|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box Wishlist
|
Joined: Sep 2021
Posts: 2,069
Veteran
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2021
Posts: 2,069 |
Is it very difficult to make each bar 4? Please design each bar so that 4 chords can be input directly. I hope we don’t keep everyone waiting until 2025.  ![[Linked Image - Only viewable when logged in]](https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=download&Number=27811&filename=2024-04-10_083405.jpg)
WIN10 20H2, AMD R4800H ,16G , 2T ,FOCUSRITE 2i4 MKII，Studio One,FL STUDIO
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box Wishlist
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 26,297
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 26,297 |
Well, we've been here before.
I support this, with two assumptions:
One, that this example is for a time signature of 4/4. I still hope that we might someday see more complex time signatures, but what is portrayed here is that one beat gets one box. It the time signature was 3/8, for example, we would have one box per eighth note andf three boxes per measure. If the time signature were 3/4, there would also be three boxes per measure etc.
Two, that subdivisions of each box are possible. That way, the microchords that are presently possible would still be possible.
BIAB 2024 Win Audiophile. Software: Studio One 6.5 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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box Wishlist
|
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 19,191
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 19,191 |
Yes, another vote of support, along with the suggested necessities.
+1
BIAB & RB2024 Win.(Audiophile), Sonar Platinum, Cakewalk by Bandlab, Izotope Prod.Bundle, Roland RD-1000, Synthogy Ivory, Kontakt, Focusrite 18i20, KetronSD2, NS40M Monitors, Pioneer Active Monitors, AKG K271 Studio H'phones
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box Wishlist
|
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,102
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,102 |
I presume that back at the dawn of BIAB time, whoever did the initial design reckoned that 4/4 and 3/4 were enough and that it was unlikely anyone would want more than two chords per measure or would find the workarounds "too hard/clumsy/silly". It seems very much to me like that it was then baked-in. To add the extra chords per measure without breaking whatever "step to next chord" key(s) they were then using (I imagine it was "Enter" right from ther start), they instead chose to separate the existing chords from the new additional chords with a new and different separator. And that too stuck. If I'm right, then for the life of me I can't understand why they thought people couldn't or wouldn't adapt to a double-key to step twice. I do like the box-per-beat look.
Similarly I imagine that the 4/4 constraint was tied to compact use of data right at the start. Ditto the 255 or 256 measure limiit. What I struggle to comprehend is why on Earth they didn't address all of those things at the earliest opportunity, instead propogating the fails for decades. The longer one leaves these things before fixing them, the greater the pain. Those are 8-bit data constraints. We're no longer working on 8-bit computers.
I struggle to fully understand even why it appears so painful for them to change.
If it's really just a worry about compatibility to older versions, then offer a program-only upgrade amnesty to the version with the changes.
I really think it would make PGM's task easier, quicker and lower cost in the longer term to fix it.
And it should end a huge amount of user frustration.
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
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box Wishlist
|
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 19,191
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 19,191 |
You touch on some valuable points, Gordon. Yes, the longer it takes to have these worthwhile (necessary) functions incorporated, the more difficult it will likely be to lever them in.
255 bar limit, floating-point tempo's, alternative time signatures (5/4, 6/4, 7/8 etc) and more come to mind.
BIAB & RB2024 Win.(Audiophile), Sonar Platinum, Cakewalk by Bandlab, Izotope Prod.Bundle, Roland RD-1000, Synthogy Ivory, Kontakt, Focusrite 18i20, KetronSD2, NS40M Monitors, Pioneer Active Monitors, AKG K271 Studio H'phones
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box Wishlist
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 26,297
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 26,297 |
Gordon, I agree completely. We've had these discussions going way back two decades before you joined the forum. The '255 measure limit' is only the clearest example of an 8-bit constraint. I suspect most of us here will recall that in the days leading up to Y2K, we solved that by expanding the length of the date fields, but it's an indicator of how precious disk storage used to be to keep the length of a record short. **
The floating point (non-integer) tempos is a good example where the field in the record ** needs a change of type.
PG Music could create a utility that would be a one-time conversion of old song files to meet the new format, so backward compatibility could be assured. I think the one-beat per box concept also may have originated in recent years by Swingbabymix (I'm willing to give him credit unless someone can prove otherwise) but the assumption in that idea has always been that subdivisions within the beat would be possible, since the idea originated around the same time as microchords.
** for anyone not sure what these refer to, the hierarchy of data is simply this: bit, bye, field, record, file, database. Each is a collection of the prior one.
BIAB 2024 Win Audiophile. Software: Studio One 6.5 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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box Wishlist
|
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,102
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,102 |
Thanks Trev, I'd forgotten floating-point tempos ... yes, same issue I think. PG Music could create a utility that would be a one-time conversion of old song files to meet the new format, so backward compatibility could be assured. I think the one-beat per box concept also may have originated in recent years by Swingbabymix (I'm willing to give him credit unless someone can prove otherwise) but the assumption in that idea has always been that subdivisions within the beat would be possible, since the idea originated around the same time as microchords. I agree that a one-time conversion utility is a good strategy for the future sounds like the cleanest approach, though I suspect PGM's concern would be with older copies of BIAB being unable to work with new songs. At present, I can send an SGU/MGU to someone with a much older BIAB and, apart from the likely style substitution, generally it will work. If the file format is changed significantly, that will no longer be true. That appears to be important for PGM and I commend them for it ... many, maybe most, companies would not do that. There are several possible ways to deal with the compatibility issue and I'll start by ignoring the "tough, it''s changed now" option as contrary to PGM's philosophy. Two options that strike me as suitable are either/or: - make a backwards-convertor from new format to old format and have it available as a free download (make a new product and give it away free ... not a great business case in itself)
- the "amnesty" ... a program-only upgrade to the BIAB with the new format for a peppercorn fee.
In practice, even the Pro upgrade from any pre-2022 version at $79 isn't punitive, but discounting harder once (e.g., keep the 2025 version only at, say, $20 for some years) would get rid of lots of backwards-compatibility planning, coding, testing, bug-fixing and the rest. I can't know PGM's internal concerns, but looking at is as a outsider with experience of similar issues, to me it sounds like, longer term, that would likely save time, money and probably staff frustration too. The amnesty option might warrant a "sweetener" for the people who upgrade most years so may feel a bit robbed, or it could mark a start to a content-only pricing strategy for the future. Only PGM can decide what's really best for their business plan. I suspect that it's possible that getting these tired old issues out of the way for once and for all might actually be sweetener enough. Maybe a poll?
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
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box Wishlist
|
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 19,191
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 19,191 |
I suspect that it's possible that getting these tired old issues out of the way for once and for all might actually be sweetener enough. Maybe a poll? Many of us have stated that for just one release, we would prefer to see 50 'improved features', rather than the usual 50 'new features'. Those 'improved features' would handle the constraints of 255 bars, integer time signatures, complicated and sometimes confusing menu structures, and much more. I personally think it would be a major selling attraction to users. Many users probably don't upgrade because they don't consider this or that new feature sufficiently useful. On the other hand, I am confident that significantly more users would upgrade if it fixed some of the existing shortcomings that they currently endure. Unfortunately, we have never been able to convince the company to adopt this approach.
BIAB & RB2024 Win.(Audiophile), Sonar Platinum, Cakewalk by Bandlab, Izotope Prod.Bundle, Roland RD-1000, Synthogy Ivory, Kontakt, Focusrite 18i20, KetronSD2, NS40M Monitors, Pioneer Active Monitors, AKG K271 Studio H'phones
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box Wishlist
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,651
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,651 |
It might be harder to get users to "pay for fixes" rather than new features ? I think Peter may of said it would be easier to add the chord entry on any beat in the Track view Chord Track same as Cubase, Studio One etc.. ? The best place to start with real time signatures, 255+ bars, real tempo maps is with the JUCE Plugin when they move the generate code into it, get rid of all the old limiting factors, giving it a quantum leap. I can generate up tracks in Reaper in any time signature and any number of bars. ![[Linked Image - Only viewable when logged in]](https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=download&Number=27823&filename=Reaper-Instant-Traks.png)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box Wishlist
|
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,102
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,102 |
Many users probably don't upgrade because they don't consider this or that new feature sufficiently useful. On the other hand, I am confident that significantly more users would upgrade if it fixed some of the existing shortcomings that they currently endure. I wonder how many people don't upgrade because of all the new bugs they know will appear with the new features. When I tried BIAB again after a six year (IIRC) hiatus, it was at a time when there were a great many bugs and bug-fixes over almost the entire year. It was a painful time because I spent so long trying to fully identify bugs and make them repeatable for the developers. I look at this years changes and that there have been quite a few bugs and fixes and I'm now reluctant to get involved. I upgraded my Audiophile edition and bought the add-ons, but in truth I've barely used BIAB since. So many old bugs are still there, so much clumsiness and arcaneness are still there, I still struggle to get some things to work as I think they should. As a consequence I've reverted to iRealPro for much of my practice and I've backed off from my thoughts that I might try producing music from BIAB. They're gradually losing me.
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
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box Wishlist
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,651
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,651 |
..So many old bugs are still there, so much clumsiness and arcaneness are still there, I still struggle to get some things to work as I think they should. As a consequence I've reverted to iRealPro for much of my practice and I've backed off from my thoughts that I might try producing music from BIAB.
They're gradually losing me. +1 I think that's a good thing, users going through all this with Biab, it's a great learning tool of what not to do, what's not really needed...and take all of that and put it into the Plugin/Plugin Standalone to development into Biab Lite (no bloat), easy to learn, easy to use, EZBBvst, bring a younger audience to Biab to future proof it. Look how wonderful EZDrummer is, it stayed version 1 for ages, the BBPlugin is up to version 6 and still has issues as it's using old BBW4 in the background. Is 7 a lucky number ? I know I'm the only one that keeps incessive nagging about this but I think other users need to see the light and get onboard as I don't know how the Delphi and 6mths Win then 6mths Mac will hold up going into the future ???? is there really a future for this 10-20 years from now ????
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box Wishlist
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 21,670
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 21,670 |
[quote=musocity
...............................................................
I know I'm the only one that keeps incessive nagging about this but I think other users need to see the light and get onboard................................. [/quote]
I have been calling for a complete rewrite for many years now. However every time I post that I get shot down. Its funny in that every other music software I have used has either had a complete rewrite, did real meaningful upgrades, or they went out of business. I have been using music software since the mid 1980s!
As far a what language that is way above my pay grade. I haven't programed anything other that Lotus 123 and Excel macros for many many years now.
Yeah, I've got O.C.D, Old, Cranky, and Dangerous.
64 bit Win 10 Pro, the latest BiaB/RB, Roland Octa-Capture audio interface, a ton of software/hardware
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box Wishlist
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,651
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,651 |
..I have been calling for a complete rewrite for many years now. However every time I post that I get shot down. +1 yes there has been a lot of shooting down, those users don't realize how they have held it back by trying to protect PG's feelings from getting hurt. I know the post is about chord entry but at some point we need to look at the bigger picture. I did post these before: ![[Linked Image - Only viewable when logged in]](https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=download&Number=27827&filename=BB24-Chord-Select2.gif) ![[Linked Image - Only viewable when logged in]](https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=download&Number=27828&filename=RC-Chord-Entry2.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box Wishlist
|
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 350
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 350 |
Thanks Trev, I'd forgotten floating-point tempos ... yes, same issue I think. ... I agree that a one-time conversion utility is a good strategy for the future sounds like the cleanest approach, though I suspect PGM's concern would be with older copies of BIAB being unable to work with new songs. At present, I can send an SGU/MGU to someone with a much older BIAB and, apart from the likely style substitution, generally it will work. If the file format is changed significantly, that will no longer be true. That appears to be important for PGM and I commend them for it ... many, maybe most, companies would not do that. There are several possible ways to deal with the compatibility issue and I'll start by ignoring the "tough, it''s changed now" option as contrary to PGM's philosophy. Two options that strike me as suitable are either/or: - make a backwards-convertor from new format to old format and have it available as a free download (make a new product and give it away free ... not a great business case in itself)
- the "amnesty" ... a program-only upgrade to the BIAB with the new format for a peppercorn fee.
... Consider the approach Microsoft took with its Office apps. When they added the new files formats (e.g., .docx and .xlsx), they provided backward compatibility at the file level with Save As .doc or .xls, with the warning that newer features that may (or may not) have been used in the current document or spreadsheet would be lost. At least the files could be opened by older versions of the software. I also recall Save As options for specific older versions of a given app. So...SGUX and MGUX?
ThinkPad i9 32GB RAM 7TB SSD; Win11 Pro; RME Fireface UCX II; BiaB 2024 Ultra
Bitwig Studio 5; Studio One Pro 7; Melodyne Studio 5; Acoustica Premium 7
Gig Performer 5; NI S61 MK3; Focal Shape 65; Beyerdynamic DT 880 & 770
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box Wishlist
|
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,102
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,102 |
- make a backwards-convertor from new format to old format and have it available as a free download (make a new product and give it away free ... not a great business case in itself)
Consider the approach Microsoft took with its Office apps. When they added the new files formats (e.g., .docx and .xlsx), they provided backward compatibility at the file level with Save As .doc or .xls, with the warning that newer features that may (or may not) have been used in the current document or spreadsheet would be lost. At least the files could be opened by older versions of the software. I also recall Save As options for specific older versions of a given app. So...SGUX and MGUX? Yes, I think you're right. My thinking for the external app was to get as much clutter out of BIAB as possible, but having to run an external app is an unwarranted extra task. Of course the process for saving could perhaps just call that external app.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New! XPro Styles PAK 7 for Band-in-a-Box 2024 for Mac!
We've just released XPro Styles PAK 7 with 100 brand new RealStyles, plus 50 RealTracks and RealDrums that are sure to delight!
With XPro Styles PAK 7 you can expect 25 rock & pop, 25 jazz, and 25 country styles, as well as 25 of this year's wildcard genre: Celtic!
Here's a small sampling of what XPro Styles PAK 7 has to offer: energetic rock jigs, New Orleans funk, lilting jazz waltzes, fast Celtic punk, uptempo train beats, gritty grunge, intense jazz rock, groovy EDM, soulful R&B, soft singer-songwriter pop, country blues rock, and many more!
Special Pricing! Until September 30, 2024, all the XPro Styles PAKs 1 - 7 are on sale for only $29 ea (Reg. $49 ea)! Supercharge your Band-in-a-Box 2024® with XPro Styles PAK 7! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of XPro Styles PAKs.
Watch the XPro Styles PAK 7 Overview & Styles Demos video.
XPro Styles PAKs require Band-in-a-Box® 2024 or higher and are compatible with ANY package, including the Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, and Audiophile Edition.
New! Xtra Styles PAK 18 for Band-in-a-Box 2024 for Mac!
Xtra Styles PAK 18 for Band-in-a-Box version 2024 is here with 200 brand new styles to take for a spin!
Along with 50 new styles each for the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres, we’ve put together a collection of styles using sounds from the SynthMaster plugin!
In this PAK you'll find: dubby reggae grooves, rootsy Americana, LA jazz pop, driving pop rock, mellow electronica, modern jazz fusion, spacey country ballads, Motown shuffles, energetic EDM, and plenty of synth heavy grooves! Xtra Style PAK 18 features these styles and many, many more!
Special Pricing! Until September 30, 2024, all the Xtra Styles PAKs 1 - 18 are on sale for only $29 ea (Reg. $49 ea)! Expand your Band-in-a-Box 2024® library with Xtra Styles PAK 18! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of the Xtra Styles PAK 18 here.
Watch the Xtra Styles PAK 18 Overview & Styles Demos video.
Note: The Xtra Styles require the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box®. (Xtra Styles PAK 18 requires the 2024 UltraPAK/UltraPAK+/Audiophile Edition. They will not work with the Pro or MegaPAK version because they need the RealTracks from the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition.
New! Xtra Styles PAK 18 for Band-in-a-Box 2024 for Windows!
Xtra Styles PAK 18 for Band-in-a-Box version 2024 is here with 200 brand new styles to take for a spin!
Along with 50 new styles each for the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres, we’ve put together a collection of styles using sounds from the SynthMaster plugin!
In this PAK you'll find: dubby reggae grooves, rootsy Americana, LA jazz pop, driving pop rock, mellow electronica, modern jazz fusion, spacey country ballads, Motown shuffles, energetic EDM, and plenty of synth heavy grooves! Xtra Style PAK 18 features these styles and many, many more!
Special Pricing! Until September 30, 2024, all the Xtra Styles PAKs 1 - 18 are on sale for only $29 ea (Reg. $49 ea)! Expand your Band-in-a-Box 2024® library with Xtra Styles PAK 18! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of the Xtra Styles PAK 18 here.
Watch the Xtra Styles PAK 18 Overview & Styles Demos video.
Note: The Xtra Styles require the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box®. (Xtra Styles PAK 18 requires the 2024 UltraPAK/UltraPAK+/Audiophile Edition. They will not work with the Pro or MegaPAK version because they need the RealTracks from the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition.
New! XPro Styles PAK 7 for Band-in-a-Box 2024 for Windows!
We've just released XPro Styles PAK 7 with 100 brand new RealStyles, plus 50 RealTracks and RealDrums that are sure to delight!
With XPro Styles PAK 7 you can expect 25 rock & pop, 25 jazz, and 25 country styles, as well as 25 of this year's wildcard genre: Celtic!
Here's a small sampling of what XPro Styles PAK 7 has to offer: energetic rock jigs, New Orleans funk, lilting jazz waltzes, fast Celtic punk, uptempo train beats, gritty grunge, intense jazz rock, groovy EDM, soulful R&B, soft singer-songwriter pop, country blues rock, and many more!
Special Pricing! Until September 30, 2024, all the XPro Styles PAKs 1 - 7 are on sale for only $29 ea (Reg. $49 ea)! Supercharge your Band-in-a-Box 2024® with XPro Styles PAK 7! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of XPro Styles PAKs.
Watch the XPro Styles PAK 7 Overview & Styles Demos video.
XPro Styles PAKs require Band-in-a-Box® 2024 or higher and are compatible with ANY package, including the Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, and Audiophile Edition.
Video - Band-in-a-Box® DAW Plugin Version 6 for Mac®: New Features for Reaper
Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Mac® - Update Today!
Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Mac® Video - Over 50 New Features and Enhancements!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums65
Topics82,967
Posts751,709
Members38,959
| |
Most Online2,537
Jan 19th, 2020
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean