|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: May 2023
Posts: 1
Newbie
|
OP
Newbie
Joined: May 2023
Posts: 1 |
Other than uncompressed file sizes perhaps, what might the reasoning that BiaB does not at this time plan on supporting 96 kHz. Thank you for your time! Edd 8:30:50 PM Are there plans to operate at 96 in the future? Jerry 8:31:18 PM Not at this time. We base many features and content updates on what is submitted on our Wishlist forums. If you'd like to see this feature added in the future, we suggest posting your ideas in our Wishlist forums, here: [a url="https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm&c=3"] https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm&c=3[/a]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,445
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,445 |
Why would they? The 44.1kHz 16 bit Audiophile files sound quite good.
You need better? The BIAB plug-in lets you use any libraries you want in your DAW.
BIAB 2024 Audiophile, 24Core/60CoreGPU Core M2 MacStudioUltra/8TB/192GB Sonoma, M1 MBAir, 2012 MBP
Digital Performer11, LogicPro
Finale27/Dorico/Encore/SmartScorePro64/Notion/Overture
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: May 2020
Posts: 2,176
Product Manager
|
|
Product Manager
Joined: May 2020
Posts: 2,176 |
Indeed, file size is the biggest part. The Audiophile edition is currently around 1.9TB at 16-bit 44.1kHz - if we were to increase that to 24-bit 96kHz it would be around 5.7TB.
In addition , currently zero companies make a 2.5" 6tb external drive or larger, meaning we would have to offer it on a 3.5" drive. This would no longer be very portable, as not only would the drive be about 5 times the size of what we currently offer, it would require a separate power supply for the drive.
I work here
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 26,520
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 26,520 |
I think 96K is overkill at this point. I could see an option for 48K for compatibility with video-oriented devices and/or where the sample rate is locked at 48K. My Roland MIDI synth is like that.
But since external drive size is an issue, this is perhaps an opportunity to revisit the method of delivery. Some of us would welcome an option for downloading the audiophile version in a lossless compressed standard (and preferably one that worked on both Windows and Mac operating systems.
BIAB 2025 Win Audiophile. Software: Studio One 7 Pro, Swam horns, Acoustica-7, Notion 6; Win 11 Home. Hardware: Intel i9, 32 Gb; Roland Integra-7, Presonus Studio 192, Presonus Faderport 8, Royer 121, Adam Sub8 & Neumann 120 monitors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,251
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,251 |
I too think 48k would be good.
24bit or single-precision float.
I guess it would be feasible to offer 96k as an option with the proviso that the drive would be larger and probably that the price would be higher. I fully understand any reluctance to do that due to all the product/parts/shipping management issue that would occur, so I fully understand "not at this time".
Jazz relative beginner, starting at a much older age than was helpful.
AVL:MXE Linux; Windows 11
BIAB2024 Audiophile, a bunch of other software.
Kawai MP6, Ui24R, Focusrite Saffire Pro40 and Scarletts
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 2,625
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 2,625 |
Matt and I have had similar discussions about interfaces. When is "good" good enough, and where do we reach diminishing returns in both convenience and cost?
The 44.1kHz 16-bit issue came up with the new interface I installed the other day, but I am not unhappy with the sound quality at 44.1kHz 16-bit.
Then again, I have been too lazy to get off my rear end and go into the shop and build a tube audiophile stereo with custom exotic speakers I have had in mind for several years...lol
Personally, PG Music could send me any size hard drive, USB or not. I would have no issue dealing with any size drive.
Regarding cost, with my upgrade price, the audiophile drive is well within the range of "worth what it costs." I don't buy a new addition every year but generally every two years.
There are many things in BIAB I would like to see change, but 44.1kHz 16-bit is really not even on the list.
I also agree with Matt on the download issue. Many of us have gigabit internet nowadays. So large file transfer is not an issue.
Billy
Why do bagpipe players walk while they play?
To get away from the noise
What kind of music should you listen to while fishing? Something catchy!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,445
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,445 |
Reality check:
Unless PG Music is going to re-record all of the samples at 96kHz 24 bit, they would have to upsample the existing audiophile files. Well, any of us who need the existing files at 96k can do that ourselves.
Likewise, a large number of older VI libraries were recorded at 44.1/16 but are now available at 48/24. Hmmmmm… I wonder how that happened? Properly and carefully done to samples that were well recorded, you won’t hear the difference.
I sometimes have to deliver audio @ 96k for HD DVD audio but I’ve had the ability to record at that resolution for a couple decades now. I can’t imagine the situation where I would ever have to deliver a BIAB project at 96k.
The largest 2.5" HDDs (mechanical hard drives) are 5TB. 2.5" form SSDs are available at 8TB now but they’re pricy by comparison. Although I’m sure that, if PG Music goes to the expense of re-recording Audiophile at 96k, those few clamoring for this won’t mind paying the extra few hundred bucks for delivery, will they? Frankly, I’d be happy to download such a product but I might have the minority opinion — or do I?
BIAB 2024 Audiophile, 24Core/60CoreGPU Core M2 MacStudioUltra/8TB/192GB Sonoma, M1 MBAir, 2012 MBP
Digital Performer11, LogicPro
Finale27/Dorico/Encore/SmartScorePro64/Notion/Overture
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 6,637
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 6,637 |
Reality check:
Unless PG Music is going to re-record all of the samples at 96kHz 24 bit, they would have to upsample the existing audiophile files. Well, any of us who need the existing files at 96k can do that ourselves.
100% As it is the stone won't be squeezed for more DrealDrum "stems" in a hurry, which I'd have thought easy enough as they ought to have been recorded in the 1st instance. This makes me suspect that original, premix, files may have been erased for space and that, most likely, trickles a little. Upscaling, like upmixing, is used, in the main, by con artist/floggers.
Cheers
rayc
"What's so funny about peace, love & understanding?" - N.Lowe
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 26,520
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 26,520 |
I think re-recording RealTracks would be silly. They can’t duplicate them exactly, and I would rather have new ones anyway.
As I understand it, RealTracks were recorded at a bit rate of 24. That would be worthwhile having as an audiophile version option. To my knowledge, we have not been told what sampling rate was used to record existing RealTracks.
BIAB 2025 Win Audiophile. Software: Studio One 7 Pro, Swam horns, Acoustica-7, Notion 6; Win 11 Home. Hardware: Intel i9, 32 Gb; Roland Integra-7, Presonus Studio 192, Presonus Faderport 8, Royer 121, Adam Sub8 & Neumann 120 monitors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 621
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 621 |
Way too much gets made of this. No one can hear the difference.
Byron Dickens BIAB. CbB. Mixbus 32C 8 HP Envy. Intel core i7. 16GB RAM W10. Focusrite Scarlett 18i 20. Various instruments played with varying degrees of proficiency. https://soundcloud.com/athanorsoundlabs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,732
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,732 |
Right, and the OP has left the building with that one post.
 Steve BIAB/RB 2022, Pro Tools 2020, Korg N5, JBL LSR 4328 Powered Monitors, AKG/Shure Mics.
PC: Win11 PRO, 4 TB M2 SSD, 2 TB HD, 128 GB Memory
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,251
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,251 |
Way too much gets made of this. No one can hear the difference. Aye. As a young lad my hearing was measured to 26kHz, which was where the test kit ran out. Even that would have been unlikely to allow me to have heard the difference. These days I sometimes don't hear kitchen timer beeps over the tinitus. Ho Hum. IIRC someone at PGM said their recordings were made at 48kHz/24bit, but don't quote me ... that may be a false memory. Sampling at 96kHz has benefits because the anti-aliassing filters can be gentler and have fewer phase artifacts. Once recorded, though, there's really negligible (possibly nil) benefit in a higher sample rate until one gets to the final digital-to-analogue stage, when up-sampling to allow a gentler filter can again be a benefit.
Jazz relative beginner, starting at a much older age than was helpful.
AVL:MXE Linux; Windows 11
BIAB2024 Audiophile, a bunch of other software.
Kawai MP6, Ui24R, Focusrite Saffire Pro40 and Scarletts
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: May 2020
Posts: 2,176
Product Manager
|
|
Product Manager
Joined: May 2020
Posts: 2,176 |
Unless PG Music is going to re-record all of the samples at 96kHz 24 bit, they would have to upsample the existing audiophile files. Well, any of us who need the existing files at 96k can do that ourselves. Yep, but a better idea than that is to simply export at 96kHz. It doesn't matter whether the Realtracks audio files are upsampled before the tracks are rendered or after, so there's no need to store all of the data at 96kHz if BIAB can simply render the file and upsample on the fly. Although I’m sure that, if PG Music goes to the expense of re-recording Audiophile at 96k, those few clamoring for this won’t mind paying the extra few hundred bucks for delivery, will they? If we were to re-record ALL of the existing (past and present) RealTracks, that would involve thousands of hours of re-recording, possibly tens of thousands of hours, and likely hundreds of thousands of dollars being paid to the musicians to re-create the previous Realtracks. The "few" that are clamouring for 96k RT's would likely have to pay MUCH more than an extra few hundred bucks. This makes me suspect that original, premix, files may have been erased for space That's quite possible. I don't personally know whether the original files still exist somewhere, but keep in mind that we've been doing RealTracks since 2008 when a "large" hard drive was maybe 500gb. Back around that time I worked as a sysadmin for a publishing company with about 120 employees, and the entire company's storage across multiple serverswas around 16tb. PG being a smaller company likely would've had less than that, so I'd imagine after some time that the original files may have been deleted. This is entirely speculation, however. Way too much gets made of this. No one can hear the difference. In general, yes. Even young people with perfect ears would be hard pressed to hear the difference. These days I sometimes don't hear kitchen timer beeps over the tinitus. Ho Hum. Same here. I'd blame my days as a drummer (despite wearing ear protection), but sadly for me it's hereditary. IIRC someone at PGM said their recordings were made at 48kHz/24bit, but don't quote me ... that may be a false memory. I don't know the answer. It's possible that some of the recordings were made at 44.1/16, since in many cases the recordings were done halfway across the world from us, and going back to 2008 when we started we may have opted for 44.1/16 simply to be able to transfer the files faster over a slow internet connection. Again, purely speculation. Sampling at 96kHz has benefits because the anti-aliassing filters can be gentler and have fewer phase artifacts. Once recorded, though, there's really negligible (possibly nil) benefit in a higher sample rate until one gets to the final digital-to-analogue stage, when up-sampling to allow a gentler filter can again be a benefit. Correct, however oversampling provides that same benefit even when recording at 44.1kHz.
I work here
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,251
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,251 |
Sampling at 96kHz has benefits because the anti-aliassing filters can be gentler and have fewer phase artifacts. Once recorded, though, there's really negligible (possibly nil) benefit in a higher sample rate until one gets to the final digital-to-analogue stage, when up-sampling to allow a gentler filter can again be a benefit. Correct, however oversampling provides that same benefit even when recording at 44.1kHz. I hope I didn't mislead there. High sampling rates, e.g. oversampling, at the interface between analogue and digital is essentially always beneficial, whatever the final data rate. The essential bit is not particularly the final sample-rate, but the 'clean'-ness of the filters, mostly those used for anti-aliasing the sampling. Most or all of us know how high-Q filters sound when used on synthesisers ... for good fidelity we want about the lowest Q we can manage. 44.1kHz is perfectly fine for most people. It does seem a shame, though, if one needs to up-sample to 48kHz. (FWIW, I had a quick look at some datasheets from a while back ... a TI part with a 2014 datasheet offering 192kHz sampling at 24bit. Similar had been done well before that by using multiple ADCs. Several parts today offer 768kHz at 32-bit and around 120dB s/n.)
Jazz relative beginner, starting at a much older age than was helpful.
AVL:MXE Linux; Windows 11
BIAB2024 Audiophile, a bunch of other software.
Kawai MP6, Ui24R, Focusrite Saffire Pro40 and Scarletts
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 26,520
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 26,520 |
I think we are in some agreement here. I would like to see options for the Audiophile version that would include 44.1 or 48K sampling rates to match equipment requirements, but I would most like to get 24-bit files for the added headroom while mixing. I believe we were told 24-bit files were recorded.
BIAB 2025 Win Audiophile. Software: Studio One 7 Pro, Swam horns, Acoustica-7, Notion 6; Win 11 Home. Hardware: Intel i9, 32 Gb; Roland Integra-7, Presonus Studio 192, Presonus Faderport 8, Royer 121, Adam Sub8 & Neumann 120 monitors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,445
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,445 |
I think we are in some agreement here. I would like to see options for the Audiophile version that would include 44.1 or 48K sampling rates to match equipment requirements, but I would most like to get 24-bit files for the added headroom while mixing. I believe we were told 24-bit files were recorded. That's the real issue for me, too. Although I render to 24 bit, I convert to 32 bit float in my DAW for the additional headroom when mixing. Much faster to get a clean mix that way. Yes, but the Audiophile version would no longer fit onto that 2TB spinner that I and many others wish wasn't required. Don't get me wrong—it's ok to make that still available for those few who still want it, complete with 44.1/16 files, I suppose, but the ability to download the Audiophile tracks at 48k/24 if that's how they were recorded would be nice. I have a hard time believing that increasing the server capacity at PG Music would cost more than the manufacturing and "free" shipping associated with the current product.
BIAB 2024 Audiophile, 24Core/60CoreGPU Core M2 MacStudioUltra/8TB/192GB Sonoma, M1 MBAir, 2012 MBP
Digital Performer11, LogicPro
Finale27/Dorico/Encore/SmartScorePro64/Notion/Overture
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 26,520
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 26,520 |
Mike, you're more on top of these things than I am: what standard would you recommend for lossless downloadable audio files from PG Music that would serve both Mac and Windows?
BIAB 2025 Win Audiophile. Software: Studio One 7 Pro, Swam horns, Acoustica-7, Notion 6; Win 11 Home. Hardware: Intel i9, 32 Gb; Roland Integra-7, Presonus Studio 192, Presonus Faderport 8, Royer 121, Adam Sub8 & Neumann 120 monitors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,445
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,445 |
Mike, you're more on top of these things than I am: what standard would you recommend for lossless downloadable audio files from PG Music that would serve both Mac and Windows?
Good question but I think the correct answer is It doesn't matter. BIAB for Mac and Win use different schemes that are incompatible with each other and there's no universal standard that's compatible with both (FLAC is not supported by the MacOS). Zip and RAR do not save space and must be decoded so neither is a solution for the End User. In any case, there will always be two versions to download. PG Music already has a partial solution, the Band-in-a-Box Install Manager. They just need to finish it to include this task. If you have Komplete, IK Media, UVI or half a dozen other VI libraries, you know that you can just fire up the Install/License/Download manager (or whatever it's called), click on Update or Install and it will know not only the correct libraries but also where you want them installed. To quote the late Ron Popeil: "Set it and forget it!". All you have to do is enter your license info—some installers query your account and take it from there. iZotope's is not a good example, BTW, but I'm hoping that, now they are aligned with Native Instruments, this will improve.
BIAB 2024 Audiophile, 24Core/60CoreGPU Core M2 MacStudioUltra/8TB/192GB Sonoma, M1 MBAir, 2012 MBP
Digital Performer11, LogicPro
Finale27/Dorico/Encore/SmartScorePro64/Notion/Overture
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 14,822
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 14,822 |
As I've mused for years I dream of a double blind research project (with all the proper protocols) that would determine the accuracy to which audiophiles could differentiate the different bit files via a simple hearing test.
Just a slightly off topic ramble.
Bud
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,251
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,251 |
Mike, you're more on top of these things than I am: what standard would you recommend for lossless downloadable audio files from PG Music that would serve both Mac and Windows?
Good question but I think the correct answer is It doesn't matter. BIAB for Mac and Win use different schemes that are incompatible with each other and there's no universal standard that's compatible with both (FLAC is not supported by the MacOS). Zip and RAR do not save space and must be decoded so neither is a solution for the End User. In any case, there will always be two versions to download. ..... I think Matt's question was inadvertently slightly loaded here, which also slightly loads the answer. There is, or can be, a difference between "lossless audio format" and "lossless download" that skews both the question and the answer a bit. Mike's absolutely right that there's no compression advantage by applying, e.g., .zip to an already losslessly compressed format, but there is a compression advantage of applying it to, e.g., a .wav file. There isn't I think any real reason why .wav files shouldn't be compressed with, e.g., .zip for the download and decompressed onto the drive after download, to be used thereafter as the .wav files. That's different, of course, from BIAB directly using a lossless format like FLAC for the file format on the drive. I presume(!) that "(FLAC is not supported by the MacOS" means supported natively and that there's no fundamental reason why PGM shouldn't use the algorithm/library themselves, notwithstanding that Musocity suggests that there are other better-suited lossless format(s) around.
Last edited by Gordon Scott; 06/07/23 10:34 PM.
Jazz relative beginner, starting at a much older age than was helpful.
AVL:MXE Linux; Windows 11
BIAB2024 Audiophile, a bunch of other software.
Kawai MP6, Ui24R, Focusrite Saffire Pro40 and Scarletts
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ask sales and support questions about Band-in-a-Box using natural language.
ChatPG's knowledge base includes the full Band-in-a-Box User Manual and sales information from the website.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Update your Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Windows® Today!
If you’ve already purchased Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Windows®, great news—a new update is now available! This update introduces a handy new feature: a vertical cursor in the Tracks window that shows the current location across all tracks, and more.
Discover everything included in this free update and download it now at https://www.pgmusic.com/support_windowsupdates.htm#1124
Video: Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Windows®: Boot Camp: The AI Lyrics Generator
With Band-in-a-Box 2025® for Windows®, we've introduced an exciting new feature: the AI Lyrics Generator! In this video, Tobin guides you step-by-step on how to make the most of this new tool.
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Windows®: Boot Camp: The AI Lyrics Generator video.
Check out the forum post for more information.
Video: Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Windows®: Using VST3 Plugins
Band-in-a-Box 2025® for Windows® now includes support for VST3 plugins, bringing even more creative possibilities to your music production. Join Simon as he guides you through the process in this easy-to-follow demonstration!
Video: Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Windows®: Using VST3 Plugins
Join the conversation on our forum.
Video: Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Windows: Using The BB Stem Splitter!
In this video, Tobin provides a crash course on using the new BB Stem Splitter feature included in Band-in-a-Box 2025® for Windows®. During this process he also uses the Audio Chord Wizard (ACW) and the new Equalize Tempo feature.
Video: Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Windows®: Using the BB Stem Splitter
Check out the forum post for some optional Tips & Tricks!
Congrats to Misha (Rustyspoon)…downloaded/installed a full Audiophile 2025!
Breaking News!
We’re thrilled to announce that Rustyspoon has made PG history as the very first person to successfully complete the download and install of the full Band-in-a-Box 2025 Windows Audiophile Edition (with FLAC files)—a whopping 610GB of data!
A big shoutout to Rustyspoon for stepping up to be our test "elf!"
Thank you for your support, Rustyspoon!
Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Windows Videos
With the launch of Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Windows, we're adding new videos to our YouTube channel. We'll also share them here once they are published so you can easily find all the Band-in-a-Box® 2025 and new Add-on videos in one place!
Whether it's a summary of the new features, demonstrations of the 202 new RealTracks, new XPro Styles PAK 8, or Xtra Styles PAKs 18, information on the 2025 49-PAK, or detailed tutorials for other Band-in-a-Box® 2025 features, we have you covered!
Reference this forum post for One-Stop Shopping of our Band-in-a-Box® 2025 Videos - we will be updating this post as more videos are added!
Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Windows is Here!
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Windows is here, packed with major new features and an incredible collection of available new content! This includes 202 RealTracks (in Sets 449-467), plus 20 bonus Unreleased RealTracks in the 2025 49-PAK. There are new RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, “Songs with Vocals” Artist Performance Sets, Playable RealTracks Set 4, two new sets of “RealDrums Stems,” XPro Styles PAK 8, Xtra Styles PAK 19, and more!
Special Offers
Upgrade to Band-in-a-Box® 2025 with savings of up to 50% on most upgrade packages during our special—available until December 31, 2024! Visit our Band-in-a-Box® packages page for all the purchase options available.
2025 Free Bonus PAK & 49-PAK Add-ons
We've packed our Free Bonus PAK & 49-PAK with some incredible Add-ons! The Free Bonus PAK is automatically included with most Band-in-a-Box® for Windows 2025 packages, but for even more Add-ons (including 20 Unreleased RealTracks!) upgrade to the 2025 49-PAK for only $49. You can see the full lists of items in each package, and listen to demos here.
If you have any questions, feel free to connect with us directly—we’re here to help!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums65
Topics83,459
Posts758,191
Members39,119
| |
Most Online3,932
Nov 19th, 2024
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean