PG Music Home Forums PG Music Wishlists Band-in-a-Box Wishlist BIAB 2024, WORKFLOW IMPROVEMENTS: What is conspicuously missing in the NEW Track View?

What is conspicuously missing in the NEW Track View?
Hint: You can find it in all DAWs.
Do you think a full play head vertical cursor would improve your workflow while working in the multi-Track View?
Would separate independent play head, selection areas, and loop region improve your workflow in the NEW Track View?

+1

+1

+1 for sure!

+1

+1

+1

JP.
of course plus oodles.
I do a ton of surgical edits comping best bits of instrument tracks and vocal tracks to new free tracks.

let me add the following after a user highlights a piece of track in new tv.…and a pop up menu appears.

1..all the edit features currently of bb audio editor in menu pop up.
major flaw i find re current bb audio editor and is covered in your nice vid…viz as things stand i can't do surgical edits easily cos i cant see all the other tracks.
2..other features like subtle moves of bits of a track forward and back in time…and other manipulation features of a section of a track eg changing the volume of a track section viz other track sections.

i'm sure you get the idea from the above details…ie typical daw editing features that are easy to use…selecting from a pop up menu.

finally let me say with clever feature additions to new tv making it a users central work view…just eliminating lots of hopping around like a little bee tween various views…
chords/audio edit/mixer views would be redundant.
a man can dream can't he ? lol.
similar in realband make rb tracks view the centre of a users song creation work…
I hope i make sense.

happiness.

om

+1

Triple +1 for sure.

Definitely +1
It should have always worked this way.

+1 for sure

+1

+1

I can't stress enough how important vertical cursor is. I hope it will still be considered / added to 2024 version.

I'm pretty sure the vertical curser feature will be added to BiaB eventually. The question is, can we expect to get it before 2030?

+1

I've reported this before as well! Not as elaborate as you explained it!!

With several big discussions this year, it's clear that most people want fixes & improvement of existing features, instead of rolling out new ones and leaving existing behind in original state. Would like very much 2025 be mainly focused on improvements, workflow and limitations.

Yes, it's very clear, at least among forum users who posted an opinion.

Don't know if I've missed this somehow, but would like to see the volume automation available under the tracks view, where you could see multiple tracks at once.

This post shows that many users requested for changes in the biab 2025. Did biab2025 features added based on user's request ?

There's a possibility that the company has a preference to introduce new features as a priority over many requests for improving existing features.
The introduction of the AI lyrics generator and AI stem splitter in 2025 are two possible examples.

Misha,

Is this correct? I would have thought that 'a number of people' is more accurate than 'most people'. The forum has nearly 40,000 members and I don't recall a thread that had over 20,000 people replying to a post to say that they agree with such a statement. Have I missed something? I was in and out of hospital a few times during the year so I might not have seen everything.

I recall the poll below to which a few people responded (29, I think).
https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=813482#Post813482

I also remember this 'White Paper' thread. While this thread had nearly 12,000 views, only 115 people responded.
https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=811732#Post811732

Statements such as the one you made paint PG Music as the 'bad guys', because such a comment makes it sound as if the company doesn't care about its customers. Honestly, is that your personal experience? Does PG Music consist of 'bad guys'? Personally, I have enormous respect for what Peter Gannon and his team have done, and I have found PG Music one of the friendliest and most accommodating companies that I have ever dealt with. I have never once been let down by PG Music in my 18 years of dealing with them.

Regards,
---Noel

Oki Doki. You asked...

#1 Noel, first of all, please don't shovel words into my mouth. Bad juju.

#2 In most cases the points I am making resonate with users. Not all, but most. In fact, most critique I express, I base on common outcries. Have you noticed any lately, or should I point you to specific threads?

#3 There are only a handful of users that I know of, and I followed forum closely since 2018, who are in favor of redundant / obsolete features, giving ridiculous reasons, finding absurd excuses, blaming users for not following obscure workflow and offering workarounds as a panacea. Resisting common sense calls for improvements. Is this where we need to go?

#4 To directly answer your question. No, I don't believe "PG Music consist of 'bad guys'". Absolutely not.
But I do believe they are a bit disconnected from user base. Most common and loud requests are: Fix known bugs and Workflow & GUI (as far as software goes). Some things are being done and they are noticed, but not nearly enough and not fast enough.

#5 I care deeply about the future of BIAB as it's my center for creating initial idea/sketch for the songs. I want it to be successful and healthy for years to come. Time ago, PGM had a luxury of developing software at their own pace as they were truly unique, but there has been a tectonic shift with AI and other phrase based algorithmic software that use pitch/stretch techniques of real audio. To cement itself, BIAB needs to re-evaluate the need for questionable features and heavily focus on the items that have been suggested over and over again by paid members. Specifically: Known bugs and issues eliminated, Workflow & UI, Redundancy minimized.

Afterword:
Some folks, (and me at some point) suggested a complete rewrite of BIAB. I have changed my opinion on this.
My personal major concerns were addressed in last a few years. Mainly, 64 bit, more tracks, partial regeneration, MTP, Chord Track, VST3 and a few others. But one item that I thought was never going to be possible is speed. I thought that it's a bottleneck of the old code. Fortunately PGM solved that in 2024, making regenerations super fast. I truly believe that BIAB can be made significantly better without major rewrites. But it needs to act aggressively not to miss the unique opportunity while it still has good following. And this:
I always purchase my BIAB licenses and the ones that I received as generous SC awards, or for helping out, I always re-gift. That's my way of supporting and showing my sincere gratitude for PGM.

The End.