JPF Home Page Forums General Messages Musician Message Forum BIAB version?

Band in the Box plugs in nicely to my DAW.
I was going to purchase it but there are several versions ranging in price from a couple of hundred bucks to 600. I dont want to buy a loaded program with bells and whistles that I will never use.

Can anyone suggest what level BIAB package would prolly work for someone such as myself.

Thanks

Martin

Martin,

You would get better advice by asking in the PG Music Forums.

https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm


Regards,

Bob

Thanks for the link Bob. I will take a look.
The guys at Guitar Center usually give me good software advice, but none of them use the program.

Much appreciated.

Martin

Hi Martin.
Don't go for anything less than the Ultra Plus pack. I took Floyd Jane's advice and glad I did.
If you do go for less it's a good bet you will want to upgrade within a month and that will be more expensive.
I've now got the Audiofile version but not a great deal of difference between that and Ultra Plus pack.

Vic

Marty, PG Music tends to have big sales at the end of the year, which can reduce the price by a lot. I started off with the PRO (the most basic version) and then upgraded during the sale, saving hundreds of dollars. I now have Ultra-Pak. The Ultra-Pak+ doesn't seem to offer any more except for song lessons. Their website can be very confusing. It gets even more confusing during their sales. Sometimes they confuse themselves, which is how I ended up upgrading for such a bargain price
I updated last year to get the VST plug-in, but have found it pretty much useless with my DAW.

Vic

What differences between Utrapack and Audiophile have affected you the most?

I went for the audiophile because they are uncompressed wav files so I assumed they would be better for recording. It's like the difference between wav and MP3.
If you want to make quality audio cds, audiophile is the way to go. You may prefer to go for the Ultra plus pack first to see how you get on with it though.

https://www.audioanimals.co.uk/news/quick-tips/why-wav-is-better-than-mp3

Vic

That's interesting about the uncompressed .wav files in Audiophile, Vic. I export files from BIAB to my DAW as .wav files. I guess that might not really provide any benefit since the original is a wma.

From what I had heard the audio file contains every nook and cranny they have, every style and variations ever made, and with the added advantage of working with wav which supposedly sounds better.

Isn't it a moot point though because once you put it into a format the listener can hear it's going to be mp3 anyway?

I think some folks have done very well with band in a box, I'm preferring stuff where you have more control of what is being played...

Toontracks line is great

I was thinking the same, FD, regarding the formats that most people use to consume music in these days of streaming, basically some kind of MP3. Vic made the point that Audiophile comes into its own if you want to make high quality CDs. That seems to make sense.
Other than the uncompressed files, I don't think there are any differences between Audiophile and UltraPak+.

I talked with the PGmusic rep on the phone right before purchasing. She told me that Audiophile came with wav rather that mp3s or mp4s.
The point that I made to her is that I dont think that very many people could tell the difference between a wav and am Mp3 when listening through the speakers that they are most likely to have...which is what I hear Gavin and FD saying.

I've been in recording studios that had state of the art speakers and I doubt that I could be certain of wav vs mp3 coming out of them.

I went with the ultrapak. She said that it offers more styles and real-tracks than I will ever know what to do with. She didnt state it that way but the point came across.
And it sounded right.

Music always sounds better in the studio than it does at home listening on your computer or stereo. So they mix and master knowing this

You may hear the difference when your recording but not in your car.

Really? Are you sure?

The thing is:
If you make an mp3 from quality wav files it'll sound better than making an mp3 from a lesser quality file. Most of the original presence is retained.
Also, if you copy that mp3 again you lose even more and so on until you get left with dust. You can copy a wav file infinitum without any loss.
The equivalent in digital photography is a j.peg and a tiff. file. You can copy a tiff file over and over with no loss.

I know that mainline radio stations will ask for a wav copy and a wav made from an mp3 is basically still an mp3 so it will only retain the quality of that mp3.
Is it worth the difference in price? I suppose it depends what you want it for.

Vic

So... in the case of BIAB, the recording undergoes compression once - from the original .wav file recording to .wma (which is a slightly superior relative of an mp3, as far as I can figure out). Then you can save it as a .wav and bring it into your DAW, so no further compression takes place. Having Audiophile avoids that one compression and I'm certainly willing to believe that it sounds better. Thanks for pointing this out. Very informative.

Vic

No argument about the quality of wavs. But I have copied mp3 back and forth and forth and back when messing with songs, and I've yet to notice an objectionable difference. A diminished presence is a concern I had not considered. BIAB just came this afternoon. Going to give Ultrapak a go and decide later if I need to upgrade.
Thanks for the insight.


In other news...
In looking at the PGMUSIC forums, I saw an excellent quote. (paraphrased from memory)

"I love BIAB because...BIAB shows up on time, not drunk, not stoned and not in a bitchy mood."

I laughed out loud when I saw that.

Sure about what Marty?

That music sounds better in a recording studio than at my home.
LoL ...was kidding.

I appreciate that you are giving "life lessons, " but I already knew that one.

It wasn't a lesson, it's a fact. People don't hear the track through treated studio rooms or recording gear, they hear it on whatever device they own, and wherever they are when they hear it, affects the sound.

Hence, no two people really hear the same exact mix

Ok then.
Fact it is.

Are you sure about that?

No. I am sure of nothing.
Particularly unsure in 2020.

The real experts are able to mix and master so that the track sounds great through high quality equipment, but still sounds good through a cheap mono speaker. It's not easy. I have to admit I can't do it. One of the many reasons I'm not an expert.

Yes and case in point, I still use an ancient alarm clock radio.

And it still amazes me how I can hear a song from 1980 on this chit radio with one speaker, and somehow it sounds professional.

I'm guessing if one of my home recordings were heard in this radio it would sound like a complete mess

Here the actual radio I still use to wake up with

https://0303dba.netsolhost.com/ge_74624_clock_radio1.jpg

I am under the impression that BIAB uncompresses the wma files to wav files while it is doing audio processing. To my knowledge, if you use the audiophile version, your wav forms NEVER go under any compression throughout the entire BIAB session. If you output to mp3 or wma, that is the only time compression is done to the audio files. Most of us can only hear the smallest, slightest differences between wav and mp3/wma (if any). So I would say you only need the audiophile version if you are doing purely professional work.

But the audiophile version comes on hard drive, so one advantage is it doesn't kill the pcs storage capacity or cpu and with the hard drive you get every style and genre they have. From the first few to the latest released

Well,
It appears there are several Music Producing Software Programs out there. Free Versions as well as more elaborate versions. I don't have one. For a better look just Google Music Software Programs.

The UltraPak also comes on a hard drive. It has all the same tracks and styles as Audiophile.

I have no experience with any programs like this...I'd like to hear some tracks people have completed using BIAB... Anyone want to put some links to their BIAB recordings?

I would like to see & hear if this is something I should look into more...

I'll bite.

Here are 150 songs. 95% of everything in them came from BIAB.

http://www.floydjane.com/Songs/Player.html

And...btw... for the discussion... I have the UltraPAK. In my opinion no one is going to hear any difference using the Audiophile version once you get more than one instrument in a production (and the only time you hear ANY difference is from a single acoustic guitar or a single cymbal - and even then, the difference is not going to matter because it is so slight)

Here a 50 songs - same thing..

https://soundcloud.com/floydjane

Here are some more...

https://soundcloud.com/fjsongs


OH..and btw....Steve - when you were commenting on Alan's song and then heard "Good Ol' Girl" play (which you listened to 3 times)... that was mine. And that is BIAB - except for the lead guitar which I played. Only time I've ever done that (recorded my lead). Usually the leads in my productions are generated from BIAB... (you can find it in the 3rd list)

Steve, almost everything on my recent songs are compiled using BIAB and sometimes a little of EZ Drummer or piano.
I do have to cut and paste sometimes but that's part of the enjoyment.

Vic

Vic,

Those guitar solos are BIAB ?

Hi Steve:

You have managed to lure (single-handedly) one of the most talented guys we ever had among us here at JPF...
Floyd Jane. He is a top notch BIAB user and there must be at least a dozen more in our midst. I particularly miss Mike Zaneski who was so generous to share ideas pertaining to BIAB and other recording techniques with us. I hired Mike to do 14 work for hire demos for me and several other JPF songwriters kept him busy all the time.

Deej is using BIAB to his advantage to enhance that great vocal he shares with us every now and then. Like you, I am constantly amazed at the talented folks we get to rub elbows with here at Brian's Place.

Regards, ----Dave

Gents

The information gained here has been very beneficial. Thanks to everyone who posted.

Martin

Hell, so I ve been spending a day laying piano tracks and not happy with any of em. .

I guess I need to watch some videos on this.

Hi, Martin, Steve and all . . .

I'm a little late to this thread, but thought I'd chime in. As my esteemed friend and occasional collaborator, Mr. Rice notes, I am a BIAB user . . . though I'm not nearly as skillful using it as some that I've heard, Mr. Jane being among the best of them. Mike Zaneski is also incredibly talented using BIAB, and he's missed on this board. There are others I know of that put me to shame.

Martin, you've made the right choice with Ultra-Pack. When I first purchased it, I went with the low end option only because I wasn't sure I could figure out how to use it and didn't want to lay out the cash to no good end. It was frustrating at first (not because the software is all that difficult, but more because I'm technically challenged at times, and have no formal music training). But once I got a feel for it, I upgraded and continue to do so to ensure I have the most options open to me. My process for using BIAB, one which Mike Z. advocated and that works for me at least, is not to stay with any particular style, but to audition a myriad of different RealTracks to find which ones work best for the song and sound one has in mind. You'll enjoy the software, no doubt. If you have any questions, I'm happy to try to answer them. But PG Music has resources available to you as well to answer any questions you may have. And Vic is a great resource as well (he was a lot of help to me early on).

It's somewhat embarrassing to confess perhaps, but I only days ago learned the difference between a WAV and MP3 recording. I don't have the audiophile version, but I'd say that messing around with both types these past few days, I doubt most people would hear the difference. Though audiophiles perhaps would over the right equipment. But I doubt anything posted to, e.g., SoundCloud vs. SoundClick, on anything you link to this site and via Internet, would come across as meaningfully better to most.

Steve, I believe you've commented on a couple of my tunes, the last one being "Complete". All of them are 100% BIAB, I'm not playing a single instrument, a single note. And I can't remember the last time I've done a solo track to accompany it . . . actually I think it was "Pieces of You" because I couldn't find a fingerpicked guitar RealTrack that did what I needed it to. I play guitar, but really I'm not much more than a strummer, and with my lack of musical theory often play by ear; that is, sometimes I don't always know what chord I'm playing and, when programming into BIAB, I have to look it up. And as an amateur player, I often have challenges with keeping time throughout a song . . . so synching up multiple tracks for me got both frustrating and messy.

BIAB helps me showcase my song far more than I could do alone, allowing me to add drums, piano, lead guitar, horns, pedal steel, etc.,you name it, all in time. So once I get the sound and mix of instruments to my satisfaction, I move them over to my DAW, start mixing and lay the vocals. Of course, then the mixing becomes the hard part, lol!

BIAB does have its shortcomings . . . e.g., when it comes to trying to match a fingerpicked song to how I want it, it's a challenge sometimes and I have to go in a different direction than I would have liked. For example, "Because I Dream" is not how I play it on guitar . . . though I'm happy with the outcome nonetheless. And lead guitar solos can be hit and miss. Sometimes they just work perfectly--e.g., a song I did with Dave Rice called "Just a Dream" and the lead in "Girl with Dark Sunglasses," among others. But other times, as Vic mentioned above, you need to do a bit of cutting and pasting. I have a song I'm hoping to post in the next couple of days where I had to do just that. And sometimes, no matter how hard you try, you can't quite get the sound you want on a song--so you end up compromising and going a slightly different direction. That's probably more due to my lack of expertise, but it can still be frustrating.

But on the whole, I'm obviously a fan of the software. I'm glad JPF turned me onto it (Mike Zaneski, Vic, and others). It helps a musical hack like myself better present the song like I hear it in my head when I play it. It is pretty easy to use, and someone with your talent I think would take to it quite quickly.

I hope this is helpful. Again, happy to answer any questions you may have.

Regards to all,

Deej

Deej makes a good point. The use of real tracks sometime changes the direction you can go in because you don't always get exactly what you want out of the real tracks. That is because realTracks is not midi. Midi utilizes individual notes that you can shape any way you want (if you have the skill and patience!). Real tracks are made up of musical phrases that last at least a few notes or even measures.

The way the more talented biab users get around this is to slice and dice to get more of what they exactly want. I have often wondered if having the advanced version of Melodyne would be of use since you can break the phrases down into individual notes! In any cases, the compromises are small enough that you will get 80-90% of what you want just by picking the right real tracks and editing your chords just right.

I have found that the more you mix in "live" instruments into the mix, it becomes more and more real. I always record my own acoustic/electric guitars where possible to any biab song I do. (Hmmm, I haven't done a biab song in a long, long time.

Here is a short biab tune: https://crowssayveeeh.bandcamp.com/track/little-bit-of-loving I am playing an acoustic guitar and electric guitar (and a little percussion in the middle) while biab plays drums, bass, acoustic guitar, piano, harmonica and banjo.

Kevin.
I don't have Melodyne but I can and do drag BIAB instruments into V-Vocal for stretching and pitch changing but not sure if that works in the non audiofile versions.
It works fine if it's not overdone. Right about putting the odd live one in too if BIAB won't play what you want.

Vic

Steve. Yes, 99% with a little adaption and manipulation here and there.
If you can play a guitar it helps, though.
Vic

I have another question for anyone who would like to answer?

Who loads the entire program on to their internal hard drive and who leaves the real tracks on their external hard drive?
For anyone who leaves the real tracks on the external...how does that work out?

Thanks

I load mine on my computer's hard drive. The folder that contains BIAB is 140 G (the UltraPak). It takes an hour (or 2) for it all to load, but that is just once. If you update to new versions, they load right over the existing stuff.

2 advantages to that, I think. Regeneration of tracks is a bit faster. And, once you load it to the computer hard drive, you can disconnect the drive it ships on - so it will never get corrupted and you always have a backup. If you have the space, why not...

(the company keeps your purchases available in your account, so you can always re-download them from there. So a local backup is not totally necessary. But, still, I like having it).

Marty, I leave everything on the external hard drive and run it all from there - program and tracks. I don't load anything from my computer. It works just fine. The exception is the DAW plug-in, but, as I said before, I find that pretty useless with my DAW (Mixcraft). I do everything I want in BIAB and then export the .wav files to Mixcraft, where I add the vocals and anything else.

Marty,

Really depends on what computer you have and memory capacity. I bought a new Mac this past November, and with the much higher memory capacity, I loaded everything on the hard drive. However, my prior Mac was only 250 GB, so I worked off an external hard drive. Either works fine, but its more convenient, IMHO, to have it on the computer's hard drive.

Deej

Steve, I echo what Deej says. Like him, I have done songs that are completely BIAB, except for the vocals, of course. That last one you commented on, "Gulp Don't Sip," for example. Others are mostly BIAB.

One advantage that hasn't been mentioned here is that the recording quality is consistent. I don't really have a home studio and my recording environment is not great, but with BIAB, that doesn't matter.

When I first discovered BIAB, it felt weird and a little like cheating. I loved the opportunities it opened, but I felt like I shouldn't take myself seriously for using it. That's what is behind my "band," the Mysterious Beings. On my website, mysteriousbeings.com, I have bios for all the members, Dee Sharpe on guitar, Aldo Sachs on alto sax, Juan Tusrifor on bass, Kit Bashir on drums, Gene Poole-Skimmings on keyboards, Beau Strokes on fiddle, our roadie Ford Van Drijver, and our Swedish recording engineers Max and Minnie Mumsetting. I then weave these characters into stories behind the songs. Amazingly, I am occasionally contacted by talented musicians wanting to join the band. https://mysteriousbeings.com/meet-the-band/.

I've since heard the marvelous way that some folks here use the program and feel a little less sheepish about using it. I have a lot to learn before I can use it like them. For me, it has allowed me to take songs that have been going around my head for decades, as well as new ones, and give them some sort of life,

What I usually do and this is just me, and by no means a one size fits all. But what I usually do is , not use biab and listen to other peoples demos who do.

It works out I use much less memory listening to other peoples music .

But it's a radical approach I know.

When those men kidnapped you as a young child...they did very bad things to you, didn't they?

Gavin,

Really interesting comment--I felt the same way when I first started using it . . . like I was cheating. And so, on some of the earlier efforts, I usually tried to add something if just to say, "Yes, I'm playing on that." But pretty quickly it became clear that the BIAB "musicians" just play better than I can. So even when I can't find the exact sound I'm looking for, I can almost always find something that works for me and the song. It can be a time suck . . . but auditioning different styles and RealTracks will get you there eventually, usually. And it's a better compromise than me playing a track and ending up with a lesser production.

I occasionally play a song I've done for a friend, who I play guitar with fairly regularly. He often asks me whether I'm playing on any of it--the answer almost always being "No." On one hand, I get the feeling he thinks it's cheating too (which just added to my feeling early on that I was, in fact, cheating!). On the other hand, he's pretty impressed with the program. And I figure if he has to ask whether I'm playing on it or not, it means he can't tell!

Cheers!

Deej

The goal is to make and present your music the best way possible. Unless someone stole the song, there is no "cheating."

Nope, even then I was tougher than the rest, kick their azz