I know I post a lot on the form, I'd probably win the gold or sliver in the most post category, but I have one simple request. Please add a second real drum track slot for adding a second drum part, i.e. percussion.

Yes, another old request resurrected. This would help.

+1

Yes, definitely supported

+1

+1
Would be a great addition for BIAB and a big step in profesionnal arrangements.

+1. alternative would be implement the "Medley" function to work on the drum track like it does on the others (this was my version of this request a good while back).

Another +1 to an old and repeated many times request.

as I always respond to a request like this why not open all 16 channels? We could then have as many drums, guitars, strings etc as we want.

I was pretty sure this question would come up. As I understand it, several of those first 16 channels have always been reserved for possible use by harmony (channels 8-9, or 5), and by individual guitar strings (channels 11-16). Click on the MID icon, then select Options, Help and you'll see this.

Of course, if we could choose what to include on any track instead of those, I'm all for that. I never need the individual guitar strings, and only rarely use the harmony tracks. Another approach would be to support a second bank of 16. Then I think we would be constrained only by system considerations (RAM, disk throughput, and CPU speed).

Except that I believe some of the PGMusic MIDI styles do use them, so you have at least be aware here. I believe the ones that use the "Guitar Macros" use channels 11-16 for the guitar strings.

Yes, that's right John. I had just added that and other info to my post above. I'm assuming someone using only RealTracks for guitar would not need 11-16 reserved.

And I will respond the same way I did before to this same request.

This is one of the primary reasons Real Band was created. RB is a marriage of Biab and a DAW precisely so you can create multiple parts of the same instruments on different tracks, bypass Biab's 255 bars limit (there's yet another thread about that for the gazillionth time), better midi editing, better audio editing, etc, etc. RB was and is PG's answer to all these things that come up on the forum continually because Biab IS NOT A DAW.

The "Band" in Band in a Box refers to a standard small group of 4 or 5 players playing standard AABA type songs. That has already been expanded by things like the Crooner RT's, and loops. More than that and you're entering the world of DAW's.

16 tracks?? That's small change Mario, you've got 48 already.

Use Real Band guys, that's why it was invented in the first place.

Bob

+1 for sure!

Yes, +1

And I'll respond to this the same way I seem to always need to remind you of: Realband DOES NOT EXIST ON MAC!

And if you look again, that's precisely the platform the OP is using, so I'd say his request is still absolutely warranted.

Very legitimate question because it's a Mac version. Garage Band is a different animal.

I think the question is legitimate for the PC version, too. Sure, we have RealBand and that's great, but some of us would still prefer to stay in one program if it were possible with a few modifications. We are entitled to make a request here that fits our preferred workflow. If that workflow doesn't work for you, then I suggest you can just let the request pass without argument.

+1000

Then when one uses one of those styles channels 11-16 would not be available to the user but channels 1-10 would be.

Also anyone with a MIDI guitar controller should learn how to set his controller and the software program to use any 6 channels that are available.

Yes Bob I know that BiaB is not a DAW. But BiaB has 16 channels all ready so why not, if possible, open them up the user?

I already have an extremely good DAW now so I really don't want to learn another one when everything that I would want to do in BiaB would be enhanced with all 16 channels.

I know that 16 tracks are small change for a DAW! But 48 tracks is small change to what I could use in my DAW if you want to get into specs. But I will add that most all of us would never use 48 tracks.

I am not trying to start a war I'm just suggesting that BiaB could be a lot better for many users, IMHO, If all channels were open.

Yes I know but I'm pretty sure that's simply not possible because everything Biab does is midi controlled and I suspect all the midi resources are being used already. Plus of course the overriding thing is it's been clear so far that they have no interest in turning Biab into a DAW even if it were possible. Why? Because of RB. Could that change, sure it could PG will do whatever they think is best for the company.

Years ago when RB first came out all this was discussed to death including very long threads discussing the pros and cons of doing a complete merge of Biab and RB so there's only one program. Basically a 48 track Biab with all the full DAW functions. The overall consensus was a program like that would be so complex that literally nobody could work with it. Real Band alone was PG's answer instead of expanding Biab.

When folks say they already use a good DAW and they're not going to learn another one then all I can say is you're losing out on all this stuff you're asking for. There are reasons why people choose one program over another and this is a reason to choose RB.

As for RB not being available on Mac, when folks buy the Mac version of Biab they don't realize what RB is capable of and what they will be missing. Why? Because so few people on this forum give RB a second glance. It's "just included" so they think it's some little throwaway program they really don't need. Imho, if you're a Mac power user who understands all these recording concepts then it's a mistake to buy Biab for Mac precisely because you're losing out on RB.

Of course everyone is free to keep making their wish suggestions but there's a pattern here. Once RB came out, that's been the answer.

Bob

Well, in a way, you can use all 16 channels in BIAB (using the Sequencer feature); it's just that in addition to the ones BIAB already uses, they're only available on the Melodist or Soloist track as a multi-channel track. Each one of those channels can have it's own instrument, but you have to be using a GM synth that accepts standard patch numbers to set the instruments on the different channels. You have to be careful to work around the channels already used by any MIDI styles.

That being said, it would be much easier to manipulate the date if each channel had its own track, but as Bob said, you really are getting into DAW territory here. Not saying that BIAB couldn't do it, but it would be much more of a DAW, but just a different user interface than RealBand.

But back to the original post, I don't know why the RealTracks and RealDrums have to overlay the MIDI tracks. They should be separate. That would allow you to have a RealDrums track and a MIDI drums track. Better yet, be able to assign a RealDrum to any RealTrack. BIAB should be smart enough to know that it's a RealDrum and not transpose it when the chord grid changes.

Here was my original request back in early 2015 regarding this.

That's an interesting question, why the RealTracks must be connected to the MIDI channels. I assume because the way the program developed as MIDI-based, audio snippets are 'controlled' by MIDI, but we don't know how it may really work.

In your diagram just above, all 16 MIDI channels can be accounted for. Channel 1 generally sends 'control information'. 2-4 are shown. 5 is the alternate channel for Harmony, select-able in the MIDI icon, options. 6-7 are shown. 8-9 are for Harmony (unless using 5). 10 is always drums in the MIDI standard. 11-16 are reserved for the six guitar strings, also in MIDI icon, options, in some MIDI styles as John pointed out. That fills up the first bank of 16.

So much programming over so many years would have to be changed if this scheme were to be changed now. That's why I was wondering if PG Music could address the second bank of 16 MIDI channels instead, and leave those new ones assignable.

Bob, that would be great if I had a PC, but I'm using a Mac.

++ RealBand For Mac ++

Show your support for wanting a RealBand for Mac by adding your +1 to my wishlist request.

Noted and reported!

Thanks all for your valued feedback.

Cheers!

That's why people use Intel Mac's, install Windows and dual boot. There are lots of cool PC only programs and not everything is dual platform. It's the same the other way too. Lots of great Mac only programs so I have to decide which way I'm going to go. I costs a ton of money to rewrite a program for the other platform if it wasn't done for both from the beginning.

I'm sure you give this same advice to PC users who ask you the same question about a Mac only program. What's the answer? Keep bugging the company to rewrite the program or just buy a Mac?

In your case here, you can wait for PG to come up with a Mac version of RB (it could happen but when?) or set up a Win/Mac dual boot system.

Bob

Yes, good ideas.