Just curious...


Those who send all of AD2's audio outputs to Sonar (18 tracks or so), do they bother routing the BUS and MASTER outputs from AD2 into Sonar?

(I guess hearing the bus could give it some New York quality, but I'm not sure about the usefulness of AD's master bus unless you only want to send two tracks to Sonar instead of 18).

Thanks..

I'm not an AD user, but this applies to all virtual drum instruments...
 
The sole function of any drum sampler's master bus is exactly what you suggested: for doing all the mixing within the instrument and routing the whole thing out to a single stereo track in the DAW.
 
Personally, I prefer coming out from the instrument's busses to individual tracks, e.g. grouping all the toms into a common bus within the instrument's mixer, then sending that tom bus to a "Toms" track. That yields the best of both worlds, plus it allows me to freeze the instrument and still be able to tweak effects afterward.
 
I don't think I've ever had a need to use the master bus in the drum sampler's built-in mixer. I suppose you could put a compressor on the master for parallel compression, but that seems like a very clunky way to go about it. 

Thanks BitFlipper...
 
With AD2 the bus fader is looking like it's set up by default for parallel compression within AD2. At least with the preset that I'm using. Whether I'd use it or not is another matter.


I've just realised if you want to use AD2's built in fx the only way you can output them as a single channel (wet) is via master bus, unless others have found a way.

That seems like an oversight on the part of XLN. One of the things I like about Superior Drummer is you can apply its effects to individual instruments or to any of its 32 busses. Even Kontakt-based drums can do that, albeit somewhat less conveniently.

If the instrument can do all the mixing, then why not just use that to accomplish the same task as outputting all 18 channels separately, mixing, compressing, etc. and then busing them back into common buses again?  I suppose this could give more flexibility, but I think AD2 works well by itself.  All the presets seem to not have the same gel when I mix with separate tracks.  AD2 has its own sound, and I think the master output sounds great.  To me, the easier the better to accomplish the same task.  I am merely a hobbyist, however.

I by pass the mixer entirely, so send all the outputs except the master and effects. I've hidden some of the others though. I prefer to use the same sets of reverbs for everything, though having access to the room mics mean I use little reverb. I like to have access to the drums faders when mixing the other elements, so having them all in the console view suits me better. 
 
To do a New York style with the master outs, I'd have to mix both in and out of AD2, so the masters had a mix to work with. That's too fiddly for me.

I totally agree with that school of thought (mixing with AD2) as well. It wins the day for quick and easy. However there are things you can do better within Sonar such as automation. Also I often want to achieve something different away from the presets. Also freezing each track in Sonar helps future proof the project away from AD2.

Kamikaze
I by pass the mixer entirely, so send all the outputs except the master and effects. I've hidden some of the others though. I prefer to use the same sets of reverbs for everything, though having access to the room mics mean I use little reverb. I like to have access to the drums faders when mixing the other elements, so having them all in the console view suits me better. 
 
To do a New York style with the master outs, I'd have to mix both in and out of AD2, so the masters had a mix to work with. That's too fiddly for me.

Do you use AD2's bus output at all?

Just the Overheads and Room, not the Bus and Master.
 
I don't use the presets though, not even as a starting point.

2:43AM
If the instrument can do all the mixing, then why not just use that to accomplish the same task as outputting all 18 channels separately, mixing, compressing, etc. and then busing them back into common buses again?  I suppose this could give more flexibility, but I think AD2 works well by itself.  All the presets seem to not have the same gel when I mix with separate tracks.  AD2 has its own sound, and I think the master output sounds great.  To me, the easier the better to accomplish the same task.  I am merely a hobbyist, however.

There are advantages to both methods. If you have a workflow, effects and automation etc, that you are used to in Sonar for live drums, output to several tracks makes sense. If your looking for convenience and are okay with the AD2 offerings for effects etc. it makes sense to mix inside the VSTi.
 
Rocky