PG Music Home Forums General Discussion Beginners Forum A few noob questions on BIAB.

Frankly I think that this is a great thread. A user has asked questions and offered reasonable suggestions as to how the program might be improved. I'm definitely in favor of that approach rather than saying "It's done that way because it was always done that way".

I think any program developer needs to continually look for ideas if 'that way' could be improved. Such a vision on continual improvements has meant that we don't still have Netscape as a browser and Word-Perfect as a word processor (OK, and DOS and an O/S).

It really amazes me how folks who can write quite well don't seem to understand basic English. Reread what I wrote earlier in this thread. Show me where I said "It's done that way because it was always done that way" or even implied that. Here's a very basic question to answer:

What is Band in a Box and what's it's purpose?

Here's another one for Mike:

Did you read what Peter wrote about 64 bit?

I guess if there's no 64 bit version coming that means "It's done that way because it was always done that way" right? No underlying reasons WHY things are done that way?

Bob

Bob,

I loved some of those tips you had on chord entry. As a songwriter, it is what I do all day. Can you point me to any links, manuals, anything else you might have along the lines of the solid comments you made about chord entry.

I have put together a word document with many of the shortcuts and nomenclatures you need to know in BIAB but I am always look for more if you have stuff YOU really love and use. Feel free to PM me if you want to email. I am building my library. Thanks for anything you have.

On Bob's posts:

I have noticed that from time to time there tend to be a lot of posts that make grand insinuations that PG Music does not care about improving products and is stuck in the past. Quite frankly, some of the posts sound asinine and come from people who have never posted a tune. Yes, yes, we know maybe you are writing but just have not posted. But if you are writing, can't you at least post one so we can get an idea of what you are doing with the program? We are all trying to learn. How are we supposed to understand what is bugging you so much if you never used the tools to write and then post a song so we can see why and how the program is letting you down so much? It is like saying "I am sitting here on my butt staring at the screen and I would write a great song if only BIAB had an easier way for me to add a diminished 7th chord, although I never really use them anyway."

If someone comes out with a strand of illogical sentences that really do not make sense, with a strident and condemning tone (Oh when oh when will PG Music ever get its act together!!!) is Bob not allowed to use the exact same tone in rebutting the complaint?

Every single day of my life I spend many hours in front of mixing board counting my lucky stars that I have real track possibilities to fill in a certain mix, and am in awe of certain capabilities that BIAB brings, though I know there is room for improvement, of course there is.

But many (not all, but many) of the complaints that have been offered so far are pretty vague and nebulous--and it is not how programmers work.

It has been my experience that any time I make a suggestion to PG Music, they receive it warmly and add it to their list if it makes any sense at all. Even if it does not make complete sense, they receive it warmly and try and see if they can translate the suggestion to something they might actually be able to do. I remember calling Kent about a glitchy problem with Real Track exports in Band in a Box 2018 earlier this year and they got right on it and it was fixed by the end of the week. That is pretty lightning fast in the programming world. They seem to be pretty responsive people to me.

So my advice is this:

If the normal routes of communication--emailing PG, adding things to wish lists, even calling PG does not work, then call up Peter Gannon himself, ask for a job, tell him you know better than them, beef up your programming skills, go to Canada and write some code.

Maybe then by 2025 you will be able to produce a song: or not.

David / Bob.

I you do not like critique or some opinions, you do not have to follow the threads you find not to your tastes. Thats all. You do not see issues, great for you. Nobody is making you do things you do not want to do, right?

Some of us have different opinions on things.

P.S. David, if Peter Gannon, trully wanted tec with proper skills to modernise BIAB, coherent with the line of 2018 software, he would have no problem of finding right people in Canada or elsewhere.

Sure, I can say the moon is made out of cheese, but that doesn't mean it is.

Doesn't hurt. Let the cheese moon rise! Whatever tickles your pickle David.

With RapidComposer you can create the chord track bit by bit with keyboard input then when you have it how you like import into BB. A lot of musicians don't know what chord they are playing so keyboard input is a good idea.
I just try to find workarounds to give the user more options.
I gave a guitarist a Roland guitar pickup to know the chords she's playing.
RapidComposer Exports the Chords as MIDI markers because I ask them to add that same with MusicLab RealGuitar I ask them, I have been asking PG for 10 years.
It just makes it easy to get chords from one app to the other.
To get chord midi markers in midi from BB I have to export as MusicXML import that to Reaper then Reaper will write the midi chord marker from the chords in the MusicXML.
If I export MusicXML chords from Reaper everything reads it but BB.

And RapidComposer running as a VSTi in BB refitting midi riffs with keyswitches from Ample Riffer.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/k7q8ikg7e3pgx0g/Biab-RC-Ample-Bass.mp4?dl=0

Thanks for the explanation Pipeline. That makes sense and I see where RapidComposer would have its uses to some musicians.

To simply fill in the BIAB Chord Sheet, regardless if you know the chords or not, if you can play a melody or chord progression that sounds good to you, play it, save it to a midi file and import the midi and BIAB will automatically decode the chords and populate the chord chart in seconds. That will bypass the issue of BIAB not reading part markers. Don't you think that's very straight forward and a feature of BIAB rather than a work around? You can also accomplish a populated chord chart using audio and the Audio Chord Wizard which would bypass the midi conversion and the cost of the Roland guitar pickup and setup. RapidComposer does appear to be ideal outside of BIAB to create some complex pieces in step fashion very quickly. I appreciate you taking time to provide the explanation and gifs. Very helpful.

The only problem with midi chord output/input is is correcting the non basic chords it picks up wrong, there are so many errors in the BB Chord Output midi as well so you spend a lot of time correcting, these are just a recent couple, in RC i can go and add/edit any chord easily but BB you have to hope and wait.

Pipeline,
Thank you for taking time and posting videos. I have tried Rapid Composer some months ago. It is interesting program indeed. It has some very nice theory based power features, but for some reason it felt a bit "transitional" to me. Not in the sense that it lacked features, quite opposite I would prefer it to be simpler, just sort of basic "chord scratchpad" with some assistance.

Scales, inversions, slash chords, circle of fifth, suggestions and basic timeline, just so you can enter 3+ chords and just hear it on the fly and possibility of entering chords from controller directly.
I would stop it here. I know Rapid composer is able to do those things, but it is a bit obscure and not in one place. And you are right about BIAB translating chords wrong from other virtual controllers...

There is also a "thing" called Captain Chords 2.0, but you have to be connected to "their" database and I do not feel happy about it, but the prog. does look very interesting.

I guess I am looking for a software that will hit the sweetspot for my uses. I do not hibernate waiting for it, life goes on One such "sweetspot" program for me is vArranger. Together with BIAB they kick @ss, but on the dark side, they both badly need some modernization/development enema.

Huh? Yes, I wrote that quoted text, so I presume the response is directed at me, but where did I name any specific person to have said anything? I didn't see any name in anything I typed. I simply made a generalist statement.

I wrote, and I quote verbatim: "I'm definitely in favor of that approach rather than saying "It's done that way because it was always done that way"."

I was looking to how systems could / should always undergo continual improvement. I understand basic English. I never implied anything to anyone in particular. I made a generalist statement.

Maybe some forum members have become a little too edgy. Maybe feeling that they need to take charge of deciding how things have to be be done.

I tried to be constructive. I was being objective rather than subjective. I've worked as hard as the best here to get improvements made. My legacy is testament to that.

I'm disappointed with being unnecessarily jumped on. I certainly didn't deserve that response.

I'm the one being jumped on here so of course I thought that statement was directed at me. Sorry for misunderstanding you. You're one of my favorite people here, you do a lot to help out.

Now, let's comment about what Pipeline just wrote about Biab having issues with chord detection.

Mike and Pipeline again the implication in those comments imply this is a problem with Biab, If that's not what you meant to imply, then sorry again. This is a problem with forums, nobody is face to face. All these little perceived slights and personal judgements get resolved instantly face to face but when it's in writing on a forum all kinds of bad stuff can happen.

Anyway, we're talking about midi right now. Chords are not part of the midi standard. There is zero chord information in a midi file at all. Biab is actually one of the first programs if not the very first to offer ANY kind of midi chord detection. I alluded to that earlier in this thread but didn't expand on it.

Basically how this works is Biab starts by looking at the key sig of the file. Now, that alone can be a huge problem because it's very common for a user to forget to to enter the key sig, the song is just using the default key of C. If it's supposed to be E, that alone will mess up the chord detection. If you're trying to use a downloaded midi file you found on the internet and you're trying to figure out the chords and the key sig is wrong well, that ain't Biab's fault. The first thing a user has to do is correct the key sig before you try do anything with a midi file.

Assuming the key sig is correct the next thing it looks at is the notes displayed on the major beats of the song. If it's in 4/4 and the bass is simple on 1 and 3 of the beat then Biab looks at that and the key sig and decides what the basic chord is by assuming that bass note is the root. Then if it sees a 3rd and dominant 7th in the scale of the root it will display a E7 as the chord if the key sig is E.

BUT what if on that exact beat the chord is supposed to be the E7 but the melody note is a C? Now you and I and any other musician will assume that's just a passing tone for a singer or lead instrument but Biab doesn't know that, it's just an AI program not a mind reader. What does it see as notes on that beat? It sees E, G#, B, D AND C. It's likely to display an E7+ or augmented and that will cause you to have to correct the chord.

Nothing to be done about that because again, there are NO midi instructions to tell the program the chord is just a plain old E7. What you can do is to not have Biab use all the tracks for chord detection, try using just the bass and guitar or keys tracks and leave out the melody track but even then guitar and piano can easily be playing some passing notes too on one of the major beats so again Biab takes all the notes and tries to come up with a chord name for them.

This stuff isn't perfect and chord information is one of many things people have been hoping for in the upcoming new midi standard that's being developed right now.

Bob

Good explanation, Bob. I wish they would standardize the implementation of Music XML and that would solve these things too.

Thanks and wait there's more!

I explained a simple basic song in E. What about a complex song with lots of upper extensions like 7b5, sharp 9, 13, sharp 11's etc? And lots of bass harmony notes too.

Songs like that can be a total mess if you're depending on chord detection. To me and maybe there is a better way, don't know but to me if you're working with songs like that you need to have enough musical chops to understand some theory. You understand what a 3-6-2-5 turnaround is and which of those is major and which is minor for example.

Let me stop right here for a sec and clarify something. Mike and Pipeline do you understand that stuff or are you looking for a shortcut for someone who really doesn't understand any theory? They've learned by ear and don't know what they're playing they just know it sounds good. That would change this discussion a lot. Biab works best if a user has some technical understanding of music.

To continue, I don't see how using another program to handle that then paste it in Biab is any faster than simply typing in those changes into the chord grid. Like my little chart earlier you type hit enter, type hit enter and so on. That's it. If you wind up with an arrangement that sounds too complex then that's why Biab has the "Natural Arrangement" button, hit that and it cleans it up.

Even though the chord detection can be off and WAY off in some cases it's still far from useless. Why? Because you still have a complete song laid out in front of you. If it's 48 bars the 48 bars are all there, you're not starting from scratch on bar 1 and building it out. Your song is being displayed as a complete song and all you have to do is correct some of the chords. That's got to be faster than doing what you guys are talking about IF you understand some basic things.

Bob

If BB has to be used the way Bob says and can't be improved and it's just how it is then I give up as I'm just a bit worn out from trying to improve BB as I gave up with RB as it took it's toll on me, maybe it's what others have said "you're flogging a dead horse" ! maybe I need a new horse or a new dog that can learn tricks.

I think of the Audio Chord Wizard as being similar in user functionality and technical understanding to a DSLR Camera. It's a very complex but versitile device and allows a novice user with limited to no technical knowledge to take great pictures right out of the box using auto mode. They don't have a clue to how it happened, but they're only interested in the end result and accept a percentage of waste pictures as a cost of convenience.

The same camera in the hands of an expert is where the magic happens. They abandon auto and have the technical skills and experience to make the same camera do things a novice most times has no idea the camera could even do such a complex picture.

The ACW works similarly. Load a song, press F8 and hope for the best. Sometimes they get great results but often not so good.

It's a great tool if it's worth the time to learn how to manually manipulate it and learn all the features. As a hobbyist and casual user, it's likely easier to be like the novice photographer. Making it easier doesn't necessarily improve it. Mastering it does...

Quote of the year.

Bob

Oh knights, the protectors of honor,
the saviors of women and youth.
your armor, as shiny as mirror,
your voice is authentic and smooth

You walk through the fields and the valleys
Inspecting the lands of your king
You haughtily shushing at gypsies
Who dance by the fire and sing.

You shiver from scenes that's unholy
And twitch from the words of untruth.
You catch cannonballs like a goalie
Outsmarting the snakes like mongoose.

The castle stands tall on horizon
Its turrets are touching bird's wings
And nobody knows if the master is able
To polish his crown from kinks.

Lay down your sword tired soldier
And drink sacred goblet of wine.
The world is not older nor younger
It's yours, as much, as it's mine.

Sure if there was a viable competitor but there isn't. Biab stands alone. I don't know what to tell you other than just use it and be happy. And keep posting suggestions in the Wishlist and hope for the best.

Big things can happen. Remember the tempo sync issue with Real Band? I was probably the biggest voice pushing for that for over 10 years and I finally stopped talking about it because it seemed a waste of time but suddenly a few years ago...Voila! Ralph at Rayzoon (Jamstix) got in touch with Peter and they discovered it was a fairly simple fix in RB's VST implementation and it was fixed. You can now use Jamstix and other drum VSTi's that can create their own drum parts. That was one the biggest bug fixes in PG's history.

But in spite of my frustration with that issue I never gave a thought to giving up on these programs. They're way too cool.

Bob

I'm always excited when I find out Peter Gannon or others from PG Music are attending NAMM or Musikmesse. One of the best things about trade shows is the opportunity to interact with your peers. Chance and by design meetings allow conversations that otherwise might never occur. Also, it doesn't hurt for PG Music to raise awareness of the programs' capabilities.

Some of the videos released showing trade show product demonstrations are flat out awesome!