Now that X3 with Addictive Drums has been out for awhile and many users have had the chance to put it to use, I'm curious.  How many of you use the processing (EQ, Reverb, Compression, etc.) within Addictive Drums, and how many use Sonar's processing for each kit piece?  Or do you use a combination of each?  Is it a convenience issue and/or a quality issue to use one or the other?  Thanks for chiming in.

I tend to use sonar processing because the workflow that I use makes it much easier if I combine AD with drums from other plugins. If i want to, say, use a AD but decide I want a kick from Z3ta+, I can run that kick through the same processing chain since it was not AD dependant.

I've had AD for years and I always use their interface... unless I want to add an effect not in the AD like a tape emulator or some saturation.   Just my technique.   I do often render the drum track and mute the midi track and may process that track to reduce processing.

I use other plugs to process. I do use the EQ and HPF in AD for certain things. For the Toms I'll use a HPF to clear away unwanted low end and the EQ. For the Cymbals I use a HPF and EQ. It depends what's going on musically though.

RobWS - I think it's a great question and I'm interested to see what folks say. I'm still experimenting.

I like Session Drummer 3 kit pieces for some things and I like AD for many strengths it has. I'm still navigating to figure out my go to strategy. Lots of options now.

I use everything!  I'll admit that the programmers at AD know a hell of a lot more about tweaking the kits than I do, so using their starting points for eq, buss saturation and all that stuff is really nice.  Then, I can take it off, tweak it a bit, and once in sonar do any other fine tuning of the kit.  Throwing the PC buss compressor on AD kits has been working great for me.  So to answer your question:  usually a little of the AD stuff (not much reverb, but most other things get in there somewhere) then I throw the kitchen sink at the kits once inside Sonar