Hello Dietz,

Thanks for your answer! Just to make sure: I'm very much aware that with real-time convolution it's not very smart to make use of any streaming technique. The ready-made/compiled IRs must be stored in RAM, but the source files could be easily located on the HD. Although I completely understand that MIR is more than "just" a reverbation unit which is based on convolution, the calculation of needed RAM doesn't really work out - for my understanding. Maybe you could shed some light on it and correct me if I'm wrong.

When MIR "compiles" / adjusts the enormous amount of IRs (which are stored on the HD) to a 4 channel IR (let's assume we are in stereo mode) and puts this 4-channel file into RAM, it might use around 10 to max. 20 MB. For each instrument this must be calculated, let's say we take the value 15MB - means on a setup with 30 instruments this sums up to 450 MB. Is it that MIR uses a different IR-format than other convolution systems, so that it would need more RAM and a value like 15 MB might be too low? Maybe that's related to the special multiphonics format MIR is using (e.g. in order to provide the microphone setup)?

If that's the case then it's still hard for me to understand why MIR is allocating a minimum of 1 GB of RAM already when the engine gets started. This would mean that it allocates the memory in advance? Doesn't it? I'm asking this because when adding instruments on a stage I can't see memory-usage growing for the MIR-processes (except when I load the samples of an instrument; but still its memory usage grows only as it would be the case with Vienna Ensemble).

Regarding the annoying MOTU 828 mk1 problem: Indeed I'm using the most up to date ASIO drivers (well; at least those which are provided officially). IMHO MOTU designs/builds very nice hardware and software for Mac whereas in a Windows environment their stuff is - put simply - crap (at least that's my impression).

Still the problem must be related to MIR, because no other Host seems to have a problem with it (e.g. Vienna Instruments. I would be so glad if we could find a solution for it.

Best,

Hans-Peter.

@Leif said:

One further question: I have an M-Audio Profire Lightbride and wonder if a firewire audio card will work OK with MIR?

Leif

Yes, it should work - at least my 828 (which is based on Firewire) does the job when it's running.

you might want to read this post to get the picture (relation between voices, latency, instruments)

astonishingly the ProFire Lightbridge worked well (VISTA + W7 64bit)

depending on what supermicro server you have you should either choose a PCIe x16 grafic card (ATI 1650 or better) or if you're limited to PCI a model which supports directX 10 and openGL 2.1 with 512 MB memory or better (ATI MV 2260 or similar)

adding a firewire card try to get some with a TI chipset
another hint: run the DPC Latency Checker to find any bottlenecks on your PCI busses

hth, christian

I have a 6015a NT supermicro with 2 x dual core CPUs. Very happy to hear the Profire should work and the post on performnce is also good news. I shall get a PCI-e firewire card for the Profire and see how it goes. Extra latency does not worry me as don't perform live with a sequencer.

Thanks for the info.

Leif

Does it matter which version of Windows 7 (64) I purchase - will the basic version be any less powerful for MIR than the premium?

Leif

W7 versions differ only in features, not in code - compare at http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/compare/default.aspx

we have a 6015A with an ATI 1950 (full height slot PXIe x16) and a TI dual FW controller (half height slot PCI-X) - IIRC 24 instruments were the limit on this type of computer because of the *only* dual channel 800 memory.

vista was troublesome on this machine but W7 runs nicely (use the latest catalyst drivers and if any W7 drivers are missing use the server 2008 versions)

christian

the biggest difference of the different W7 versions is that you can handle "just" 16GB of RAM in the Home Edition...

Bernd 

Hi,

Here is a short overview what we have tested so far. Everything is tested at "Großer Saal" Conductor position and Stereo - X-Y Standard (Cardioids):

i7 950@3.07GHz w. Hyper Threading on/ Gigabyte EX58-UD4P / 12GB DDR3 1066

Latency: 256 890 StereoVoices 65% CPU 27 instrument

Latency: 512 1140 StereoVoices 66% CPU 32 instruments

Latency: 1024 1250 StereoVoices 63% CPU 36 instruments

2x Xeon X5550@2,67GHz w. Hyper Threading on / Tyan s7010 / 24GB DDR3 1066

Latency: 256 1000 StereoVoices 60% CPU 30 instruments

Latency: 512 1300 StereoVoices 63% CPU 36 instruments

Latency: 1024 over 1500 StereoVoices 60% CPU over 40 instruments

2x Xeon W5590@3,33Ghz w. Hyper Threading on / Tyan s7010 / 24GB DDR3 1333

Latency: 256 1250 StereoVoices 58% CPU 36 instruments

Latency: 512 over 1500 StereoVoices 60% CPU over 40 instruments

Latency: 1024 over 1500 StereoVoices 60% CPU over 40 instruments

Best regards

Bernd

This would currently make no sense, as without VI you have no samples to load into it. I believe that the next version of MIR would allow you to load a 3rd party sampler, but I don't think that it has been released yet.

DG

Welcome Kambiz, and thanks for your interest in Vienna MIR!

It's exactly as DG pointed out in his message above: MIR 1.0 is for Vienna Instruments only, MIR 1.1 will be open for 3rd-party VSTi's. It will be released in a few weeks (we are in the beta-testing phase right now).

If you want to get a first impression _now_ without "wasting" a demo-licence, you could download the MIR manual from your User Area. It's available for free.

BTW: Some new "official" audio demos are mixed already, with styles ranging from pure classical over Avantgarde to Jazz.  They will be announced soon.

HTH,

Hi Dietz,

Do you still have plans to release MIR for the Mac environment or are you staying with just the PC?  If so, I think that the early targets were the end of this year.  Is that still the case?

@Chuck Green said:

Do you still have plans to release MIR for the Mac environment or are you staying with just the PC?  If so, I think that the early targets were the end of this year.  Is that still the case?

Like stated several times before - we still have the plan to release MIR on the Mac someday, but were some hurdles we couldn't overcome during the last few months. Right now, we are concentrating on version 1.1, so there will be no OSX-release ready in the near future, sorry to say so.

 argh, i "wasted" the demo license already..id really like to try MIR with 3rdparty VST`s somehow, will there be a new demo lisence (probably not) for the update?

@Dietz said:

Like stated several times before - we still have the plan to release MIR on the Mac someday, but were some hurdles we couldn't overcome during the last few months. Right now, we are concentrating on version 1.1, so there will be no OSX-release ready in the near future, sorry to say so.

Thank's for the update Dietz.  I guess I was hoping to hear that your team had gotten around the hurdles that you had mentioned several times earlier in the year so that MIR would become a reality for the current generation of Intel Macs.  If I'm hearing you correctly, there is probably not much hope that there will be a release for the Macs that are currently on the market.  This leads me to believe that if I want to deluge into the MIR experience, that I will have no option but to purchase an additional high-end PC now or wait for a new generation of Macs to hit the market and gamble that the Apple hardware and OS will not be a hinderance allowing your team to move forward.  Not what I was hoping to hear but it sounds like today's Mac architecture/OS is just not robust enough to allow MIR to function efficiently.  Calling it like it is, I'm I on track with my thinking?

i'd say the architecture/OS is robust enough, just the current macPro generation wouldn't allow you too much fun ...

triple channel ram is limited to 6 memory slots and eg. looking into your registrations and considering 1-2 GB for OS, 3-4 GB for roompack  that means ~7 GB left for arrangement ... hmmm ... kind of meager for everything beyond the special edition ...

IIRC it has been stated that pushing MIR development in general appears to be more efficient than opening the second platform at the current state of affairs ...

christian

I see Christian.  That would be tight.  Maybe a string quartet at most........

@Dietz said:

 MIR 1.1 will be open for 3rd-party VSTi's. It will be released in a few weeks (we are in the beta-testing phase right now).

[:'(]

 Arrrggghh. It has been said 10 days back Mir 1.1 will be released in a few days. Hard to deal with that impatience.

( I would N E E D this for finishing one project)

"Iin a few days"...?Hm ....  I can't find the message you refer to at the moment - but in any case, if I or somebody else wrote that, it was misleading. Sorry for the confusion. 

But to make it a bit easier (and faster) for you, we have decided to go for a public beta phase this time. :-)

 Herb wrote on Dec. 4th in this thread:

Third party VSTi implementation into MIR is already done and we are testing now.

Hopefully we can release this version in the next days.

best

Herb

Let me know when the beta version of Mir 1.1 ia available.