MIR Impression and Question

[Jay Weigel]

I have been working with MIR for the past week and find it to be a beautiful sounding addition to my studio. I am beginning to get my hands around some of its powerful features, but have a long way to go before truly understanding how to harness its power. However, one question I have centers around its outputs.

I use MIR on the same computer as my host, which is Cubase 5. I have a RME 9652 card and simple take the ADAT1 out, run it into the ADAT2 in. This way I run it back to record in Cubase should I need to. My question is this:

Is there anyway to have simultaneous multiple stereo outputs from MIR? Simple example, can I send the woodwinds out thru ADAT out 1&2 and Brass out ADAT1 3&4? Or is MIR designed to only have one set of outputs, whether that be stereo, LCR or 5.1 etc..

Thanks,

Jay

[DG]

I can't answer your question, but I do have an observation. If you have TotalMix with your RME card, you don't need to use the ADAT in and out route, as you can use the loopback facility that TotalMix has.

DG

[Dietz]

Thanks for your interest, Jay!

MIR neither offers "multed" or parallel outputs right now, nor "group/bus"-outs or submixes. Busses are something we have in mind for Vienna MIR Pro, though.

In case you just need a duplicate of your mix on a second set of outputs, you can easily achieve that with RME's Mixer: In its "Submix"-mode, you can send as many sources to a selected output as you want, even with different volumes and pannings, if you want to.

For routing back MIR's mix into cubase, you can either do that with a physical cable, or an internal loop-back, if the hardware supports it.

HTH,

[Sergino Futurino]

 I can't understand the sense of splitting outputs of MIR.

The program is made for blending as best as possible the instruments, so why do you want to separate them again?

[DG]

@Sergino Futurino said:

 I can't understand the sense of splitting outputs of MIR.

The program is made for blending as best as possible the instruments, so why do you want to separate them again?

Because it is often necessary to send stems to dub sessions.

D

[Sergino Futurino]

 But  doesn't  you loose the MIR concept goal?

Just a question[8-|]...

[DG]

 

@Sergino Futurino said:

 But  doesn't  you loose the MIR concept goal?

Just a question...

It's not up to me. If I'm told that I have to produce stems, then I have to produce stems.

Many many movies are recorded this way, so if MIR is replacing the recording studio, then I need to be able to do the same thing.

DG

[Jay Weigel]

yes, DG, you are dead on. For film work we need to send stems. Maybe there is some way that this gets addressed as things progress. For now I will do multiple passes and record into cubase. 

As to loopback, sadly the 9652 is not capable of doing this. Apparently not room on the eprom to add this functionality.

Jay

[ozoufonoun_29353]

Yes, I've asked about this on these forums umpteen times, and unfortunately no one at VSL has yet answered this basic question of standard workflow in the context of film scoring: We must deliver stems most of the time.  So, how does MIR help in this process?

Now, the folks at VSL tend to think things through to the nth degree, so this is not doubt on my part.  I'm sure it has been thought through, but, I don't yet see the answer, and nobody seems to be providing one either.  It has been asked by myself and many others and over and over again, the only answer that I see is something along the lines of "MIR is an all-inclusive mixing and reverberation solution."  However, most of the production gigs that we see in film do not allow us to be "all-inclusive."

When I asked the question on the VI-Control forum, someone chimed in and said "well, you have mute/solo on your midi tracks coming out of your DAW, right?"  THAT would be a VERY cumbersome workaround for producing stems. 

Since there are instrument groups within MIR, perhaps the audio can simply be solo'd/muted on the way out?  That would certainly be simpler than dealing with all of the indivual midi tracks coming out of the DAW.  It seems like the solution is not really all that complicated, I would just love for someone to clarify once and for all...or at least for now.[;)]

Dietz, any thoughts?

Thanks,

O

[Dietz]

Yes :-)

Right now, MIR features just one output bus (with up to eight channels). When you need stems, you will have to solo the MIDI-tracks, sorry to say so - but we were already discussing the possibility to add solo and mute to the groupable aspects within MIR.

[Jay Weigel]

Dietz,

thanks for staying on top of this thread (as you guys always do). I think the group solo possibility would be a respectable workaround. But, it sure would be great to be able to send tracks out of different stereo outs, like you suggest Vienna Pro (which I am very excited to get my hands on) will be able to do. Or, is there some way that vienna Pro would insert inside of MIR?

BTW, not being a programmer, I have no idea if what I am asking for is ridiculous or not.

Jay

[DG]

There are a lot of things that people working on music, other than purely orchestral, need. Stems is one of them.

Another is the ability to send dry signal out to hardware reverb. I hope that with the future development of MIR, these sort of things become possible, because until there is the flexibility of what we already have, it can't be considered a final mixing solution.

I think that it would be a good idea to have an area where we can post feature requests for all VSL software products, as then we can, at least, feel we have some input.

DG

[ozoufonoun_29353]

Thanks for the quick and very clear response Dietz!  Mir seems to be such a lofty project and concept that it has not yet reached the stage of seemlessly integrating with existing setups/workflow/etc.  However, this is obviously just the first public version, so I imagine it will only grow and get refined from here, especially as sheer computing power becomes less and less of an issue.  The focus could then swing more in the direction of integration rather than how-can-we-get-this-to-run-on-a-non-Cray-machine.

[Sergino Futurino]

 I perfectly understand the needs for stems but I continue to not understand the sense of splitting a MIR output

[DG]

@Sergino Futurino said:

 I perfectly understand the needs for stems but I continue to not understand the sense of splitting a MIR output

 

If you don't, you would need to do at least 4 passes. Waste of time.

DG

[Dietz]

Thanks to all for the interesting discussion. Like I said before, we have many ideas and concepts up our sleeves. Some of them will find their way into Vienna MIR, most of them will obviously be part of MIR Pro.

It's funny ... imagine you just built the first space ship, but before anybody has seen Earth from the orbit you get ask for comfy chairs, air condition and cold drinks ... 8-)

[ozoufonoun_29353]

I know, we truly are a demanding bunch, eh? [;)]

Or as they say in Wien: A Wohnsinn d' Laite (trying to spell out the Wienerisch Dialekt with my very limited Californian perspective...it's been a while since I lived there!)

[Dietz]

LOL ... perfect! Although due to your Californian influences, you have adopted that certain Styrian Schwarzenegger-idiom. In Vienna, it would be "A Waunsinn de Leit!" ;-D

[ozoufonoun_29353]

Right you are Dietz!  And, no one pronounces it quite like the Kronen Zeitung Verkaufer in the U4 Stadtsoper Station.  This guy in particular, I swear I wanted to follow him around with manuscript paper and pencil like Bartok doing musicology in the countryside taking dictation of his speach.  The musicality of this guy's dialect was incredibly fascinating.  One day I'll make a sample library of Austrian dialects! ; ) Very cool indeed.  Here, we are stuck with The Guvornator. ; )

[hose]

I need to ask something regarding instrument width in MIR pls. The width of a VI in MIR, should be treated depending on a real ensemble space(area) consumption on a real stage? Or as per instrument directivity and perception?(like what we do with panners).