Inner Circle new Handy Drums plug in does not work correctly

[take77]

Cool. Good to hear.
Thanks for the update.

I created an aux and slapped on various reverb plug-ins to try out for a touch more ambience. It sounds pretty good as it is. Adding a touch more ambience makes it a bit more lively and it could be cool for instrumental soundtrack type compositions.
I'm impressed with the "round robin" dynamics given the light size of the plug-in installer.
I'll probably stick with using the kit pieces in-stereo for the intended track-ready sound.

For those who don't already know the shortcut for automatically assigning the multi-outs of a plug-in to PT, here are the complete steps:

https://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=423156

[K Roche]

Handy tip, I will try that on my Mac I always use templates so have never used that tip thanks .

I tend to prefer mono tracks for the kit (except for toms )
Given most of my productions are vocal driven I like to have only the kick in dead center and the rest panned slightly off center and only one panning knob

OK works as posted in the other thread. and the Mac keys are Shift + Option + Command


BUT I just tried to do some recording and it does work but only if you have the actual Stereo instrument track that the HD plug in is on,, record enabled also
Which means there is not much point to instrument tracks for the kit,,, because while it records on both the Kick track and HD track but it will only play back from the HD track and you can only edit on the HD track

[Eric Lambert]

I'm not sure why anyone would use anything other than Aux tracks for splitting out plugin channels.

[K Roche]

Originally Posted by Eric Lambert

I'm not sure why anyone would use anything other than Aux tracks for splitting out plugin channels.

Well my thought was if you could record the midi notes to the different drum pieces on their own instrument track, it would be a cleaner single set of midi notes to edit . Rather than all the different notes in stacked lanes in the single HD plugin track. (not a big deal ). but that does not appear to be the case so kind of moot point.

But all in all I am liking the sound I am getting, seems dryer than Slate Drums I think
I am looking forward to using them in my next production where I can just set up my M7 reverb on it's own Aux track and send to it

[Eric Lambert]

Originally Posted by K Roche

Well my thought was if you could record the midi notes to the different drum pieces on their own instrument track, it would be a cleaner single set of midi notes to edit .

Yes, that would be nice.

[nednednerb]

Regarding counts, sets, and dimensions:

The natural numbers: {1, 2, 3,...}

We don't say start at track 0, we say start at track 1.
Bar 1|1|1 starts at 0.00 seconds.
That's cool.

The set of drums has little to do with a number, but the nature of the sound and drum. Kick, snare, hat, not drum 21, 49, and 3, although the sample library may use those integers.

So, the set of drums. Each drum has a "stereo" dimension. What if we had three ears? This would be arbitrary for evolution to pick {1,2,3,...} ears to suit your evolution. Octopus model of potential sensorimotor experience proves this!

So, first drum, a kick in stereo dimension, second drum, a snare in stereo dimension, third drum, a hat in stereo dimension.

So, numerically, the hat is the third stereo pair, numerically third.
It's the 3rd set of stereo outputs, also, which in mono count is 5-6.

Numerically speaking, the "St." pair "x" equals the mono channel numbers
"(2x-1)" for L channel and (2x) for R channel"

There is actually no coherent way to match the "3rd pair" with individual numbers that makes more sense, I would suggest.

Using "ABCs" or "I, II, or III" could useful in some places.
Otherwise, the counting and set principles (coming from math, logic, and computing principles) are useful to know also.

[K Roche]

Originally Posted by nednednerb

Regarding counts, sets, and dimensions:

The natural numbers: {1, 2, 3,...}

We don't say start at track 0, we say start at track 1.
Bar 1|1|1 starts at 0.00 seconds.
That's cool.

The set of drums has little to do with a number, but the nature of the sound and drum. Kick, snare, hat, not drum 21, 49, and 3, although the sample library may use those integers.

So, the set of drums. Each drum has a "stereo" dimension. What if we had three ears? This would be arbitrary for evolution to pick {1,2,3,...} ears to suit your evolution. Octopus model of potential sensorimotor experience proves this!

So, first drum, a kick in stereo dimension, second drum, a snare in stereo dimension, third drum, a hat in stereo dimension.

So, numerically, the hat is the third stereo pair, numerically third.
It's the 3rd set of stereo outputs, also, which in mono count is 5-6.

Numerically speaking, the "St." pair "x" equals the mono channel numbers
"(2x-1)" for L channel and (2x) for R channel"

There is actually no coherent way to match the "3rd pair" with individual numbers that makes more sense, I would suggest.

Using "ABCs" or "I, II, or III" could useful in some places.
Otherwise, the counting and set principles (coming from math, logic, and computing principles) are useful to know also.

Sorry but don't really understand what you are trying to say

Don't know about dimensions ?. But HD outputs are in stereo channel pairs (technically two mono channels) , so obviously the channel PT number increases sequentially HD st1 out is PT channels 1 and 2 in .... st2 is channels 3 and 4 .... st3 is 5 and 6, and so on.
BUT you can set each drum up in the DAW on either a stereo track or a mono track .

Have no clue what "Numerically speaking, the "St." pair "x" equals the mono channel numbers "(2x-1)" for L channel and (2x) for R channel"" means. But
If you are using mono channels (in Pt) then for HD's st2 out,, the PT input channel selection is then either 3+4.L or 3+4.R

[nednednerb]

Hi there,

You had expressed some wondering about why "Stereo 2" makes for "Mono 3 -4"

It's actually, meaningfully,

A specific drum with a left and right channel.

I mention Octopus, because IF we had evolved to have three ears, we might have developed and used the word "Stereo" (referring to dimensions of hearing, NOT the integer "2" for three channels of audio going to each of the 3 possible ears.

So I said, the dimensions of stereo field are "Left and Right" and I mean specifically the left ear is not "1" and the right is not "2" except and only because of convention. There is no reason the right ear is not the first ear. It is JUST convention to stick to.

This, a drum with width doesn't essentially have a number. A kick drum could be the 1st drum, or the snare could be the 1st drum. You probably see, "duh that doesn't matter" and I wouldn't doubt that.

However, using numbers for "stereo groups" (or individual drums, in this plugin), as well as numbers for "mono channels"

Could unfold the drop down and see "Kick - L + R"
But instead it just shows St.2 - Mono.3 + Mono.4

When switching to actual surround sound, the number of mono channels per group definitely starts to betray "numbers" because the speaker above and centre, which number does it get?? It's merely convention, we decide, but chances are we just use the program where someone else decided.

As such, I'm not confused about how it is working and it makes the most sense that it possibly could, I think.

St.6 would get two times six for mono channel 12 (R) and minus one for channel 11 (L). That's it, with my "equation" referring to "2x-1" - it's just the abstraction of the relation between stereo numbers and mono numbers. Stick in the St. digit, and you can 2x-1 to get the L channel number. At least it's not a square root or something!

The real "pedantic" point here (spending time instructing) is both for yourself and others reading. This kind of logical association between computer numbers and real world hearing channels CAN mess one up, so understanding the relations between objects (like drums), senses, and computer numbers might help sort out the routing. Even if it remains a few steps with "well, uh, double that, so uh, yah.. TWELVE" in the brain.

[K Roche]

Originally Posted by nednednerb

Hi there,

You had expressed some wondering about why "Stereo 2" makes for "Mono 3 -4"

It's actually, meaningfully,

A specific drum with a left and right channel.

I mention Octopus, because IF we had evolved to have three ears, we might have developed and used the word "Stereo" (referring to dimensions of hearing, NOT the integer "2" for three channels of audio going to each of the 3 possible ears.

So I said, the dimensions of stereo field are "Left and Right" and I mean specifically the left ear is not "1" and the right is not "2" except and only because of convention. There is no reason the right ear is not the first ear. It is JUST convention to stick to.

This, a drum with width doesn't essentially have a number. A kick drum could be the 1st drum, or the snare could be the 1st drum. You probably see, "duh that doesn't matter" and I wouldn't doubt that.

However, using numbers for "stereo groups" (or individual drums, in this plugin), as well as numbers for "mono channels"

Could unfold the drop down and see "Kick - L + R"
But instead it just shows St.2 - Mono.3 + Mono.4

When switching to actual surround sound, the number of mono channels per group definitely starts to betray "numbers" because the speaker above and centre, which number does it get?? It's merely convention, we decide, but chances are we just use the program where someone else decided.

As such, I'm not confused about how it is working and it makes the most sense that it possibly could, I think.

St.6 would get two times six for mono channel 12 (R) and minus one for channel 11 (L). That's it, with my "equation" referring to "2x-1" - it's just the abstraction of the relation between stereo numbers and mono numbers. Stick in the St. digit, and you can 2x-1 to get the L channel number. At least it's not a square root or something!

The real "pedantic" point here (spending time instructing) is both for yourself and others reading. This kind of logical association between computer numbers and real world hearing channels CAN mess one up, so understanding the relations between objects (like drums), senses, and computer numbers might help sort out the routing. Even if it remains a few steps with "well, uh, double that, so uh, yah.. TWELVE" in the brain.

Me thinks you are way over thinking this and injecting thoughtful but abstract and likely unnecessary verbiage



The simple answer is the Handy Drums numbering scheme for outputs is in sequential pairs st-1 is channels 1-2 ....st -2 is channels 3-4 ... st-3 is channels 5-6 etc. etc. (And yes obviously not the drum names,,,, given you can assign any of the 16 pairs of st channels to any named drum )

AH I now get what you are saying about the 2X -1 gives you the left channel number.
But functionally it makes no difference because in PT in a mono track,, either PT number will trigger the sound --- for example if the kick is st-2 on HD then either PT input (3+4 L) OR (3+4 R) will give you the kick sound

[nednednerb]

Originally Posted by K Roche

Me thinks you are way over thinking this and injecting thoughtful but abstract and likely unnecessary verbiage



The simple answer is the Handy Drums numbering scheme for outputs is in sequential pairs st-1 is channels 1-2 ....st -2 is channels 3-4 ... st-3 is channels 5-6 etc. etc. (And yes obviously not the drum names,,,, given you can assign any of the 16 pairs of st channels to any named drum )

AH I now get what you are saying about the 2X -1 gives you the left channel number.
But functionally it makes no difference because in PT in a mono track,, either PT number will trigger the sound --- for example if the kick is st-2 on HD then either PT input (3+4 L) OR (3+4 R) will give you the kick sound

It's true, I said so, too.

I understand the numbers here as logical

The logic always applies. It is not necessary.

It's okay.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk