be used in BIAB.

Band-in-a-Box for Mac: Recording Audio

With the introduction in 2021 of Utility Tracks, it's easier and more accessible than every before and there's not many instances that audio editing needs to be exported to a DAW or audio editor like Audacity. The audio Track the Utility Tracks and the Audio Editor is a very robust audio recorder/editor.

This gave me a chuckle. You have changed greatly in the short three years you have been here. Your appreciation of the new features introduced just in that short time is heartening to see. Now imagine what a few of us have seen over three decades. Remember, there was another forum before summer 2000 when this one started fresh. And imagine the suggestions we have made that are often taken now as new. Pipeline’s first post was making that point, though most would not have the context to realize it. Did everyone see that the original post was made in 2010?

There is an effective way to encourage changes and you and some others have found it. A few of us have taken a stronger approach behind the scenes recently that we hope will yield welcome results.

Everyone, ignore Charlie at your peril. He gives well-researched thoughtful responses every time. Sometimes I tune out because they are long or complicated, and then I come to regret not having paid better attention.

There have been many improvements and features over the last years I will give PG credit for that.
Though there's still remnants of the past when asking for solo/mute buttons in the VST, they were pretty defiant about that and it took a massive fight, now look at the latest DAW Plugin 3.0 New Features, that looks professional, nothing to do with PG one would think, BUT that took a hell of a lot of pushing to get them to lift their game up!
Don't get me started with VST Sync (for EZDrummer etc..), that was a ten year saga.
Play direct from disk instant generate could be another saga or we may be amazed with it being implemented at the end of the year ?

Matt,
I have seen some amazing music software go to drain because they did not modernize in time and lost momentum. That was my initial reaction. The updates above definitely put BIAB on the right path, and changed my views significantly. I guess lucky me to come at the right time

While there are a few large items on the wish list that people asked for, I still think much more attention should be given to ergonomics. If something is possible already - make it easily accessible. If something can be combined / condensed, make it so. You guys (Matt, pipeline, Charlie and many other folks here) are too tech oriented compared to me. It is a compliment btw, but which has a weak spot. Software has to look pretty and work intuitively nowadays, enough for a kid to understand it.

I didn't want to go philosophical, but here is a short off topic. We have a seater made by Knoll in early 1970s. Unfortunately original brown vinyl gave up. Local upholstery people gave us ridiculous price to fix it. So... we went to the shop got the fabric last week and my wife with my passive help finished the project in 2 evenings. Now it looks inviting Cat loves it. The point I am trying to make is, PG crew do not need some fancy designer to tune up BIAB, just takes a will and some elbow grease.


Charlie is one of most knowledgeable people here on BIAB guts, hands down. But Charlie, I think you are underestimating the patience and expectations of new users. BIAB is a treasure chest, but people will ignore it because of a length and learning curve it will take to go from A->B Yes, BIAB can be used very professionally, but many users are hobbyists, just like me. Time is very limited for most to deeply explore the program to use features that are expected to work right out of the box from a Band In a Box. That is why I am not a fan of workarounds, especially in niche software.

P.S. Not trying to be negative, just constructive.

Like some more of your VST designs for the Biab GUI, they should pay you to come up with some prototypes.

Pipeline,
ha ha

Well... Complete user editable skins could be something to consider in the future.

I agree 100% with Rustyspoon!

+1 for request

-1 for <<workarounds>>

I will repeat what I have said in the past...users like Charlie and Pipeline are an amazing resource for PGM and this forum. They clearly understand this software quite deeply.

I, on the other hand, do NOT understand it deeply nor do I wish to! I simply want to use it to produce cool tracks and then get out of it as quickly as possible and into something modern like my DAW.

Work-arounds like the one Charlie presented are welcome and useful but when they require more steps and depth of knowledge than simply saving 5 versions of my song and comping in the DAW then I will ALWAYS take the easier route using the DAW.

The original request, over 10 years ago, was spot on then and is still spot on today. This is exactly how the software should work. Just select bars and click Regen Bars. Plain and simple and extremely useful.

------

Sidebar: Reason #20 why I don't like multi-step work-arounds in BIAB. It is because I almost always ending up hitting a brick wall. Sometimes it is because I goofed up a complex process but sometimes it is because BIAB goofs up. Either way, it severely interrupts the creative process in an unacceptable way.

When I was a young fella I owned a car built by Morris Garages, an MG! I owned a full set of maintenance and repair manuals and learned to fine tune its dual carbs, repair its brakes, pretty much anything it needed (because I couldn't afford to pay someone else, I had time on my hands and I loved to tinker!) Fast forward MANY years and my new car needs minimal maintenance and absolutely no work-arounds to keep it running! I wish BIAB was less like my old MG and more like a modern car!

<< The original request, over 10 years ago, was spot on then and is still spot on today. This is exactly how the software should work. Just select bars and click Regen Bars. Plain and simple and extremely useful. >>

You are absolutely correct. And, this is exactly how BIAB works today, Just select bars and click regenerate bars. Plain and simple and extremely useful.

Here's a link to the original PG Music introduction video for Utility Tracks from Dec 5, 2020 that demonstrates building a solo exclusively within the BIAB program and using a single Utility Track. This introduction video is only the very tip of an iceberg of benefits, features, editing techniques that elevate the quality and complexity of RealTracks whether they remain in a BIAB project or they're exported to a DAW for further processing.

Band-in-a-Box® 2021 for Windows® Build 804: Generate RealTracks on Utility Tracks!

The Util tracks generate was a bit of an added after thought as the soloist dialog it users does not have direct input option and the Util tracks need to be saved to wav, so like the BBPlugin you are filling the drive with wav files.

The video you linked shows selecting generated audio file sections on a utility track and regenerating those.

The original request (and subsequent requests) was to select bars on standard RealTracks in the mixer and be able to regenerate just those bars. So, your claim that "this is exactly how BIAB works today" seems not to be quite correct.

Furthermore, when I tried to select bars of the utility track in the default chordsheet view it did NOT regenerate just the selected bars. It seems to require that I do my selecting in the Audio window.

So, IMHO this is a useful but more complex workaround with its own limitations as Pipeline pointed out.

I think PG Music has the idea by now.

Since they have expressed the intent to make the Utility Tracks act like legacy tracks, this wish would seem to be rolled into that. Let's see what they come up with for BIAB 2022.

<< The video you linked shows selecting generated audio file sections on a utility track and regenerating those.>>
Yes it does. My answer said "this is exactly how BIAB works today, Just select bars and click regenerate bars." and that is absolutely correct. What's the necessity of doing it on a standard Legacy Track when the program has 16 Utility Tracks that do generate RealTracks?

<< The original request (and subsequent requests) was to select bars on standard RealTracks in the mixer and be able to regenerate just those bars. So, your claim that "this is exactly how BIAB works today" seems not to be quite correct. >>
In 2010 when that specific and all subsequent requests made before this year, Utility Tracks didn't exist.

The narrator tells in the video how BIAB can handle the situation if a user happens to generate a RealTrack on a Legacy Track and it needs to only be partially edited.

<< Furthermore, when I tried to select bars of the utility track in the default chordsheet view it did NOT regenerate just the selected bars. It seems to require that I do my selecting in the Audio window. >>

It's unfair to blame the program for operator error. The video demonstrated exactly how the process works.

<<So, IMHO this is a useful but more complex workaround with its own limitations as Pipeline pointed out. >>

Pipeline's stated that "the soloist dialog it uses does not have direct input option and the Util tracks need to be saved to wav, so like the BBPlugin you are filling the drive with wav files." It's true that Utility Tracks RealPicker dialog does not have the Bluesy, Simple, direct input and Held buttons but that does not create a limitation. RealTracks that have Direct Input and the other buttons can be edited with or without those feature buttons activated and will only render a single WAV file. One file should be an issue and it's necessary to the DAW. Editing tracks in BIAB using the Audio Channel and Utility Tracks reduces the number of files BIAB has to generate for export to a DAW. There's no need to export 5-6 tracks to comp in a DAW when it can be done with a single track in BIAB.

In most DAWs the files play direct from the hard disk, even RealBand can play 48 tracks from hard disk.
Most use non destructive editing unlike BB RB that use destructive audio editing, this is something from the past when there was not enough pc power.
It was a hard job to get volume nodes in RealBand but they are in there now, this allows for non destructive gain editing, same can be added to Biab.
I can get a RealTrack and a RealDrum to generate and play instantly direct from disk in Reaper.
If Reaper can play many tracks direct from disk applying stretch and pitch change on the fly there is no reason in these modern times that Biab can't do that same.

When you copy a section of a RealTrack it will just be coping the data, no wav or RAM. You will be able to freeze all tracks and save without wav's and this will then open in the BBPlugin and be identical.
The generate speed should be faster as it's not writing to RAM first.
Users will be blown away with this speed in the BBPlugin, no generating to RAM then rendering to wav files, just instant play.
Work this out now and you won't need "BB and The Workarounds"

BUT, maybe if this is all too hard to modify Biab to do then it can be just done in the BBPlugin so you get instant gen/play and opening of frozen SGU in the BBPlugin then users that are not using the BBPlugin at the moment because of slow gen/play times will be more likely to use this in their DAW rather than "BB and The Workarounds" ??????
Would this be the case that users would more likely use the BBPlugin directly in their DAW if it had instant gen/play and open frozen SGUs as in the BBPlugin it's easier to get away from all the limitations of Biab like 255 bars, no real time signatures, no fractional/decimal tempo maps ???
Or would you rather Biab do it all ????


Flow chart:
Old Way Create file to RAM
New Way Play direct from hard drive





So on the bottom is the RT source file with all the chords that were played, Biab chooses the sections it wants to play from the source file and plays them back in linear order on it's timeline direct from hard drive.
FULL SCREEN

That's an interesting concept Pipeline and I can see its value when applied to the Plug-in and if you can generate RealTracks in Reaper but I'm not following how RealTracks generated in the Reaper DAW from RealTrack audio files has any relevance to the subject of this thread about regenerating a RealTrack in BIAB?

Not everybody that uses BIAB uses Reaper or in many cases I'm sure, use any DAW. That means that not every BIAB user uses the Plug-in either. I agree that if you edit the audio construction of a track to completion in BIAB that it must be saved as a WAV in DAW but that's editing that doesn't have to be done in the DAW, just mixed. That's no different than if a mix engineer/producer gets stems from recordings made in another studio.

When you generate a RealTrack in Reaper does it also generate the MIDI like BIAB does on its Legacy and Utility Tracks?

When you use Reaper to generate a RealTrack can you generate multiple sections of the highlighted region in a row of both audio and midi, audition and hear them instantly, select your favorite clip from the multiple generations like the narrator does at the 3:43 mark in the introduction video and have that same ability to undo and redo multiple times?

Having the midi generated with each edited regeneration is important to BIAB users that use the Notation, Piano Roll, Audio Editor, Lead Sheet, Fake Sheet, Guitar Window and the Big Piano. Using the Copy/Move command, a user can choose whether to include all midi, some midi or no midi along with the audio clip.

I'm also unclear to how you're defining non-destructive and destructive audio editing in BIAB. The BIAB Audio Editor has multiple Undo/redo capability and I've never encountered what I would define as a destructive edit. Cut, paste, gain change, fade in, fade out, normalize, delete, silence, insert silence, generate, regenerate, convert channels, harmonize, transpose, fix tuning and fix sour notes can all be applied to the audio and undone if desired.

I appreciate your input and agree that if implemented it would be a great benefit to many users and to the BIAB program but I don't see it making a difference or affecting the current generating, regeneration or audio editing in BIAB.

"any relevance to the subject" If I generate a RT or RD in Reaper it is instant and I can regenerate any section "Isolate what measures to re-generate".
Biab tracks are in RAM maybe that is why this has never been implemented ? maybe it's too hard to do ? I don't know, but I can do it easy in Reaper.

I said way back to re-write Biab 64bit more like a DAW so users can stay in Biab and got a lot of flack but this is the way it's going.
I'm not saying to use Reaper instead of Biab this is not a competition, but what Reaper can do there is no reason that Biab can't do the same.
It is not a problem to generate both audio and midi from source files in Reaper.

"When you use Reaper to generate a RealTrack.." yes you can do all that, but why not make Biab do what Reaper can do. Look at smooth seek in Reaper that would work great in Biab for smooth transitions from any section to another or for live chord input like an arranger keyboard.

" Cut, paste, gain change, fade in, fade out, normalize, delete, silence, insert silence, generate, regenerate, convert channels, harmonize, transpose, fix tuning and fix sour notes can all be applied to the audio and undone if desired. "
Reaper will do all that and leave the original file intact
D:\bb\RealTracks\Bass, Acoustic, Bossa Ev 110\bs1266.wav
you can't go go back to any undo you like in Biab, you can't come back the next day and undo, that is destructive the audio is destroyed.

All the ideas I push and research time I put in is to make Biab RB BBPlugin better, not to give up and just use Reaper
As I said look at the DAW VST ver 3.0 video demo it looks professional, not from PG, there was a hell of a lot of pushing, effort and fighting to get it there.

<< "any relevance to the subject" If I generate a RT or RD in Reaper it is instant and I can regenerate any section "Isolate what measures to re-generate". >>

I'm satisfied with the generation time of a Utility Track in BIAB and I can regenerate any section "isolate what measures to regenerate".

<< Biab tracks are in RAM maybe that's why its never been implemented? maybe it's too hard to do? I don't know, but I can do it easy in Reaper. >>
It's easy to do in BIAB. A couple of clicks of the mouse.

<< I said way back to re-write Biab 64bit more like a DAW so users can stay in Biab and got a lot of flack but this is the way it's going. >>
Yes, I agree that BIAB is becoming more like a DAW.

<< I'm not saying to use Reaper instead of Biab this is not a competition, but what Reaper can do there is no reason that Biab can't do the same. >>
Regarding how BIAB code reads the source files, I think is more important to how BIAB interfaces with DAWs and the Plug-in and that's important to the future growth of the program so I support your efforts. What you're doing with RealTracks in Reaper has no effect on the Audio Editor tools in BIAB.

<< It is not a problem to generate both audio and midi from source files in Reaper. >>
That's good. It is important that BIAB can do both.

<< "When you use Reaper to generate a RealTrack.." yes you can do all that, but why not make Biab do what Reaper can do. Look at smooth seek in Reaper that would work great in Biab for smooth transitions from any section to another or for live chord input like an arranger keyboard. >>

BIAB does do all of those tasks too. It would be great if BIAB did it like Reaper for future development but as far as audio editing in BIAB, how the source material in the audio editor and Utility Tracks is accessed is irrelevant. It's audio on these tracks not RT data. BIAB doesn't see any difference editing a singer recorded live track from a generated RealTrack from midi converted to audio.

<< "Cut, paste, gain change, fade in, fade out, normalize, delete, silence, insert silence, generate, regenerate, convert channels, harmonize, transpose, fix tuning and fix sour notes can all be applied to the audio and undone if desired. Reaper will do all that and leave the original file intact." >>
I can easily do it in BIAB and leave the original file intact. This is applying simple, decades old multi track recording techniques.

<< D:\bb\RealTracks\Bass, Acoustic, Bossa Ev 110\bs1266.wav >>
I have no clue what this is about..

I think I exceeded the post's length barrier. It cut off the last of my response....

<< you can't go go back to any undo you like in Biab, you can't come back the next day and undo, that is destructive the audio is destroyed.>>
Incorrect. Edits can be preserved if that's what the user wants to do. It's decades old multi track techniques.

<< All the ideas I push and research time I put in is to make Biab RB BBPlugin better, not to give up and just use Reaper
As I said look at the DAW VST ver 3.0 video demo it looks professional, not from PG, there was a hell of a lot of pushing, effort and fighting to get it there. >>
All the ideas I push and research time I put in is to make BIAB better. Keep on keeping on, it's worth your time and everyone benefits when something you've researched and spent time on is implemented into the program. For me, the Audio Editor is under-rated, under utilized and is on par with the Editors in hardware Digital Recorders like Tascam, Zoom and other brands. It's not perfect and could be improved but it's a very robust tool.

Charlie,
simple truth. I believe anyone born after 1990 is not looking for a "decades old multi track recording techniques."
They will be more inclined to use "modern and automated techniques" The last time I used a hardware multitrack was about 20 years ago. (and that was quite a sophisticated machine for that time). It was fun while lasted, but thankfully I do not have to come back to those days. The time consumption of learning specific gear "tricks" and "workarounds" + hardware limits is responsible in part for creative stagnation that lasted years for me. I should have adopted faster to new technology.

You keep on saying "I can"... That is great, but that is not what I can, and certainly not what is being requested in this post. It is a particular wish. A wish is different from "finding a way". Nothing is wrong with finding ways. But again, I do not believe a "workaround" is what was requested.

Yes, I want to simply highlight bars and either freeze them or regenerate that selection of all tracks (or selection of tracks, but that is another topic). Not Mixing, Not Cutting, Not going into deep menus, No Audio editors, No bouncing.
...And unfreeze them as needed. Is it possible now - No it is not. Is it acute problem? Nope. Do I want it to see it happened as requested - sure. Do I want a multi tier "workaround" - no thank you.


P.S. I can clearly see what pipeline is proposing. Makes total sense. (+1 pipeline). I am just not enough tech. advanced to know if it is something doable in BIAB given code and backward compatibility. I guess, there could be a block written, that will translate track segment positions and use that data instead of mixing every time...non destructive way as in DAWs.

I had a old muso friend that I set a computer studio up for, even though he was used to splicing tapes he soon got used to the computer.
I can get him to come on here and give a guide on tape splicing.

Biab has to move forward you can't keep it in the past, I had a computer that loaded the program from a cassette tape.
If users don't use a DAW and just use Biab chances are they are not up with things and the advancements made after the 90's.
I made do with RealBand for a long time and going through all that I have learnt how things need to be made better, sure if you were stuck out in the woods in a time warp with just RealBand you would get by or someone else maybe just stuck with a tape machine they would get by.
When Util tracks were first released I said the users won't like this and they would have to be improved and the generate added so you actually have that now what you are talking about because of that very reason, I could of said nothing and that's what you would now have, nothing.

That's why I asked, maybe this is too hard to do with Biab and it should be done to the BBPlugin for those that want to use it in a professional environment.
With Biab that is the problem as there are old users with Pentium 100's and IDE hard drives so it's a fight between old and new users, where as the BBPlugin would be all new DAW capable users.

I suggest this instant play in the DAW Plugin Forum and got this response

and I replied:

THANK YOU! I agree 100%! It is so tiresome to hear wishes dismissed with a "BIAB can already do that" when, in fact, it cannot! Don't get me wrong, I deeply appreciate power users explaining their process to achieve things BUT the wish is clear and unambiguous. It does not ask for a workaround for editing tracks that are converted to audio tracks. It simply asks that we be able to select bars and regenerate those bars.

Yes, precisely.
And this absolutely possible. It just needs to have the code written to do exactly that.

This is what the user requested, if I can do it this way in Reaper so too Biab could. BUT, again if it's too hard in Biab to modify then just do it in the BBPlugin.
Full Screen


Full Screen

I would like to see a gif where you attempt the same thing you've done in Reaper but this time do it in BIAB on a single Utility Track. Demonstrate highlighting a bar and regenerate just those highlighted bars in BIAB and also regenerate the region 5 times like you've done in Reaper and come to the forum and place a ✔or X if you accomplished the task in BIAB or not.
✔ - Means BIAB can do it.
X - Means you were unable to do the task.

PG Music says that using a Utility Track you can:

1. Generate RealTracks on a Utility Track.

2. You can generate the ENTIRE RealTrack from the track menu, complete with RealCharts.

3. You can also generate highlighted sections of the Utility track.

4. You can change the highlighted section to a completely different RealTracks instrument.

5. Cross fades will automatically create smooth transitions.

6. You can non-destructively convert a mono track into a stereo track so a stereo instrument can be merged with a mono instrument.

7. Regions regenerated multiple times can be seen and auditioned and selected using Undo/Redo command.

Is this what you need ?

No, actually it isn't. Multi Riffs were rejected by forum members as a regeneration tool in the thread "Unfreeze/regenerate one bar on one channel" on 5/28/21 and Multi Riffs haven't been mentioned in this thread.


Read through this thread and the one mentioned and you'll see folks don't think BIAB can do this and may be confused by your proposal and gifs that Reaper is doing what BIAB can't do. The plain truth is Utility Tracks generate RealTracks with the same steps that's done on Legacy Tracks. In addition, Utility Tracks can also do partial bar regeneration.

You are highly respected and perhaps if you demonstrate Utility Tracks generating RealTracks, highlighting bars and regenerating only the highlighted regions like you've demonstrated in Reaper, they'll have a better understanding.

Sorry I'm at a loss here where you are going. Bear with me I'll get there.
"I would like to see a gif where you attempt the same thing you've done in Reaper but this time do it in BIAB on a single Utility Track. Demonstrate highlighting a bar and regenerate just those highlighted bars in BIAB and also regenerate the region 5 times like you've done in Reaper"
Isn't that what the pic represents ?
Unless you want a take system like Reaper and toggle through the multiriffs in a section of track ?

"Multi Riffs were rejected by forum members" ?????

My posts are about playing files direct from disk that Reaper does.

The main problem with Util tracks are they are wav and users wanted them to behave as regular BB tracks. I'm trying to get Reaper features in Biab so this can all happen thus the Reaper gifs,
as I don't know if you can have all these tracks in RAM along with all the multiriff takes and more than 255 bars ? where as if it's just data that tells BB what section of this here file to play:
D:\bb\RealTracks\Bass, Acoustic, Bossa Ev 110\bs1266.wav
rather than piecing it together first and storing it to RAM or then writing it to wav.
At the moment Util Track Gen is a make do until..

The whole idea of Utility tracks came from all my posts with EnergyXT:

<< My posts are about playing files direct from disk that Reaper does. >>

This remark will work.

<< The main problem with Utility tracks are they are wav and users wanted them to behave as regular BB tracks. I'm trying to get Reaper features in Biab so this can all happen thus the Reaper gifs. >>

I've heard that said. Why would that matter if true? A RealTrack must be rendered into an audio file (WAV, WMA, MP3, MP4) to be used in a DAW and the same is true for a RealTrack generated on a Utility Track and the same is true for Reaper. What's the significance to a user creating an audio file? On a Utility Track, the file has to be saved before a user can access that audio in any audio format. There's no difference to the user between recording live audio onto a Utility Track and generating a RealTrack. That's better than a regular legacy track which cannot contain audio unless it's been converted into an audio file (WAV, WMA, MP3, MP4). The same is true for a Utility Track. Although the WAV file is visible in the Audio Editor Window, the content isn't until that track is saved and a WAV file created. To a user, they're functionally identical as the end result.

In Reaper, aren't you going into the RealTracks folder and accessing the RealTrack audio, D:\bb\RealTracks\Acoustic Strumming Hank Sw 120\AcG011.WAV?
The 5 rendered tracks in your gif are WAV files as well as the comp track being a WAV file. I understand the direct file from disk access rather than BIAB going through RAM and the obvious speed difference but that's how the RealTrack audio is sourced in both Reaper and BIAB.

How does a regular BB track behave differently than a Utility Track that makes Utility Tracks a workaround rather than a feature? What do users want done differently?

"A RealTrack must be rendered into an audio file (WAV, WMA, MP3, MP4) to be used in a DAW and the same is true for a RealTrack generated on a Utility Track and the same is true for Reaper. "
I thought you didn't want to use a DAW and just stay in Biab ?
The tracks generated in Reaper are not rendered there is no extra wavs written, it's only data, there is only rendering when you do a downmix to 1 stereo file.
Look at the attached pic, both Biab and RealBand have the identical tracks saved but look at the file size. Reaper has the same file size as a frozen SGU.
How many wavs will you have on the hard drive with all util tracks and more than 255 bars ?
You are creating masses of unnecessary wav files filling up the hard drive. What bit rate and sample rate are they saved to if you are saving every thing to wav ?

"There's no difference to the user between recording live audio onto a Utility Track and generating a RealTrack."
If you are recording you are creating a new wav, if you generate you don't need to create new wav files you just play the existing wav files on the 1.5 TB drive that is full of wav files, why fill up your hard drive with copies of the same files ?

"The 5 rendered tracks in your gif are WAV files as well as the comp track being a WAV file." there is no rendering as in no physical wav files created. The saved Reaper project is only like 200k not 200meg.

"How does a regular BB track behave differently than a Utility Track that makes Utility Tracks a workaround rather than a feature? What do users want done differently?" the util tracks are RealBand all over again, look at the size of the RealBand SEQ file, what if I had all 48 tracks over 255 bars how big would it be compared to the Reaper project file with 100 RealTracks and RealDrums ??

Non destructive editing can change any FX for any section of any track at anytime you like you can't do that with destructive wav FX.
You can have a DI guitar with a different FX on different sections of the song on many tracks but you can easily change the FX, I don't mean track FX but section/bar FX. If I apply Audio Effect in RealBand to the wav, that's it.

RealBand is ideal just how it is if you want to work with wavs, destructive editing and massive file sizes.
A lot a Biab users don't use RealBand as they like how Biab worked, but to add what they don't like about RealBand to Biab is going backward.
"How does a regular BB track behave differently than a Utility Track that makes Utility Tracks a workaround rather than a feature? What do users want done differently?"
To have all the Generate options as the RealTrack Picker proper, RealDrum Picker, UserTrack Picker, Loop Picker, MST Picker, MIDI Style tracks Picker or any other PICKER there is like Rusty's Multi Picker.
If the RT/UT/RD/LOOPS Util tracks saved like frozen BB tracks rather than wav files that would be better wouldn't it ?


Can I go to bed now ?

<< I thought you didn't want to use a DAW and just stay in Biab? >>
I don't use a DAW and do stay in BIAB for audio editing and comping. I was referring to those that do use a DAW. The tracks generated in BIAB are not rendered, there are no extra WAV's written until the file in rendered to a stereo file. It doesn't matter what RealBand's size is. It isn't relative to BIAB projects.

You are not correct that BIAB, RealBand and the Plug-in all have to have large WAV files to edit audio. It's true for RealBand and the Plug-in but we're not talking RealBand and the Plug-in or Reaper but only about BIAB. The request is to edit in BIAB. That's Legacy Tracks, the Audio Track and Utility Tracks in BIAB. To generate five tracks in BIAB and to comp from those five tracks only generates a single stereo file when editing is done and the comp track rendered. This results in a BIAB file as you say, around 100-135 Kb. There are no masses of unnecessary WAV files filling up the hard drive only a single stereo/mono WAV. I'll post screen shots.

<< There's no difference to the user between recording live audio onto a Utility Track and generating a RealTrack. >>
If you do a live recording in Reaper you're creating a new WAV. If you generate a RealTrack in BIAB it will just play from the existing WAV file on the 1.5 TB drive that's full of WAV files. I agree, there's no need to fill up the hard drive with copies of the same file. My point about live recorded audio and generating is there's no distinction between the audio to BIAB or Reaper for that matter.

<< The 5 rendered tracks in your gif are WAV files as well as the comp track being a WAV file."there is no rendering as in no physical wav files created. The saved Reaper project is only like 200k not 200meg. >>
Those same 5 rendered tracks in BIAB aren't WAV files and neither is the comp track a WAV file. There's no rendering and no WAV file created until the single stereo file of the comped track has been edited and comped from the 5 RealTracks and the user satisfied with that track and render's it to a stereo WAV. The BIAB project is saved as an normal SGU file and if the user ever needs to reconstruct that exact comp again, the user only needs to open the SGU file and render that track again. That BIAB project is around 100Kb or less compared to Reaper's 200K

<< How does a regular BB track behave differently than a Utility Track that makes Utility Tracks a workaround rather than a feature? What do users want done differently?"the util tracks are RealBand all over again, look at the size of the RealBand SEQ file, what if I had all 48 tracks over 255 bars how big would it be compared to the Reaper project file with 100 RealTracks and RealDrums?? >>

BIAB is not RealBand and has many features that are not included in RealBand or the Plug-in, neither of those programs are full-featured BIAB programs. The size of a RealBand SEQ file regardless of the track numbers or Bar length is not relevant. A BIAB project with 100 RealTRacks and RealDrums would be considerably smaller than a Reaper Project.

<< "If I apply Audio Effect in RealBand to the wav, that's it." >>
BIAB is not RealBand, if you apply Plug-in Audio Effect (Flanger) to a RealTrack, the effect can be turned off any time prior to the song being rendered with the effect. There's no WAV until the track is rendered in BIAB.

<< "RealBand is ideal just how it is if you want to work with wavs, destructive editing and massive file sizes." >>

BIAB is not RealBand... Does not behave like RealBand. It has more features, techniques and processes than RealBand, Audacity, Reaper, Sonar, Logic, Pro-Tools, Studio One, Cakewalk and every other DAW in the world. BIAB stands alone and it's two built-in audio editors can do things DAWs can't do. It can do them faster and better and all without creating masses of WAV files filling up the hard drive.

<< "How does a regular BB track behave differently than a Utility Track that makes Utility Tracks a workaround rather than a feature? What do users want done differently?"
To have all the Generate options as the RealTrack Picker proper, RealDrum Picker, UserTrack Picker, Loop Picker, MST Picker, MIDI Style tracks Picker or any other PICKER there is like Rusty's Multi Picker. >>

Those are all features I fully support users presenting on the Wishlist and PG Music implementing. However, none of them have anything to do with editing audio in BIAB including generating, highlighting, fx's or file size. So yes, go for that full steam...

<< If the RT/UT/RD/LOOPS Util tracks saved like frozen BB tracks rather than wav files that would be better wouldn't it? >>
Yes, this would be beneficial but is not crucial. This is the only item in BIAB that you've mentioned that presently requires a workaround but only as it applies to the Audio Track and Utility Tracks.

I have attached a screen shot of the Comp SGU Main Screen and of two WAV forms created by generating 5 RealTracks and comping them onto a Utility Track. The left screen shot was captured after the comped Utility Track was rendered onto a WAV file. The 5 Utility Tracks were frozen and the Utility Track was erased. I also saved the track and bar selections into the song memo and the SGU project saved and closed.

The right side screen shot was made by opening that saved file with the 5 frozen RealTracks, selecting and pasting onto the Utility Track the same bars for each track exactly like they're listed in the memo and since the 5 RealTracks were frozen when the file was previously save, the result is an exact reproduction of the original Comp track. The Comp SGU file is only 160kb and as many exact copies can be rendered as the user wants or the same 5 RealTracks can be used to create a new Comp file or minor editing can be used to fix small issues that arise later in the project.

When replying to the first post you said Biab can do this in the Util tracks.
But then when I say it creates wav files you say it doesn't and use the normal BB tracks as an example.

"The tracks generated in BIAB are not rendered, there are no extra WAV's written until the file in rendered to a stereo file....You are not correct that BIAB, RealBand and the Plug-in all have to have large WAV files to edit audio....I agree, there's no need to fill up the hard drive with copies of the same file....There are no masses of unnecessary WAV files filling up the hard drive only a single stereo/mono WAV....BIAB is not RealBand." (in the pic below it's RealBand all over again)

"BIAB is not RealBand... Does not behave like RealBand. It has more features, techniques and processes than RealBand, Audacity, Reaper, Sonar, Logic, Pro-Tools, Studio One, Cakewalk and every other DAW in the world. BIAB stands alone and it's two built-in audio editors can do things DAWs can't do. It can do them faster and better and all without creating masses of WAV files filling up the hard drive."
If that's not a stuck in the past time warp lock delusional denial what is it ?
THIS IS THE VERY THING I think that says everything there is to stay, as I have said ALL ALONG since coming here there is way is too much blocking by old guards that has held PG in the 90's for way too long, you are really up against it here.

See that's why I said just do it with the BBPlugin, BUT because of all the old guard crap for years n years here it blocks the BBPlugin development from real potential also.
This all flowed over in the development of the BBPlugin, it has been a incredible fight to get normal industry standard features put in the BBPlugin.
I think I must be so stupid to hang around here, "kicking against the pricks", why on earth should I even bother, honestly ?????????????????????
I sit here typing all this stuff and for what reason ??????? 0

If you've seen that light you give that light to others, but the light shines in the darkness and the darkness comprehends it not.

<< When replying to the first post you said Biab can do this in the Util tracks.
But then when I say it creates wav files you say it doesn't and use the normal BB tracks as an example. >>

I chose to demonstrate using 5 BIAB generated tracks for comping for several reasons.

1. Regarding creating WAV files, it's not relevant where or how BIAB generates these 5 tracks because other than the single stereo render, no other file is required to be rendered and saved. One WAV file of the comped track, that's all that's necessary. The BIAB SGU file can be saved and will have all of the information necessary to retain and restore the Style, Chord Chart, Key, Tempo, and the RealTrack that was comped. If editing is needed, import the comped track, select the appropriate RT and regenerate the edit needed. So, regardless whether I use one Utility Track, 5 Legacy normal RealTracks, or all 23 of the total tracks available to create a comped track, the saved SGU can save and restore that scenario. It's what BIAB does. Although generating 5 Utility Tracks works, it's unnecessary and redundant. It's much faster and easier to create the comp track by selecting regions and generating the track in sections as explained in point 2.

2. The PG Music Utility Track introduction video I posted earlier in the thread demonstrates the process how a user can comp a track from scratch using a single Utility Track at the 3:40 mark. Just by highlighting any region and generating multiple versions of the region and selecting the best version, then repeat that process for selected regions until the end of the track.

3. Generating 3-5 tracks and exporting them into a DAW to comp a single track appears to be a common practice of users. Generating 5 tracks, exporting them to a DAW is mentioned by one poster in this thread. Your gif demonstration used 5 tracks. Generating 5 normal RealTracks seemed to be a demonstration users could easily relate to. My purpose is to demonstrate the BIAB capability to comp tracks within the program without the need of a DAW.

4. There's an excellent tutorial elsewhere in the forum of how to create a sax solo in BIAB and the narrator uses 5 tracks generated in BIAB, exported from BIAB into Cubase.

5. BIAB can generate 5 Utility Tracks and use them to comp into a single track and update the silent midi charts as well using normal Legacy tracks or Utility Tracks or a combination of the two. There's no necessity to create multiple WAV files.

<< See that's why I said just do it with the BBPlugin... >>
There will always be users that are more comfortable working in a DAW and depend on BIAB simply to generate tracks they can manipulate those WAV files in their DAW. RealBand, the BBPlugin and DAWs are integral to their song creation process. Your time isn't wasted and you help everyone with your efforts. Only you can decide if that's worth your time and effort.

While I appreciate your attempt to show how large a folder could be if a project uses all 16 Utility Tracks, it's off topic and a completely useless representation about generating a comp track from 5 RealTracks in BIAB because it's inaccurate regrading what's required.

To provide viewers an accurate and real life example graphic, I've attached a screen shot of the folder of a 96 bar song that's 3.26 in length adapted from a PG Music demo. The screen shot contains the SGU file and the single necessary WAV file rendered of the comped track that took only one Utility Track to do it. Comping this track in BIAB created a 36.7Mb WAV and a 38.7Kb SGU file.

You are telling me stuff that I have done for years.
Why have you got Util Tracks now ? why have you got a "PG Music Utility Track introduction video" ?,
you are telling me about Util tracks generating RealTracks, you have that now because because I said something, else you would not have it period, limited generate is a last minute make do after thought.
Now you say to me that is good enough, don't take things further, this is THE cut off in history, no further development is needed.
How many features in Biab are you now using simply for me being here ??????
I've seen it with my own two eyes so many times over the years, way back the very same user whom block a new suggestion I made, now years later recommends the now added feature to other users.

What are you trying to tell me, what do you want me to do, stay in your comfort zone, don't go beyond, don't aim higher, fear of the unknown, don't rock the boat ?


Lord, it's the same old tune, fiddle and guitar
Where do we take it from here?
Rhinestone suits and new shiny cars
It's been the same way for years
We need a change
Somebody told me, when I came to Nashville
Son, you finally got it made
Old Hank made it here and we're all sure that you will
But I don't think Hank done it this way
No, I don't think Hank done it this way

The light shone in the darkness and the darkness comprehended it not.
There have been so many insights posted over the years and many got pounced on by the old guard and those users were got rid of never to return again as you see by the number of their posts, hence PG stuck in the past.
I had to force what little you have now into being 11 years later.
You either trust me with what I say, but don't give me lines and lines of old stuff trying to get me to come back to the past where I have been there and done that.

Everyone's contributions are valuable here.

I do get a little tired of some folks' negative references to the 'old guard' as if they only do damage. I also get tired of the claims by a few to have been the only one to have invented ideas. November 2010 was a full two years after RealTracks were introduced. It would be hard to prove who first hit upon the concept of regenerating less than a full song, but it is equally hard to ascribe all credit to one person since such proposals are discussed and refined by many. That is a great strength of this forum. If an idea cannot survive a little scrutiny, perhaps it isn't quite ready.

And I do realize you have admitted you posted under at least one other name before your registration date of 2015.

Everyone's contributions are valuable here, cumulatively and collaboratively.

Come up with new ideas, BUT DON'T BLOCK THINGS.

When other users come up with ideas or prototypes I support them,
look at Old Muso's Bar View a lot of work went into that.
I know what the story is as I see and hear things before they even happen.

Look at Rusty's GUI, should we try to block him ? what do you yourself think Matt ?

I have no problem with these ideas. For RustySpoon’s, I would prefer to switch between modes to see one or the other. OldMuso thread ideas don’t particularly do anything for me but I don’t think I ever commented, especially not negatively.

Who do you think is ‘blocking’ anything? How can that even be done here?

So both you and Charlie don't want to exercise a "veto" to this suggestion ?????????????????????????????????
no vetos about changing and updating the software ??
no old guarding going on ??
everything is all good ??
are you really sure about this ??

OldMuso thread ideas might not particularly do anything for me but I went out of my way to help him out to find what he wanted and express in animated gifs examples.

<< So ... Charlie doesn't want to exercise a "veto" to this suggestion????? >>
No
<< no vetos about changing and updating the software?? >>
None. But understand that changing and updating the software doesn't mean the program is not perfectly usable today. Features, including Utility Tracks work as advertised. Utility Tracks will do exactly what's demonstrated in the PG Music Utility Tracks Introduction video. Audio Recording will do exactly what's demonstrated in the PG Music Recording Video.

<< no old guarding going on?? >>
No. I didn't own BIAB software in 2010 nor participate in the Forum. Neither Recording Audio or Utility Tracks existed in 2010. My postings were about correcting inaccurate statements being made about audio editing and Utility Tracks. Once a track is generated, whether direct file access was used or not is totally irrelevant to editing in BIAB after the file is generated. If Direct File Access is implemented in BIAB, editing will still occur after the file is generated.

<< everything is all good?? >>
Yes. BIAB works great but I expect to see 50 or more improvements like normal when 2022 is released. Don't you?
PG Music has people working on this.

<< are you really sure about this?? >>
Absolutely.

You don't get it, I'm trying to drop subtle hints to click your memory without posting the information that will expose what's going on here.
I had to go back and find the info that was brought to my memory about what Matt was saying, even though it was deleted because it was very exposing, I still do have a copy, and to my surprise (well not surprised at all now I see) there was Charlie there also, so it all comes out.
I think Matt may now know what the story is but Charlie hasn't clicked as you can see above he's still in hit mode.
Here I was trying to help Charlie with gifs to get to the issue but there was just an ulterior motive going on (stupid me I was nearly fooled).
No wonder, no wonder, no wonder it was still stuck in the 90's when I came here , the inner workings have been reveled to me, who says there's no old guard, deep state !
I don't want to have to post the posts here that will expose what's going on, I would rather you just drop this hit job.

" If Direct File Access is implemented in BIAB, editing will still occur after the file is generated. "

What file ? there is no file created, it is just source reference data that non destructive editing is applied to during playback.

"inaccurate statements being made"
same as you said I was creating files in Reaper, NO FILES CREATED.
"A RealTrack must be rendered into an audio file (WAV, WMA, MP3, MP4) to be used in a DAW and the same is true for a RealTrack generated on a Utility Track and the same is true for Reaper."

NO hit going on here. No constructive conversation either. I'm out of the discussion but I stand behind every word I've written in this thread and can demonstrate each technique and result if it's needed.

"No constructive conversation either"
only 3 pages of clear explanations.

"can demonstrate each technique and result if it's needed"
Show me where these files are in Reaper, show me where they would be in Biab with using Direct File Access.

I'm glad you clicked.

So has Reaper created AcG011.wav in the RealTrack folder, but that's weird the date is 2008, that must be the file you mean.

Uhhff... Some crazy and unexpected storm we had... After 3 days, I still can hear water bubbling down from the top of the mountain. Power is back. Full sunshine ahead.

I hope that these are the last of the storm surges here too. I feel it is just a misunderstanding that makes this uneasy. Charlie, I think the issue is, you do not see a specific wish as a limitation, but a "problem that needs to be solved  at any means." Seems, that if it is achievable, even if not in a particular way, that wish request was presented, it "becomes" invalidated.  When a person explains exactly how they want the wish to be fulfilled and you are offering a workaround, saying that it is exactly how the program operates, it makes people confused  (because it is not) and discouraged  from further conversations. In my opinion your observations and techniques, such as in this post are valid, but do not  address "wish" request specifics, I feel they are more inline with  regular BIAB Windows forum section or Tips / Tricks  section. 

Pipeline in my view explains how to get from A to B the shortest and cleanest way. It does not support wish directly, but I can see how his proposal might benefit the idea. I am far from programming, but it makes total sense to save a map of positions of the files, instead of actual files being assembled, such as how most DAWs do it. Whether this is achievable or not, I do not know. Seems if it is, it will take BIAB to another level. I do have reservations about the reading from the external disk, as far as seek times, given the number of files & folders particularly on older usb 2 systems, with less than perfect  usb port / motherboard chips. Somebody with knowledge probably can answer that. 

There had been several request for partial bar selection freeze or bar to bar regeneration. I would prefer this route: select bars, right click-> freeze selected> choice of either freeze all tracks within those selected bars or individual tracks. See attached.

<< Charlie, I think the issue is, you do not see a specific wish as a limitation, but a "problem that needs to be solved at any means." Seems, that if it is achievable, even if not in a particular way, that wish request was presented, it "becomes" invalidated. >>
True for this specific eleven year old wish revived by Pipeline to promote his direct file access idea but it's true only as it applies to versions prior to 2021 BIAB. When this wish was posted in 2010, Pipeline's direct file access concept for BIAB did not exist. Recording Audio and Performance Tracks did not exist. "Isolate what measures to generate", "Enable Audio Edit for RealTracks", and "Unfreeze/regenerate one bar on one channel" were valid wishes in 2010.

The workaround strictly for audio editing is, and always has been, exporting RealTracks into DAWs. The BIAB Audio Editor is on par with any and every DAW and audio editor program for editing and comping RealTracks. Since audio recording/editing and Performance Tracks were implemented in BIAB and all of BIAB's features remain accessible, it's normally easier, faster and better than any other method.
It is by no definition a workaround. It is a native feature of BIAB but users choose to continue to use a DAW that in most cases, they were familiar with its operation before they ever purchased BIAB. Makes sense to me they would do that, it's comfortable.

From 2014/15 forward, the problem was solved by PG Music even if not by the particular way the wish request was presented. RealTracks could be edited using the BIAB Audio Editor and RealTrack one bar regeneration became possible solely within the BIAB program with no external software necessary. The above wishes are valid pertaining to RealBand and the PGPlugin VST. Neither RealBand or the PGPlugin VST are full featured BIAB products and both lack many BIAB features and are just light editions of BIAB.

Pipeline's wish for Direct File Access is necessary to be included in the BIAB program so it's accessible to other PG Music products and will improve interaction between PG Music products and external DAW and audio software programs and aid PGMusic future product development. Read through my posts and you'll see that I support Direct File Access.

Pipeline chose the wrong eleven year old wish to revive. Direct File Access has no effect on audio editing in BIAB. RealBand, PGPlugin and future development is another topic and Direct File Access is a great idea. I'm like you, "whether this is achievable or not, I do not know. Seems if it is, it will take BIAB to another level." Regardless of that outcome, it will have zero effect on editing audio or comping a track from multiple generations of a RealTrack in BIAB.

Pipeline's allegation that audio editing, regeneration and comping tracks creates multitudes of WAV files filling up the hard drive is nonsense. A comp track created in BIAB using 5 generations of individual RealTracks, Chords, bars and regions created in BIAB only needs to render the final edited WAV file. Freezing the generated Mixer Tracks and making a Comp Chart in the Song Memo page retains all of the necessary data for those tracks in the SGU file. That's a smaller file than a similar project saved in Reaper and much smaller than a saved RealBand SEQ file. Even if the original WAV file is lost. The frozen track data and song memo and SGU file can be used to recreate the comped file.

I've attached screen shots of the 79.2Kb SGU File image of the SGU main page. The 9.67 WAV file and the Song Memo Comp Summary.

Rusty, this is a well thought out and generally great idea. However (you knew that was coming, right?), it is too complicated for PGM to implement and get stable. It adds a need to have an indicator for bars that are frozen separately from the overall track. It requires complex management of different bars of the track. I cannot even wrap my head around how complex this could be.

IMHO a much simpler method would be as follows,

1) allow me to select a bar or contiguous set of bars and regenerate just those bars
2) there is no step 2!

This changes one single thing...selective regeneration. It does not alter or affect the current frozen track management in any way. If the track is already frozen no regenerate can be done (just like current behavior). If the track is not frozen then the selected bars are regenerated but the rest of the track is not. As you correctly pointed out we need an option to choose which track should be regenerated but that is it. My proposal has no/low side effects.

This thread is too long for me to follow, but that won't stop me from contributing even at the risk of not knowing what's going on....

Didn't we get this requested feature with MultiRiffs in 2020?

MultiRiffs is a popular feature that has been available in RealBand and the Band-in-a-Box DAW Plugin. Now it is available in Band-in-a-Box 2020. It allows you to quickly generate 7 variations of riffs from the same RealTracks for either a portion of the song or the whole song.

Well, I'm sure someone will come in and say "YES, we already have this feature!" but if we do I sure don't know how to use it. Charlie explained how to do this on a utility track but that does not address the wishlist request. 1) select bars, 2) click regenerate for selected bars only, 3) repeat until you're satisfied with the result. When finished you have a standard RT track with the selected bars regenerated. Anything you can do with an RT track is available to you. No utility track conversion to audio needed.

Charlie,
for the most part I am talking about this:
"problem was solved by PG Music even if not by the particular way the wish request was presented."
To me, how it was solved, it did not address wish. You can not select bars, right click and freeze just those bars. Not comping, not audio editing. Just simply freeze selection.

About direct playback access.. in my understanding each regeneration forms a new audio by mixing an actual audio file(s) instead of just "playing a position" that what takes 6-10 seconds of "regeneration". Here is my stone age view. Imagine a book and a list of bookmarks with highlighted text. Instead of opening the book and reading these sections per instruction, BIAB copies parts to separate "sheets" and glues them to a big "physical" board to make it coherent. I might be wrong...
----------

JJJ,
"(you knew that was coming, right?)"
Kind of.
Ok.. while your idea is simpler, here is the issue. Lets assume you got, 70 bars, if you add bars, or make any chord changes at any place, BIAB will most likely create a new generation on playback for unfrozen tracks. Adding a chord on bar 70, might change anything anywhere (what is not frozen).


Please let me ask you this, so I understand this better. In your proposal, how will regenerated selected bars (your way), will stay intact if they are not frozen? In my archaic understanding of BIAB algorithm, while your proposal makes sense from user end, it would be a 2 step behind the scenes actions. Regenerate + Freeze (exclude from next regeneration) of those sections...

Also, how will you know what you regenerated and what you did not, especially if you do bar to bar at random sections? In my opinion indications would be needed. We had that discussion not too long ago. Found pics from it. Or you proposing doing partial regens "by ear"?

I’m hesitant to wade in here, but reading RustySpoon’s latest idea, I would think it might work better to turn this a bit around. Most of my tracks are fine, so I would like to be able to freeze a track and then highlight a few measures I don’t like and just regenerate those until I get something that I do like.

Yes, the inverse is reasonable also, and if you can do one, there's no reason you can't do the other.

In the Old Muso's Bar View I said about mirroring things in other dialogs so the user can choose the way they wish to apply the the sections. In the Old Muso's Bar View you can visually see what is where as well as it's mirrored in F5, so if you want to change a loop, UT, RT, RD etc.. at any bar that will show and be in F5 also, like you can generate another RT on the same Util track at any bar, this will keep track of what is where with a visual. It is basically just using a table to give an instant visual representation of what is set where.

That's what I love about Reaper I can go there now create a GUI to do what I like and post it in the forum, but here we stand around the wishing well year in year out wishing and hoping.
With the BB Plugin we get added features in the next release.
Before Mac we had biannual releases of BB RB.
With RapidComposer you have a continual Beta throughout the year rather than that last minute made rush Beta test then spend Dec-Jan fixing and improving features as the user that bought it are complaining.
Whereas RapidComposer had a good Beta testing improving period before a release version.

"Yes, the inverse is reasonable also, and if you can do one, there's no reason you can't do the other."
Videotrack, Thank you!

---
OldMuso Bar view, would definitely be nice and useful to have... as "another" view of the project.

So, first, I like your ideas; I just think PGM won't be able to implement them completely and correctly. But, as for my suggestion, you're overthinking it. All I want and need is a simple 1) select bars and 2) regenerate just those bars feature. It is completely unrelated to frozen status. It would work just like it does now. If a track is frozen don't regenerate even if bars are selected. If the track is not frozen then regenerate any bars that are selected. Really simple but powerful. Most of the time I have a solo that does something goofy over 4 or 8 bars and I just want to correct it quickly. This basic regenerate bars feature would address that need 95% of the time.

At the moment the Util tracks can generate select beats, say you want some lead in notes going into the next bar it would be good to be able to have that as well in the BB tracks. Maybe the chord sheet can be made to select beats rather than whole bars like the Audio Edit, using ctrl + drag will snap at each beat if needed ?

So the chord sheet selection will reflect the beats selected in the Audio Edit and the other way:

<< To me, how it was solved, it did not address wish. You can not select bars, right click and freeze just those bars. Not comping, not audio editing. Just simply freeze selection. >>

You're correct Utility Tracks are not the exact wish for regeneration of Legacy RealTrack regeneration.

<< About direct playback access.. >>

I have to defer to Pipeline about how Direct Playback Access works. From what I've read here in the forum, track generation times are much slower in RealBand and the PGPlugin VST. That's a big issue effecting DAW users.

According to Pipeline's posts, this is a particular bottleneck for users that have professional, high end computers, DAWs and more sophisticated recording studios. I think he's correct on these issues.

The Util tracks are in RAM until saved, so if you regen a section of the Util tracks it's still in RAM, so it looks like it should be able to do the same with regular BB tracks this way.
I generated all the regular & Util tracks before saving and Biab was using 1.5 GIG of RAM for 96 bars @ 120bpm. For it to work it would just need to save the track data for all generated tracks rather that saving to wav, but any imported, recorded or destructively edited tracks would need to save to wav (unless it uses non destructive editing then the track could be saved as reference data).
I don't know how it would all go if we ever get more than 255 bars that are all in RAM and the time it would take to generate first to RAM rather than direct play ???
The BBPlugin needs direct play before Biab.
If the BBPlugin can get away from BBW4 to do this all the better.