Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread
Print Thread
Go To
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 137
F
Apprentice
OP Offline
Apprentice
F
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 137
Could you pls advise?

Suppose you are happy with the BIAB arrangement and you export the tracks to your DAW. For each track (bass, guitar, piano, etc), you may add your favorite VST instruments.

But will you double the tracks in order to have a fuller sound? I mean, should you duplicate so that you will have two tracks of piano, two tracks of drum, etc?

Thank you

Band-in-a-Box for Windows
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 25,800
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 25,800
Almost never. If I do, it's for the lead instrument or vocal.

This would be a good topic in the Recording/Mixing Forum.


BIAB 2024 Win Audiophile. Software: Studio One 6.5 Pro, Swam horns, Acoustica-7, Notion 6; Win 11 Home. Hardware: Intel i9, 32 Gb; Roland Integra-7, Presonus Studio 192, Presonus Faderport 8, Royer 121, Adam Sub8 & Neumann 120 monitors
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,921
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,921
I will do it for lead vox, rhythm guitar, and occasionally backup vox if I am the one singing. Some artists use doubling as an in-your-face effect, but I tend to keep it subtle.


"My primary musical instrument is the personal computer."
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 6,080
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 6,080
I've done it on a part or two to emphasize a part. I've also detuned or put a little chorus on the doubled one and that can change the sound, sometimes making it sound fatter, sometimes just weird - experimentation is the key for me.

But I think if you did it to all the parts, it would sound pretty much the same.

I'm also talking MIDI here, I do most of my editing with MIDI because (1) it's easier to edit MIDI and (2) there are hundreds of edits you can perform on MIDI that you just can't do with audio yet.

Insights and incites by Notes


Bob "Notes" Norton smile Norton Music
https://www.nortonmusic.com

100% MIDI Super-Styles recorded by live, pro, studio musicians for a live groove
& Fake Disks for MIDI and/or RealTracks
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,301
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,301
Mostly.......NO! Doubling a track in that manner does nothing except make it louder and risk other issues.

You can use compression and level control to get a louder sound if that's what you're after.

But before you do anything..... ask yourself and answer this question. What do you mean when you say you want a "FULLER SOUND"? Is there anything wrong with the version you have with one track each? Does it sound OK or does it lack something? Could the problem be solved another way...such as with EQ and compression?

Figure out what it's lacking first. There may be a way to get what you want... in fact there is....and you don't need to double to get it.


Having said that: doubling, tripling, and more (aka layering) is a useful tool when it's used correctly and in the proper places. Doubling everything in the project is NOT the right way to get it. In fact, that will simply cause other issues to occur. I use it on vox and acoustic guitars..... but I NEVER copy a track to do it. I always ALWAYS record unique tracks for each track I want in the mix. Levels and EQ are critical to a successful double vs something that isn't.

Most of the lead vocals in my projects are triples..... main in the center up nice and loud... 2 additional leads, lower, and panned 100% L/R. In fact, you probably can't hear the other lower vox in the mix..... but in a soloed state.... they are audible. That's how it works best. The subconscious hears them and to you....they simply sound a bit fatter, or fuller.

Often, the desire to double the tracks to get a "fuller sound" is really a band-aide solution on something else that's really the problem. You should be able to get a nice full sound with relatively few instrument tracks and none of them doubled. If you can't..... you need to find out why you can't and work on that problem.


You can find my music at:
www.herbhartley.com
Add nothing that adds nothing to the music.
You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both.

The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
J
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
J
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
Doubling is a fine technique to use if it helps you accomplish the sound you are looking for!

I have used it on vocal tracks to "thicken" my voice. And I have used it when I want a background of something like a strummed acoustic panned both right and left.

Of course you have to do a little more than just double the track...mainly add some delay to the doubled track. Check out these articles for more info,

https://www.soundonsound.com/sos/apr09/articles/doubletracking.htm

http://music.tutsplus.com/tutorials/how-to-create-rich-depth-with-doubling-techniques--audio-559

Oh and John Lennon famously used Automatic Double Tracking to great effect!

Band-in-a-Box for Windows
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 15,544
PG Music Staff
Offline
PG Music Staff
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 15,544
If you are using BiaB, there is a special feature working behind the scenes to deal with the issue of doubling parts. It actually makes completely different parts, it doesn't try to just change one slightly from the other. This is for Realtracks.

If you put 2 or more of the identical Realtracks on separate tracks, BiaB will automatically generate different parts for each of them, so that there is no time in the arrangement that it would be playing the same thing - because if it did, it would sound like one player instead of two.

There is no setting needed for this, it just works, as long as you are generating them all at once by pressing the play button. We call this feature same-but-different.

Fwiw, in our tests, attempting to generate different parts by just offsetting the timing of an audio track, or panning doesn't work, and it often sounds worse. That's why we made the same-but-different feature, so that you actually hear 2 different parts play at all times.


Have Fun!
Peter Gannon
PG Music Inc.
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,301
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,301
Originally Posted By: PeterGannon
If you are using BiaB, there is a special feature working behind the scenes to deal with the issue of doubling parts. It actually makes completely different parts, it doesn't try to just change one slightly from the other. This is for Realtracks.

If you out 2 or more of the identical Realtracks on separate tracks, BiaB will automatically generate different parts for each of them, so that there is no time in the arrangement that it would be playing the same thing - because if it did, it would sound like one player instead of two.

There is no setting needed for this, it just works, as long as you are generating them all at once by pressing the play button. We call this feature same-but-different.

Fwiw, in our tests, attempting to generate different parts by just offsetting the timing of an audio track, or panning doesn't work, and it often sounds worse. That's why we made the same-but-different feature, so that you actually hear 2 different parts play at all times.


This is really handy for the rhythm tracks. Use this on the acoustic guitars for example, in the background of the song. I simply set up 2 tracks and record my Taylor guitar 2 times playing the same thing. RB will also duplicate this quite easily and well.

I would not advise using this on a lead part for the attempted purpose of doubling the track since it does NOT play the same thing twice...... HOWEVER..... I use this unique function quite often on lead parts, not to double, but to choose segments from each part to create one awesome solo. Listen to the piano and the guitar solo in this song.

The Best Christmas

There are 3 piano parts rendered from the same piano in real band and there are 5...yes 5...count them.... 5 guitar tracks rendered from the same real band track and in Sonar, I used envelopes to allow the parts I wanted to play. The result is fills and a solo that sound like they are one simply amazing part/solo. Some of the piano fills, while very short, are in fact coming from 2 different tracks controlled by volume envelopes.

AS PeterG points out... the worst way to attempt doubling is the lazy man's way.... simply copying a track and delaying it or detuning it.... this method causes some serious phase issues as the frequency of the notes played a few milliseconds apart mix in the DAW. You get comb-filtering and that doesn't sound good. I've done it, we've all done it, it's just not the best or recommended way to do this.


You can find my music at:
www.herbhartley.com
Add nothing that adds nothing to the music.
You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both.

The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 6,080
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 6,080
A lot of people have used double-tracking in hit records. It's an effect, and like most effects, it's probably best to use sparingly and only when it contributes something special to the song.

Here's another approach. Have you tried a BBE Sonic Maximizer? A little bit of processing with that gizmo can really liven up tracks. (they have a software plug in too).

Like most things, too much is too much.

The theory behind it is this (the way I understand their literature):

The voice coil of any loudspeaker delays the high frequencies more than the low ones. Coils resist changes in voltage. This results in the low frequencies hitting your ears first.

The BBE has a control (process) that delays the low frequencies so that they highs and lows can enter your ear in phase. Since no two voice coils are alike you use your ears to adjust the process control. Note: I find it best to adjust the BBE before equalization.

There is also a low contour that acts like the "loudness" button on an old stereo set. It boosts the presence of the low sounds, adding punch without adding mud.

I have the hardware unit on my PA set, and won't leave home without it wink

Insights and incites by Notes.


Bob "Notes" Norton smile Norton Music
https://www.nortonmusic.com

100% MIDI Super-Styles recorded by live, pro, studio musicians for a live groove
& Fake Disks for MIDI and/or RealTracks
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
J
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
J
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
Originally Posted By: PeterGannon
If you are using BiaB, there is a special feature working behind the scenes to deal with the issue of doubling parts. It actually makes completely different parts, it doesn't try to just change one slightly from the other. This is for Realtracks.

If you put 2 or more of the identical Realtracks on separate tracks, BiaB will automatically generate different parts for each of them, so that there is no time in the arrangement that it would be playing the same thing - because if it did, it would sound like one player instead of two.

There is no setting needed for this, it just works, as long as you are generating them all at once by pressing the play button. We call this feature same-but-different.

Fwiw, in our tests, attempting to generate different parts by just offsetting the timing of an audio track, or panning doesn't work, and it often sounds worse. That's why we made the same-but-different feature, so that you actually hear 2 different parts play at all times.

Peter, this is a wonderful feature of BIAB and I use it a lot!! But on a few occasions I have seen BIAB generate the exact same part for two different tracks on a few bars. In these situations I either regenerate or I export each track individually and manipulate them in my DAW. I noticed this because I had both tracks panned hard left/right and on some bars it would come back to the center as they combined! If I see it again I will save the file and send it to you. I do not think I have seen this in BIAB 2015 yet. And, as I recall it was a ukulele RealTrack in at least one case.

Band-in-a-Box for Windows
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
J
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
J
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
Originally Posted By: Guitarhacker
the worst way to attempt doubling is the lazy man's way.... simply copying a track and delaying it or detuning it.... this method causes some serious phase issues as the frequency of the notes played a few milliseconds apart mix in the DAW. You get comb-filtering and that doesn't sound good. I've done it, we've all done it, it's just not the best or recommended way to do this.

I am not sure if we are talking about the same thing here but I am talking primarily about doubling a single track for "thickening" a vocal where the singer cannot sing a double for whatever reason. In these cases this technique can work quite well.

IMHO it is silly to call a technique "lazy man's way". Did the Revolver album suffer because John and the others were "lazy" and chose to use ADT instead of actually performing doubles? If a technique helps you achieve the sound you want then use it!

Last edited by JohnJohnJohn; 05/14/15 08:25 AM.
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,301
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,301
Quote:
I am not sure if we are talking about the same thing here but I am talking primarily about doubling a single track for "thickening" a vocal where the singer cannot sing a double for whatever reason. In these cases this technique can work quite well.


I thought that was the topic of discussion in this thread. If a singer can sing a track, certainly, they should be able to record a second (or more) track in a short time. Unless the taxi is outside honking the horn, in which case, you gotta work with what you got into that one track. I might have used this on "Give Me A Chance" because we recorded one take. I'd have to go back to the project and look to be 100% sure. The singer was not able to get back to record anther after that with her school schedule. So, yeah... sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do, or do without. When we did the original recording, I wasn't thinking about doubling the track. After the fact, I did. Too late.

Quote:
IMHO it is silly to call a technique "lazy man's way". Did the Revolver album suffer because John and the others were "lazy" and chose to use ADT instead of actually performing doubles? If a technique helps you achieve the sound you want then use it!



It is the "lazy" way to do it since doing it right means you have to take the time and make the effort to record a brand new track and get the phrasing 99.9% accurate.... vs simply doing a copy and paste then nudging the track a few milliseconds.

After all the goal of a double is NOT to have two or more audible voices but to simply make the one sound fuller, thicker, fatter. IIRC, the Beatles did use it quite a bit and it kinda became a signature sound so to speak. The Beatles invented lots of things and as a result of them being at the beginning of new concepts, had the levels set differently from what many producers use today. Not wrong, but just different...they were breaking new ground and learning about things as they went. I heard a story about Paul. It was said that he spent 2 days...and not 8 hr days, but much more than that, working in the Abby Road studio on ONE vocal track for a single song.... doubling the tracks by recording a new unique track and getting it perfect. He didn't copy it or punch it in or splice it.... he wanted it right. Beginnings of words, the consonants, the endings, the inflections.... everything had to be right.

But here's the critical thing.... while yes, absolutely, lots of hit records from every genre are using this, and have been for decades, it's critical to get it right and most folks who are using the lazy man's way to double are probably also a sure bet that in addition to being lazy, they don't really know how to get a decent double that doesn't sound obvious and have comb filtering issues in it. A good ear can almost always tell when someone is just starting out using this technique and quite often when the track is copied and nudged. I admit I have used the lazy man's double a time or two myself. Nothing's wrong with that...we all have to start somewhere and learn as we go.

Last edited by Guitarhacker; 05/14/15 03:15 PM.

You can find my music at:
www.herbhartley.com
Add nothing that adds nothing to the music.
You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both.

The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
J
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
J
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
Originally Posted By: Guitarhacker
Quote:
I am not sure if we are talking about the same thing here but I am talking primarily about doubling a single track for "thickening" a vocal where the singer cannot sing a double for whatever reason. In these cases this technique can work quite well.


I thought that was the topic of discussion in this thread. If a singer can sing a track, certainly, they should be able to record a second (or more) track in a short time. Unless the taxi is outside honking the horn, in which case, you gotta work with what you got into that one track. I might have used this on "Give Me A Chance" because we recorded one take. I'd have to go back to the project and look to be 100% sure. The singer was not able to get back to record anther after that with her school schedule. So, yeah... sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do, or do without. When we did the original recording, I wasn't thinking about doubling the track. After the fact, I did. Too late.

Quote:
IMHO it is silly to call a technique "lazy man's way". Did the Revolver album suffer because John and the others were "lazy" and chose to use ADT instead of actually performing doubles? If a technique helps you achieve the sound you want then use it!



It is the "lazy" way to do it since doing it right means you have to take the time and make the effort to record a brand new track and get the phrasing 99.9% accurate.... vs simply doing a copy and paste then nudging the track a few milliseconds.

After all the goal of a double is NOT to have two or more audible voices but to simply make the one sound fuller, thicker, fatter. IIRC, the Beatles did use it quite a bit and it kinda became a signature sound so to speak. The Beatles invented lots of things and as a result of them being at the beginning of new concepts, had the levels set differently from what many producers use today. Not wrong, but just different...they were breaking new ground and learning about things as they went. I heard a story about Paul. It was said that he spent 2 days...and not 8 hr days, but much more than that, working in the Abby Road studio on ONE vocal track for a single song.... doubling the tracks by recording a new unique track and getting it perfect. He didn't copy it or punch it in or splice it.... he wanted it right. Beginnings of words, the consonants, the endings, the inflections.... everything had to be right.

But here's the critical thing.... while yes, absolutely, lots of hit records from every genre are using this, and have been for decades, it's critical to get it right and most folks who are using the lazy man's way to double are probably also a sure bet that in addition to being lazy, they don't really know how to get a decent double that doesn't sound obvious and have comb filtering issues in it. A good ear can almost always tell when someone is just starting out using this technique and quite often when the track is copied and nudged. I admit I have used the lazy man's double a time or two myself. Nothing's wrong with that...we all have to start somewhere and learn as we go.

Sounds like elitist BS to me! smile if a technique works and gets you the sound you want then by all means use it! John Lennon knew that as do thousands of others. I guess it is lazy to use pitch control or a digital reverb instead of building your own plate version? Must be really lazy to use BIAB instead of hiring studio musicians! It is always about the results, not whether you used this tool or that tool or took a route someone else considers "lazy".

Last edited by JohnJohnJohn; 05/14/15 07:31 PM.
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 39
Enthusiast
Offline
Enthusiast
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 39

Waves Doubler exellent on vocals and guitars!!!!!

Attached Files (Click to download or enlarge) (Only available when you are logged in)
Doubler.jpg (300.13 KB, 160 downloads)
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,301
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,301
Quote:
Sounds like elitist BS to me! if a technique works and gets you the sound you want then by all means use it! John Lennon knew that as do thousands of others. I guess it is lazy to use pitch control or a digital reverb instead of building your own plate version? Must be really lazy to use BIAB instead of hiring studio musicians! It is always about the results, not whether you used this tool or that tool or took a route someone else considers "lazy".


That made me smile......

Yes, it's lazy when you simply copy a track to double it rather than recording it two, three, four or more times, taking the time to do it the right way when you have the option and the time to do it the right way. I don't think I have said "don't do it"....just that there is a better way to do it that takes more time, effort, and skill. It's not the easy path, but it does yield better results in the long run.

That's all.

Just as "nudge" is a tool that can line up a clip properly, pitch, reverb, and BB/RB are tools. Just as using a hammer to drive a nail is using a tool, rather then trying to use your hand or a rock..... tools make a job easier. It's not laziness to use a tool.

And if you want to use copy/paste/nudge & detune for your doubling .....all I can say to that is... be my guest. You will get out of it what you put into it.

Last edited by Guitarhacker; 05/15/15 02:46 AM.

You can find my music at:
www.herbhartley.com
Add nothing that adds nothing to the music.
You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both.

The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
J
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
J
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
Originally Posted By: Guitarhacker
Quote:
Sounds like elitist BS to me! if a technique works and gets you the sound you want then by all means use it! John Lennon knew that as do thousands of others. I guess it is lazy to use pitch control or a digital reverb instead of building your own plate version? Must be really lazy to use BIAB instead of hiring studio musicians! It is always about the results, not whether you used this tool or that tool or took a route someone else considers "lazy".


That made me smile......

Yes, it's lazy when you simply copy a track to double it rather than recording it two, three, four or more times, taking the time to do it the right way when you have the option and the time to do it the right way. I don't think I have said "don't do it"....just that there is a better way to do it that takes more time, effort, and skill. It's not the easy path, but it does yield better results in the long run.

That's all.

Just as "nudge" is a tool that can line up a clip properly, pitch, reverb, and BB/RB are tools. Just as using a hammer to drive a nail is using a tool, rather then trying to use your hand or a rock..... tools make a job easier. It's not laziness to use a tool.

And if you want to use copy/paste/nudge & detune for your doubling .....all I can say to that is... be my guest. You will get out of it what you put into it.

Need my EBS filter for sure! laugh You say doubling a track is lazy yet you use computer-generated backing tracks rather than hiring studio musicians! laugh Gag at a gnat and swallow a camel much?

Everyone has their tools and techniques and shortcuts. One man's BIAB/digital reverb/ADT is another man's lazy technique. There is ALWAYS "a better way to do it" for everything in producing music (and life in general) but I choose the techniques that work for what we are trying to achieve in any given situation and ignore "authorities" who frown on such techniques. Because the end result is what I am after!!

Band-in-a-Box for Windows
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,301
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,301
Some do.....some talk. You talk a good game. When was the last time you posted some music you worked on?

Just wondering, because I took a few minutes to search back over 2 years to find and listen to something you actually recorded and posted to see and hear your skills in action.... sorry, but I came up empty handed.

Last edited by Guitarhacker; 05/15/15 08:29 AM.

You can find my music at:
www.herbhartley.com
Add nothing that adds nothing to the music.
You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both.

The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
J
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
J
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,558
Originally Posted By: Guitarhacker
Some do.....some talk. You talk a good game. When was the last time you posted some music you worked on?

Just wondering, because I took a few minutes to search back over 2 years to find and listen to something you actually recorded and posted to see and hear your skills in action.... sorry, but I came up empty handed.

I don't post my music here. Simple as that! smile

Care to elaborate on how you can say ADT is lazy while you use computer-generated backing tracks and that is not lazy? For the record, I don't think either one is lazy! laugh

Last edited by JohnJohnJohn; 05/15/15 10:23 AM.
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 10,099
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 10,099
The first plug-in on ++ THIS ++ page should work. Here is a quote from the developer's page:

"ADT - Artificial Double Tracking
The ADT technique was developed at Abbey Road Studios by engineers recording the Beatles in the 1960s. To free John Lennon from having to sing everything twice for real double tracking they came up with an artificial replacement: they sent the original signal to another tape machine and re-recorded it. Due to the physical distance between record and playback heads the new signal was delayed. The length of the delay depends on the tape speed (the slower the tape is running the longer it takes for the signal to travel from the record to the playback head). However, due to the machine's (small amounts of) Wow and Flutter the delay time was not fixed but varied slightly, giving an additional chorus-like effect.
The ADT Plug-In takes a mono input signal and creates a stereo output. The original input signal will be output on one channel, the new ADT signal on the other. Blending the two is also possible. The Plug-In allows to control the delay time (10 - 50ms), Wow and Flutter (both with intensity in % and frequency). All values are based on the technical data of the tape machines that was originally used to create this effect."


By the way, this VST is free and is comparable to the $150(US) Waves doubler. There are 12 pages of comments on ++ THIS ++ KVR Audio forum.


Jim Fogle - 2024 BiaB (1109) RB (Build 3) Ultra+ PAK
Cakewalk - Zoom MRS-8 recorder
Desktop: i7 Win 10 build 2004, 12GB ram 256GB SSD, 4 TB HDD
Laptop: i3 64bit Win 10 build 21H2, 8GB ram 500GB HDD
Music at: https://fogle622.wix.com/fogle622-audio-home
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 18,838
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 18,838
Hi Jim,

You've done it again! This looks excellent. I'll have to give it a go.

It makes sense that the automatic doubling using a tape recorder is more effective than today's 'copy and paste' because of the mechanical variations that the machine naturally experiences. It's interesting to note that delay was also variable and a consequence of the electronics. Cool.

Regards,
Noel




MY SONGS...
Audiophile BIAB 2024
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Go To
Page 1 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
ChatPG

Ask sales and support questions about Band-in-a-Box using natural language.

ChatPG's knowledge base includes the full Band-in-a-Box User Manual and sales information from the website.

PG Music News
Band-in-a-Box® 2024 Review: 4.75 out of 5 Stars!

If you're looking for a in-depth review of the newest Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows version, you'll definitely find it with Sound-Guy's latest review, Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows Review: Incredible new capabilities to experiment, compose, arrange and mix songs.

A few excerpts:
"The Tracks view is possibly the single most powerful addition in 2024 and opens up a new way to edit and generate accompaniments. Combined with the new MultiPicker Library Window, it makes BIAB nearly perfect as an 'intelligent' composer/arranger program."

"MIDI SuperTracks partial generation showing six variations – each time the section is generated it can be instantly auditioned, re-generated or backed out to a previous generation – and you can do this with any track type. This is MAJOR! This takes musical experimentation and honing an arrangement to a new level, and faster than ever."

"Band in a Box continues to be an expansive musical tool-set for both novice and experienced musicians to experiment, compose, arrange and mix songs, as well as an extensive educational resource. It is huge, with hundreds of functions, more than any one person is likely to ever use. Yet, so is any DAW that I have used. BIAB can do some things that no DAW does, and this year BIAB has more DAW-like functions than ever."

Happy Easter! Holiday Hours...

2024 is well underway - it's already Easter Weekend!

Our Customer Service hours this weekend are:

Friday, March 29: 8-4
Saturday, March 30: 8-4
Sunday, March 31: closed

Regular hours resume Monday, April 1st - no joke!

Convenient Ways to Listen to Band-in-a-Box® Songs Created by Program Users!

The User Showcase Forum is an excellent place to share your Band-in-a-Box® songs and listen to songs other program users are creating!

There are other places you can listen to these songs too! Visit our User Showcase page to sort by genre, artist (forum name), song title, and date - each listing will direct you to the forum post for that song.

If you'd rather listen to these songs in one place, head to our Band-in-a-Box® Radio, where you'll have the option to select the genre playlist for your listening pleasure. This page has SoundCloud built in, so it won't redirect you. We've also added the link to the Artists SoundCloud page here, and a link to their forum post.

We hope you find some inspiration from this amazing collection of User Showcase Songs!

Congratulations to the 2023 User Showcase Award Winners!

We've just announced the 2023 User Showcase Award Winners!

There are 45 winners, each receiving a Band-in-a-Box 2024 UltraPAK! Read the official announcement to see if you've won.

Our User Showcase Forum receives more than 50 posts per day, with people sharing their Band-in-a-Box songs and providing feedback for other songs posted.

Thank you to everyone who has contributed!

Video: Volume Automation in Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows®

We've created a video to help you learn more about the Volume Automation options in Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows.

Band-in-a-Box® 2024: Volume Automation

www.pgmusic.com/manuals/bbw2024full/chapter11.htm#volume-automation

Video: Audio Input Monitoring with Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows®

We've created this short video to explain Audio Input Monitoring within Band-in-a-Box® 2024, and included some tips & troubleshooting details too!

Band-in-a-Box® 2024: Audio Input Monitoring

3:17: Tips
5:10: Troubleshooting

www.pgmusic.com/manuals/bbw2024full/chapter11.htm#audio-input-monitoring

Video: Enhanced Melodists in Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows®!

We've enhanced the Melodists feature included in Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows!

Access the Melodist feature by pressing F7 in the program to open the new MultiPicker Library and locate the [Melodist] tab.

You can now generate a melody on any track in the program - very handy! Plus, you select how much of the melody you want generated - specify a range, or apply it to the whole track.

See the Melodist in action with our video, Band-in-a-Box® 2024: The Melodist Window.

Learn even more about the enhancements to the Melodist feature in Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows at www.pgmusic.com/manuals/bbw2024upgrade/chapter3.htm#enhanced-melodist

Forum Statistics
Forums66
Topics81,400
Posts732,555
Members38,443
Most Online2,537
Jan 19th, 2020
Newest Members
danielsk, Mark Morgan, zagrajbarke, Ernest J, Izzy
38,442 Registered Users
Top Posters(30 Days)
MarioD 199
Al-David 132
DC Ron 116
rsdean 84
dcuny 83
Today's Birthdays
(charlie), WobblyGstring
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5