I debated between SD3 and EZ3 mainly because I have a drumming background and I worried if I'd be happy enough with EZ3.or if I'd get overwhelmed with SD3 and find it annoying.
The only reasons I can see to still move the MIDI data into the DAW would be for "belt-and-braces" backup redundancy, or for sharing the MIDI data with a collaborator that does not have EZ Drummer. So, now I have been leaving it in the plugin. I don't want to lose this edibility by moving the data to the DAW. With the new features to directly edit notes, and options to "humanize" the feel of parts, or to vary/ramp/randomize velocities, etc. With the Grid Editor, editing (creating or tweaking) the drum parts is so much easier than their old step-sequencer method, or dealing with a MIDI piano roll or pattern editor in a DAW. The primary reason, though, is the new Grid Editor feature. I wish it would just pick up time signature changes from the DAW but, at least you can keep the measures synchronized. With EZD3, I have started leaving the MIDI data in the plugin, for a couple of reasons:įirstly, you can now vary the time signatures within the song, though it's a manual process. So, for both of these reasons, by the end of the process, all of my MIDI data was located in, and playing from, the DAW track. So, if you had, say, a 4/4 song with some 2/4 measures at the end of a section, then the measures would get out of alignment between EZD2 and the DAW. Also, EZD2 did not allow you to vary the time signature within a song. Depending on the complexity of the song, I might have used the Song Track function to assemble some of the grooves into sections. Click to expand.With EZD2, my general workflow was to create or edit grooves in EZD2, then pull the MIDI data into my DAW (Logic Pro X) for final tweaking.
0 kommentar(er)
