PG Music Home Forums FAQ and Knowledge Base Band-in-a-Box DAW Plugin for Windows FAQ Things needed to make the plugin functional.

Things needed to make the plugin functional.

While we understand that the plugin is not supposed to have all the functionality of the main program, it needs to be able to render tracks to work well with live recorded and user made tracks in the DAW. It also needs to be able to open and play files made in BiaB and follow the basic instructions in those song files.

The following are known and confirmed issues not working with the current plugin:

Center Panned, Dry, (no EQ or FX). These are important for rendering to a DAW, as they allow the user to use tools in the DAW for processing rather than having them pre processed. A must have!

The 300 new MIDI RCs for Real Drums (Studio one, Cakewalk, and Ableton live not working) they worked last year when there were only 20 but are broken now. Also, a must have to allow much wanted multi-track drums.

Song Fold/Unfold bug. If a song is generated while the chord sheet is folded. It will generate all choruses. If you drag tracks to the DAW, play the song in the DAW then make any changes to the song, it will only generate the 1st chorus. Note: in the info bar (black area with blue lettering) if the chorus count looks like 1/2 or 1/3 etc generation of all choruses fail. If you hit the red stop button on the plugin or manually reset the count it will work.

Embedded Tempo, many DAWs can stretch the audio to follow a live tempo but the audio file must have embedded tempo first. MIDI tracks always have the tempo embedded.  If you want to have the plugin work with a live recording or want to add tempo changes in your DAW, the file needs embedded tempo.

Style changes in the Bar settings. This is a cool feature to add texture to the song. It only works when a file is brought from BiaB, not one created in the plugin.

The new in 2020 Harmony's or thickening this doesn’t work properly

Medley Changes are not working properly in the plugin.

Song Settings 2-4 Bar Ending only works with 4 bars ending.

RDs do not re-generate when generated on the Style page.

Direct Input versions of RTs are very important allowing a user to use amp sims to create the sound desired but are not working.

1/8 push, 1/16 push are still not working

This plugin can be a real power tool for DAW users. PGM needs to allot the resources to complete it at least this far for now not letting a second development cycle slip by with these vital issues unresolved. Please if you also feel that these issues need attention please add your voice. If PGM could spend some time and solve these issue we would have a solid working plugin.

Sure there are other requests, like GUI  and solo/mute/etc, however these do currently work as they are. Maybe there are better or more intuitive ways but we all probably agree basic function is vital to attract new users and enhance our experience. Since we know we are up against the Mac development cycle let’s ask for function first. If you see a rendering feature that was missing or still doesn’t work for Windows add it to the list.

Regards Rob.

Very well stated. Hopefully the next 50 new improvements will be on the VSTi. One can hope.

If that is the case we will not see these "improvements"
until 2021.

Only the last two DT direct and pushes are improvements.

The rest are bugs. PGM has already released the feature and it does not work Properly

In the past 2.5 months, today back to Dec 1, 2019 when the V2 of the VST was launched, there have been 34 individual threads posted in this forum subsection. This resulted in 165 separate comments across all threads and 6, 628 views. I can't tell you exactly what percentage of all those metrics is made up of you, me, and pipeline with a recent surge by Masi and Brian but I would guess it would be substantial. My point?

We are not a significant enough demographic to change the course. The current version of the VST is working as intended and functioning enough for us to get by even with the limitations. New features will be added in V3 of the VST with pay-for-release in Dec 2020 and those will fix bugs and introduce new ones. At that time, God willing, we will all still be here. And if the year is good to us, as I hope it will be, we will be plucking down our CC for the next version.

That said, your points are well understood and well appreciated - you and pipeline are fighting the good fight. I do wish it would be different. I wish PGM was more capable and more responsive to the input and suggestions of their more vocal members in the forum. I wish they would have a more frequent revision cycle which addressed bug reports and feature requests. For their sake as well as ours, I wish the BIAB code was more up to day to permit the kind of flexibility needed to accomplish these wishes. I wish there were no Mac OS so programming resources didn't need to spend time on a niche market.

But to be honest I really wish above all else, that I had more musical talent so I did not need this program so much to make my music.

Maybe I should take some of this stuff over the the wishing forum, the black hole that it is.

<< all comments made with a sly smile and tongue in cheek >>

These are all reasonable fix requests and would go a long way toward making the plugin top notch. I've started working with the plugin more lately, but hesitate to fully embrace it for some of these needed fixed. Adar has done wonders with the plugin, but these fixes would really put it over the top.

All points have been really well put, with fairness for all parties involved.

I too wish that more attention was directed towards resolving well known issues.

I appreciate all who have added to this post. I hope many more will stop by and add their voice to this cause. I also want to say that I do not intend to bash Peter, PGM or anyone involved. This request is with the utmost respect for the company, and its product line. However, this product started two cycles ago, and many issues were never solved the first year. Some of this is understandable. All but two of the fix request here, are based in features offered this year, which all of us paid to upgrade for. It is only right that these bugs are fixed in this cycle. It is really not asking to much.

This what I am asking for, only what is fair. I would like to add that I ask this not in anger, frustration, or contentiousness . But respectfully and kindly. I have been a loyal user, and fan of the company. I will continue to be. Please handle theses issue and start next year fresh.

In all fairness: I asked PG probably already way back and just after in Atari days, when BIAB was still MIDI only, if they could incorporate a slave MidiClock, MTC or SMPTE mode for BIAB.
Never understood why they did not do just that.

I still think this VST makes the whole slaving thing far too complicated. Quite a thing to get used to BIAB and it's quirky interface and all those 'hidden' submenu-ed and sometimes quite useful functions. But you learn to live with that.

I've been trying to get things done with this VST, but still couldn't find an easy going & practical way of working with it.
A simple tempo or bar-count or key change, and off you go rendering the lot a gain, and so much slower compared to BIAB it seems. Call it the VST blues? This VST still feels like it's unfinished business. Sorry PG.

Thanks, Rob, for bringing these core rendering issues to light.

BiaB RTs, RDs, and RCs are the best-kept secret from the DAW world. “Professional Studio Musician playing your song's tracks!”

The DAW market is expected to reach $16 Billion by 2026. Hopefully, PGM sees the plugin as a potential “Game Changer” gateway product to this massive DAW market.

The plugin as a gateway offers the crème de la crème of BiaB “Rendered Pros” with a very low learning curve compared to a 675+ page manual.

However, this new DAW generation expects it to be intuitive, and simply work as advertised.

Because the plugin is at its core a "Front end to BiaB’s rendering engine", why would anyone bother to use it if it cannot match the core rendering capabilities of BiaB?

I am sure PGM is aware of these dozen rendering issues, but it is frustrating to both wait 15 months for them to be addressed and hold off recommending it to the world.

With all due respect I disagree. There are enough bugs present, so I wouldn't recommend it to anyone who is not a very loyal customer who is willing to accept glitches and hiccups.

There will never be any software without any bugs. There are just too many for the limited features set of the plugin.

Masi

I do not use the plugin at and haven't touch BIAB for a while. I've been mainly making my own tracks in Logic with my virtual instruments.

Although I agree that solo and mute buttons would be more obvious, the played selected process is not bad https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nq5b3YKgAic

Thanks Jeff, that is helpful. I also found that highlighting one holding shift allows you to choose several tracks in a row as you showed in the video. Holding control and clicking tracks allows you to choose several and skip tracks.

I tried plugin on a few occasions...
However, I will still use BIAB 99% of the time.

If a plugin is a "way" to rewrite BIAB, perhaps it is a good start. However with so many things that are missing that are in BIAB, I hardly find a use for it.

Ideally, I would want a single platform. For example like Halion Sonic (or Kontakt) You can use it as a standalone or as VST with almost identical interface and functions. With PG plugin it is another game that I have to learn. I am keeping an eye on it, but for now I still feel it is in very early stage. Maybe it is a good idea to slow down new features flow and focus on strengthening software, giving more time to consider suggestions and for beta users to test it thoroughly?

One more paragraph

I was very frustrated when I tried BIAB for the first time. One forum member suggested that I should approach it with "open mind". I am glad I did. Now, I want to give same advise to PG & staff. Talk to somebody who is ace in music software programming with "open mind". See what they have to say... especially what they would prioritize/focus on if it was their fish to fry. (I am talking about design+functions, not RT/RD/Midi content here)

Good thoughts RS, BiaB is a powerful program that most folks never scratch the surface of what it can do. The plugin however is and never was a rewrite of BiaB. It is a way to create BiaB type tracks inside a DAW. Allowing the DAW user to add instruments to an existing song or start a song track bed from scratch. As it sits now it can do that, but there are a few basic features that are not working properly. Once these are repaired it should be a nice tool in the box.

We should never expect it to replace BiaB, which is far too deep with features to try to put in a VST plugin. The best way to view the plugin is to imagine a simplified BiaB lite.

When a DAW users comes to the plugin for the first time the interface should be a no brainer to use. Look how much conversation and confusion there has been with playing syncing soloing muting. I should not have to nag every day since it's release. It was said at the beginning to give it it's own unique name, like Session Tracks Pro etc... like you have PowerTracks, RealBand, Band in a Box.
No one should have to come on the forum and ask how do I sync a track, how do I solo a track, how do I mute a track. It was the same thinking when RealBand was made, there was one blue solo button that you enabled then go and select tracks with Ctrl+ left click, then if you clicked on the chord sheet to play they would all become unselected. It is still the same thinking applied to the Plugin.

Like with ChordPotion how many users are asking how do I mute/solo tracks, where is the Big logo ?


Or with Ezdrummer or Superior Drummer, how do I get it to follow the Host, how do I solo/mute tracks, why is the Logo so big ?

Pipes, your point is valid. I agree that there needs to be some changes to the GUI regarding solo etc. maybe this can happen. Hopefully in the new version 3.0, maybe even before. What I am trying to focus on is feature advertised during the release cycle that do not work, or are core to proper function. Things like Real Charts for RDs, Tempo embedded, ability to render dry, flat centered track that the user can pan, FX, match up to either live or midi tracks. Harmonies and thickening were advertised as new features. All the above and a few more were why many bought the upgrade. I know that the PGM team want to fix all this, but there is limited time in each cycle. So I am asking for actual bugs and broken features be repaired before the cycle is over. Kind of a “give us what you promised” conversation.

Nothing would make me more happy if it included some form of mute/solo revision, I know that you have worked hard to point this out. I’m sure you would agree we need basic broken feature function fixed first before upgrades. The reason Jpettit posted the solo video was not to abandon the idea of refinement but to offer some clarity for users on how to use the current solo feature. So that the focus could remain on repair before update.

Thanks again for all you do here, you are a valued opinion’round these here parts!

Regards Rob

There is a DAW user in Bolivia that just got his Biab hard drive, he has no internet and can't work out the Plugin. If we had no internet we would be in the same boat still trying to decipher it to find the hidden features, I never had to get on the net to work out Ezdrummer.

Those Dry, Flat, Center, Normalize, ACID are all done in BBW4 that has to be done by Peter's side that's probably working on the Mac at the moment and will be for a while.
The graphics are there for Dry Flat...ACID and just waiting for Peter's side but the solo mute don't need Peter's side to be fixed.
I would say a lot of the other issues are BBW4 related.

Since giving up on RealBand for creating tracks for artists live session or studio sessions I have not got back into it due to the fact there is no EZ creative work flow with the Plugin.
Don't look at things from the perspective of using only one Biab Plugin, look at using more, then think about the work flow if it would be EZZZZZZZ.

But again at the end of the day there are so many hours and so many programming staff.

https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=581689&page=1

This article makes a point. For a decade you could drag and drop from the main application.

It also reiterates the point of this thread. Why would people use it if it cannot at least match the existing BiaB capabilities? Thus the need for parity and the reason this forum only gets .5% of the views.

Then one could ask why would they use it even if it had the same functionality?

In my humble opinion, the new or casual DAW-BiaB user does not have to sift through the 675-page manual.

Within a few minutes, the new DAW-BiaB user is getting "Pro Musicians" playing their song! They don't have to become a BiaB expert.

This is why I think it has great potential as a gateway product.

To that point why do some want certain feature added that are best done in the DAW. I have seen request for normalizing the tracks, why that would be done on final render in the daw. Volume sliders, those are standard fare in the DAW.

I think you need to look at sync playback of the generated tracks in the local folder.
You need to be able to adjust the vol and pan to preview those tracks with the existing tracks in the DAW.
If you are just using one instrument track at a time like DI MultiRiffs per plugin and sending that track to FX then you can use the DAW track vol/pan.
Same with midi channel if you are sending midi tracks from the Plugin if you can re-channel each track to the selected channel, at the moment you can't tell what channel the midi tracks are on, so if you had a simple track mixer like VstSynthFont it would handle everything.
Originally there was no sync playback it was the same as using the main BB and dragging tracks out into the DAW to see if they fit if not back to BB.

This sums up my conclusions. Three months in and we will have to wait for the 50 new features.

And while we are just chatting between friends, since this is a very limited audience in the forum... how is that new Multiriffs feature working out for folks ? I am not looking to stir the pot over in the other forums, but I recognized this as a clinker the first time I used it. Have to acknowledge that the glory days are behind us - there is always next year. Up to us now to keep the music alive.

I have been having a lot of fun with Scaler. Waiting anxiously for 2.0 which is running 6 months behind its claimed release date.

I worked out easy ways to do the MultiRiff/Bar to Bar regen using 2 instances of BB or using the BB Plugin in BB, BUT there are issues that need fixing like a padding or no padding option in BB for MultiRiffs so they play from that start of the section till the end with no early or late notes,
the sync is not working in BB if you play from the very start it's fine but if you play from any other bar the sync (BB Plugin) will start play from the very start.
If they fix these 2 issues then Bar to Bar regen will be possible.

Multiriff is hit and miss for me but I have learned to work them out. I get pretty solid results now. I usually start them early and end late use the comping capability of my DAW. I don’t think we can expect a feature like multiriff to replace a great lead musician. It is a tool to use to create and will require some learning, experience, and trial.

And PG sadly - infuriatingly - does this all the time.

I could have actually gotten on fine with BIAB as it was many years ago - before even plugin hosting was included - with just basic use for practice - generating real tracks. etc.

But I've now paid *specifically* for newer release when a particular **very desirable for me** feature was finally "delivered".

First it was ability to host AU /VST plugins. Delivered badly with both bugs and clear missing features - things that one would expect in an app that hosts plugin instruments but wasn't included.

Then came Piano Roll editing in Mac BIAB. Again - released a few months after the yearly release cycle - and delivered in a lets say sub-optimal fashion, making it - at the very least - no fun to use.

Lastly came the addition of a true BIAB plugin - and as everyone well knows - it barely resembleses what it needs to be - it was very buggy in its initial period, extremely slow to regen - and I haven't even begun to get onto the missing features that Rob Helms mentioned.

There is a pattern here. Franky I feel like I've merely been paying an upgrade fee in order for PG developers to carry on working. Subsidising them. Because the three features they "delivered" are delivered in a rushed state and with a grudging attitude towards making these fear polished.

I could forgive them for Piano Roll. I understand that apparently few people use it on Macs. But then thats hard surprising given how dreadful the GUI Implementatons of these things are.

I could also forgive PG once they introduced the BIAB VST/AU plugin. * if * the thing actually worked as one would expect... because I'm much happier using the Piano roll in my DAW to record my own parts than the built in piano roll.
But fact is the BIAB plugin isn't ready for prime time with DAWs either.

I hear you on this. The good news is if PGM would address these basic features the plugin would be a solid and useful tool for creating tracks in the DAW. I also understand the desire of some users to want to add other more powerful features. Like our Mr. Pipeline. He has worked hard to introduce many innovative ideas and concepts to light. For that I tip my hat to him. I also feel his frustration and have nothing but respect.

I do however think that many of these ideas, while undeniably interesting and possibly powerful. Should be considered as down the road upgrades. So I keep stressing the vital importance of fixing the already existing broken features and bringing the plugin to a solid stable and useful tool. Something as jpettit said, a new DAW user can employ without reading a huge manual.

DAWS Plugin; I am supposed to open the DAWS Plugin within Garage Band by selecting Plugins" + AU Instruments + etc... Problem is that AU Instruments takes it to Apple Music instead of PG music inc. ???????

How do I get the plugin installed if Garage Band can't locate it?

Jim

If it's not in the list it's not installed correctly.

Using the Band-in-a-Box for Mac DAW Plugin in GarageBand

Bringing the hijacked thread back and bumping. And yes it is okay to post a question regarding GarageBand here as we want folks to get answers to their questions.

Bump back to original conversation.

You don't need to feel like this, because this is the way it is.

PGMusic's business is based on the selling of upgrades at the end of each year. Naturally they have to deliver something, so the users gets more RealTracks. But as is this not enough they have to add features. Fixing bugs is great, but hardly usable for marketing.

Sadly the budget for the development teams seems to be insufficient at times. Then we get half-baked or buggy features that are cramped into the yearly release just for the sake of it. We're talking here of marketable features.

And if the developers have to fix bugs for a long time after the release they are late for new features of the upcoming release. For them it would be the best to get the code base in a stable condition before adding new stuff. Of course that's not possible because PGMusic cannot print money. So they need a release with new feature. Da capo in eternum.

Masi

PS: This year I thought about skipping a release. But the list of items they have done listening to the customer got me hooked. Plus the RealCharts for drums and the plugin. Neither the RealCharts are working for me (I hear others have good results) nor is the plugin usable. IMHO selling buggy software to loyal long-time customers is a dangerous business strategy in the long run.

Same here.

But selling buggy software to new customers is more dangerous. What if someone purchased BiaB a couple of years ago for the VSTi? I'd bet the lost a customer for life. I know that if that was me I would never look at another PGMusic product.

Each year I look at the VSTi and every year thus far I have determined it isn't for me. YMMV

Caught in an infinite loop:

I was really hoping there'd be more development at this point. Here we are heading into the end of the first quarter and many of these bugs still exist. They are not features we wish for they are actually bugs. This is a good comprehensive list and we really need to get these done.

I put it wrong.

I meant relying on loyal customers to deal with quirks and bugs is dangerous. It's a no-go for winning customers unless you're prices are extremely low.

Masi

We all agree that the plugin needs some work. We all agree that it’s not right to continue to roll it out there and not complete it at least to the degree that it will be productive. That is the reason for this post not to suggest big changes, or complicated updates, but rather to fix the punch list items listed in the original post. These are not great ideas, they were advertised features. If they worked properly this plugin would be very useful.

So let’s as a collective group ask kindly but firmly that PGM move the needed resources to accomplish this NOW or at least very soon.

It serves very little purpose to continue to point out the problem, we need to as loyal and valued customers send a united voice for resolution.

So here is my request: To Peter Gannon, and the development team at PG music, both the BBW4 developers, and front end group, Please ASAP divert the resources required to complete this cycle, fixing the bugs in the list originally posted in this thread as well as send to you directly by email. This plugin is a gateway product that will generate many new customers for you when it works properly. But the core reason is that you promised these features as incentives for purchase in this release cycle, and we loyally supported that release.

Now to all users contributing to this post, please add your +1 to unite our voices.

+1

+1 But will it get heard.

+1

Rob, you should put this on the wish list if you haven't already done so. You could reference this thread.

+1

Masi

I am sure they have heard this but it doesn’t hurt to all speak up again in unison. The roar of a crowd is more Impressive than the squeak of a mouse!

After reading these and related threads my recommendation to PG: PULL the plugin altogether and either DROP IT COMPLETELY (PG stays with BIAB as BIAB) or only have alpha and SELECT expert-only beta testers use the VSTi until perfect, WHENEVER, and whatever, that is.

Obviously VSTi users are losing sleep and can't get real work done, so Peter please just remove the obstacle causing their misery.

Larry

+1 usually after the holiday break they work on bb and the plugin but they were on the Mac first maybe because of the delay it had last year because of stupid apple banning all 32bit apps.
Apple have no qualms about all the grief they cause developers because of their slackness, so developers need to come out of retirement and run behind them because just about every update some app don't work anymore or they have to spend $$$ going to 64bit.
Developers out there are still trying to get things to work on Catalina.

We have all this man/woman power but we are powerless to do anything but complain, we can't pitch in and help to get things done

+1

Sounds like sarcasm but I'm inclined to agree with you. If they can't/won't fix it they should drop it.

I also agree Rob. A big +1 from me.

Jeff

+1

BiaB backend Features advertised in the 2020 Plugin that don't work:

• Center
• Panned
• Dry
• Embedded Tempo
• Normalize
• The 300 new MIDI RCs for Real Drums
• Style changes in the Bar settings
• The new in 2020 Harmony's
• Medley Changes
• Ending only works with 4 bars ending.
• RDs do not re-generate when generated on the Style page Center

To complete the basic rendering capabilities of BiaB:

• Direct Input
• Pushes

+1
+1
+1

Please fix those things

Nope really not sarcasm, I'll leave it at that.

I hope everybody gets the plugin they want.

Larry

+1

Here's the problem.

Nobody cares.

This minute as I'm writing this there are 134 viewers on the main Biab forum and 4 on this one including me and I don't care either. This 3 page thread has the same 10 to 12 users who post in the other big threads about this.

Unless PG has stats showing a whole lot more interest in the VST than the forums do this thing is a big bomb. Just mho, I don't think the bugs have anything to do with it. The vast majority of Biab users are not into DAW's and this VST means nothing to them, just look at all the posters who have never opened Real Band and have no clue about it. Typical Biab users like the basic simplicity of the program and go no further with it so to me this is the problem with putting a lot more resources into it.

Bob

Bob, I agree that the VSTi is a big bomb. I can see some value in it but as I have stated it is useless as it stands right now. Personally I don't care if it flies or not.

But I don't believe your "The vast majority of Biab users are not into DAW's" is a true statement. I believe they are into DAWs as I see a number of DAWs listed every day. DAWs like Cakewalk, Studio One, FL Studio, Reason, RealBand, etc, are some of what has been mentioned. Many of use don't use RealBand because we are already proficient in other DAWs. YMMV

It should of been marketed as a whole new product without the very old Band in a Box name.
If you are using it in a DAW you want session musician tracks and the name Band in a Box is associated with accompaniment that's been around since 1854 so it's not something new to get the interest of DAW users "oh Biab I tried that once could not work it out...too complex...".
Session Track Pro VST, Studio Tracks Pro VST whatever.. would of got attention and out of the Band in a Box mindset.
This was all suggested way back in beta.

Bob, Mario, your opinions are both valid. I have to respectfully ask why air them here. The whole point of this thread is for those who do care about the plugin. We all like it, and are excited to see it get fixed. Why you ask?

Well frankly there is a whole world out there of DAW users that are not crusty old BiaB curmudgeons. This plugin when working properly can be a true gateway product into those folks world. I know several here that have many friends in the DAW world that would like the product if it was fixed. I know at least three here in this thread that would promote this elsewhere.

So if you are truly against this why come in and rain on others parade, why not just either be supportive of others or move on and post where your interest lies. I for one would use this plugin on almost every project.

Rob, you're right and I'm sorry. I just reacted to Bob's message. My bad.

No worries my friend I always respect your opinion as I also do Bob’s.

I don't really use the plugin myself, but if my memory serves me correctly, PGmusic has demonstrated it at NAMM and other places, and the impression I got was it went well for them.

So I would imagine a new user to biab on seeing those demonstrations and probably buying biab on the strength of what he/she saw would be very irked if the plugin did not work correctly for them, as what they saw in the display, and buying biab on the strength of that.

Music lover your post is exactly why this thread exist. This needs to be fixed ASAP as is is being promoted as a viable part of the system and can cause problems when used and some features are broken so can we count you as a +1 in light of hoping this doesn’t hurt PGM.

I'm in this camp. I don't care not so much for the plugin as such but for an easy way to integrate BiaB into my DAW worklflow.

In all the years I used BiaB I didn't even try RealBand once. There are so many really good, fully featured, all-purpose DAWs around I don't no why I should bother using one that comes as an add-on.

Masi

Well, I hope they fix the list of bugs/issues/etc, as I really want to use the plugin with a DAW. I see a lot of value, especially for easily generating parts and dropping them into a track (even just a few bars at a time, if you wish). I also don't have to worry about things like two apps concurrently open, both using ASIO, and I get to visually "stay in" the DAW while working.

I don't think anything that's been asked for here is unreasonable, and Adar (and company) has been pretty quick to get things working. I understand the effort is probably on the Mac 2020 version right now, but I'm fine if they get these things done by the end of the year (I'm patient).

I don't think anyone can say no one cares. Just because someone doesn't participate in the forum doesn't mean they aren't interested. In fact, only 252 people have logged into the forum this month (and then it drops back to January for the most recent login). Clearly, PGMusic has many, many more users than the regulars (or even irregulars) on the forum, or they wouldn't still be in business.

If I judged by the number of posts in their forums both Arturia and Behringer should be out of business.

Masi

Very good points guys.

That's always the question, isn't it? Do the forums represent a valid cross section of the actual user base or not? Is the actual user base roughly over 60 years old or is it younger? Is the base truly mainly interested in 50 year old classic styles from the 50's to the 70's? Is the base generally not very computer savvy? It's just my opinion of course but I strongly suspect the answer is yes.

Therefore, my generalized use of the term "nobody cares" stands. Of course some care but is it enough to matter?

And Masi, you're comments about already being a DAW user so you never even gave Real Band a look is part of the problem. Not blaming you because that's a logical point of view on your part. You already have a DAW and don't need another one. What you're missing is Real Band is not a standard DAW, it does much more than any DAW can do. If you were proficient with it I think you would have a different view of the VST concept.

From what I've seen so far, RB beats the VST so badly it's not even in the conversation. Anything you want the VST to do in a DAW RB already does so to me RB should be the thing getting developed further but it never has.

How many comments are there on these forums saying PG should finish developing and fixing things in Biab or RB before moving on to something new? RB has all the standard DAW functions but I agree some do not work as elegantly as the bigger name DAWs so yes it could use more polishing but so can pretty much any other piece of music production software.

Anyway, I'll leave it up to you guys to boost the VST concept and good luck with it.

Bob

RB is so far from the modern DAWs available! You try to make it sound like it just needs a little polish when it is slow and clunky. It has one feature and that is the ability to use RealTracks. Without that single feature I cannot imagine anyone choosing it over any other DAW out there.

RB can be used successfully I did over 100 projects in it and it work pretty well. But it is not as smooth and quick as one of the top DAWs and lacks polish. With out RTs it is just powertracks.

Bob, as far as no one cares regarding the plugin, that might be at least partially true. Yet I think that initially people did care, but it was not working properly, and interest waned quickly. Yes a lot of the demographic here is Surley old curmudgeons like you and me. But that could change if the plugin were working properly. There are some people here lurking to see if that changes. I can think of three people off the top of my head that are very influential on other DAW sites and would be very likely to suggest even promote the plugin to many potentially new users.

I think Bob, you make a good, but sad and painful observation when you say no one cares. Therein lies the problem. In my mind PGM is locked into a very old and debilitating cycle of release hell. Each year they add new features and new RTs to a program created in the early 90 patching over old legacy code. Stuck in a never ending cycle of 6 months of windows release and fix, and 6 months of Mac release and fix. No real time or resources to truly develop a modern version with modern code. Hence the plugin never getting the time it deserves to become a gateway to DAW users tool.

RB is no better, trapped in the old code of Powertracks from the old days. Yes a decent product but the GUI and feature set reminiscent of cakewalk music creator from 15 years ago.

We all pour our money into this product each year expecting the offered features to work properly, and many times they don’t. We shrug our shoulders and say “just the way it is”. This time I and several others are asking that this cycle be broken and the promised features be fixed.

This is only expecting what we paid for, and no more. Maybe there is little interest in the plugin at this time, but it was an advertised feature of the core program, and its unfinished.

Rather than argue and debate whether there is interest in a feature why not expect, no demand that products not be offered for sale unless they are sale worthy, that being actually working as advertised.

I’m not being mean or hard, I love PGM products. I have been a user for years. I expect for my loyalty, loyalty in return.

One more thought, PGM can’t rely on the older generation forever we are slowly going away. Mr/Dr. Gannon is from our generation, and someday he too will pass this company on to family and friends. I want to see his legacy continue to shine in the light of new users and products. Imagine the “50” new features in BiaB 2030 or beyond.

This product as is will not hold up to the expectations of the younger generations. It’s time to do two very important things.

1. Get this plugin to where it will bring in Dollars (Canadian) from the vast field of young DAW users. Revenue for development.

2. Begin to rewrite BiaB in a totally new coding that allows simultaneous release of Mac and Win versions. Like many of the DAWs out there, I.e. reaper, studio one etc.

This may take some capital investment but will allow this product to survive into the next generation of DAW users.

FWIW here is my idea of the perfect BiaB VSTi.

For the MIDI side I view the VSTi as an input device much like a MIDI controller. That is using it to drive data into your DAW. Thus you assign a VSTi in your DAW and each BiaB VSTi MIDI track would power each different DAW track. Again that is much like making zones on your keyboard controller. After you achieve the perfect BiaB VSTi track you would or could move it to your DAW. What you hear in the BiaB VSTi is exactly how it will sound in your DAW.

My reasoning for this is that GM is not used much outside of the PGMusic world. MIDI users usually would have much better sounding samples than what comes with GM so having to listen to a VSTi that only uses GM might be a major step backwards for them.

For the RT side the above isn't necessary. Just generate your RTs then move them to your DAW.

For styles with both RTs and MIDI a combination of the above ideas would come into play.

This is just my view and others may or may not agree.

Very interesting idea! So If you drag or open a midi track inside the plugin VSTi it could be assigned to a DAW track with a synth VSTi and play insync with the plugin RTs and other DAW tracks right?

+1 everything Rob said !

How many users have used more than one Biabvst in their DAW ??

That's why in the new GUI I showed midi channel choice so if you are using one instance you can set the channel of that midi track, so it will rechannel the midi tracks in the local folder to the selected channel so as it's sending to the DAW where you can route that channel to any track.
Guide: Using Multiple Biab Plugins
You can put a Biabvst on each track generating a midi track in each plugin with different virtual instrument after the Biabvst.
In Reaper I just set up the Biabvst on one track and load the chords,
now just duplicate the track as many time as you like,
set a virtual instrument on each track,
generate up a midi track in each Biabvst,
double click on each midi icon to set them to sync play
(in the new GUI you don't need to do this as it will play sync by default unless you click the mute button (yes a Mute button with an M that Mario will see no problem without having to distinguish colors) to mute tracks or hit the Host button to stop sync playback).
If track 4 don't sound right generate it up again or have a multiriff midi and use the S solo button in the new GUI to solo the riff you like.
Will that give you enough midi tracks now ??

The whole idea of the Biabvst is for this

so to give those in the studio "Session Tracks Pro" vst not the old name "Band in a Box" that is associated with auto accompaniment from the 90's and a nightmare to workout and learn.
You can't tell a Studio using Mac to use RealBand !

YES

It is my firm hope that as soon as Mac beta is completed, and Mac release begins that Peter and team will spend the time to fix the 11 promised features that don’t work, and bring this plugin product to where is needs to be, before any new ideas are implemented for 2021.

How cool that would be. If they do this let’s make a commitment in return to let everyone we know that dabbles in this area, that this is a great addition to their DAW creation process. Some might be on the fence due to the conversation around these part regarding the problems.

A better example would be Native Instruments MASCHINE - available standalone or as a plugin. Or REASON by propellerheads.

Rob Helms, - and so many others here..

I'm so relieved and encouraged that there are others here who share - not only my enthusiasm with BIAB - *and* its idea - but also the huge potential the plugin *could* offer if implemented properly.

So I can only add a gazillion of +1's to this thread. My amens.

I'm a Mac plugin user but this thread clearly has more traction than the Mac equivalent.

I am of course the person who dared to raise the heresy of PG considering outside sources of funding - buyouts even - in order to break the same old cycle that has been so well - even graphically ( literally ) illustrated here.

I recall Pete Gannon even piped in at one stage to say or imply that there was no issue with any lack of funds to support any additional developer resource for plugins etc.

Seems to me that now many many months down the road - and how things have panned out that this isnt the case. Far as I can tell its a single developer - no doubt overworked - who codes both the windows and Mac plugin.

Now of course it isnt necessarily the case that simply throwing more developers. (and cash ) on a software problem resolves things - sometimes it makes things worse. But something just isnt right.

I was clearly in a minority of one to dare to suggest "teaming up" with the Y-word.... And in the end those posts actually got deleted on the FR forum.

I think I'm vindicated now and its still imo a good idea.

But hey - if. things work out with the plugin in the next year all the better.

I note that theres nothing in the 2020 plugin notes that mentions anything about speeding up generation though. Thats a biggie for me. Not seen much talk bout it here. Are people fine with the huge rendering times?

I remember well the conversation

As for speeding up generation, considering that it generates useable tracks usually 4 or 5, in somewhere around a minute. I don’t feel that is too much of a wait time to crush creativity. I mean if you were having to program a drum track in EZDrummer, and then go program one in EZKeys, then piece together a bass track with another program, or loops, then add a guitar track from some guitar VSTi that might take hours not minutes. So 1 or 2 minutes is just not a big problem. I think sometimes we get sort of crazy with our expectations. If the plugin worked with all the feature list advertised would it be horrible if it even took 5 minutes to generate? Most likely not. So a couple minutes is really good.

I tried several files and most of my render times were around 90 seconds the longest was just under 120 seconds. Now these songs were 2 or 3 choruses and not real complicated, so if the song was super long it might take 3 to 5 minutes. Still not bad to get get a decent 4 or 5 part track base. We do have to take into consideration the speed and power of our personal computers. Some of the delay maybe on our end. I know my system is getting older and is not top of the line.

Originally it took ages to generate but then it was changed to use the same render method as Biab so it is the same render speed now (see pic below same song in Biab and the Plugin).

Moving all the code to the Plugin will take another 10 years.
If there was also a simple version of the Plugin that just had the code in it to generate up single tracks one at a time without the need for bbw4 and all the complexities of Band in a Box would give DAW only non Biab users a very simple no brainer Plugin like EZKeys.

The Plugin should of been targeted more to DAW only users that know nothing about "Band in a Box", it should of had it's own name like "Quick Tracks Pro" "Studio Tracks Pro" "No Brainer Tracks Pro" etc.. but because of the old name was still used "Band in a Box Plugin" long time users of Band in a Box thought they were getting Band in a Box in a Plugin so everything has been driven in the plugin over the last year to be that for them, so there was not much done with the GUI so users are still trying to work it out, where as EZKeys, EZDrummer are still in version 1 because they worked the first time from being well thought out and designed.



That's why I suggested a simple vst/au that will send VstTimeInfo play/stop/loop/pos etc from the DAW to the main Biab app so it plays back in sync to the DAW. This is what FL Studio and RapidComposer use to sync them to the DAW (see pic below).

I'm afraid I simply disagree. I find the current generation waits in BIAB standalone acceptable but absolutely not the much greater time in the plugin. As we know this is because in standalone generation gets done via RAM whereas in the plugin there is an extra step after this - namely writing the result to disk.

For me the creativity element is killed this way. And im on a relatively fast I7 Mac.

The waits incurred might be acceptable if one has firmed up the arrangement and isn't likely to be changing chords much - but if one is in early stages and trying out different progression or arrangement ideas this just hampers workflow to a point that frankly make me unwilling to use the plugin for actual production or composition in a DAW. But our disagreements on this point might as I suggest be more down to our differing approaches to composing or production etc..