PG Music Home Forums PG Music Wishlists Band-in-a-Box Wishlist Make BiaB more GUI configureable

The "minimal mode's Custom tab " does not allow me to rename the tab, and does not allow me to create more than 1.
Also is would be nice if I could move the toolbar to where I want, floating would be good if it could stay where I put it.

I would just like to see, users be able to customize (hide/show, move and pin windows, create toolbars) BiaB to their needs.

Just make things more "modular" as Rustyspoon# said " tune up GUI and modular is the way to go, as you can cook your own interface (or use a factory default)".

Robert

I agree with the idea of having a moveable and floating toolbar with tabs.
Staying put between sessions is a great idea that could be useful for users with more than one display monitor.

I do not agree with the idea of having more than one Custom tab. I just do not understand the need now or in the near future.

A configurable User Interface could be useful for some users workflow.

+1

I have 4 monitors and want to place windows in specific locations, having a toolbar specific for the task at hand, for example: On the music staff that's on monitor 4 with all of the toolbar icons that work with the staff as well. Also let's say I have the tracks on Monitor 1 with the tracks toolbar.

The view tab is useless to me, because I want many of the windows open at all times on the monitor that I place it.

Again this is to allow the user to setup his BiaB the way they want and hide what they do not use. To me, there is only two choices, very basic and overdone (you see everything). I want more than basic, but not everything.

Let's say a user want to only use BiaB MIDI, and not Realtracks and Realdrums. He should be able to hide (or deactivate) them if he chooses.

Robert

+1 for modular approach of all parts of GUI.

Robert, while this is not exactly what you proposed, but I think is a more universal approach and should work for most what you are after:

All tabs dockable & un-dockable - floating. User defines which buttons to display in the tab of specific category or even if to display a certain tab at all. Add "Action" tab where user can make any buttons they want based on any existing shortcuts. Ability to save layout as "default" for multi screen setups.

Sounds, to me that you also use Reaper (or at least know how it works)? I guess, if you don't, it allows users to modify about everything!

It's really hard to explain everything I envision, so let's start with the toolbars and windows...!

After I upgrade to 2025, and check it out, I will have a better idea of what is missing.

Robert

No, not a Reaper guy. Just thinking logically.
To be honest, there is not much that I would change in Minimalistic (front) GUI. I think overall layout design is OK. Few exceptions are the "Radio" bar (top thing) that you can't remove, but it was said to be considered to make the view optional, and pretty useless navigator when you get to about 100 bars. But that is another conversation
Other than that, floating elements such as transport, tabbed toolbars and true customization > making user buttons based on existing shortcuts would be a very nice GUI feature. Or improving existing GUI, whatever you want to call it.

Minimalist is OK, but I also do not like that if you make the main screen wider, only the Radio bar widens, that's where another icon bar could be!
Now if the if the transport could be combined to look more like this...See image...,.

I'm gonna hold off on commenting about the BiaB GUI until I checkout the up coming version 2025

Robert

Agreed. We don't know what 2025 might bring. Many improvements have been requested.

Well, I had BiaB for about 1 month now, and really giving it a run through. There is a lot that I like in this version and don't like as well.
I want to keep this to the point and will not resort to stating how other DAW/Programs do things. I know that if someone tells me how is should be (Putting myself in the place of PG developers), I would probably not even consider it.

This is not considering a 1 monitor setup.
I currently have a 4 monitor setup as follows:
1)1920x1200 set in portrait position @ 125% scale (this is my main monitor for my OS, as I need it be the main one)
2) 2560x1440 in landscape position @ 100% scale
3) 1920z1080 in landscape position @ 100% scale
4) 1920x1200 set in portrait position @ 150% scale

1st on the agenda, is how the some of the windows stay where you put them and some don't.
Main window, Detached mixer & Guitar neck are the only ones that stay open and where you place them.
Others windows (Settings type windows) I would like to have in a floating docker with tabs on the bottom that you could quickly change to.

1 Problem:
Hover the mouse pointer over an any Icon or over text and right click and the resulting window opens in the wrong location or not at all. It only worked correctly if I place the main window on monitor #4.
This results in getting very frustrated with BiaB, as I don't get anything or windows/menu is only partially shown.
This in on Monitor #2, #'s 1 and 3 are the same, only #4 seamed to work correctly. (Add correction, also works correctly when window is max on Monitor 1 and not the others)




Robert

To Add, if BiaB is put into DAW plugin mode, everything works correctly, no matter what monitor it's on and/or the main window is maximized or not.


Robert

Problem #2

If you resize the Guitar neck window (Mainly height) you loose the String Letters.



Also, why is there only positions 3 and 9 (Aeolian & Phrygian), What open position and others? Are there others? I do not know?

Robert

Just clarifying: DAW Plugin Mode is rather old by now. Its function is to make BIAB a smaller window and keep it on top, so it doesn't get hidden when you also have a DAW open. You then do Drag 'n Drop of tracks into your DAW. Is that what you refer to?

If so, I requested they add an indicator when DAW Plugin Mode was in effect, and they did so, because people were losing track of whether it was on if they then forgot and maximized the window. I haven't actually heard this mode mentioned in years.

It's about some of the windows (watch the video) in BiaB, the DAW plugin window does not have the problem shown in the video.


Robert

Ironic, because it was designed to be used in a simpler way.

Matt,

The plugin is working OK, I think better than the BiaB interface, my observation is with the Main BiaB application.

Robert

Now I am confused. The DAW Plugin Mode is not the same thing as the BIAB Plugin. I was only trying to make sure we are all talking about the same thing.

Hello Matt,

Thank you for your response and welcoming to the forum (You did that in another post)

I understand your confusion, I find it really hard to explain what I see, hence the videos to help show what I'm getting.

Hopefully this will clear things up.



Robert

Thanks. Yes, that’s the older DAW Plugin Mode alright.

an old ex developers perspective...lol.

when it comes to gui's...lots of users want it 'their way' which might be different from other users.

in industry we strived time and again to get user groups to agree amongst themselves how gui's should look without success in order to keep down the size of the code base....cos often we ended doing 'one offs' to keep a particular user or department happy.

i suspect if pg opened up the gui topic...like a town hall..to its user community like some developers do...given the above i doubt concensus could be reached.

the ideal of course is a totally flexible user configurable gui. but this has downsides also.
we tried that and the exe we soon realised would balloon and the app with its already huge code base would be a maintenance nightmare.

in summary i dont think there is a solution to the gui conundrum. the developer is always on a hiding to nothing sadly....due to the many different user opinions.

there are things i would like in bb/rb but i keep on telling myself bb and rb are already large app exe's.

happy new year to all.

om

I'm not asking to change the GUI too what I think it should be, just showing how inconstant the program is between the "Minimal, Normal & DAW plugin modes are" and again this happens if you use more than 1 screen. What I think would be best is to have BiaB work the same between all modes and and other screens. It's really fixing (I do not call it bugs) some inconstancy's. Even the Guitar neck has problems, I did find that if selected as left hand, there is no problems. I'm Left handed, but I like the Right hand view better!

Just checking Realband out, I also find that some of what Realband has, should be in BiaB. For example I like the mixer in Realband better than BiaB's mixer.

Robert

Going between the "Minimal, Normal & DAW plugin modes" you see at the bottom they you do not get a scroll bar to move the program to see the hidden icons. If you watch the top of the video, you will see that only the normal layout will provide you with a drop down menu of the icons. the other two (Minimal & DAW) do not. Hence, you loose access to them.

Also notice where the menu open at!



Robert

Oh yes, I watched your video and I see the problem.

My two monitors are different sizes and resolutions, and a few software programs react badly if I drag a window from one to another. They don’t recognize the new screen’s size and screen dimension.

There are easy ways to do things with AutoHotkey, you can make GUIs to control any function of Biab with, tabs, menus, toolbars, image buttons etc.. or you can wait another 10 years for PG to do it.
Suggestion seem to come easy and are implemented easy in the BB Plugin/Plugin Standalone GUI than trying to get improvements in the old Delphi Biab GUI, see Back To The Drawing Board
https://stash.reaper.fm/v/46803/AHK-Scripts.zip

https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=791236

https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=463822&page=3

Thanks, Musocity!

I'm not expecting things to change quickly, due to what I might say. Just pointing out inconstant workings & quirks with BiaB.

My findings, come from working how to best setup BiaB for mt use. In other words, I try to work with what I got.


I've come from that DAW land myself.

Robert

Musocity,

I see from your video, that tab 5 shows some layouts!

Q 1) By layouts, does that mean that I can place the windows where I want them and save them as layouts to recall when I need them?

Robert

I love that Biab skin you have !

Love your comment, made me look deeper into the skin.
I see that there are many things I could change, only if it was theme-able like the DAW we use.

When I find the link where I got it, I will post it. The name is "Large Color on Dark Gray", you may find it on a search.

I also did some color changes, now I may do more.

Here is how sheet music looks now.



Thanks,

Robert

Yes you can make any layout you like.
I made that skin some years ago, it may have been under pipeline user name, may have to update it for the new buttons added since.



You set it in the script to open a window then resize and position it:

So....
If I use AutoHotkey, I could Display the BiaB Minimal and have AutoHotkey to setup the missing functions that are not there in there own toolbar?

P.S.: I actually like BiaB icons better, than the skin I'm using. Now I just need to darken the backgrounds some.

Robert

Yes with AutoHotkey you can set layouts with elements on different monitors. You can access any functions in any menu. The AutoHotkey GUI can be set to "Always On Top". You can set up hotkeys, menus, buttons for different functions.

Other AHK Scripts
Biab Playlist Song Player
Random Instrument & Drum Picker
Biab Progression Library Tool
Control Biab Functions with Midi Input

To go back to original request...
While the autokey is a fun DIY project, that could very well work for some,
I believe the UI / Workflow is a final frontier for BIAB. Making UI and tools fully modular with pallet (panel) snap options will not only make program more appealing to younger audience, but would serve everybody equally well, as people would be able to use templates or arrange and save workspace and tools any way they want.

For example, not only the size, position and color could play a role, but also "complexity". To those with modest tasks a theme with less options/buttons, to more advanced users - full feature UI.

I imagine, it's not an easy task. However, I think there is a way to test concept on a smaller scale. For example, expand on idea of Tabbed MTP. In 2025 some new tools were added to tabbed block. Which would be OK, if you - as a user would be able to detach each tool, use it as it's own entity or simply don't display it. Personally, I would very unlikely use Lyrics or Splitter tabs, so in ideal world, I would detach, close them and save workspace. Another example that I keep on suggesting is have an option to remove Radio Bar. I have never used it, nor I ever will, yet it's there, starring at me for years.

Looking at bigger picture, some existing tools, such as Settings at the bar, Shots/Holds/Rests etc. could be made in such "detachable" tab panels and a user would be able to assemble their own tab clusters, or use particular panel by itself. But again, the key is to make UI fully modular.

Hi Misha,

On some of my software I have the option to right click on the tool bar(s) and select or deselect what options I want to view in the tool bar(s). Would something like this work for you? I know it would work for me.

I thought Mario would say "give it a total re-write"
The Biab GUI has been the most talked about, complained about and changed.

Here's another idea:

Mario,
I am not too worried about myself and BIAB. It fused on me to the point of acceptance, but it took years. Just trying to suggest a universal approach on UI, so if it's done right, it could be put to rest, or edited only with minor changes.

Yes, right click as you describe would work in some places, like Radio Bar, but panel tool are a bit different. A behavior similar to this:

It seems to be an endless pursuit, always changing with this new function that new function, If after all those years it's still not right, maybe that's the point in design ! so each year you need to buy it because of new features rather the great content ! Will it EVER be right ? does it need to go full circle to keep the interest up ? Look at EZDrummer how long it went just the same before another version and they concentrated just on great content.
What year will Biab finally be right, 5, 10, 20 years from now ?
That's why I like to focus on the BB Plugin/Plugin Standalone and get an EZBiab that will just work like EZDrummer has for years n years without change, keep it simple without a million features being constantly built upon, you can use the current features in your DAW, without trying to make Biab into a half baked DAW. It would be the worst thing for the Plugin to go the same road of constantly adding features to sell it, sell the great content !

I am 90% happy with functions BIAB has to offer. I am not happy how little is invested in workflow and UI.

P.S. I am tired of BS "Don't make BIAB into a DAW". It had DAW features for years! My point is, make those same features a pleasure to use. UI + Workflow.

My thoughts are that there are missed opportunities to improve the user interface, reduce complexity, and enhance workflow.

I think it needs some more concept videos, as that bought about a big change last time.

I showed the Biab 2007 how it has moveable toolbars along with be able to choose the icons you want, why was that got rid of ?
I go to a lot of trouble to create up pics and videos with examples, like more tracks and automation lanes in Biab in a Tracks window, that's not stopping it becoming like a DAW, as this is what I heard users asking for. I don't try and stop anything be added to Biab, when I hear users asking I try and come up with ways it can be implemented. I support other users with whatever they want, I come up with scripts they can use until PG implement, or don't. It's good to have an alternative, isn't it ?
As I said I'm not interested in using Biab for myself. I remember asking PG to add users to the beta testing because they had a lot of good ideas, I didn't ask for anyone to be blocked or argue against their ideas. It's strange that many of them gave me a hard time without knowing the story.

imho the big opportunity with bb is the new tracks view. i can live with the gui.
but what bugs me compared to rb is i can do all sorts of editing of tracks in rb tracks view but not in bb tracks view. to do editing in bb i have to jump around too darn much within the app.

i really wish pg would do an experiment and ask for all users desires re gui's.
from my experience as a dev in industry turf battles occurred but what the hey at least if some commonality could be realised in the user community then they could at least say like we used to do to our users 'well heck you signed off on the gui'.

seriously when it comes to gui's...lol its like herding cats and the developer is on a hiding to nothing imho.
you wouldnt believe the battle royals we used to see in industry. no matter what we did one department or user group couldnt be satisfied.
so my recommendation to pg is to have a user 'town hall'.

happy new year to all.

om

"imho the big opportunity with bb is the new tracks view. i can live with the gui.
but what bugs me compared to rb is i can do all sorts of editing of tracks in rb tracks view but not in bb tracks view. to do editing in bb i have to jump around too darn much within the app."
That's why I said "without trying to make Biab into a half baked DAW"
RealTrack/Drum Edit in Track Mode
you want it all to work like a real DAW unless I would have to use my real DAW.
Biab is good as it uses non destructive editing for the most part compared to RealBand that is destructive editing and takes longer to generate up.

Mcity.

re destructive editing.
well ive found ways round like saveing previous versions before the edit.
in reaper its still destructive editing if i save the rpp right ? which is like rb seq. in reaps i still have to save previous versions if i want to go back right ?
there are little techniques one can use.

anyhoo back to gui.
heres my challenge to all bb users.
start a new thread with the topic...
'submit graphic layouts of your ideal bb gui'.
lets see if concensus can be reached.
it would be interesting to see the results.

happiness.

om

I have been beaten down on the "total re-write" issue. As we both know it will never happen so the issues that are being complained about today will the be the issues complained about tomorrow.

"in reaper its still destructive editing if i save the rpp right ? which is like rb seq. in reaps i still have to save previous versions if i want to go back right ?"
Reaper uses all the source files direct and keeps them intact when saving to rpp, there is no destruction, no matter how many edits you can go back to the original file, it's unharmed.
That's why a RealBand seq of 1.3gb of Biab RTs RDs is only a 2meg saved project file in Reaper (rpp). there is no creation of any new files. Why create copies to fill up the hard drive when you can use the files direct without harming them in any way ? Biab don't create any wav files when it generates, it saves all the wav instruction in a small frozen SGU 1.5meg not 1.3gig seq of wav files. I remember Noah used destructive editing on the ark.

"I have been beaten down on the "total re-write" issue."
I think the BB Plugin/Plugin Standalone will be the Biab total re-write, look at it now it can generate up midi styles instantly without creating any wav files at all, remember the old days of having to go make a cup of coffee while it generated and filled up the hard drive with wav's !

Mcity.

re standalone etc.

frankly it frustrates me because i lose sooo much functionality that i have in rb.
i see where your coming from but disc space is dirt cheap these days.
i would sooner have functionality if i had to choose.

really what this illustrates is akin to when i worked in tech...ie there are no free lunches re developing apps. each technical alternative has its plusses and minuses...in this case the bb plug in viz rb.
maybe i'm spoilt by rb tracks view.

(same with gui's...each solution comes with its plusses and minuses. )

but lets take the example of the bb plugin being used in reaper. how do i edit ? where do i edit ?
of course in reaps because this functionality of editing isnt in the plugin. so i got to flit around tween apps.
i'm tired doing that...did it for years and years.
why do that when rb tracks view is so potent a solution ?
also i can easily gen tracks in rb, edit till my hearts content and comp tracks to finals then just drag them into reaps if i wish... easy peasy.

i'm doing something rather complex in rb right now.
no way the bb plugin/standalone could be used.
because essentially the bb plugin or standalone is just a generator of tracks for daws. like a dumb waiter serving
up food in a diner. whereas in rb i have sooo many extra features to help creating songs and lets not forget a plethora of tracks compared to bb.

i get where your coming from re disc space as well as non destructive editing...all VERY good points.
which is the reason i suggested the use of flac techniques even more in rb if possible.

now that multiprocessing is used by rb re gens of session muso tracks things have got faster in rb and i really hope more extensive use of flac is used in rb.
i'm sure we both agree re flac.

as i said each tech solution has plusses and minuses...sigh. believe me if the bb plugin ticked all my boxes or the standalone i would use them.

please dont give me "flac(k)'...lol.

as always Mcity great respect to you and your
efforts to make things easier for users.

happy new year.

om

Not sure why conversation went into
RB, plugin, standalone, magical reaper, Track view, etc.

To me, this is no brainer. Making UI fully modular and configurable with workflow in mind the right way, learning from those companies whos users don't complain about UI - Problem (one of the most quoted problems in BIAB) solved.

The "guts" of the BIAB with exception 2-3 dozen of older bugs are pretty much solid. Program is fast and stable, especially considering complexity. Some bugs are related to workflow and could be addressed if they decide to tackle a well overdue UI upgrade.

Because we can LEARN from these to make things better without putting our head in the sand and ignoring. It's not a competition. I'm sure PG takes it all in, they would not be getting confused and hurt by it all. You have so many great ideas and I respect that but you need to do the same. Why not learn from "magical reaper" to make the PG products better, why has it got to be run down. would a wise man do that, keep doubling down when all the evidence is show ?
If PG have fallen for this con they must be very gullible.
I don't know what or if any DAW you use, if it has track templates and will load flac or wma non destructively I might be able to help.

You can't edit because you are using the old Noah version of Reaper with NO api scripting or Rewire.
I have requested Drag n Drop Track Templates (Reaper) (Easy Fix) this will allow Reaper users to drag and drop the non destructive wav/flac instruction from the Plugin or SavedTracks folder as Reaper track templates, this will work in the Noah version also allowing you to edit Biab tracks non destructively that you can't do with a consolidated wav file. (as long as it will handle flac if not you can use wav or any other format the Noah version will handle)
EDIT: if you tell me what file format RealTracks you are using and what hard drive path they are on I will send you a track template that you can drop into the old Reaper.

We all learn things, as Noel was appreciative from another thread:

Mcity.

(note... frankly i hardly use reaps any more due to recent rb upgrades..)
much respect and happiness Mcity.


Rusty (and all).

do you think the idea of pg users submitting graphics of what they would like the bb gui to look like has merit rusty ?
ie a picture is worth a thousand words etc etc.
if you do then i would suggest a thread be started titled along the lines...
'please post graphics of what gui design would keep you happy',
hopefully a user consensus could be reached.
it might also be usefull as input to pg to consider re future versions of bb ?

just an idea.

happiness to all.

om

"ie a picture is worth a thousand words etc etc." +1
I remember Rusty made a great pic of the BB Plugin that helped !
I use http://www.webpage-maker.com/ it's free to try and that is all you need, the try version creates a watermark when you save to html but you don't need to do that.

I think anyone who has used a modern DAW will not do multi-track editing in BIAB.

Therefore, BIAB multi-track editing cannot be the main breakthrough.

BIAB's advantage is the large number of real tracks. The search function should be strengthened. Let us quickly export some instruments that can be used and easily inserted and changed, and put them into other DAWs for use


Please allow me to be honest.
I now open BIAB less and less.

I come up with ideas for those that want to edit in Biab
I come up with ideas for those that want to edit in a DAW

yet I get hassled by both

This non destructive editing will fix RealBand and generate speed as it won't take all that time for bbw2 to render wav files for it, it could just use the flac/wav/wma direct:

Once the Plugin has the drag n drop track templates you will get the non destructive wav instructions editing:

Still working on my next post.

As seen in the post by musocity, BiaB did have, at one time have the ability to add / remove and even float toolbars.
I would like to see that feature return to BiaB.

Also I did find how to remove Icons from BiaB that I did not need, without loosing what the icon does, as the same function can be found in the top menu.

I will not provide where or exactly how to do this, You really need to be knowledgeable with how things work on a PC.

I just hope that PG brings this back.

PGmusic does not endorse this as well, anyone that decides to do this, is on their own and there it's their responsibility.



Robert

After some thought on my last post, and discussions with a forum user, I decided to give some information on how you can remove icons from BiaB.

Again, anyone that decides to do this, is on their own and there it's their responsibility.

1) Find the correct icon you want removed and DO NOT DELETE, just change the name by removing the "p" ex: xxxx.bmp to xxxx.bm
Doing it this way, will allow you to change things back if needed.

There are a few places where it needs to be done
2) If you have a custom skin then go to; (x is the BB installed location) "x:\bb\data\customskins" and skin name folder also "x:\bb\Data\Images\MainScreenButtons"

I would suggest you do only 1 icon first to see if that works, once you are comfortable doing it, then move on slowly until you are satisfied.

Robert

Problem #3

If you look at the Red circles, you will notice text is cut short, this also may occur in other areas of the program.



Robert

To me the Preferences window (Found at Options/Preferences), is just a mess. I say that because many of the buttons just open another windows.



I think that something like this (Showing below) would make it more understandable and whatever you select, can be shown in the same window.



If anyone has better solution, Please comment!

Robert

+!

The existing Prefernces window gives the impression of something of which PGM lost control many years ago.
The [Display] button and the [Colors] button seem to open the exact same window.
The [MIDI Driver] button diolog also includes a button to open the same windoe as the [Audio] button. I've never really understood why the MIDI page should open that.
Some dialogs remember their last position, some don't.
The [Practice] button, uniquely, closes the its parent window ... maybe that's logical if the next activity will be practice? Bizarrely, trying to open some of the practice tools from here is unreliable... when I asked about that some years ago, PGM said it was a resource conflict. I find the whole of this dialog very clutterd and, well, weird actually.

The left-hand pane you show, if PGM adopt it or similar, may well benefit from foldable sub-categories, e.g. on > and V symbols.

+1

robertw,
+1000 on settings menu suggestion.
The DAW that inspired the idea had it right from the start

Would you be so kind and start a new thread with your graphics on Settings, so it has a better visibility? It will be somewhat lost in this thread that got a bit polluted with unrelated blah.

Re GUI's.

some things to ponder.
(from a developers perspective.)

i discussed with my wife the whole issue of the biab gui.
to get an unbiased perspective. she has seen it many times.
she has significant experience not just as an end user manager
working with very large legacy applications (big exe's) serving
very very large user populations but also as a user tech.
(i was largely on the app development side.)

she made the following observations re legacy applications.

1..probably when bb was developed originally the developers
did the best they could given the confines of the available
development tools and operating system.
(same with systems she worked with years back.)
whereas today (eg some daws) a developer with modern development tools can make an app more flashy and user configureable.
eg i think it fair to say that the bb plugin/standalone are
flashier than the core bb app.
(i actually commend pg re the fact they didnt overdo the 'razamatazz' like some modern apps which, as i'm vision impaired i find can be an issue for me.)

2..when user groups clamoured much later for 'modernising' the legacy apps in terms of 'gui look' and user groups ability to configure the legacy app in a flexible way (ie their way) the issue often came down to 'budget'. for example more programmers would need to be hired and managed. but when users were asked to share the cost...
this became a major issue. often gui upgrades were not implemented therefore.
also there were many concerns by techs re disturbing the current code base which might introduce new testing and implementation issues and time to chase down.

3..now lets talk about money a bit more.
would bb users be willing to be charged a bit more in order that legacy bb be 'modernised' ? in terms of user flexible bb gui's ?
what about this idea.
keep the current bb price as is currently but if users want the new user configureable modernised gui bb there is an added charge ?
would this be acceptable ? or would users balk ?
thus pg could devote more programming resources.
(hire added coders).


a conundrum of course is some existing users are used to bb as it stands.
so they have to be taken into account also.
so this is a 'wrinkle'. as my wife found out some users preferred the 'old ways' to quote more than a few.
as one can see the developer is in a catch 22 as my wife found out.

given the above lets talk about the 'proverbial elephant in the room' like my wife encountered re legacy systems...'money'.
as often is the case in commercial life things come down often to money.

SO...i would be curious to know what percentage of pg users would be willing to pay more for a new 'modernised' flexible gui bb app.
and by how much eg ten percent increase ? more ?

there are some nice gui ideas in this thread i have to say.

(ps whats always amused me on the reaper forums is one user wants reaps to look like daw 'x' while another user daw 'y' and yet another user daw 'z'.
with the same kbd shortcuts they are used to. oh..the poor developer...)

happy new year to all.

om

@ Rustyspoon#.

If I start a new thread, it can also get side tracked!
How can we prevent that?

As long as it's brought back on track, that should be OK?, or should I just make a new thread for each problem I find, and suggestions I make?
I want to try and keep things on track regarding the GUI, which is showing the current state of Biab and how it could look. any new feature request will be on another post.


Robert

I like the standalone look as well.
PGM can save a lot of programming cost, by making 1 program that can do what currently 3 are doing (BiaB, Realband & Standalone DAW plugin).
Make BiaB a Very good program by combining Realband and the standalone DAW plugin into it.

Each program has things that others cannot do. Like "Realband & Standalone DAW plugin" can do 48k, BiaB cannot. Realband has a better looking mixer and control over tracks, Standalone DAW plugin so far has a better looking GUI.

As far as some want BiaB to stay looking the same way, I think of many of the OS's out there, they change and we have to get use to it.
And they, some times put something back when their is a lot of Hoop_La over the change.
Many of the users accept the changes and those that stay with the old, eventually come on board as to not be left behind.

Robert

justanoldmuso.
I must confess, I am having difficulty of deciphering manuscript above. However, I believe I have a basic understanding of where you going with this.

What is not clear to me is this: "from a developers perspective". WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT?
is it a observer developer? PGM developer? Refactoring developer? UI developer?
I am not a developer. But it's clear to me as bright day that BIAB UI and workflow are not made to standards and improving on that front is painfully slow compared to almost any other software.

Is it me? Or that is what is said about BIAB in nearly EVERY unbiased review? These days people don't like facts much, but I encourage you to do some reading. Wikipedia would be a good place to start. There is a section there specifically with constructive critique.

Good design is not about "flashiness". Good design is a combination of smooth, easy to grasp workflow, properly sorted menus structure, clear wording, supporting modern resolution and multi monitors and yes, flexible elements that do not look like 2005 software.

To PGM credit, there was some breakthrough progress made in 2024. Specifically: significant generational speed improvement utilizing multi CPU cores, MTP library and a few other tools made non-modal. But then, instead of doubling on workflow enhancements, progress for the most part stopped.

JAOM, If you are happey about how things are concerning GUI (and it seems you are), there is no need to lauwer for PGM. They are big boys and girls to stand up for themselves.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From AI perspective when asked about BIAB weaknesses. #2:

2. User Interface (UI) Complexity
Cluttered UI: The interface, while functional, can appear overwhelming and unintuitive to new users. It often requires a steep learning curve to understand all the available features and options, especially for beginners.
Outdated Design: Some aspects of the software's design look quite dated, which might be off-putting for users accustomed to sleek, modern DAWs like Logic, Ableton, or Cubase.

Robert,
I believe the mock you made for the main properties deserves a separate topic because it is a bit different from "Make BiaB more GUI configurable".

Secondly, some folks are happy with main UI, but might support main preference menu overhaul. I've seem some threads revived from years ago. For example, if PGM would give some long overdue love to main UI by the end of the year, second topic on "preferences" would still be relevant.

Concept Main UI



the UI would have the (Red Boxes), able to take toolbars and place wherever you want and if more than 1, it would have tabs to select the group you want.
The Green Square is for what is selected from the left side.




Robert

robertw

you make good points re combining features of bb/plugin/rb.
ive said for a long time it must be confuseing for example for new users that for example rb and bb are different in various ways as youve found out.

lets take bb new tracks view as one example.

i really like that pg did the new tracks view...
however for a new user it possibly is difficult to understand why in rb the rb tracks view not only 'looks different' from bb but also has lots of editing features built in that arent in bb tracks view.
and there are many many other differences tween not just bb and rb but also re the bb plugin...the latter which ive tried to love but keep on going back to rb for many reasons.

what i sense from an overview perspective is there are various user groups within the pg user community spanning the world that pg are trying to make happy...follow my logic please...

1..some want full steam ahead re the plugin to feed their daws.
ie like a food waiter in a restaurant.
2..some want the fab new bb tracks view and bb to have more daw features.
3..some dont want more daw features in bb.
4..some want bb to stay the same because they really dont to learn a new way of doing things.
for example maybe they dont want bb mixer to look like the rb one.
and there are many other viewpoints...not just re the gui.

the problem from a developers perspective is how to keep everybody happy takeing into account all the diverse opinions in the user base.
a salient example might be for those users that want bb to be more daw like have a 'turn these features on' feature and for those users who dont want more daw like features an option to 'turn off those features'.

in summary if pg try to keep all the diverse users happy it could turn into a maintenance nightmare. (been there done that.).
lets not forget pg also offers their apps in different languages...a further complication. some music apps dont have this added complication...
they offer one language only....it simplifies things.

i feel frankly there are no perfect solutions...includeing gui's.
lets also remember that only a fraction of pg's world user base probably are on these forums regularly. thus a possibility is the 'silent ones' might not agree with anything agreed on these forums between regular forum users.
we had the same problem in industry...even though we got very active powerfull user groups to agree and sign off on new features (after many battle royals and politicking...lol.)..then we had to contend with unhappiness from user groups not involved in design of new features. the 'silent ones' sometimes didnt like the new way of doing things...so more use squabbles occurred.

robertw...great ideas BUT what is the possibility that all pg users would actually be happy with integration of the various pg apps (bb/rb/plugin etc)....or would there be great complaining ?? therein lies the rub.
one reason i like your idea is that i'm tired of flitting tween various music apps (eg for many years flitting tween bb AND rb AND reaper.).
(robertw...the reason i like rb tracks view is because i can accomplish so much with it without flitting to another app....which drives me nuts as i spend lots of time tranferring tracks between the 3 apps.).

Rusty.

maybe you think i'm a 'suck up'...lol. but this isnt true..all i'm trying to make people aware of is a developers perspective and how very difficult it is for a developer to keep a user base all over the world happy. thats all.
a good way to see if i'm correct in my observations re user groups is i'll throw out a challenge...
have a core group of pg users come up with a groovy new gui philosophy and approach the core group is happy with.
now invite comments from anyone who wants to chime in.
and see if concensus can be reached with the wider pg user community.
honestly Rusty i'm not trying to be a pain in the proverbial...
its just its SOOO difficult to achieve user concensus often.
its the old 'not invented here' syndrome.

to be fair to pg also in some ways it makes sense re how things are currently ie seperately bb and the plugin and rb....
rather than one 'massive' app.
in industry we often found compartmenting apps easier to deal with.

just my 2 cents.

om

JOM,

You are correct on many points

1) maybe you think i'm a 'suck up'...lol. but this isnt true..all i'm trying to make people aware of is a developers perspective and how very difficult it is for a developer to keep a user base all over the world happy. thats all. No one can make everyone happy, and that should not stop change.

2) a good way to see if i'm correct in my observations re user groups is i'll throw out a challenge...
have a core group of pg users come up with a groovy new gui philosophy and approach the core group is happy with.
now invite comments from anyone who wants to chime in. and see if consensus can be reached with the wider pg user community. There will always be someone coming out of the wood work to complain.

3) in industry we often found compartmenting apps easier to deal with. PGM could make BiaB as the main app with Realband features with the Standalone modern look(dark mode but good contrast for people that have bad eye sight). and as you said, make a switch for users to use the new Biab or not. As for size, Well BiaB is already BIG


Robert

BiaB, may look different, if given a new GUI, if the same Icons are used and not changed, There would be very little o relearn. but allow users to switch them out. I can be done as some of my images already show


Robert

Robert,
as you might be already aware, most people use BIAB+DAW combination. A few years ago, I suggested same idea. Combine BIAB +RB... Unlikely to happen. The main issue, people who use RB are way too forgiving, or they are too deep in it. Because there were no hard demands, and the fact that it came as a complementary software, it wasn't developed aggressively when needed. Starting about 10+ years ago. As a result, it is what it is. Given democracy of Windows systems, it will likely stay "alive" for years to come, but personally I have not seen any major developments of that software since I started using BIAB. I would open RB every year, spend 30-40 minutes trying to like it, and close it till next.

BIAB is the main software across the board. (PC or Mac users). In 2024 Track view was introduced in BIAB...
All that needs to be done is make those tracks record audio / MIDI properly. Up to standard. As most audio software do. Just finish it the right way! Ironically, most (if not all) functions are in place. With 2 dozen available tracks, BIAB could become a "To-Go" all in one software for singer/songwriter that would need 2-12 tracks for their instruments or vocals. If one needs more features, there are many full fledge DAWs out there, free and/or inexpensive.

JAOM
"i'll throw out a challenge...
have a core group of pg users come up with a groovy new gui philosophy..."

It seems you didn't read what I said about UI. Good design is closely tied to workflow. It has little to do with "grooviness". Often times less is more.

Here is an eye opener:
Has it occurred to you that if PGM had the invested more in modernizing outdated UI + workflow design and minimizing redundancy, it would very likely have a much bigger and diverse "Core Group", and odds are we would not have this conversation. Judging from combination of user requests and outcries from this forum and what "internets" say, this makes perfect sense to me.

@ justanoldmuso

1..some want full steam ahead re the plugin to feed their daws.
ie like a food waiter in a restaurant.
Then don't stop with it's development, I want the plugin as well!

2..some want the fab new bb tracks view and bb to have more daw features.
I want it a little, but I do not want to become a DAW!

3..some dont want more daw features in bb.
Same answer as #3

4..some want bb to stay the same because they really dont to learn a new way of doing things.
for example maybe they dont want bb mixer to look like the rb one.
and there are many other viewpoints...not just re the gui.
What I'm asking for and showing, is for making it easier to use, not new features, but to only rearrange things to work better. They should use the icons they are currently using, so that users will still feel comfortable with the program and have little learning.

Do not get me wrong I see where you are coming from.
I don't think points; 1-4 should prevent PGM from developing BiaB with a better GUI.
Their ca$h cow is in the "*PAK's they sell" and even that could have some changes, Like let existing users pick and choose, their own package. Offer the ability for users to what Audiophile packs they want, like MegaPak Audiophile, etc....

Heck, many of us may not even be alive, by the time it gets here or BiaB might not be around. Right now they are the only ones that do what they do.
Maybe not for long, as the old program "Jammer" was bought by a company and working on updating it. competition is around the corner!


Robert

with respect much as various people might complain about various aspects of bb lets also remember the postives.

ie the thousands and thousands of songs done over the years by users all over the world.
the user showcase being just a sampling of the huge number of songs done with bb....not forgetting all the pleasure people have derived from bb etc each year.

when i get frustrated sometimes with a gui aspect or a workaround i remind myself that over the years bb (and rb ) have given me the tools to take ideas from my brainbox and get a slew of songs done.
i also remind myself that for a paltry under 100 bucks purchase of the entry level pak a muso is given a tool set that ive never seen in another music app.
lets remember that some music software alone can cost hundreds of dollars....


i'm interested to see what you all come up with re any new gui approach.

ps i'm surprised as an ex developer that nobody has said what extra amount they might consider paying for their favorite pak if all outstanding user concerns/issues were to be addressed includeing the gui aspects.
in the end like ones daily cost of living it all comes down to money.
so what do people on this thread think would be an equitable amount ?

pps Robert re competition for bb...we shall see what the future brings.
frankly if what pg does were trivial at the technical level,,,imho we should have seen competitors years before 2025.
imho pg has too much of a lead in this market space....and i'm sure if they were challenged at some point, as one sees in various markets the market leader always responds to competition.
the tech market leader isnt going to stand idly by and lose market share.
its just biz 101 or mba 101...lol.
fyi Robert...years back i contemplated doing an advanced music app because not only was i frustrated with market offerings but also because i knew working in tech
some brilliant developers who also were interested in music apps...as often it was their hobby. however once i drilled down into the tech implementaion details i decided not to proceed. this stuff isnt trivial imho.


happiness to all and interesting exchange of views.

om

Yes the old version I showed was more customizable. The elements should be able to be moved around and scalable to give different layouts as well as being able to remove icons so uses can create their own skin. Have custom menus to add whatever functions you like. This is all coming back to me again, as I remember posting animation of Adobe Audition skins/layouts and how easy it was.
There are also other DAW's that can have any skin from another DAW as well as behaviors.
IF it's going to be changed again allow it to be fully customizable (that means it can't be sold down the track with a different hard wired theme).
All this is so much easier to do with the JUCE BB Plugin and a lot better quality GUI, when it's programmed for Win it's also programmed for Mac at the same time not a half year later.
I think you need to take into account the future and the best way to make it sustainable.
A lot of us here are old users, you need to think about catering for new users down the track.

BIAB's GUI
band in a box GUI

"imho pg has too much of a lead in this market space...."

What? Seen what AI can do? Give it another year.

I like tinkering with software, but a good number of people just want to get from point A >B fastest possible way and be done.

Its our job, dedicated users to ring alarm bells, not hiding under our little comforts and excuses of past victories and possible "workarounds" . Giving constructive suggestions, not picking nose to find reasons to counter conversation. That is of course if we care about the future of BIAB=New members.

I am not preaching apocalypse, but saying - Train is coming, and if you have your bags lying in different benches on the station, better hurry...it will not wait.

Well said! And absolutely true!