Many people have requested GUI changes to the main screen, specifically the top area of the main screen.
(note: there is a different thread for general GUI requests **other** than the main screen. It is here
http://www.pgmusic.com/forums/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=382579&an=0&page=0#Post382579We would appreciate hearing any specific suggestions that you have - the more specific the better.
For example, do you want the ptoolbar, or piano area changed, etc. - if so how.
Thanks
How about the ability to customize your own in preferences. I personally wouldn't want to change anything, even though I changed my RB to Rharv's Metal skin and made one with wood, ducks and babies. I changed back to the original.
How about UNDO and REDO buttons?
Stan
Peter, thank you for opening up this important topic to the community.
I would like to be able to personalize or reorder the dropdown menus on the main taskbar so that they emphasize features important to my workflow and remove or otherwise deemphasize (gray out?) features which I rarely or never use.
Edited to add: Think about the option to 'parallel' menu items with the buttons so that if something is eliminated in one place it is removed in the other as well. I see it as an option because I can see cases where you might want to have a button instead of a menu item, and vice versa.
have a separate play button and regenerate button. I am a new user but I never expect to have everything regenerated when I press play. The regenerate button is so powerful and should never be accidentally pressed. just my opinion!
there should be some way to add notes (not musical notes but text) to bars. also a way to display all settings on all bars. maybe to do that you'd have to come up with a color/dot scheme like for rests? I know the real estate is small and lots of info but something cryptic would even work as we could learn it over time.
not sure if this request should go here but I'd love to see an option that completely hides midi buttons, options, info, etc. I love RealTracks and do not ever see me using midi for anything so it would greatly simplify the interface if all these features would just hide!
Here are my suggestions for the main screen GUI; these are visual suggestions, not changes in how the program works (for which I have ideas also):
1) When you enter information in the chord grid, it should more Excel-like. That's what people are familiar with and new users will already know how to do that. Right now, you type in the little box in the upper left and the chord shows up when you hit enter. Just type it in the chord grid, be able to edit what you type while you type (using left, right arrows, mouse swipes, highlighting, cut, copy, paste, etc).
2) I agree with others about having the separate play and regenerate button. Play should be play and should not regenerate the song. Yes, I know BIAB was designed to play something different each time, and that worked well when it was only MIDI because regeneration took less than a second. Now with RT's and RD's, it takes longer to get sound going. So I like the idea of essentially swapping the functionality of Play and Replay. Play would play the current song as is (and generate it, if it's a new song or changes have been made), but if I want to listen to the song three times, it plays the same thing those three times (again, unless changes have been made, which necessitate a regeneration). The former replay button would now be a Regenerate button, and would regenerate the arrangement. I might go so far as to say it doesn't necessarily start playback unless you then hit play, but I suppose that could be a toggle option.
3) The main tool bar needs to be broken into smaller parts and allow moving around like in RealBand/PowerTracks. I would like to be able to move the Play/Stop/Pause buttons to the left side of the screen, for example.
4) All the toolbars need to be able to select "small" icons (like you can in RealBand) to take up less screen real estate.
5) There is no indication (especially to new users) that the "Audio" track is available to do anything. Visually, it looks like a label (but the wrong label) for the harmony settings. All the other tracks have radio buttons, the audio track does not.
6) Replace the single letter buttons with text. What the heck is "S"; make room for it to say "Sng" or better yet, "Song". The "F" buttons should at least say "Fav".
7) There should be some visual way to better help folks understand that for each half beat, you enter a comma in the chord grid. Maybe have a cell for each beat and do away with the comma (the program should then be able to interpret older files properly, which would have the comma).
8) Why have two different reverb spinners for the tracks? When you select a RealTrack, the A Reverb (what's a reverb?) allows you to select the value and the M Reverb (what's m reverb) goes grey. And vice versa. Why not just have a single Reverb setting that is sensitive to the type of track selected.
9) Why is LoopSec and Loop in two different parts of the screen? Seems like looping functions should be kept together.
10) The Wizard checkbox should be relabeled. It's not really a wizard in the current context of wizard. Maybe label it "Keyboard" or "QWERTY" or something similar.
11) When you have a MIDI track, you can select the patch you want from either the drop-down box or the GM2 box. Actually, I don't know why you need both. If you are using a GM2 synth, then those instruments should be shown in the instrument drop-down. Also, the drop down should (like the GM2 button does) break the instruments down into groups, not just a long list of 128 instruments.
12) When you select a RealTrack, instead of greying out the patch list, why not allow users to select the RealTrack (maybe using a list version of it) or RealDrum from the list just like MIDI tracks.
13) When I right-click on a track, I should get an option to assign plug-ins without having to go to the mixer to do so.
I have some more ideas and non-main screen ideas, which I'll post later, but gotta go to work now.
1. Implement a visual marker system on the chord screen:
2. Right button on any element of the screen -> Options for that element.
3. Modular GUI approach, wich means resizable elements, and an easy way of showing them on / off.
4. Zoom tool on the main chord screen (like the one on MS Word, for example), and an option to show more than 4 bars per row.
5. Alow custom organization / simplification of the menu system, as Ryszard suggest. That's a great one.
6. Smaller icons, with the option to not showing them on the screen if you want. It would be nice if they get a more modern redesign, making them simpler and less colourful. This could be just an option ("Modern Skin), alowing those who likes the "clasic" design keep using it.
Visual: I'm not a graphic artist but look at other DAW's. Look at the color schemes and most importantly not just color but texture. Modern software is similar in look to luxury cars. Look at color schemes on a Lexus, Mercedes, Cadillac, Ford Fusion, etc and just come up with something that looks modern. Black, silver, chrome accents with some hot modern colors tastefully thrown in. Just that alone without changing anything else would go a long way to modernizing the look.
Now for some real oldie but goodies that have been talked about for years. Please, please get rid of 20 year old terminology like MME or the really old soundcards/synths like a Soundblaster 16 FM synth, crap like that. Really, who among your customers is actually using a 20 year old Technics KN650 or a Korg M1 or an Ensoniq (sorry Eddie)? Those things came out in 1985. Keep the synth list short and modern and have a button that says "have an older synth?"
Real Track/Drums selection: If it's a RT style and you want to change the guitar then when you right click to change the RT it opens to whatever RT is selected now. But, if it's a midi style and you want to add a RT guitar it opens to the top of the list. If it's guitar have the list open to the guitars and in addition, if it's a bossa style, then have it open to the bossa guitars, or tex mex or jazz or whatever. Simple and logical.
Midi individual instrument selection. Similar to the above, if it's a funk style and I want to change the guitar part there must be some way to isolate all the funk guitars from all the different funk midi styles that contain a guitar. I know this one is probably much more difficult than the RT thing but it sure would be nice. As it is having the ability to plug in individual midi instruments is really fools gold. Trying to find a part that's hiding inside different midi styles is just not worth it. Since you gave us that ability, I've given up on trying to use it.
That's enough for now, I know I'll have more later.
Bob
1. Away to mark/color a bar, and make some note that will allow me to make notes about what i want to domat that point etc.
2. +1 on clear Play/Regen buttons
I would like to see a separate app for "Playing", similar to the most recent pop up you developed for volumes and tone etc.
This would include all the play, stop, rewind, loop things, perhaps just another 'page', for the popup.
In the future, I'd certainly like to see the interface separate into tasks.
So for those who are developing a song the interface would be different from those who have finished and are using Band in a Box as a player, where they are using some of the conductor features, however have no intention of say getting into options or other menu items.
I'm finding it hard to conceptualize, however I think my idea is communicated. Different screens for different tasks. I spend 90 percent of my time loading and playing, so I just want the notes and a player interface, and perhaps the conductor features on my screen, with a songlist. But none of the setup or other tasks there, just a button to go to the "Main Interface", the current one.
You could always do what google does, i.e. (use new interface, or keep old...)
It's very gratifying that P&G should be asking for GUI design input but unfortunately it's a bit like an artist asking for input on how to design a painting. I'm afraid that P&G will receive dozens of pet ideas and the GUI will continue to look like it was designed by a committee. Also I can see that the ideas will concentrate on improved features rather than the look and the feel.
It's a good idea to seek some user input but P&G need to employ an experienced, creative computer graphics designer who is instructed to consider the latest GUI ideas from the industry and let him/her get on with it. At the end of the day, this is far more important than juggling the user input.
Tony
Quote:
It's a good idea to seek some user input but P&G need to employ an experienced, creative computer graphics designer who is instructed to consider the latest GUI ideas from the industry and let him/her get on with it. At the end of the day, this is far more important than juggling the user input.
Excellent point Tony. I was thinking exactly the same thing after I made my post above. Just like writing a song, most of the time it's done by one person, maybe two and that's it. Let somebody with a good track record just do it and Peter could post screen shots for us to comment on.
Bob
If I were on the team at PG I'd seriously consider several of the "big picture" suggestions above as well as a few others in the overall product/business plan.
1) completely redesign the user interface using a professional interface designer who works hand-in-hand with in-house staff so a great interface is designed that still works for all of the BIAB functionality
2) related to above, study and emulate the extremely cool interfaces being designed for DAWs, VST plugins, etc. I know these are mostly cosmetic but DANG are they enticing!
3) rename and relaunch the product. I know this is painful because the brand is well-known among your user base but you can tell them about the change in emails, on the forum, the website, etc. And, a new, slick product name could help establish the kind of credibility that would gain you a multitude of new customers. I continue to be amazed at how many pros in the music business either don't know about BIAB or have no idea how awesome it is. Trust me, as a new user, I was quite skeptical until I tried it and now I continue to be just blown away by what can be produced using this software!!! It should be in every songwriter's toolkit and I'd even go so far to say everyone making a demo should do their first version in BIAB before they ever spend a dime on studio time. I know there is no replacing the experience and quality of a studio & staff but you can get very close with just a little effort with BIAB!
4) related to above, again, hire a pro from outside your company or an agency to develop the new product name. invest in focus groups and field testing of the new name. It will pay off!
5) Update all demo videos to the latest version and include them at no extra charge when someone buys BIAB and all RealTracks. I felt a bit gypped to spend almost $500 and then have to pony up another $29 for video tutorials that seem to be a bit dated. You really should do this because it is in your best interest for a new user to get going quickly!
6) Go through the entire product, documentation, demos, tutorials, etc. and cut WAY back on all the jazz references. I guess the product has its roots in jazz but when you look at your potential market, jazz is probably the smallest group by far (check out 2012 mid-year music sales here
http://www.scoopmarketing.com/2012/07/th...ndustry-report/ about the middle of the page and you'll see the only music selling less than jazz is classical!)
7) because you have a DAW you might consider a tighter integration with BIAB but I'm not sure if this would be a good idea as I'm pretty certain I'm gonna keep using Reaper because it is familiar to me.
8) target a younger demographic to add more diversity to your community. I'm on the other side of 50 and get the impression most/many of your users are too so it would be great to see some young blood involved in forums. They could get help from the seasoned vets and we could get their fresh perspective and see how they use BIAB.
9) get some celebrity endorsements. I play and write music and I've listened to tons of music and I write software...and with that experience I feel I am qualified to say BIAB is an AMAZING product so you should not have any trouble getting some endorsements.
10) advertise in songwriting and other musician magazines, websites, google adwords, etc. I have been playing music all my life and had never heard of BIAB until I read Robin Frederick's songwriting book where she recommended BIAB! And, BTW, it would be worthwhile for you to contact her to update her recommendation about BIAB...she makes no mention of RealTracks, focuses on midi and states that you have a working demo!
http://www.robinfrederick.com/resources.html11) related to above, contact other songwriting teachers, writers, etc. and get them to recommend BIAB on their websites!
12) contact music schools and offer a discount if students buy BIAB through their school
13) be more active on your Facebook page and/or start a blog with something daily or at least weekly
There is probably lots more that you can do but these were just a few of my thoughts on this chilly midwest morning.
And, FWIW, even if you change nothing about BIAB I will remain impressed and thrilled to have the product! You have done some amazing work here!!!!
Another thanx for asking input from users. This is probably the only company that does this on a regular basis.
There have been a lot of good ideas brought forth thus far however organizing these ideas/improvements could prove problematic. My suggestion would be to take an idea from Sonar called screen sets. You could have three non-customizable ones.
I’ll try to explain. The three non-customizable screen sets would be as follows:
1-midi and RT/RDs for when working with both
2-midi only for midi only compositions
3-RT/RD only for RT/RD compositions.
It would work like this. All of the data in the main chord screen would be the same (chords, tempo, style, etc) however all of the menus would change according to the screen set you select. Note you should be able to move from one screen set to another without rebooting the program by pressing screen set icons. The midi screen set would only have menus dedicated to midi and RT/RD screen set menus dedicated to RT/RD. The screen set for both could stay the same as it is now.
If possible a few other customizable screen sets could be available for users to show or hide whatever icons or menus they use or don’t use.
I believe a method like this would unclutter the main BiaB screen.
I second Mario's idea of separate initial screen choices for separate workflows.
Photoshop does this with the options for Essentials,Design,and Painting as the beginning screen options.
Cleans up the workspace to begin with.
Then you have the ability to add more windows/palettes if you want.
These can be free floating or docked to a menu bar at the top.
I think being able to customize your workspace is an important feature to be sure.
That way you know where all your tools are without having to hunt through a multitude of drop down menus which can be very frustrating especially for a newbie.
Also have the ability to return to "Classic" view for those who desire it.
How about a Realband button that would automatically open your present BIAB work in Realband without dropping and dragging.
Always felt a seamless merging of the two programs would be the way to go.
Maybe under a new name?
Carkins
to steal an idea from Windows: THEMES, which I suppose boil down to collections of compatible skins that can be applied to all screen elements to produce a variety of "look & feel" combinations
regarding menu customization:
several of the software packages I use at work offer the ability to create custom toolbars by dragging commands from a comprehensive list onto a toolbar. These toolbars can be docked to the main menu, undocked and free-floating, dragged, repositioned, etc
Once the toolbars are organized the way you want, right clicking on the main menu lets you turn whole sets of toolbars off and on, so you only need to have subsets of commands visible based on the part of the project you're working on
The advantage of clustering commands together according to your own organizational logic is that it puts commands where you can find them, instead of having to navigate sub menus and right click menus
This is for both the main and the other screens.
I would like to either have the fonts changed or the ability to change fonts on the various messages and menus. For example the font for category in the style menu is one of them that is almost impossible to read on a high-resolution monitor. As are some of the message windows on the main screen.
They are actually a little smaller than these.
Fonts: Hmmm, I am guessing that these fonts are not controlled in BIAB(?), but are coming from the windows operating system based on the menu/screen type. Found this at
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-vista/Change-Windows-fontsQuote:
Change Windows fonts
You can change the font in any part of Windows (for example, menus). Changing a Windows font does not change your program fonts.
Open Appearance Settings by clicking the Start button Picture of the Start button, clicking Control Panel, clicking Appearance and Personalization, clicking Personalization, and then clicking Window Color and Appearance. If the Appearance Settings dialog box is not displayed, at the bottom of the page, click Open classic appearance properties.
Click Advanced.
In the Item list, click the part of Windows where you want to change the font. For example, if you want to change the menu font, click Menu in the list.
In the Font list, click the font you want to use.
In the Size list, click the font size that you want.
In the Color list, click the font color you want.
Repeat steps 3 through 6 for each part of Windows where you want to change the font, its size, and its color, and then click OK.
Maybe someone knows which font setting to choose -- there are a lot of choices.
(1) Whatever you do, please include a "Hertitage" option for those of us who just happen to hate wasting time remembering WTH an icon/tile is supposed to represent---one of the reasons Macs have been shunned by PC people. The 'heritage' mode should absolutely include the standard Windows command bar.
(2) The ability to add buttons where you want them and place them where you want them (floating pallette). A tracking/keypress feature would be nice (automatically build a palette of buttons and commands that you have been using)
(3) Context-sensive button/tool bars (like in every office suite)
(4) Skins and color preferences
Good luck to all of us!
Paj
8^)
A few from me.. all IMHO only
Represent bars properly when dealing with unusual time signatures - one bar per bar in the chord sheet window
Either.. drop the instrument names in trhe GUI just call them instrument one, two, etc or, give them the names that actually apply.. don't call banjos pianos
Assign most of the MIDI readings to a loadable window, most MIDI assignments/program changes are rarely used, weho uses LSB?
Build the GUI for Real Tracks its the future...
Use more tooltips - color coding things, though useful, is only good if you have read the manual.. did you read the manual for yur mobile
Get away from the windows 95 look it creates a poor impression.
Make it possible to show repeats in two ways - one as in classical notation, secondly in exanded view as if in a sequenccer
Last but certainly not least, a great learning tool would be to provide a learner with explanation of given chord types. E.G. Bb7Alt is exactly.....? Do this directly on the chord sheet window by a hovering action (which may be turned off in prefs. Provide some suggested chord voicings somehow - for learners. Also consider indentifying chord sequences as groups - e.g 2/5/1s chord subs, modulations. In other words try to display the structure beyond roman numerals (which are great).
Loose the windows 95 look its bad for your image - a great engine in a model T chassis
Love the product would love to see the GUI brought up to date
Quote:
Build the GUI for Real Tracks its the future...
Not sure what that means. I'm all for progress (see my earlier post) but not at the expense of those of us who use BIAB almost exclusively with/for MIDI. A big 10-4 for losing the Win 95 deal, though. I also second the notion of being able to rename or dynamically display the instrument names, too. A banjo isn't a piano, nor is a guitar strings, et cetera, et cetera.
Did anyone mention yet that it would be very helpful to be able to adjust the number of measures per line on the chordsheet (since it's on the main screen)?
Way too general Zero. Look again at Peter's original post:
We would appreciate hearing any specific suggestions that you have - the more specific the better.
For example, do you want the ptoolbar, or piano area changed, etc. - if so how.The more specific the better and you want to make changes, then explain exactly what and how the best you can.
A lot of these posts are like that, not just yours. They're like an average person looking at a portrait in progress. "She looks weird, he has to make her look better".
Gotta get specific,
exactly how do you want the GUI to look? What is it you don't like about it? Be specific, is it the icons? How would you change them? The chord grid? How would you change that? The instrument menu's? How would you change those? Etc, etc. What is it that makes it look like Win 95 to you? As opposed to what?
Binars are supposed to be very logical, they make Vulcans look like emotional basket cases. Split that brain of yours and come up with something...
Answers to these types of questions is what Peter is looking for.
Bob
I like the old girl just the way she is.
Quote:
Way too general Zero. Look again at Peter's original post:
We would appreciate hearing any specific suggestions that you have - the more specific the better.
For example, do you want the ptoolbar, or piano area changed, etc. - if so how.
The more specific the better and you want to make changes, then explain exactly what and how the best you can.
A lot of these posts are like that, not just yours. They're like an average person looking at a portrait in progress. "She looks weird, he has to make her look better".
Gotta get specific, exactly how do you want the GUI to look? What is it you don't like about it? Be specific, is it the icons? How would you change them? The chord grid? How would you change that? The instrument menu's? How would you change those? Etc, etc. What is it that makes it look like Win 95 to you? As opposed to what?
Binars are supposed to be very logical, they make Vulcans look like emotional basket cases. Split that brain of yours and come up with something...
Answers to these types of questions is what Peter is looking for.
Bob
Your point is a good one...specifics are better. But I think everyone would agree if you compare BIAB GUI to most other modern software (Reaper, Excel, etc.) there are many obvious improvement opportunities that jump out at you. And I don't mean to criticize because BIAB works great and even if it is never improved visually I'll be glad to have it, but it kinda resembles a DOS program that was hastily ported to Windows 3.1! And I know function is more important than looks but the GUI does get considered when someone is thinking about new software. And if they judged BIAB just on its visuals I think it might not get fair consideration.
Oh yes, looks are vital always has been whether it's Miss America or the latest software. Since none of us are pro graphics designers it is tough to make specific suggestions yet that's what has to be done. Us users are the ones who know the program the best. If they start completely rearranging the windows, how does that affect the basic operation? What about the colors? Can we still see what we need to see easily? These are the sorts of things we have to think about carefully and then make detailed suggestions. Simply saying "it looks old, fix it" is no help.
Every software company such as Reaper posts screen shots on their websites, you don't have to actually own the software to see what it looks like. Go to some and look at them and try to think about what if Biab looked like this? Where would the piano display be? Where would the instruments buttons be, how to access the Real Tracks, the chord grid, the icons or do you think they should get rid of the icons and use something else but if so what else? You have to think about what the program is and how it does what it does. Biab is not a DAW like Sonar or something else. All we're talking about in this thread is the look and feel of the program, not about changing the basic functions, just how to see and access them.
Not easy when you really get down to it.
Bob
not easy at all Bob. I suggested in another post that they hire an outside GUI expert and pair him/her/them up with someone who knows BIAB inside and out (PG?) in order to design the new GUI. I seriously doubt GUI design can make much progress here in the forums.
Jazz mammal: I think you make a fair point, I was away from BIAB when I posted. Here are some specific suggestions, Main GUI only:
Everything 64 bit as well as 32.
Support unusual time signatures properly - no two bars equal one bar thing..
Develop a MIDI window and assign the MIDI part info of the display to that. I am talking of the section that is displaying 'electric piano' (when in this piece there is no electric piano), GM2 F + Volume, Pan, Tone, Bank0, LSB, Mreverb. I doubt if most people use this much and the MIDI instrument name misleads or is silent. Who uses LSB?? Very few, and they should find it in a drop down if they really want it.
Clarify the looping: At present we have the loop button, the loop sec button, the tick box for loop then the spinning arrows icon for loopsec in three different places. - maybe a 'transport bar' like cubase - but dockable.
Make the instrument names for the tracks either accurate or simply name them one, two, three etc.
Loose the Windows 95 look. Here I cannot be specific but even behind the main screen in the dialogue boxes everything looks dated.
When something is a MIDI only function, label it so (e.g. reverb).
Have a Zoom function available in the bottom right of the gui so you can see more chords if desired
Make the Roman numerals function visible on the Main GUI - handy for quick analysis
Controversial: Loose RB and integrate it into BIAB - have a sequencer view. (I know many wont like this but cleaving the application into two entities is IMO a bad thing).
Have tool tips that give the notes for the chords. If you hover over Bb Sus 4 it could show the notes.
When I look at the top of the gui for the particular song I am in almost all the information is inaaccurate or irrelevent. Its composed of real tracks, features harmonica and organ, none of which show. There is no electric piano.
Improve the notation screen. For me its unuseable and breaks up into blocks when the creen chagngers - this should never happen. Bars are often cluttered to the degree of unreadable - note heads in black crfowed blocks. I ma jsut looking at the TAB menu for guitar in "The Stars Above" and its a mess of bits of numbers. I never use notation because of these issues - even though I can read. Why a 'leadsheet; window, AND a 'chord sheet' window? Integrate them please.
Consider having lyrics displayed under chord sheet? I know this is not as easy as it sounds.
Song structure window:
Give us more power over the structure of the song in the way it is displayed. Most songs can be divided into structures like IntroAABA, ABABA etc. Give us a window where we can control at this level, giving us the option to repeat a letter - e.g. AABA and have it show with the correct repeats on screen. Have an option for A1' and A2 where the eight bars are essentially the same but tweaked (usually last couple of bars). Include pick up notes.
Concerning roman numerals and song structures. Often in a song, particularly Jazz, songs go slightyl out of the home key form, for example a 2/5/1 might be built on the dominant or a tritone substitution used. Roman numerals takes you so far, but sometimes you might get say a 2/5/1 into a minor or something. If BIAB could have an "Analysis screen" that did more than simply convert to roman numerals this would be a great learning tool. Maybe with suggested scales for unconventional chords too. This could be a strong selling point.
Anyways.. these are my thoughts..
It would be nice when right-clicking on the Drum Real Track to have an option that actually regenerates the drum track, which is a function available on all the other Real Tracks.
There is a selection for "regenerate this real track," but I believe that only works if an instrument other that drums is assigned to the Drum track.
Maybe there should be an additional line that says "regenerate real drums."
Thanks
John
When I see us start making specific suggestions like proper time sig support, proper instrument names and the like all I can say is those things have been asked about literally since before I became a member here 7 years ago. Nothing has been done about them.
I mean literally these things have been asked and bitched about over and over and over and over....oh, and over again. To those who are not beta testers I can tell you these things continually come up every beta test too yet no comments from anybody in power and nothing is done. Just like the VST timing issue in Real Band. I can only assume that due to the basic coding of the program, these things simply can't be done and that's it.
This is why I keep trying to point this discussion to the basic question about the GUI. Both of these new threads ask about the GUI. What does that mean? Graphical User Interface. Basically the look and feel of the program, nothing to do with internal specifics like time sigs, notation or the like. Just like your Windows desktop. That is the Windows GUI, nothing to do with what's happening under the hood. Not trying to be the hall monitor at all, just putting out a fair warning these other things have been talked about to death. PG is well aware of them, trust me. Just focus on the title of these threads.
Bob
I think a couple of folks have already mentioned it, but it would be nice to be able to break down a song into its component parts (Intro, Verse, Chorus, Bridge, Ending), with the option of V1 V2 and C1 C2 etc, and then be able to specify how the song fits together: I-V1-C-V2-C-B-C-E
For the intro indicated above, it would be nice to have real intros (2 to 8 bars), much like arranger keyboards do, and then like StyleMaker, allow the user to create their own Intros library (to supplement those provided by PGMusic). The intro can include instruments on any one of the tracks.
Likewise, there should be 2-8 bar endings (not just the 2 bar now allowed), again with the ability of users to create their ending library (to supplement those provided by PGMusic). The intro can include instruments on any one of the tracks.
1. The cluttered and chaotic main screen of BiaB can be made to look fairly decent using the customization that's available now. The result is not terribly trendy, but I suspect there'd be fewer complaints mentioning Windows 95 if the layout looked more like this by default:
The keyboards and gimmicks should (at a minimum) be made addable by option, rather than forcing users to hide the goofier stuff by themselves. Little-used features shouldn't have an icon showing.
2. IMO, the worst problem about the GUI is not immediate visual impression but the disorganization of the menus. Correcting this is probably a big job, because the system "jus' growed" over decades without care for consistency. As the program grew more complex, menus got even worse.
Menus should at least execute in a consistent manner (mouse and Enter key). The scroll wheel must be made to work in all menus, including those programmed 15 years ago. Otherwise you give the impression of a carelessly constructed program that doesn't know what it's doing.
Some good, powerful features are actually crippled by deplorable menus. The leadsheet printing feature -- once you study up for a couple of years -- can yield fine results; but some quite smart users don't think that's worthwhile, because print attributes are arbitrarily distributed over 3 wildly complicated menus (one of them quite effectively hidden behind one of the others).
Another example is the endings, codas, and repeats menu, so messy and hard to interpret that it causes never-ending puzzlement on the forums. A thing which confuses MOST people can't be willed into acceptability by claiming user error and failure to read the directions.
Jazz Mammal: "can only assume that due to the basic coding of the program, these things simply can't be done and that's it."
My guess is that to include a 64 bit application and to Integrate with the Metro interface attributes of Win 8, to start designing for IPads, Androids and the like, this version of BIAB needs fundamental change that the ancient code cannot support. I guess (but have no knowledge) that the next version of BIAB is a complete rewrite and will include addressing some of these long standing issues - like 12/8, 7/4 time signatures and the like.
Obviously it is possible to support unusual time signature and other things like this, its just about how... from the coding perspective.
Even though it looks very dated BIAB is an innovative product, but it cant stand still. Cubase 7 has introduced a new 'chord track' due out December, its not BIAB by any means but things move on.2
I have a very positive feeling about BIAB 2013 being a step change product, PG needs to move forward rapidly from here..
All IMO
Zero
I think that the use of primary and secondary colors is what makes many people refer to the GUI unfavorably. In our culture you are likely to see mainly primary colors in kindergartens and day care facilities. Whether or not we consciously understand our reaction to visual cues we associate with small kids, the association evokes a reaction.
When I hear people make comments like "looks like a toy" I believe this is exactly the reason.
That theory would be easy to test. If THEMES were available, and some of them were monochromatic or even metallic, it would be interesting to see how many people opted for the primary color themes and how many opted for the more sedate schemes.
MY preferred theme would be a brushed aluminum look with a high-end audio system styling, simulated LED status boxes etc.
(I can see an aftermarket for BIAB theme graphic sets.)
My favorite example of an advanced GUI in an audio app is FLStudio. The app's approach to creating music is very different than BIAB's, but the modularity of design is outstanding in my opinion...
The design and programming principles should be transportable.
I think you make a good point Pat two blended tones add a touch of class IMO. I think its also true that you 'can have too much of a good thing' and end up with a GUI that looks like a space ship or something - like Win Amp for example.
I have been thinking about the main screen, it could look SIbelius like - the creamy manuscript look. The main default font in the chord sheet window is comic sans I believe (I am away from BIAB at the moment) - this gives clarity but not elegance. Obviously this could be changed.
Loose that Windows Grey in all the dialogue boxes and the main screen - its like having grannies wallpaper in your living room. Also the font for the menus is a little old school.
Spin buttons: Like I say, I am not in front of my machine but do they show a slider once clicked? I recall they do not. My eyes are not great (judge by my tyupos)
and it would be good if the smaller items on the screen were elegantly to enlarge on use.
I am just concernd that PG will delay the upgrade to deliver a new GUI and forget about adding the 101 new styles ...
Personally a new look is not high on my agenda as when i use it there is nothing for me to compare it with and thinking about it more and more fear that if a redevelopment starts it could take quite a while ago tomget back to the point they are now.
I hope that the GUI pushers understand that the programming hours cannot be applied to adding the WIBNIFS (Would'nt It Be Nice If) features we want extra if they spend time upgrading the look and feel.
Whatever you do, please include a "Classic View" switch so those of us who have used BIAB for many years are able to choose to use the classic BIAB GUI.
Tabbed multiple main screens (player, midi, real tracks, Combo:MIDI/RT, utilities). Each tab main screen would consolidate the icons and commands that support each tab. When users switch between tabs, chordsheet, or combination chordsheet/piano roll for midi main screen, and transport control window follows each screen.
I'd like to see piano display default to off.
Two floating(above or below chordsheet)toolbars with each having three selectable icon sizes (small, normal & large), the ability to show or hide icon names, the ability to show or hide floatover icon descriptors and the ability to show or hide each toolbar.
Floating and resizeable transport window with buttons for Start, Pause, Stop, Play, Loop Play Selected Bars, Record (Selected Track{s}, End, Regenerate Selected Track(s).
