Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread
Print Thread
Go To
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: May 2023
Posts: 1
E
Eddg Offline OP
Newbie
OP Offline
Newbie
E
Joined: May 2023
Posts: 1
Other than uncompressed file sizes perhaps, what might the reasoning that BiaB does not at this time plan on supporting 96 kHz.

Thank you for your time!

Edd 8:30:50 PM
Are there plans to operate at 96 in the future?

Jerry 8:31:18 PM
Not at this time. We base many features and content updates on what is submitted on our Wishlist forums. If you'd like to see this feature added in the future, we suggest posting your ideas in our Wishlist forums, here: [a url="https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm&c=3"]https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm&c=3[/a]

Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,184
Expert
Offline
Expert
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,184
Why would they? The 44.1kHz 16 bit Audiophile files sound quite good.

You need better? The BIAB plug-in lets you use any libraries you want in your DAW.


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: May 2020
Posts: 1,629
PG Music Staff
Offline
PG Music Staff
Joined: May 2020
Posts: 1,629
Indeed, file size is the biggest part. The Audiophile edition is currently around 1.9TB at 16-bit 44.1kHz - if we were to increase that to 24-bit 96kHz it would be around 5.7TB.

In addition , currently zero companies make a 2.5" 6tb external drive or larger, meaning we would have to offer it on a 3.5" drive. This would no longer be very portable, as not only would the drive be about 5 times the size of what we currently offer, it would require a separate power supply for the drive.


I work here
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 25,720
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 25,720
I think 96K is overkill at this point. I could see an option for 48K for compatibility with video-oriented devices and/or where the sample rate is locked at 48K. My Roland MIDI synth is like that.

But since external drive size is an issue, this is perhaps an opportunity to revisit the method of delivery. Some of us would welcome an option for downloading the audiophile version in a lossless compressed standard (and preferably one that worked on both Windows and Mac operating systems.


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 & A5X monitors
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,839
Expert
Offline
Expert
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,839
I too think 48k would be good.
24bit or single-precision float.

I guess it would be feasible to offer 96k as an option with the proviso that the drive would be larger and probably that the price would be higher. I fully understand any reluctance to do that due to all the product/parts/shipping management issue that would occur, so I fully understand "not at this time".


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: Jul 2015
Posts: 2,513
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 2,513
Matt and I have had similar discussions about interfaces. When is "good" good enough, and where do we reach diminishing returns in both convenience and cost?

The 44.1kHz 16-bit issue came up with the new interface I installed the other day, but I am not unhappy with the sound quality at 44.1kHz 16-bit.

Then again, I have been too lazy to get off my rear end and go into the shop and build a tube audiophile stereo with custom exotic speakers I have had in mind for several years...lol

Personally, PG Music could send me any size hard drive, USB or not. I would have no issue dealing with any size drive.

Regarding cost, with my upgrade price, the audiophile drive is well within the range of "worth what it costs." I don't buy a new addition every year but generally every two years.

There are many things in BIAB I would like to see change, but 44.1kHz 16-bit is really not even on the list.

I also agree with Matt on the download issue. Many of us have gigabit internet nowadays. So large file transfer is not an issue.

Billy


New location, new environment, new music coming soon

Seize the moo-ment
If you feel like you’ve herd all these cow puns before, you probably have deja-moo
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,184
Expert
Offline
Expert
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,184
Reality check:

Unless PG Music is going to re-record all of the samples at 96kHz 24 bit, they would have to upsample the existing audiophile files. Well, any of us who need the existing files at 96k can do that ourselves.

Likewise, a large number of older VI libraries were recorded at 44.1/16 but are now available at 48/24. Hmmmmm… I wonder how that happened? Properly and carefully done to samples that were well recorded, you won’t hear the difference.

I sometimes have to deliver audio @ 96k for HD DVD audio but I’ve had the ability to record at that resolution for a couple decades now. I can’t imagine the situation where I would ever have to deliver a BIAB project at 96k.

The largest 2.5" HDDs (mechanical hard drives) are 5TB. 2.5" form SSDs are available at 8TB now but they’re pricy by comparison. Although I’m sure that, if PG Music goes to the expense of re-recording Audiophile at 96k, those few clamoring for this won’t mind paying the extra few hundred bucks for delivery, will they? Frankly, I’d be happy to download such a product but I might have the minority opinion — or do I?


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: Apr 2016
Posts: 6,191
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 6,191
Originally Posted By: Mike Halloran
Reality check:
Unless PG Music is going to re-record all of the samples at 96kHz 24 bit, they would have to upsample the existing audiophile files. Well, any of us who need the existing files at 96k can do that ourselves.

100%
As it is the stone won't be squeezed for more DrealDrum "stems" in a hurry, which I'd have thought easy enough as they ought to have been recorded in the 1st instance. This makes me suspect that original, premix, files may have been erased for space and that, most likely, trickles a little. Upscaling, like upmixing, is used, in the main, by con artist/floggers.


Cheers
rayc
"What's so funny about peace, love & understanding?" - N.Lowe
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 25,720
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 25,720
I think re-recording RealTracks would be silly. They can’t duplicate them exactly, and I would rather have new ones anyway.

As I understand it, RealTracks were recorded at a bit rate of 24. That would be worthwhile having as an audiophile version option. To my knowledge, we have not been told what sampling rate was used to record existing RealTracks.


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 & A5X monitors
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 611
B
Journeyman
Offline
Journeyman
B
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 611
Way too much gets made of this. No one can hear the difference.


Byron Dickens

BIAB. CbB. Mixbus 32C 8 HP Envy. Intel core i7. 16GB RAM W10. Focusrite Scarlett 18i 20. Various instruments played with varying degrees of proficiency.

https://soundcloud.com/athanorsoundlabs
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,732
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,732
Right, and the OP has left the building with that one post.




Steve

BIAB/RB 2022, Pro Tools 2020, Korg N5, JBL LSR 4328 Powered Monitors, AKG/Shure Mics.
PC: Win11 PRO, 4 TB M2 SSD, 2 TB HD, 128 GB Memory
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,839
Expert
Offline
Expert
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,839
Originally Posted By: Byron Dickens
Way too much gets made of this. No one can hear the difference.

Aye. As a young lad my hearing was measured to 26kHz, which was where the test kit ran out. Even that would have been unlikely to allow me to have heard the difference.

These days I sometimes don't hear kitchen timer beeps over the tinitus. Ho Hum.

IIRC someone at PGM said their recordings were made at 48kHz/24bit, but don't quote me ... that may be a false memory.

Sampling at 96kHz has benefits because the anti-aliassing filters can be gentler and have fewer phase artifacts. Once recorded, though, there's really negligible (possibly nil) benefit in a higher sample rate until one gets to the final digital-to-analogue stage, when up-sampling to allow a gentler filter can again be a benefit.


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: May 2020
Posts: 1,629
PG Music Staff
Offline
PG Music Staff
Joined: May 2020
Posts: 1,629
Originally Posted By: Mike Halloran
Unless PG Music is going to re-record all of the samples at 96kHz 24 bit, they would have to upsample the existing audiophile files. Well, any of us who need the existing files at 96k can do that ourselves.

Yep, but a better idea than that is to simply export at 96kHz. It doesn't matter whether the Realtracks audio files are upsampled before the tracks are rendered or after, so there's no need to store all of the data at 96kHz if BIAB can simply render the file and upsample on the fly.


Originally Posted By: Mike Halloran
Although I’m sure that, if PG Music goes to the expense of re-recording Audiophile at 96k, those few clamoring for this won’t mind paying the extra few hundred bucks for delivery, will they?



If we were to re-record ALL of the existing (past and present) RealTracks, that would involve thousands of hours of re-recording, possibly tens of thousands of hours, and likely hundreds of thousands of dollars being paid to the musicians to re-create the previous Realtracks. The "few" that are clamouring for 96k RT's would likely have to pay MUCH more than an extra few hundred bucks.


Originally Posted By: rayc
This makes me suspect that original, premix, files may have been erased for space

That's quite possible. I don't personally know whether the original files still exist somewhere, but keep in mind that we've been doing RealTracks since 2008 when a "large" hard drive was maybe 500gb. Back around that time I worked as a sysadmin for a publishing company with about 120 employees, and the entire company's storage across multiple serverswas around 16tb. PG being a smaller company likely would've had less than that, so I'd imagine after some time that the original files may have been deleted. This is entirely speculation, however.


Originally Posted By: Byron Dickens
Way too much gets made of this. No one can hear the difference.

In general, yes. Even young people with perfect ears would be hard pressed to hear the difference.


Originally Posted By: Gordon Scott
These days I sometimes don't hear kitchen timer beeps over the tinitus. Ho Hum.

Same here. I'd blame my days as a drummer (despite wearing ear protection), but sadly for me it's hereditary.


Originally Posted By: Gordon Scott
IIRC someone at PGM said their recordings were made at 48kHz/24bit, but don't quote me ... that may be a false memory.

I don't know the answer. It's possible that some of the recordings were made at 44.1/16, since in many cases the recordings were done halfway across the world from us, and going back to 2008 when we started we may have opted for 44.1/16 simply to be able to transfer the files faster over a slow internet connection. Again, purely speculation.


Originally Posted By: Gordon Scott
Sampling at 96kHz has benefits because the anti-aliassing filters can be gentler and have fewer phase artifacts. Once recorded, though, there's really negligible (possibly nil) benefit in a higher sample rate until one gets to the final digital-to-analogue stage, when up-sampling to allow a gentler filter can again be a benefit.

Correct, however oversampling provides that same benefit even when recording at 44.1kHz.


I work here
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,839
Expert
Offline
Expert
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,839
Originally Posted By: Simon - PG Music
Originally Posted By: Gordon Scott
Sampling at 96kHz has benefits because the anti-aliassing filters can be gentler and have fewer phase artifacts. Once recorded, though, there's really negligible (possibly nil) benefit in a higher sample rate until one gets to the final digital-to-analogue stage, when up-sampling to allow a gentler filter can again be a benefit.

Correct, however oversampling provides that same benefit even when recording at 44.1kHz.

I hope I didn't mislead there. High sampling rates, e.g. oversampling, at the interface between analogue and digital is essentially always beneficial, whatever the final data rate.

The essential bit is not particularly the final sample-rate, but the 'clean'-ness of the filters, mostly those used for anti-aliasing the sampling. Most or all of us know how high-Q filters sound when used on synthesisers ... for good fidelity we want about the lowest Q we can manage.

44.1kHz is perfectly fine for most people. It does seem a shame, though, if one needs to up-sample to 48kHz.

(FWIW, I had a quick look at some datasheets from a while back ... a TI part with a 2014 datasheet offering 192kHz sampling at 24bit. Similar had been done well before that by using multiple ADCs. Several parts today offer 768kHz at 32-bit and around 120dB s/n.)


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: Jul 2000
Posts: 25,720
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 25,720
I think we are in some agreement here. I would like to see options for the Audiophile version that would include 44.1 or 48K sampling rates to match equipment requirements, but I would most like to get 24-bit files for the added headroom while mixing. I believe we were told 24-bit files were recorded.


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 & A5X monitors
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,184
Expert
Offline
Expert
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,184
Originally Posted By: Matt Finley
I think we are in some agreement here. I would like to see options for the Audiophile version that would include 44.1 or 48K sampling rates to match equipment requirements, but I would most like to get 24-bit files for the added headroom while mixing. I believe we were told 24-bit files were recorded.

That's the real issue for me, too. Although I render to 24 bit, I convert to 32 bit float in my DAW for the additional headroom when mixing. Much faster to get a clean mix that way.

Yes, but the Audiophile version would no longer fit onto that 2TB spinner that I and many others wish wasn't required.

Don't get me wrong—it's ok to make that still available for those few who still want it, complete with 44.1/16 files, I suppose, but the ability to download the Audiophile tracks at 48k/24 if that's how they were recorded would be nice.

I have a hard time believing that increasing the server capacity at PG Music would cost more than the manufacturing and "free" shipping associated with the current product.


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: Jul 2000
Posts: 25,720
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 25,720
Mike, you're more on top of these things than I am: what standard would you recommend for lossless downloadable audio files from PG Music that would serve both Mac and Windows?


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 & A5X monitors
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,184
Expert
Offline
Expert
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,184
Originally Posted By: Matt Finley
Mike, you're more on top of these things than I am: what standard would you recommend for lossless downloadable audio files from PG Music that would serve both Mac and Windows?


Good question but I think the correct answer is It doesn't matter.

BIAB for Mac and Win use different schemes that are incompatible with each other and there's no universal standard that's compatible with both (FLAC is not supported by the MacOS). Zip and RAR do not save space and must be decoded so neither is a solution for the End User. In any case, there will always be two versions to download.

PG Music already has a partial solution, the Band-in-a-Box Install Manager. They just need to finish it to include this task.

If you have Komplete, IK Media, UVI or half a dozen other VI libraries, you know that you can just fire up the Install/License/Download manager (or whatever it's called), click on Update or Install and it will know not only the correct libraries but also where you want them installed. To quote the late Ron Popeil: "Set it and forget it!". All you have to do is enter your license info—some installers query your account and take it from there. iZotope's is not a good example, BTW, but I'm hoping that, now they are aligned with Native Instruments, this will improve.


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: Dec 2011
Posts: 13,857
Veteran
Offline
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 13,857
As I've mused for years I dream of a double blind research project (with all the proper protocols) that would determine the accuracy to which audiophiles could differentiate the different bit files via a simple hearing test.

Just a slightly off topic ramble.

Bud

Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,839
Expert
Offline
Expert
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,839
Originally Posted By: Mike Halloran
Originally Posted By: Matt Finley
Mike, you're more on top of these things than I am: what standard would you recommend for lossless downloadable audio files from PG Music that would serve both Mac and Windows?


Good question but I think the correct answer is It doesn't matter.

BIAB for Mac and Win use different schemes that are incompatible with each other and there's no universal standard that's compatible with both (FLAC is not supported by the MacOS). Zip and RAR do not save space and must be decoded so neither is a solution for the End User. In any case, there will always be two versions to download.
.....

I think Matt's question was inadvertently slightly loaded here, which also slightly loads the answer.
There is, or can be, a difference between "lossless audio format" and "lossless download" that skews both the question and the answer a bit.

Mike's absolutely right that there's no compression advantage by applying, e.g., .zip to an already losslessly compressed format, but there is a compression advantage of applying it to, e.g., a .wav file.

There isn't I think any real reason why .wav files shouldn't be compressed with, e.g., .zip for the download and decompressed onto the drive after download, to be used thereafter as the .wav files.

That's different, of course, from BIAB directly using a lossless format like FLAC for the file format on the drive.

I presume(!) that "(FLAC is not supported by the MacOS" means supported natively and that there's no fundamental reason why PGM shouldn't use the algorithm/library themselves, notwithstanding that Musocity suggests that there are other better-suited lossless format(s) around.

Last edited by Gordon Scott; 06/07/23 10:34 PM.

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.
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
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

Band-in-a-Box® 2024 DAW Plugin Version 6: New Features Specifically for Reaper®

New with the DAW Plugin Version 6.0, released with Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows: the Reaper® Panel!

This new panel offers built-in specific support for the Reaper® DAW API allowing direct transfer of Band-in-a-Box® files to/from Reaper® tracks!

When you run the Plugin from Reaper®, there is a panel to set the following options:
-BB Track(s) to send: This allows you to select the Plugin tracks that will be sent Reaper.
-Destination Reaper Track: This lets you select the destination Reaper track to receive media content from the Plugin.
-At Bar: You can select a bar in Reaper where the Plugin tracks should be placed.
-Start Below Selected Track: This allows you to place the Plugin tracks below the destination Reaper track.
-Overwrite Reaper Track: You can overwrite previous content on the destination Reaper track.
-Move to Project Folder: With this option, you can move the Plugin tracks to the Reaper project folder.
-Send Reaper Instructions Enable this option to send the Reaper Instructions instead of rendering audio tracks, which is faster.
-Render Audio & Instructions: Enable this option to generate audio files and the Reaper instructions.
-Send Tracks After Generating: This allows the Plugin to automatically send tracks to Reaper after generating.
-Send Audio for MIDI Track: Enable this option to send rendered audio for MIDI tracks.
-Send RealCharts with Audio: If this option is enabled, Enable this option to send RealCharts with audio.

Check out this video highlighting the new Reaper®-specific features: Band-in-a-Box® DAW Plugin Version 6: New Features Specifically for Reaper®

Band-in-a-Box® 2024 DAW Plugin Version 6: New Features Video

The new Band-in-a-Box VST DAW Plugin Verion 6 adds over 20 new features!

Watch the new features video to learn more: Video: Band-in-a-Box® 2024 - DAW Plugin Version 6 New Features

We also list these new features at www.pgmusic.com/bbwin.plugin.htm.

Free Updates Available for PowerTracks Pro Audio 2024 & RealBand 2024!

Using RealBand 2024 or PowerTracks Pro Audio 2024? Head to our support page for your free update!

RealBand 2024 Build 3 resolves the "expired program" error users were experiencing, along with a few other issues that were reported. It also adds the option to launch the Style Picker from the Tracks Window! Learn all about this patch and download it here.

A lot of what you see in RealBand you'll find in PowerTracks, as these are similar programs - so the "expired program" error was also occuring in PowerTracks Pro Audio 2024. Fortunately, PowerTracks Pro Audio 2024 Build 3 resolves this!

Forum Statistics
Forums66
Topics81,124
Posts728,745
Members38,351
Most Online2,537
Jan 19th, 2020
Newest Members
fethiye, jdr24, joboda, lewiso, thon665
38,352 Registered Users
Top Posters(30 Days)
MarioD 189
dcuny 184
musocity 143
DC Ron 126
rsdean 123
Al-David 118
Today's Birthdays
There are no members with birthdays on this day.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5