|
|
|
|
#764366 - 05/04/23 03:39 PM
[Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production]
operate at 96k in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time.
|
|
Registered: 05/04/23
Posts: 1
Newbie
Registered: 05/04/23
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]
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#764925 - 05/10/23 12:20 PM
[Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production]
Re: operate at 96k in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time.
[Re: Eddg]
|
|
Registered: 04/24/17
Posts: 1091
Loc: Sillie Con Valley, California
Expert
Registered: 04/24/17
Posts: 1091
Loc: Sillie Con Valley, California
|
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, 18 Core iMac Pro/4TB/128GB Ventura; 2021 M1 MBAir; 2012 MBP
Digital Performer 11, LogicPro
Finale 27, Dorico 4, Encore 5.0.7, SmartScore Pro 64 Notion 6, Overture 5
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#766321 - 05/23/23 12:57 PM
[Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production]
Re: operate at 96k in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time.
[Re: Eddg]
|
|
Registered: 05/19/20
Posts: 1592
Loc: Victoria, BC
PG Music Staff
Registered: 05/19/20
Posts: 1592
Loc: Victoria, BC
|
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
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#766326 - 05/23/23 01:25 PM
[Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production]
Re: operate at 96k in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time.
[Re: Eddg]
|
|
Registered: 07/12/00
Posts: 24996
Loc: Hudson Valley & Lake George NY
Veteran
Registered: 07/12/00
Posts: 24996
Loc: Hudson Valley & Lake George NY
|
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 2023 Win Audiophile. Software: Studio One 6 Pro, Swam horns, Audition 3, 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
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#766332 - 05/23/23 02:17 PM
[Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production]
Re: operate at 96k in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time.
[Re: Matt Finley]
|
|
Registered: 01/15/15
Posts: 1589
Loc: Hampshire, UK
Expert
Registered: 01/15/15
Posts: 1589
Loc: Hampshire, UK
|
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 10; Win8.1: Scarletts
BIAB2022 UltraPAK, Reaper, a bunch of stuff.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#766340 - 05/23/23 03:36 PM
[Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production]
Re: operate at 96k in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time.
[Re: Eddg]
|
|
Registered: 07/10/15
Posts: 2504
Loc: Cow Country, Florida
Veteran
Registered: 07/10/15
Posts: 2504
Loc: Cow Country, Florida
|
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
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#766533 - 05/24/23 07:32 PM
[Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production]
Re: operate at 96k in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time.
[Re: Eddg]
|
|
Registered: 04/24/17
Posts: 1091
Loc: Sillie Con Valley, California
Expert
Registered: 04/24/17
Posts: 1091
Loc: Sillie Con Valley, California
|
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, 18 Core iMac Pro/4TB/128GB Ventura; 2021 M1 MBAir; 2012 MBP
Digital Performer 11, LogicPro
Finale 27, Dorico 4, Encore 5.0.7, SmartScore Pro 64 Notion 6, Overture 5
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#766551 - 05/25/23 01:00 AM
[Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production]
Re: operate at 96k in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time.
[Re: Mike Halloran]
|
|
Registered: 04/13/16
Posts: 5918
Loc: Cooran Queensland Australia
Veteran
Registered: 04/13/16
Posts: 5918
Loc: Cooran Queensland Australia
|
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
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#766584 - 05/25/23 07:27 AM
[Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production]
Re: operate at 96k in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time.
[Re: Eddg]
|
|
Registered: 07/12/00
Posts: 24996
Loc: Hudson Valley & Lake George NY
Veteran
Registered: 07/12/00
Posts: 24996
Loc: Hudson Valley & Lake George NY
|
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 2023 Win Audiophile. Software: Studio One 6 Pro, Swam horns, Audition 3, 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
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#766590 - 05/25/23 08:36 AM
[Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production]
Re: operate at 96k in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time.
[Re: Eddg]
|
|
Registered: 11/02/03
Posts: 565
Loc: Hockley, TX
Journeyman
Registered: 11/02/03
Posts: 565
Loc: Hockley, TX
|
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
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#766591 - 05/25/23 08:37 AM
[Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production]
Re: operate at 96k in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time.
[Re: Eddg]
|
|
Registered: 12/27/13
Posts: 2732
Loc: St. Louis, MO. USA
Veteran
Registered: 12/27/13
Posts: 2732
Loc: St. Louis, MO. USA
|
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
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#766626 - 05/25/23 03:12 PM
[Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production]
Re: operate at 96k in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time.
[Re: Byron Dickens]
|
|
Registered: 01/15/15
Posts: 1589
Loc: Hampshire, UK
Expert
Registered: 01/15/15
Posts: 1589
Loc: Hampshire, UK
|
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 10; Win8.1: Scarletts
BIAB2022 UltraPAK, Reaper, a bunch of stuff.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#767720 - 06/05/23 05:31 PM
[Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production]
Re: operate at 96k in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time.
[Re: Gordon Scott]
|
|
Registered: 05/19/20
Posts: 1592
Loc: Victoria, BC
PG Music Staff
Registered: 05/19/20
Posts: 1592
Loc: Victoria, BC
|
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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#767753 - 06/06/23 07:31 AM
[Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production]
Re: operate at 96k in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time.
[Re: Simon - PG Music]
|
|
Registered: 01/15/15
Posts: 1589
Loc: Hampshire, UK
Expert
Registered: 01/15/15
Posts: 1589
Loc: Hampshire, UK
|
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 10; Win8.1: Scarletts
BIAB2022 UltraPAK, Reaper, a bunch of stuff.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#767756 - 06/06/23 08:15 AM
[Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production]
Re: operate at 96k in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time.
[Re: Eddg]
|
|
Registered: 07/12/00
Posts: 24996
Loc: Hudson Valley & Lake George NY
Veteran
Registered: 07/12/00
Posts: 24996
Loc: Hudson Valley & Lake George NY
|
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 2023 Win Audiophile. Software: Studio One 6 Pro, Swam horns, Audition 3, 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
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#767846 - 06/07/23 07:45 AM
[Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production]
Re: operate at 96k in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time.
[Re: Matt Finley]
|
|
Registered: 04/24/17
Posts: 1091
Loc: Sillie Con Valley, California
Expert
Registered: 04/24/17
Posts: 1091
Loc: Sillie Con Valley, California
|
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, 18 Core iMac Pro/4TB/128GB Ventura; 2021 M1 MBAir; 2012 MBP
Digital Performer 11, LogicPro
Finale 27, Dorico 4, Encore 5.0.7, SmartScore Pro 64 Notion 6, Overture 5
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#767848 - 06/07/23 08:34 AM
[Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production]
Re: operate at 96k in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time.
[Re: Eddg]
|
|
Registered: 07/12/00
Posts: 24996
Loc: Hudson Valley & Lake George NY
Veteran
Registered: 07/12/00
Posts: 24996
Loc: Hudson Valley & Lake George NY
|
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 2023 Win Audiophile. Software: Studio One 6 Pro, Swam horns, Audition 3, 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
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#767856 - 06/07/23 10:33 AM
[Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production]
Re: operate at 96k in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time.
[Re: Matt Finley]
|
|
Registered: 04/24/17
Posts: 1091
Loc: Sillie Con Valley, California
Expert
Registered: 04/24/17
Posts: 1091
Loc: Sillie Con Valley, California
|
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, 18 Core iMac Pro/4TB/128GB Ventura; 2021 M1 MBAir; 2012 MBP
Digital Performer 11, LogicPro
Finale 27, Dorico 4, Encore 5.0.7, SmartScore Pro 64 Notion 6, Overture 5
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#767869 - 06/07/23 01:56 PM
[Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production]
Re: operate at 96k in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time.
[Re: Eddg]
|
|
Registered: 12/05/11
Posts: 13328
Loc: GA USA
Veteran
Registered: 12/05/11
Posts: 13328
Loc: GA USA
|
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
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#767921 - 06/08/23 02:33 AM
[Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production]
Re: operate at 96k in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time.
[Re: Mike Halloran]
|
|
Registered: 01/15/15
Posts: 1589
Loc: Hampshire, UK
Expert
Registered: 01/15/15
Posts: 1589
Loc: Hampshire, UK
|
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.
Edited by Gordon Scott (06/08/23 02:34 AM)
_________________________
Jazz relative beginner, starting at a much older age than was helpful.
Kawai MP6, Korg M50, Ui24R, Saffire Pro 40.
AVL:MXE Linux; Windows 10; Win8.1: Scarletts
BIAB2022 UltraPAK, Reaper, a bunch of stuff.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Day for Truth and Reconciliation - Holiday Hours
Saturday, September 30th is National Day for Truth and Reconciliation in Canada. This day is also being recognized by employers on Monday, October 2nd.
We will have limited hours this weekend:
Saturday, Sept 30: 8am PDT - 4pm PDT
Sunday, Oct 1: closed
Monday, Oct 2: 8am PDT - 4pm PDT
Regular hours resume on Tuesday, October 3rd.
Review - Band-in-a-Box® 2023 for Windows is Overflowing with Features!
Dennis posted his very thorough Band-in-a-Box® review recently, where he dives into some of the new features added with version 2023: Sound-Guy's Band-in-a-Box Review
Read his thoughts on the Download & Install Manager, partial track regeneration, Playable RealTracks, Audio Editing, the addition of SynthMaster, the VST DAW Plugin, and more!
"Band-in-a-Box continues to be an expansive musical tool-set for both novice and experienced musicians to compose, arrange and mix songs, as well as an extensive educational resource. It is, without negative connotation, a monster of a program. Yet, so is any DAW that I have used. No DAW can do some of the things BIAB does, while BIAB can do a lot that DAWs do."
Band-in-a-Box® Tutorials for Low-vision and Blind Program Users
Our friends at EyesFree_Tutorials have just released their Band-in-a-Box Tutorials, Bundle 2!
Created for low-vision and blind program users, this collection of Band-in-a-Box for Windows tutorials includes 31 audio instruction files and 19 music files for practice, plus help documents. Specific topics include "ABACA, let's make a song form," "Recording melody and lead-in," "Playing and editing: part markers; the handy clipboard. The play function. Search and replace," and more!
Learn more about their new tutorials, and connect with Roy & Gudrun to order the Band-in-a-Box Tutorials, Bundle 2 here.
Introducing... ChatPG!
Looking for answers to your questions about Band-in-a-Box? From "How do I ____?" to "What do I ____?" to "What is ____?" and more, you'll find your answers when you ask ChatPG!
We will be constantly updating the resources for this powerful addition to our website based on suggestions & feedback, as well as all of the questions that have been asked by program users and website visitors.
Videos! Get To Know XPro Styles PAK 5 & Xtra Styles PAK 16 for Band-in-a-Box® 2023
XPro Styles PAK 5 adds 75 new RealStyles for rock, pop, jazz, funk, and country, and 25 styles based around MIDI SuperTracks that utilize the SynthMaster plugin!
Here's just a taste of what XPro Styles PAK 5 has in store: electronic Latin funk, spacey dancehall grooves, soulful Americana ballads, heavy house beats, vibin' cool jazz, rollicking country train beats, playful pop country jams, gritty blues rock, modern disco funk, moody synthwave, subdued bossa nova, lo-fi jazz, and many more! Pick up XPro Styles PAK 5 today!
What are XPro Styles PAKs?
XPro Styles PAKs are styles that work with any version (Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, Audiophile Edition) of Band-in-a-Box® 2023 (or higher). Each PAK includes over 100 styles!
XPro Styles PAKs aren't exclusive to Pro users, there's a huge range of RealStyles available for everyone - even Audiophile customers! That's right, XPro Styles PAKs can be used with ANY Band-in-a-Box® 2023 package!
XPro Styles PAK 5: https://youtu.be/QdhS9tc0y_s
Xtra Styles PAK 16 includes an absolute plethora of styles... 200 to be exact! 50 new styles each for Jazz, Country, Rock & Pop, and Praise & Worship!
Take a gander at what you can expect to find: modern disco funk, exciting gospel shout, busy jazz fusion, soulful R&B ballads, various Americana styles, modern pop country, blistering heavy metal, uplifting worship rock, lo-fi hip hop, a plethora of progressive rock, old-timey autoharp, modern surf rock, and many more!
What are Xtra Styles PAKs?
Xtra Styles PAKs are styles that work with the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box® 2023 (or higher). With over 2,600 styles included in Xtra Styles PAKs 1-16, the possibilities are endless!
Xtra Styles PAK 16 requires the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box® version 2023. They won't work with the Pro or MegaPAK version because they need the RealTracks from the 2023 UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition..
Xtra Styles PAK 16: https://youtu.be/KP1svm_RMfI
How do I know if I have XPro Styles PAKs or Xtra Styles PAKs?
You can find out in Band-in-a-Box® by clicking the "Add-ons" button in the StylePicker. Show me how.
Just Released - XPro PAK 5 & Xtra Styles PAK 16 for Band-in-a-Box® 2023!
We're back with 300 new RealStyles included in XPro Styles PAK 5 & Xtra Styles PAK 16!
XPro Styles PAK 5 adds 75 new RealStyles for rock, pop, jazz, funk, and country, and 25 styles based around MIDI SuperTracks that utilize the SynthMaster plugin!
Xtra Styles PAK 16 includes an absolute plethora of styles... 200 to be exact! 50 new styles each for Jazz, Country, Rock & Pop, and Praise & Worship!
Amp up your Band-in-a-Box® 2023 experience when you add XPro and Xtra Styles PAKs!
Each PAK can be purchased for $49... Order XPro Styles PAKS | Order Xtra Styles PAKs
Mac User? Click here for your OS specific announcement.
Band-in-a-Box® 2023 for Mac - Translations Available!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37903 Members
67 Forums
79192 Topics
706351 Posts
Max Online: 2537 @ 01/19/20 07:09 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean