Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread
Print Thread
Go To
Page 2 of 2 1 2
rharv #745218 12/17/22 05:15 AM
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 2,584
J
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
J
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 2,584
Gordon….Mcity or another user….

can someone confirm something re flac for me ?
to make sure i'm not going bonkers in my dotage.

some background….

as we all know a typical daw multitrak music production software recording and playing back wav files uses 'look ahead' programming techniques ie filling buffers with wav data before its actually needed…THUS..

it seems to me in an all flac capable multitrak software like reaps that the same thing is occurring ie filling buffers with flac data instead of wav data.
as a step further ive happily had a mix of wav and flac traks in reaper.
eg importing wav bed traks from biab on different traks then adding my vocals and say any guitar traks using flac…in summary ability to create the final song stereo mix from mixing down flac and wav trak mixtures.

eg simple example…traks 1 thru 12 in reaps being biab genned wav rt's…then another 12 traks of my vocs//geetar flac..giving 24 traks total.

now to my question…please confirm for me when recording//playing back flac files with the biab wavs i see no additional files created in the song project dir when using flac ?
am i correct in this thinking..ie no added conversion files or anything xtra over wav ?

from what i see reaps is simply reading the flac audio into look ahead buffers like as in wav. am i correct ? also when reading flac into the look ahead buffer is some extra process occurring with flac over wav ? or not ? ie buffer manipulation ?

bottom line i'm trying to figure out WHY…on lower power junk pc's…useing flac makes the old pc seem more 'nimble' using flac. its a feeling thats 'bugging me' which i'm trying to understand at a technical level…
WHY DOES FLAC ON OLD PC'S SEEM TO RESULT IN A MORE NIMBLE USER EXPERIENCE OVER WAV ?? WHAT ARE THE TECHNICAL REASONS ?? IS IT TO DO WITH HOW AUDIO DATA HEADERS ARE HANDLED ?? OR SOME OTHER FACTORS LIKE WAV IS BIGGER THAN FLAC ON DISK ??

i would love to know the answer to the above questions, cos its been ages since i coded software and i cant see the answers googling. i would love other peoples perspectives on these questions.


a merry xmas to all.

om


New Song "PRETTY GIRL" for my wife...Dec 2023
(my vocs....mixed for good earbuds.)
https://soundcloud.com/alfsongs/prettygirlrbfinalcalfsongsdec2023mp3
(and rock song THE STALLION and bluegrass song... BANKER MAN....90 songs useing bb/rb.)
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 10,099
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 10,099
justanoldmuso,

Thanks for taking time to respond to my question. That was a well thought out answer.


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
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,609
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,609
Quote:
it seems to me in an all flac capable multitrak software like reaps that the same thing is occurring ie filling buffers with flac data instead of wav data.


After further study of Flac I don't think this is true at all .. eventually the DAC needs audio data (which is what gets buffered along the way)
Your DAC doesn't decode the Flac to audio ..that decompression/conversion would happen inside the box earlier on before being buffered ..
I may be wrong, but I don't think so
If I am it wouldn't be the first time, even in this thread smile


Make your sound your own!
.. I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome
rharv #745234 12/17/22 07:50 AM
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 2,584
J
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
J
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 2,584
Rharv//All.

what i'm wrestling with is , if your comment was true wouldnt this imply that the programmer would have to add code/procedures/tasks to implement flac ?
ie more code than a wav implementation ?
but then on large trak count projects on a old junk pc wouldnt this imply that the old junker pc would be slower with a flac implementation ?
but ive found the opposite…the old junk pc is more 'nimble' with a flac implementation.

see what i'm wrestling with ? maybe i'm stupid and missing something...lol.

i guess the only solution is to talk to a programmer of multitrak software that has coded for both wav and flac.

this afternoon i'm doing further tests to see if i can pinpoint pc resource differences (other than storage)..
re wav versus flac. .. the problem is my new pc is fast ryzen with m2 so it might be only on junker pc's does one see a difference…dunno.

i'm having probs coming to reasoned technical arguments why one shouldnt use flac…cos…all i can say having used flac for boatloads of song traks for years..…flac just 'floats my boat'.

have a great xmas rharv.

om

ps jim.

thanks for your comment. merry xmas.
i'm interested to see how pg handles year over year increases of the 'content library'. ie rt's//demo songs etc etc.

Last edited by justanoldmuso; 12/17/22 07:52 AM.

New Song "PRETTY GIRL" for my wife...Dec 2023
(my vocs....mixed for good earbuds.)
https://soundcloud.com/alfsongs/prettygirlrbfinalcalfsongsdec2023mp3
(and rock song THE STALLION and bluegrass song... BANKER MAN....90 songs useing bb/rb.)
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,873
Expert
Offline
Expert
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,873
I can't answer the specific question as I don't know how Reaper handles things, but I suspect any subjective improvement in performance may relate to what proportion of time is spent reading in the files vs what proportion is spent decompressing.


Jazz relative beginner, starting at a much older age than was helpful.
Kawai MP6, Korg M50, Ui24R, Saffire Pro 40.
AVL:MXE Linux; Windows 11; Win8.1: Scarletts
BIAB2022 UltraPAK, Reaper, a bunch of stuff.
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 2,584
J
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
J
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 2,584
All.

ok…i have some hands on results re wav vs flac and why use of flac on a junker pc might make the junker seem more 'nimble'. particularly as trak counts climb on the
junker with older drive technology. (i hate to be beaten by this stuff …lol.)

keying off gordans excellent comment, and given there is a read//write 'path' or 'pipe' tween the drive and the music software ( in this case reaps )...its obvious that using wav results in more data (writes//reads)...being stuffed thru' the 'pipe' per second while much less is being stuffed thru the pipe using flac…which ive always thought must be the case...and confirmed by my testing this afternoon.

THEREFORE….
on old junker pc's , the 'pipes' are often slower right ? and slower drives etc.
thus as trak counts climb using flac the old junker seems more nimble to the user cos less data (read//writes)... is being stuffed thru the junkers 'pipes' versus wav…and also remember the clunker will have a slow clunky drive.
excellent insights gordon. my real life testing confirms your point.

btw…i looked in the dir after recording 8 flac tracs at a time. all was as i suspected...
on stop recording ie 8 flac files stored obviously.
in the wav case 8 waves in the dir resulted obviously.
of course the flacs took up less storage than the waves as would be expected.

so where is the 'magic conversion' of flac taking place ? that might lead to slowness versus wav ? cos i'm not seeing any slowiness in flac.

of course it cant be in the A>>D chips that digitise the incoming analogue audio…
SOOO what i cant figure out is where is this 'flac conversion' taking place ?
also maybe any overhead of the flac conversion task has less impact than the 'pipe stuffing//lookahead buffer creation process ' ? right ? ie the major performance impact is the 'pipe stuffing' task.

maybe i'm being dense ??…as i'm a big dumb oaf my wife says sometimes…lmao.

i find the wav vs flac a very interesting discussion topic. thanks for everyones thoughts.

if i'm correct it would seem advantageous for a user with an old clunker pc to use flac for recording rather than wav…particularly if such a user envisions very high trak counts on the clunker pc.

have a merry xmas all.

om


New Song "PRETTY GIRL" for my wife...Dec 2023
(my vocs....mixed for good earbuds.)
https://soundcloud.com/alfsongs/prettygirlrbfinalcalfsongsdec2023mp3
(and rock song THE STALLION and bluegrass song... BANKER MAN....90 songs useing bb/rb.)
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 10,099
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 10,099
justanoldmuso,

You and others may find +++ THIS +++ comparison of audio file formats interesting. Plus, I think it answers some of the "why" questions you've asked.

A little background. Digital audio data can archived in a lossy digital audio format, where some of the audio data will be forever lost or lossless digital audio format, where no digital audio data is lost. MP3 and WMA are examples of lossy audio formats. This conversation is about two lossless digital audio formats, WAV and FLAC.

Digital devices require a CODEC to (1) encode digital audio data into a file format and/or (2) convert an audio file into a digital audio stream suitable for playback.

Each digital audio format requires a unique CODEC. A software application may include an audio format encoder but not the decoder. This is generally utility applications where you a doing format conversions. An application may include a decoder but not an encoder. An example is a compact disc player in your vehicle that does not include "burn-a-CD" capability.

The base line audio formats are WAV for Windows and AIF for Apple. Both are audio formats, or containers, that are lossless and hold the actual audio data and metadata that describes the audio data inside the format. But, remember an application needs a CODEC to read ANY audio file format, including WAV and AIF.

Now, here is some interesting news. The FLAC CODEC is lossless but is capable of compressing audio data a little more than 60 percent as compared to a comparable WAV or AIF file!

More interesting news. The FLAC encoder takes a little more than 20 percent longer to encode an audio file as compared to the time it takes to encode a comparable WAV or AIF file. Whoa, it's pretty slow when encoding a file.

Best interesting news. The FLAC decoder is FAST, 60 percent faster than any other digital audio format except WAV or AIF. The article confirms your decoding experience.

My guess is the FLAC developers anticipate FLAC's use by streaming sites and archival file storage. Professional don't mind the extra encoding time as long as they can make it up by selling customers fast CD quality or high definition audio file services.


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
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 2,584
J
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
J
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 2,584
Jim and All.

jim thats a v good link/treatise. kudos.

one interesting aspect is it looks like flac is one of the best alternatives to wav.
the wavpk stats were interesting vs flac.

now heres a 'BRAIN TEASER'...lol…(****see footnote at post end.)....as follows.

lets consider again that old junk pc with a slow hard drive, and lets also consider the situation where instead of playing a multitrack project from the beginning (pre loaded look ahead buffers filled)...INSTEAD…the user wants the ability to 'flit around' the time line'…ie user clicks the mouse to start playback at any time point….eg 1min30secs, 2min05secs whatever time point the user wishes…ie any time point ideally…

BUT there are problems for the poor software coder of music production software….

1..the coder doesnt know where the user might playback from ie the time points.
2..the tech foundation is not 'real time'. its just an 'illusion'. in summary its easy to create pre filled buffers when user is playing back from song start…cos they are prolly created on previous stop…BUT…WHAT ABOUT RANDOM USER DECIDED PLAYBACK TIME POINTS ?? thats the 'elephant in the tech room' !!
3..add in the fact the coder is prolly dealing with windows audio api's.
(some coders i believe use assembler sub routines i assume to keep things speedy rather than C++)

do you feel sorry for the poor programmer of music software yet ??...i do.

in summary when the user clicks on any time point then quickly those 'buffers' have to be filled with audio data. THUS…on a slow clunker pc the user might notice a 'lag' before playback starts.
now lets add more and more traks the clunker must playback (and add in fx//instrument plug ins etc)...
OOPS ! PROBLEMS !!
major LAG can occur.
which is one reason big time recordists go for custom built studio powerful pc's etc etc. to minimise lag.
but even those in the past might get lag as trak and plug in counts reached crazy levels.

in summary the programmer of multitrak software faces very interesting tech challenges…particularly with the user that cant afford a 'big boys computer'.

SO where does FLAC figure into the above discussion re the user that can only afford an old junker pc ? ?

all i can say is it seems from my testing that on an old junker pc flac offers benefits for the user that will playback from any time point where the 'audio buffers' cant be pre filled. cos with wav more audio data has to flow thru the 'pipe' per second than flac.
this results i might suggest in less 'lag' before playback using flac.

thus ive found that recording and playback of multitrak projects on a clunker pc might be more fluid compared to wav. of course there are 'limits' if the user needs insane trak counts. (note reaper even runs on very clunky pc's compared to some other software...but even reaps has limits obviously depending on trak//plug in counts)


i hope i make a modicum of sense...lol.

(****re 'brain teaser' …my doc says creating songs , and doing crosswords//soduku is great for the brain as one ages.)

merry xmas to all

om


New Song "PRETTY GIRL" for my wife...Dec 2023
(my vocs....mixed for good earbuds.)
https://soundcloud.com/alfsongs/prettygirlrbfinalcalfsongsdec2023mp3
(and rock song THE STALLION and bluegrass song... BANKER MAN....90 songs useing bb/rb.)
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,609
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,609
Enjoyed the article Jim
om, did you notice the Encode time of flac compared to decode
it decodes quickly but is slower encoding . so how would this apply when 'recording' to flac?

Last edited by rharv; 12/18/22 06:48 AM.

Make your sound your own!
.. I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,873
Expert
Offline
Expert
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,873
Some of the article worried me a bit. I think I know what's being said, but I thought it was fairly easy to misunderstand things. One of those things was reporting WAV as "100% compression ratio" ... in my book, WAV has no compression, so is 0%. I was also uncomfortable about Samples/mcs ... I presume (never presume!) that mcs is microseconds. I worried that I was filling in too many blanks for myself. Of course any compression is going to handle data as blocks, not samples, so perceived latency will be block-size dependent.

An old PC will likely have a mechanical hard drive and the biggest impact then on random playback, assuming the data is still to be read, will be seek and read time. If all the data is already read in, then it's fairly likely that its already in decompressed for inside the application.

In an embedded sampler with which I was briefly involved, samples were requested from bulk storage at the moment of a MIDI note. The software then came back 'later' to collect the new instrument and if the instrument wasn't ready, it just waited for it, letting the existing sound continue to play instead. How much, I wonder, would one actually notice a, say, 10ms delay before a new sound started? The impression I had was that the delay was very rarely anything like that long, though the data was in SSD.

If one were to start play at a random point, would one even notice a 50ms delay before the sound started?


Jazz relative beginner, starting at a much older age than was helpful.
Kawai MP6, Korg M50, Ui24R, Saffire Pro 40.
AVL:MXE Linux; Windows 11; Win8.1: Scarletts
BIAB2022 UltraPAK, Reaper, a bunch of stuff.
rharv #745345 12/18/22 08:41 AM
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 2,584
J
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
J
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 2,584
Rharv.

yep i noticed the flac encoding stats.

possibly this is just one aspect in the overall picture tho' ??.
i would suspect the only way to get to the truth is to actually get input from a developer who has coded music software incorporating flac support as an option to wav.
(eg one of the developers of reaps.)

allow me to explain….eg…

from what i see both flac and wav create headers includeing properties eg wav RIFF.
i dont know much about flac.( see the xiph web site.)

maybe the reaper devs have some funky assembler sub routines to speed things up and have built their own custom libs. from what ive seen they are uber smart.

in summary , and looking at the big picture , the truth is probably that there are several factors relating to plusses and minuses of flac and wav.
for example i dont think anyone can argue the fact that with flac less audio data is being pumped thru the 'pipe' per second than the wav format.
maybe this aspect outweighs the flac encoding speed…i just dont know.
as i said only a developer//coder would know.

all i CAN SAY is ive never had 'glitches' using flac to record.

i suspect its the old he/she conundrum…lol…ie 'he said' and 'she said' ….but the real truth lies somewhere down the middle. thus i suspect encode speed is just one aspect and maybe overridden by other things like 'data thru the pipe' speed//sec, and hard drive and memory and cpu speed.

all i can relate are my own experiences with flac creating loads of songs.
(see my soundcloud sig where most of the songs used flac for various recording tasks…but of course some people might feel the songs suck…not flacs fault…lol.)

have a fantastic xmas rharv.
(and big respect to you for helping so many people on the pg forums every year.)

om

Gordon.

re 50 ms delay...thats an excellent point.
my goodness your good technically.
have a merry one.

Last edited by justanoldmuso; 12/18/22 08:47 AM.

New Song "PRETTY GIRL" for my wife...Dec 2023
(my vocs....mixed for good earbuds.)
https://soundcloud.com/alfsongs/prettygirlrbfinalcalfsongsdec2023mp3
(and rock song THE STALLION and bluegrass song... BANKER MAN....90 songs useing bb/rb.)
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,609
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,609
I noticed this too, and made the same assumptions regarding mcs and wav actually being 0% compression
other than that Jim's inked article made sense


Make your sound your own!
.. I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,192
Expert
Offline
Expert
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,192
Quote:
Re..why pg might support flac (or another lossless format eg wavpak)


How slow is your internet that this is a real issue anymore?

Just for kicks, I took the Stones "Can't You Hear Me Knocking" , a track that runs 7 minutes 15 seconds off the 2009 remastered Sticky Fingers CD and did some comparisons:

44.1k/16 (off the 2009 remastered CD) — 77,009,864 bytes (77 MB on disk)

FLAC — 51,015,139 bytes (51 MB on disk)

m4a iTunes (MPEG4 lossless) — 51,661,874 bytes (51.7 MB on disk)

mp3 (VBR Highest Quality) — 15,143,151 bytes (16 MB on disk)

WMA (320kps — highest quality) — 30,045,344 bytes (30.2 MB on disk)

WMA (160kps) — 10,016,544 bytes (10.6 MB on disk)

WMA (128kps) — 7,514,144 bytes (8.4 MB on disk)

Note that PGM "normally ship(s) RealTracks audio files as compressed WMA files (usually 128 or 160 kbps) … Note that it is possible to uncompress the 'regular edition' M4A files to AIFF, however these will not be the same as the original WAV files, having already been compressed once." PGM ships "m4a files (usually 128 or 160 kbps)" instead of WMA in the Mac version.

There was never a need for FLAC in BIAB and even less now that internet speeds are much faster and storage much cheaper. It ain't gonna happen and all the screenshots and rambling drivel to the contrary will not change this.

There has to be a business reason for PGM to do this. Look at the file size comparisons—it's not there.

As for using WMA (or m4a) in a DAW? That's just silly. Why would anyone want or need to do that? What — is there a new class of computers being used for music production limited to 100mbs and 128GB storage? Oh wait, the SATA bus broke those limitations in 2000. Apple was shipping in 2003 and Intel followed soon after. Things have only gotten better in the last 20 years. Yes, really.


BIAB 2023 Audiophile, 24/60 Core M2 Mac Studio Ultra/8TB/192GB Sonoma, M1 MBAir, 2012 MBP
Digital Performer 11, LogicPro
Finale27.4, Dorico5, Encore5, SmartScorePro64, Notion6, Overture5
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 2,584
J
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
J
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 2,584
Mike.

please tell me where my logic is wrong given the following.

1..millions of people in the world cant afford a fancy expensive computer..
(eg where i grew up that i mentioned upthread.) and can only afford a cheap pc clunker with a clunky hard drive.
many cant even afford that.
2..do this test sometime…on an old clunker pc…using monitoring software
record one trak wav…then playback the wav noting read/write stats.
then record one trak flac , then playback the flac noting once again read/write stats.
3..extrapolate the read/write stats for ever higher trak counts.
4..now add in the fact the clunker pc has just one slow internal drive and that biab's'content library' (eg rt's) will continue growing year over year…and is installed on that one clunky drive as well, and the conclusion ive made is that the old clunker will be asked to 'push too much data through the pipe'....as trak counts go up.

my concern mike is purely for the 'young un' ' maybe with a hand me down pc that wants to produce a song.

you asked for a business case…i hope you see from above fewer people might purchase pg products (biab/rb) if they hear that they need a expensive high end computer to reach their song creation goals...ie lost sales.


i hope i make a modicum of sense.
for me personally i love being able to use flac for recording and playback and would be a very happy bunny if biab had the option to save a genned trak as flac.


best and have a merry one.

om

Last edited by justanoldmuso; 12/20/22 07:29 AM.

New Song "PRETTY GIRL" for my wife...Dec 2023
(my vocs....mixed for good earbuds.)
https://soundcloud.com/alfsongs/prettygirlrbfinalcalfsongsdec2023mp3
(and rock song THE STALLION and bluegrass song... BANKER MAN....90 songs useing bb/rb.)
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,423
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,423
Originally Posted By: justanoldmuso
..i love being able to use flac for recording and playback and would be a very happy bunny if biab had the option to save a genned trak as flac...

If you are using flac in Reaper, you can either use the track injector to give you flac tracks instantly by batch converting the RT RD source files to flac or you can get Reaper to batch convert the folder you save the wav files to from Biab export. In the Reaper's Save dialog you have a Convert Media option to flac.
You should be able to script it to do it all automatically and replace the source wav currently in the project with flac and delete the wavs.

Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,423
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,423
Right Click Save Link/Target As
Change selected wav item to flac.lua
Copy the path to the file from the source properties
paste that in the batch window
add selected files
convert
run script

you could script it to delete the wavs but best to do manually
Full Screen

Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 2,584
J
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
J
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 2,584
MCity.

you never cease to amaze me. huge kudos.
may you have a wonderful xmas and 2023.

i dont want to cause you lots of added work, but if you ever have time…

maybe a very detailed step by step video 'for newbies' showing all your tips n' tricks for users of reaper//biab//rb together in song creation.. eg your posts on this thread and tricks on other threads….ie a 'central repository' of tips/tricks etc etc..

i'm sure not just new biab users but also even more experienced users would find it very very usefull.

let me add , ive never had such a great recording experience as useing flac in conjunction with m2 ssd tech on my new mini ryzen pc. i'm stoked. but then i dont create songs needing zillions of traks n' plug ins...
which might require i9's // threadrippers etc.

the m2 ssd tech is so blinkin' crazy fast for music production.. biab n' rb n' reaps are running great….useing the m2 tech the only way i can describe it is 'like a breath of fresh air'....

once again i laud you for the time and dedication you put into helping pg users useing the reaps//biab//rb combo.

om


New Song "PRETTY GIRL" for my wife...Dec 2023
(my vocs....mixed for good earbuds.)
https://soundcloud.com/alfsongs/prettygirlrbfinalcalfsongsdec2023mp3
(and rock song THE STALLION and bluegrass song... BANKER MAN....90 songs useing bb/rb.)
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,423
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,423
This is a simple one script way to get Biab tracks instantly into Reaper as flac (or any format) if need be.
https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=746499

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Go To
Page 2 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
Topics81,402
Posts732,575
Members38,444
Most Online2,537
Jan 19th, 2020
Newest Members
Descoward, danielsk, Mark Morgan, zagrajbarke, Ernest J
38,443 Registered Users
Top Posters(30 Days)
MarioD 200
Al-David 132
DC Ron 115
rsdean 84
dcuny 83
Today's Birthdays
(charlie), WobblyGstring
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5