PG Music Home Forums PG Music Product Forums Band-in-a-Box for Windows - Let The Games Begin! -

What will make the list of fifty new features this year?

When will 2020 Band-in-a-Box for Windows be released?

Thanks to forum member Steve, sslechta, for shooting the starting gun in +++ THIS +++ post.

I’m not playing. That’s like hearing Christmas music before we’ve had Halloween.

Already heard Christmas music playing at Family Dollar. Of course Family Dollar and Dollar General started putting Christmas stuff out before Labor Day (first Monday in September).

I'd be more than happy to just see a handful of existing issues resolved (ecstatic, in fact... )

Wrong link Jim.

But I agree, much too early to consider a new version of BIAB. Heck, I am still waiting for the promised enhanced features to the BAIB-VST from 2019. Likely I need to wait until BIAB 2021 for next purchase (boy, I have said that before)

Now explain to me how THAT brings in new customers?

Perhaps many more existing customers would purchase an upgrade? Maybe the benefit would be significantly better? Only a guess. I don't actually know.

I believe adding other time signatures to 2/4, 3/4 and 4/4 would entice new customers and make many existing users very happy.

LOL!!

Was that Laugh Out Loud or Lots Of Love for the suggestion

Just fix bugs? Beneficial for sure and I'm all for it! But do I think that more existing customers would upgrade? I don't think so. I believe most existing customers return for the content (RealTracks, etc.). But I don't think many existing Windows customers upgraded just because of the 64 bit program or VST. (Glad - yes but that's another story) If neither had happened most would have still purchased to obtain the content. However, I believe the 64 bit program and plug-in brought in many new customers. Is either belief founded in fact? No, it's just gut feeling.

For me personally I like both the new features and the content. I don’t really need 50 new features, I know their are probably 50 I have little to no knowledge of. I most likely would upgrade just cause.

My opinion, "50 new features" thing does not work well for existing users and newcomers.

I believe, it is pretty obvious that to lure new customers, interface should get some serious face lift job. I am sure a couple of old timers would not want to even hear about this, but I am simply talking about: better organization, graphical representation + modular and scale-able user defined interface, not taking away any features.

That alone could bring new, oxygenated blood into the loop....

I would prefer if PG worked more on further developing/fixing items that are already in place rather than yearly "new features". The "new" features are found everywhere...in all new plugins, DAW's, etc. BIAB is different in its core.
BIAB is focused on traditional / acoustic sound music production... What I am trying to say, I think this body needs to build up muscle, not try to grow another set of arms and legs. And of course more of amazing Real tracks please!

I enjoy the annual fanfare around the upcoming new year release!
Maybe PG should join in the the fun too and have a song competition about Biab itself with the best entries getting a free version.

I'm an old timer but I completely agree with you.

I’d love to have the feature that for the videotracks you can click and choose
....Same player, but different clothing (a tuxedo, country shirt, jeans, italian style)
....Change the players’ gender: have a woman play the drums
....Change the players’ age: swap an old person with a young one and the other way around.
....Turn down or turn up the lighting
....Trigger a smile into the camera with a Midi CC command, or frowning
....change the instruments’ brand or color: yellow Gibson, an orange Gretsch, a shiny red Yamaha drum kit
...Let’s get a little crazy here: have them play all the so-called recognized chords correctly!

One other question if I may. Should something an existing user may likely consider to be a fix be considered as a new feature for marketing purposes? This is something PG Music has done in the past. For example in 2019 the StylePicker was remodeled, drum notation was added to most RealDrums and Melodist functionality was expanded to include RealStyles.

Jim, I thinks that’s fair. It’s probably the best way to get the word out that an improvement was made.

Re: New Features bringing in new customers, I'm not sure how many potential customers are waiting to purchase but saying to themselves: "I'm not buying until it does this or that".

I think that most purchasers buy the product based on the fundamental features of the program suite. e.g. an intelligent automatic accompaniment program that provides the user with a powerful and creative music composition tool, etc.

New features are always welcomed, but I still wouldn't mind if some of the 'new features' were fixes to existing issues. Just my 2-cents.

Not to disagree with you VideoTrack but "I'm not buying until the program is 64 bit" was a fairly common comment prior to the 2019 release. Just sayin'.

Some users don't upgrade every year. From comments I've read personal finances and the list of new features seem to be the determining factor of when an existing user updates.

Sometimes new features are new and when PG Music nails it the results are breathtaking. RealDrums, RealTracks, midiSuperTracks, videotracks, audio chord wizard are all truly revolutionary features. Just that list are admirable accomplishments.

Also in my opinion it would be interesting to see the following:

1. As mentioned by a few, Less new BiaB features, instead fixing some of the long term issues. Get this
64 bit thing rock solid! Take a deep breath and let things catch up. This year was a biggie.

2. Give Realband the long sought upgrades.
a. 64 bit audio engine with real smooth time line movement.
b. cleaned up and upgraded mixer view with enhanced insert and send capability. Get rid of the built
in fx send busses and allow us to add them when needed with the ability to adjust from the effects
c. enhanced automation similar to some of the big names out there. (more than just panning and
volume)
d. break the 48 track limit, and start with zero tracks allowing the user to add what is needed.

3. Really nail down the BiaB VSTi and make it work like it was envisioned with a smooth speedy workflow.
Add the features that it needs to be polished and complete (that doesn't mean make it full BiaB but
that it properly accepts a .SGU or .MGU with shots holds and all the little things a file has)

4. And of course more real tracks and drums. Those are always cool to get.

I would buy that upgrade.

I'm currentlky working on a song that has slightly odd chords, like Fmaj7b5 - F#11sus4, BIAB modifies at least one of these chords which renders solos etc almost useless when merged with the original chords in a DAW. I won't upgrade until that issue is fixed.

This annual thread generally is spiked with an "Airing of Grievances". So why not one more.

The BIAB VST! Please don't tell me that BIAB 2020 will provide new features and functions to the VST. I paid for this last year, not fully knowing what would be in it and then being disappointed in the lack of full compatibility between BIAB and the VST. Turned into one of the prior 50 new features I don't use. But I so wanted to and still do.

I am afraid if one of the 50 new features within BIAB 2020 is the release of BIAB-VST Pro with new features and functions, I will lose it...

Jim,
"I'm not buying until the program is 64 bit"... I do not believe this was an upgrade. It is more like patient had awoken from coma update. Sure, a HUGE and happy event, but in my opinion it should have been done some time ago as a part of standard maintenance. I am very relieved this was done. Remember the depression when Cakewalk announced it was closing doors? I really did not want similar to happen with BIAB. Now, I can rest assured that BIAB will work for years to come, even if MacSoft decides to pull a plug on 32bit applications with one of their Win. updates.

Some time ago, I floated an idea on how I would prefer to see the future of BIAB. I suggested that BIAB and Realband should be merged into a single program, since many features are very similar. I tried RealBand on a few occasions, but I found it ridiculously clunky and counter intuitive. (I must admit, this idea was met with sword and shield )
However, I still believe this is a way to go. Imagine if both programs are modular and you can design your work space yourself, any way you like, loading just the modules/panels you need for your workflow. And have all the features of both programs under one roof. Ohh yes, there would be a single program to maintain, not two

P.S. To overcome a habit of workflow for some users a "classic" view of both programs (similar to "lenses" in Cakewalk) can be available, which would be compiled of the modules that would have near identical "look" of classic versions of the programs.

Funny thing is when I started this thread I thought the responses would be humorous thoughts about the date 2020 Band-in-a-Box for Windows will be released and what features might be introduced.

Jim,
ok, will this work: 2020 update: "RealBandInABox" aka RBIAB ?

please don't mix BIAB and RB - they meet different needs. mind you its October and we've just had patches for BIAB and RB - maybe the best thing for 2020 is a no bug release..............

I would expect some new RealTracks and styles as always. I assume that alone would entice many users to upgrade. More MIDI Supertracks are overdue as well.

As far as new features, though, now that it’s 64-bit I would prefer to see long-standing issues improved, rather than adding new functionality.

I'll lose it with you!

I'd agree with this.

Prediction: RealBiab is DOA. Fugggetabboutit.

Otherwise, samosamo every year. Fix all the old stuff before doing something completely new unless that completely new is a whole new program that includes fixing all the old stuff.

Another prediction: That ain't happening either but we'll all be happy with whatever they come up with. Well, almost all...

Bob

In my 7 years here I have come to understand that, at least for me, the 50 new features are more of a marketing ploy and not of much value. The VST is still a work in progress that I simply avoid. VideoTracks were a momentary curiosity. Renaming of tracks was something I had longed for but was only partially implemented so I just reverted back to the standard names. The GUI was a nice attempt but again I found it to be not enough and simply went back to the old interface.

On the other hand, there is one thing that makes me reach for my credit card every single year without hesitation. One thing that truly makes a difference in my songwriting and production. One thing I actually sit down with and explore excitedly. And you all know what that thing is, right?

RealTracks!

Rather than think of the things that will make me upgrade I choose to think of what would make me choose to NOT upgrade. And that is fairly simple.

New features be damned. If they did not offer any new RealTracks I would definitely not upgrade. But if this year is like the other 7 they will and I will.

So there! Even with all my complaining about features that don't work I remain a loyal customer to gain access to those sweet, sweet RealTracks. (I don't plan to stop complaining though!)

"Prediction: RealBiab is DOA. Fugggetabboutit."
Ha ha, DeNiro would not have said it better

Bob, I think similar was predicted about 32bit and VST... But we got it.
AND you said it yourself: "unless that completely new is a whole new program that includes fixing all the old stuff."

I personally would prefer one solid program instead of two... The one that does the job of both without hiccups. It has to be modular Ohh yes, it should be simpler to keep bugs in check in a single program than in two.

P.S. I am not a specialist, but I do not believe software has to be fully re-written to be properly merged into one. Most likely, just a couple of talented IT surgeons with dozen of testers/helpers can do it within a month or two.

Hey, this is "game" thread right? This is my fantasy software scenario

I strongly hope that the two never merge. Why you ask. Well that already happened. A few years ago we had power tracks and BiaB they merged the basics of BiaB with PT and we got RB. One is a DAW the other auto accompaniment the compliment perfectly. You can open BiaB tracks in RB. And continue. And now you can open the VSTi in the DAW of choice. The VSTi is not that far off now with a couple really important features it will be very useful.

Merging BiaB with RB to me would be a freakin disaster that would spoil the two programs for ever. Even far less complicated DAWs like cakewalk, reaper, Cubase, studio one have fought bugs through out there life spans, just imagine the pain of a DAW with all of the gazzillions of features that BiaB has. I shiver to think of the countless bugs. BiaB has long standing bugs as it is. Add to that everything thing that say reaper does with automation, unlimited tracks, routing, etc. No thanks

I think PG is on the right track. Let BiaB be what it is, continue the development of the plugin, and beef up RB. What a tool box!

With BiaB and RB patches still coming out in October does anyone think that there may not be a 2020 version? If not will there be time for 50 new features? Maybe only 25?

...people were skeptical about elevators at one point too.

RobH, Things change... I am talking about ideal world. If you read carefully where I fantasized about a single program, I said, I would prefer both programs to be modular, so the user can design interface as they see fit for their needs.

You would have your "lenses" as available in what you mentioned as: "far less complicated DAWs like cakewalk" Where you can have your RealBand just the way that is dear to you and by switching to another "lens" you will have your BIAB interface, I will have my hybrid lens, John will have his own set of lenses, Mary will have her own design, etc. But all would be working with single project in one program.

In any case, this is my fantasy, your vision is different. That's all

P.S. Mario, this is great:
"Folgers got it wrong. The best part of waking up is going back to bed after you pee!"

I think an all in one with complete customization would be the next route.We have 4 separate pieces now.

Absolutely! We're just having some fun here. It's like my Awesome Cool Dude super Biab fantasy I talked about in another thread.

And you're right I did not see 64 bit and the VST coming. I still think they should have fixed the old stuff before doing that. But, Pipeline says they had no choice about 64 bit because of Apple dumping 32 bit. It seems both Mac and Windows versions of Biab are closely linked meaning they had to do Mac anyway and that gave 64 bit Windows too. I think we can all agree the VST was premature. It should have been a 2020 release not 2019.

Bob

I don't think the plug-in arrived a year too soon. It's pretty clear that PG Music's vision of the app evolved over the past year as they received user feedback. One example is the plug-in switching from using the daw sound engine instead of the band-in-a-box sound engine. Priorities and the list of features to be implemented are changing based on user feedback. These changes couldn't happen until the product was released and user feedback received, acknowledged and acted on.

I've truly been surprised at how smooth and easy the 64 bit release worked out. The one issue I remember is the lack of PG Music DXI effects and that was quickly addressed. Funny but that was similar to the error of omission BandLab made when Cakewalk by BandLab was released; they forgot to convert the 32 bit suite of Sonitus effects.

I hear you Rustyspoon# it is fun to think about what's possible. To my thinking modular while it's interesting to imagine, I can't see it as practical. The concept of "lens" as in cakewalk sounds good on paper, but all lens or views does it place the features you like to use up front, it doesn't eliminate functions. In cakewalk by bandlab you can set it up to show the tracks view, mixer view, and the browser view in different configurations allowing the ones you like to open up to on start up. Still all three are there and all three as well as all of the other features are still there, just hidden from view.

I understand your vision though. I don't think blending those together is the answer. What I would love to see is RB really worked over to be a bit more of a stand alone program bring it's feature and GUI up to that standards of a cakewalk/studio one/reaper/Cubase level, as well as the CPU load. Seems RB is still a bit heavy. Who knows maybe the Powertracks base tied into the BiaB folders is as good as it can get without a complete rewrite. You may be right add full DAW capability to BiaB, but somehow I think that may have a bloating effect on the BiaB code.

Maybe fixing the sync issues, and making all the .sgu/mgu files with shots/holds/etc. function inside the plugin will give us all we need inside a DAW. Hey we still want more realtracks right?

As a long-time, yearly upgrader, my interest is primarily new and improved real tracks and styles. Also, anything that promotes better sound for live performance. Don’t need lots of new features. Don’t use a fraction of what 2019 will do. I just do what I’ve always done----sequence songs for live play. Works great for that.

RobH,
Sure, it is fun to think what is possible
I am curious to know if PG had means to re-invent / rewrite things any way they want...
Would they still consider making several titles or single software that does it all?

I think people complain about the bugs and other stuff (mee too...(not the movement*)). I believe the core of the problem is that PG is relatively small company and I can understand that keeping up with several titles can be challenging, especially when the focus has to be shared in production of RealTracks/Drums.

If one day I win the lottery, I will try to convince Santa to consolidate everything to a single, smooth, modular (bug free!) platform just in time for 20XX release


P.S. About the lenses in Cakewalk... Yes, sure it is mostly visual, functions are all there. At the same time you can set up you lenses or project templates focusing on specific tasks. Mixing/VST Synth Work/Recording etc... I have managed to crash Cakewalk only on several occasions when I had VST synths and FX on most of individual tracks from several different manufacturers running couple of dozen of tracks (midi+audio) and recorded vocals on multiple take lanes at same time. What I am trying to say, it is SUPER stable, no matter what I throw at it.

Uggg...all this talk about investing seriously limited development resources on RealBand!

There are soooo many DAWs out there that are far better than RB. It will never catch up.

It only has one feature my DAW is missing and that is RealTracks integration. And the only true benefit it brings to RealTracks is a feature that should be in BIAB...multiriff.

It is absurd to continue development on a product that 1) could never compete against other DAWs and 2) most of your customers don't even use!

My suggestion? Freeze RealBand and only patch it if absolutely necessary. Then put those resources into adding multiriff to BIAB, finishing the VST and fixing lots of stuff in BIAB like adding tracks, new time sigs, etc.

If I were to develop a killer new app that helps me write novels and short stories I wouldn't also invest my limited resources to try and create a substandard word processor. I'd make it both stand-alone and a plug-in for Microsoft Word.

I for one hope that RB continues to develop. It does all I want it to do and after years with PowerTracks its an interface and method of working I'm familiar with.

The seamless way you can rough out a song in BIAB then finish in RB is great. What I would like is the ability to record subgroup moves in the mixer

The last two post are very telling to me. One wants the “freeze” RB, the other develop it. Everyone has a different workflow. Taking a popular program and completely changing it effect many people.

Since we’re using Cakewalk as an example, I’ll continue that line of reason. One of the reasons cakewalk sonar failed was as it was developed, it grew somewhat unstable. I remember the long discussions on the forums. I came from the floppy disk days of twelve tone music cakewalk all the way through to sonar. One of its problems was adding to many third party plugins and many features that battled for resources.

When BandLab bought it they stripped it down to a lean and stable basic program. Now it is very solid and productive. To blend BiaB, RB/power tracks into one modular super program would introduce so many variables that one can’t even imagine the complications it would cause.

If this were feasible I would imagine that other companies would be scrambling to create competitive products. We don’t see cakewalk, Cubase, protools, etc trying to add BiaB features to their DAWs. You would end up with so many different functions and so many miles of code that would introduce so many potential bugs and conflicts that would ruin the program for everyone.

But who knows what it going on behind the scene. We might some day have a super program that does it all. I just would hate to have a Swiss Army knife program that is okay at everything, but is not great at anything.

How about a 128-bit version of BIAB. That way you can even beat IBM and AMD to the punch.

I am more with JohnJohnJohn on this.

Unless MANY hours/resources are poured into Realband to make it even remotely close to free Cakewalk or very competitively priced and expandable Reaper, I really do not see a future of this program. Except for several features that BIAB does not have, I do not see a reason to use it myself, especially as a DAW for recording vocals or live instruments or mixing...(Oh yes, I tried "liking" it) I do realize that some people are attached to the workflow and several unique features of RB and that is why I fantasized of having a single modular program that would have detachable "modules" to design interface + features that suits the end user. I would care less, if PG was a big company that could manage development of several titles without issues. It is just my belief that working on a single software title for a small company would be less time consuming, and the remaining resources could be assigned to development, not repairs.

I like RealBand and BIAB as separate products but as so many who don't like it are continuously saying such and such a DAW is better, it seems to me that currently everybody is happy with the programs they use so PG shouldn't change course.

The current market provides everything everybody wants without merging RB sand BIAB. Don't like RB - use the DAW you do like and leave me with BIAB and RB separate!

New Realtracks and super midi tracks are the main reason I update each years.........

Sorry, that this thread has got a little off track. Some clarifications are needed.

Some folk identify RealBand as being a comparable version of Cakewalk, Logic, FL Studio, Reaper or Audition.

Others identify that RealBand is an upmarket BiaB.

The fact is, that RealBand is neither.

RealBand sits in between these two. It is a unique DAW. It can take advantage of BiaB features, use them more powerfully than BiaB can, and provide very reasonable output and results. It has its own place in the industry and will probably not step on too many toes.

. Oddly, only two comments throughout this thread mention improvements to the BIAB/RB end product, audio files and they're irrelevant to the final audio file quality.
. The same deficiencies all DAW's from Audacity to Pro-Tools HDX have interfacing with BIAB/RB are the same.
. BIAB/RB audio files work with every DAW regardless of it's commercial level and OS Platform.
. Forum comments and ideals posted here are platform, OS, hardware and workflow related and not toward audio file quality.
. If any forum member ever gets the opportunity to have an original work or cover professionally and commercially published, the audio file quality will matter, not the platform, OS,hardware or workflow used to create it.
. BIAB/RB audio files are of high enough quality to be used in commercial releases or included in productions done in top commercial studios by the world's top mixers.

Bobby Owsinski, recognized as one of the world's top and most in demand mixing engineers, is also one of the best selling authors of music industry topic books. His books are used in colleges as textbooks and references around the world. I have a copy of his 2014, third edition The Mixing Engineers Handbook.

In the book, Mr. Owsinski interviews and quotes tips, quips, and complaints from 36 other world class, top rated mixing engineers about their mixing techniques, tricks and obstacles. Notable mixers such as Andrew Scheps, Ken Scott, Dave Pensado are interviewed and he's included mixing pros that specialize in nearly every genre from rap to orchestration.

100% of these professional mix engineers discuss issues with the quality and quantity of the audio files they receive from clients and zero say anything at all about the platform, OS, workflow or hardware the files are recorded on... Just sayin'...

Charlie, I would venture to suggest that there are few, if any, Professional mix engineers here in our forum. But I agree, none who are interested in BIAB versus RB. However, the real discussion point here is "workflow". For the majority of us in the forum not only do we mix, but also write, record, compose, arrange, produce, master and publish - workflow is a priority. just sayin,.

I'll start my replay with because yes, we are here for fun and not to step on toes or offend others. I'd written out two other posts for this thread before I finally pushed the enter button on this one... I don't want to offend of make light of anyone's workflow or end product. This may be close to the edge, so forgive me in advance if it is, but hear me out. My thoughts are not about anyone in particular.

I'm comfortable with your thought that few of our active forum members are solely, commercial producers and engineers. However, take some time to examine the list of Users and you'll see more than a few that don't post are Studios, Producers, engineers and other professional designates. There are fewer than 100 active forum posters out of 30,252 registered users. If there were a way to validate the true answer, I'd wager there are major, mainstream Studios, record companies, their employees, Major name artists, producers, engineers, and mixers that own and use BIAB in their commercial projects.

My point all along is we're discussing 'workflow', gear or interfacing with other software and not our 'output'. There are currently several other post of discussions in various threads here in the Forum and the core of all of them revolve around 'workflow' and not 'output'.

Professionally, it's BIAB/RB's output and not it's workflow that's universally rejected by the commercial market. Here's some examples.

1. No mainstream top level DAW/Home Recording Site, including their FB and YouTube presence, have ever done a review or demonstration of building a home studio recording project around BIAB generated tracks. They'll do one with a $49 USB Mic, a $29 USB audio interface, a $49 electric guitar internet find, VST's, or VSTi's but BIAB is off limits.

2. I've personally contacted three top level internet tutors/trainers and two of them rejected working with BIAB audio files because of their generic and recognizable sounds/repeating riffs and poor overall quality, including the 44.1/16 resolution limitation. The third didn't even bother to respond.

3. On one of these sites, there was a question from a subscriber/student regarding using a BIAB recorded track and the moderator chastised the student that forum was not about other software products and subsequently removed the post referencing BIAB product. I've subscribed to that site for years, there are multiple posts daily about different brands of hardware, software, VST's and VSTi's. BIAB is the only product I've ever seen removed in such a manner.

Considering BIAB's output reception noted above, I suggest that the majority of us in the forum that mix, write, record, compose, arrange, produce, master and publish as their workflow (all of us for all practicable purposes) have taken a bigger bite than we can effectively chew.

I'll venture back to you and suggest that there are few, if any BIAB users that have taken time to learn all of the features available in the program that undoubtedly will benefit their workflow as much as generating and moving an audio track to another software. That will increase their speed in creating and editing a project. That will also produce a very complex group of audio files solely from within the BIAB program before they move their final rendered audio files to other software programs for advanced editing and effects. Learning and using these features will create audio files that are so unique and distinctive, they will be unrecognizable as coming from BIAB. They will be astronomically and statistically impossible to duplicate and will absolutely not be generic and boring.

Charlie, two many good points in there for me to fully comprehend at this time. But you got me thinkin... thanks for the input.

Here's how Biab is used professionally. Harvey Gerst is a long time friend of Peters and owns Indian Trails studio in Texas. Google his name. He posted extensively about this years ago including his mixes. Totally pro level stuff.

He'll be doing a band demo. Limited budget. The artist is a singer and guitarist. They'll pay for a drummer and bass player that Harvey has on call. The budget is used up, he's mixing the session and it needs a little help. Enter Biab. He'll create another guitar RT or a little piano part. He may only use those for the second time around or half a bridge or whatever. Biab is used in studios the world over like that. Not the whole band or the whole song but as a sweetner here and there for demos to go with the live tracks.

99.9% of everybody on this forum are either hobbyists or delusional wannabes who buy into the hype that Biab is the be all end all for their breakout hit. Uhhhh, no.

I have a lot of fun with it but I keep it real ya know? This is why sometimes I just can't help myself and make snarky comments when people get all involved talking about high level stuff that Peter should be doing with these programs. Yeah great, wonderful. Throw all that stuff into it, make it able to create the best most awesome arrangements in the world. Who's going to know enough to use all that power? Maybe 20 people out of the 30,000 registered users on the forums?

Bob

Bob

Great dose of pragmatism and reality.

(not begin snarky I really do agree and would go further but would really hack people off so I won't and I LOVE BIAB been with it since Oct '90 it was version 2 for DOS)


Larry

Yeah, I was going to reference Harvey as an example also.
There are others, but Harvey has been considered authoritative for many years .. really since before BiaB came out, so I'm quite sure he is not the sole user to fit this definition. I'd venture to say very few of the true studio level users have the time/inclination to be posting here.
Doesn't mean they don't use it, more apt to infer that they don't have problems with it that they need forum help solving.

Just trying to keep some perspective on active users.
Some current active users have commercial releases, including TV/Movie/Radio stuff, in their portfolio .. but they don't put it in their signature or advertise it.
They are out there.

I *think* RB/PT development is done (mostly) by separate staff.
I suppose you could cut those staff, but PT/RB would essentially be frozen 'as is' if you did, like the PGPlugins were when JCJr left.

Plus some of the PT/RB developments have helped catapult some BiaB features over the years (I'm guessing here, but I assume the current BiaB plugin wouldn't have happened as easily if it weren't for previous RB development .. could be wrong, just ask my wife!).

BiaB is not a DAW, but RB helps keep some focus on the use of BiaB in a DAW.
This endeared many of us to RB, but also reveals the value of the RB development staff in helping BiaB mature over the years.

Food for thought.

Me too, Rob.
BB is great at what it does at my simplistic level.
I don't need it to look Space Age or like "X" because they like "X".
I don't 'get' midi so more RTs the better.
RB - I haven't booted up 2019 since I installed it.

My guess for the release date of BIAB 2020 is Nov. 30th.
(There should be a "pool" on this with the winner getting a free upgrade!)

LLOYD S

My guess for the 2020 BiaB for Windows release time and date is 12:00 AM PST, Saturday, November 30, 2019. That's Friday night / Saturday morning.

My guess for a surprise, new feature for 2020 Band-in-a-Box for Windows is the bar limitation will be extended from 255 bars to 999 bars.

Not a nice computer number like 1023?

Nope, it will be 999. PG Music will "humanize" the number of bars versus relying on a number restricted by the power of 2.

Guys, I think this is the year for the bar specific regeneration to arrive. Not like what is played between Bar 8 and 12 - just select those bars, pick which track you want to change, and hit "Regen-Selection". Coming Dec 6, 2019 late in the evening.

Funny. I’m sure you’re kidding because it would be a waste not to use every possible bar. But if they can break out of 8-bit addressing, then why stop at anything short of millions? 256 states (0 through 255) is 8-bit, 512 with one more bit, then 1024 etc. but why not use 16 or even 32?

Of course everyone wants this. The reason it may not happen is that every existing song file would have to be converted. But I wish they would.

We'll get 64bit RB

Excellent guess. We can certainly hope.

Why not 64 bit's? It's only 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 or in English:

one hundred and eighty-four quintillion, with the minor nuisance of some left over quadrillion's and change of a few additional trillion+

Larry

Larry, you could play a song with that many measures till the end of the sun's life and not finish it.

Since this thread is all speculation, I'll make a guess we are late on the release of BIAB 2020 Windows this season. PG Music is still actively working on patches to the 64-bit BIAB 2019 for Mac, itself delayed in release from past history. I hope I'm wrong but if I'm not, there's a legitimate reason. And no, I don't know anything you don't.

Maybe we'll get a release with 0 New Features but still a bunch of new RealTracks? Maybe the RealTracks team has been busy with their regular tasks while the programming team works on 2019?

I for one would be perfectly happy with a new release that was RealTracks only.

My prediction is November 30!

I'm as basic as it gets for producing songs in BIAB. I probably comprehend and/or use less than 10% of the features. But, I'm okay with that. What would I like to see? Simple:

1. Regeneration by the bar

2. A lot of new new RT's and Super Midis

That would satisfy me completely.

I've made a little money with songs I've created using just BIAB and Audacity. I have no expectations of "making it" using BIAB. I made oodles of money playing live for close to 50 years. Most of it (close to $100,000.00) disappeared when our granddaughter was diagnosed with stage 3 cancer at age 19 and had no insurance. But no complaints about the money - she's now 25 and doing well.

Now, I just want to create some new, fun stuff and have a good time doing it. If I get a royalty check once in a while and a few folks enjoy listening ... so much the better.

We all have different perceptions and motivations. These are mine. Wishing everyone the very best ...

Alan

Alan, many users have posted thoughts that PG Music products are not good enough to create commercial audio content. I'm sure MANY users are interested in learning more about how you've used BiaB and Audacity to make commercial songs.

Jim ...

I'll post more about that this evening. We're headed to our daughter's house in about half an hour ... her birthday. But ... it';s so utterly basic and simple, most folks might think it's still inadequate. I don't even use a DAW! Nope ... don't use Real Band, either. It's straight from the chord input sheet to Audacity. I'll give more detail this evening.

My predictive abilities have been abysmal over the years. I don't have a good crystal ball, I have a ball covered in mud. But in the spirit of self flagellation here I go:

None of these enhancements to Biab will happen, there will be some tweaks but nothing major that's on all of our wishlists. We'll get a great collection of new RT's and super midi's which will be good but the software enhancements will be focused on the VST. I think they're still wiping the egg off their faces about releasing it last year and it will be greatly improved. Pipeline will be happy. Or not. (Trying to wipe the mud off my ball and it just ain't working, that stuff is sticky...)

Bob

Hi Everyone ...

Jim suggested that several folks might be interested in how I record adequately to get airplay or movie acceptance on original songs I’ve written by using only BIAB and Audacity. I’ll do my best to explain. It’s a simple process but not quite so simple to explain.

First, I work out the chords … all of them, not just the basics … on my guitar until I’m satisfied with them. I then enter the chords onto the chord input sheet of BIAB. Then I select a style that might work. Sometimes I have to change styles a time or two in order to get exactly what I want.

Then I select the backing tracks. I usually delete some of the tracks from the selected style and replace them with other RTs. Occasionally I’ll add my own guitar tracks … depends on how much my Focal Dystonia is acting up (A disease that significantly affects the use and coordination of the fingers and hand).

I then use the basic mixer indigenous to BIAB and work my butt off using the panning, volume, tone, etc., as well as the plugins that come with the program. I use the PGDynamics plugin a lot … it’s much like a loudness control on a power amp. Sometimes I spend 2 to 3 hours doing just that. Greg Johnson has seen some of my SGUs and MGUs … I think he could affirm that I do a lot of work behind the scenes on the chord input sheet. The BIAB simple mixer is as far as I go using BIAB.

I also save the individual tracks as wave files and send them over to Audacity. In Audacity, I simply have more finite control over the adjustments I made in the BIAB chord input sheet. In Audacity, I fine-tune the tone, add compression as needed, fade/cut the tracks in and out as necessary.

For vocals, I record them directly into Audacity using an AT 2035 mic. I don’t use a PA type mixer. I use my guitar amp (Peavey Nashville 112) as my power source and then run the vocal from the amp through my TC Helicon VoiceLive/Play for effects. If I need any affects for the vocals, that’s where I get them. I then feed that into my computer’s mic input for recording directly into Audacity. I don’t record the vocals dry … I apply the reverb live from my amp. I much prefer the warmth of spring reverb over any digital reverb I’ve heard.

Once I have all the tracks, including the vocal, loaded in Audacity, I do the fine tuning, as I described above, until I’m satisfied. I then save the final output as both a high-quality MP3 and as a wave file. Some sites only allow MP3s to be loaded … that’s primarily why I do the MP3 save.

I take that final save in Wave format and load it onto Soundcloud and Songtradr. I load the MP3 versions on a couple of other music sites.

I’m done! I’ve received numerous complements on my mixes (thanks folks!), so I guess I’m doing something right.

I’ve tried repeatedly to learn some of the various mixing programs … haven’t a clue what they’re talking about. I still have no clue what an envelope or a buss is. Most of the software makes a lot of assumptions about the users’ basic recording knowledge … I have N-O-N-E! I made a ton of money playing guitar over the years … never once asked about the recording side of it. Setting up the PA was the extent of my knowledge. I’m still not sure what the difference between a parallel and series connection is. I just knew what to plug in and where to make it work.

The money I’ve made (from my original songs) is from a few movies (several in Europe and one in Russia) and overhead music distributors. The overhead is the music you hear from the ceiling speakers at malls and restaurants. Do I make a lot of money? Nope … a hundred or so dollars yearly from the overhead plays and various amounts from the movies (from $400.00 up to $2,000.00). All total, I’ve made about six thousand dollars over the past eight or nine years. It made some of my car payments and a steak dinner here and there.

Yes, my method is primitive ... probably bordering on professionally barbaric. Either I don't need all the other stuff everyone else uses ... or I do and don't realize it.

Regardless of how you record, I wish all of you great success with your music.

For those who haven't heard any of my music, here's a link to my best instrumental (in my opinion) of an instrumental using that method: https://soundcloud.com/alananddi/late-night

And here's a vocal by my wife, Di, again, using the same method: https://soundcloud.com/alananddi/dance-of-love-remix


Alan