Originally posted in the “Replacing my Pyramid…” topic, but figured that discussion is more useful to Pyramid owners considering Hapax purchase without somebody’s crazy ideas that may never happen.
This is indeed a bit of a pain point. 8 lanes is technically enough for the average rhythm part itself, but if you consider fills and variations and the lack of note naming in non-drum tracks…
It’s particularly painful because things like the hi-hat eats three lanes or more. It’s just a single instrument! Just that it can produce different sounds depending on how it’s played. I think this would be neatly solvable if each lane supported variations: you could cram in all the hi-hat variations into a single lane, and the variants could be displayed with different colors on the grid lane (think, orange for open, cyan for closed). Variation changeable by holding the note and rotating an encoder I suppose. I might even add ride (think red) in there too because it’s unlikely to be used at the same time as hi-hat, at least in the music I make. I’d think this sort of arrangement would make it even easier “hear” the rhythm from the visual representation than it is now.
And of course that goes for everything else too: a snare lane could have basic snare, rim and brush variants. With two tom lanes, with multiple variants each, you could cover anything a drummer can physically play. Ditto with cymbals, etc.
The instrument definition would need a different approach to support this of course. There could be a separate section for named notes (which would also help the other cases), and then the drum lane section would just refer to those. Something like this, using basic GM drum kit as an example:
[NOTES]
NULL:10:36 Kick
NULL:10:37 Side stick
NULL:10:38 Snare
NULL:10:42 Hihat closed
NULL:10:46 Hihat open
NULL:10:44 Hihat pedal
...
[DRUMS]
1: Kick
2: Snare, Side stick
3: Hihat closed, Hihat open, Hihat pedal
[...]
In this example all the notes are on the same channel and output, but with this kind of scheme you could end up with notes on different channels and outputs sharing the same lane. Dunno how much of an issue that would be.
FWIW, I intend to file this variation idea to Squarp through the official channel too, just want to see if there’s useful input from the forum first.