Hi Dietz,

Sorry to have make you angry, I did not mean to.

The expression "living in an Ivory tour" is not at all insulting in French.

Best

Cyril

IMO the (potential) user base will be closer to 50-100,000 world wide. Anybody using samples (of any brand) will be interested in MIR Pro, and it’s quite possible that even High-end mixers (non sample based) will find useful the front-back depth control possibilities. I say all this of course not having yet heard anything.

I hope it will be under 1K€, and I really hope VSL will accept upgrade and trade-ins. I've got some classy, vintage golf clubs that Dietz would Iove I’m sure. [8-|]

If you can't afford it, you dont need it. Considering how much a high end Lex, Bricasti, TC 6000 etc. costs for at most a couple of instances in a project, no price is too expensive. [;)]

DG

Hi Diez,

I have just a few general questions

1.) Will MIR pro make sense at all without the new VI pro player, which is not soo much my cup of tea (please... no offense, some features are nice... but I really refuse to use it: having a built in reverb and positioning tool in the player being used in MIR to me has something like going to a good restaurant and ordering a roast venison with red wine sauce and having ketchup as a side)... so if I wanted to stick with the conventional VI player, could I make sense of the additional features of MIR pro?

2.) Will there be a way to integrate dimension brass (also without VI pro), especially smoothening the differences between the Dimension Brass instruments and the previous VIs (so that e.g. a solo line played by Vienna Horn 1 (or even more important things like gliss, marc etc. that are not included in dimension brass) does not sound out of place with a line played by dimension brass horn 1?

3.) you wrote at some point all the MIR calculation will be done on one computer. So with the current setup, the (much weaker) master does only send the midi information and receive the audio data and the slave does the MIR stuff. Will this be the same with MIR pro = calculation will be done on the slave

4.) will the changes implemented in MIR have an effect on VE pro as well?

5.) will the MIR pro sync with the sequencing host (or in other words, whill there be changes concerning latency)?

Thanx and greets,

Patrik

Hi Patrik,

ad 1. MIR Pro will work with any source: VI, VI Pro, 3rd-party VSTi/AUi, or audio streams. Of course the features which need Vienna Instruments to work properly - i.e. all the Instrument Profiles, Natural Volume and the like - will (have to) remain VI/VI Pro-exclusive.

ad 2. We work on a solution, but it's to early to go into details.

ad 3. Wherever the actual MIR engine is instantiated, the calculations will take place - be it the master or a slave connected via LAN.

ad 4. Yes.

ad 5. MIR Pro will allow any modern host to compensate for its latency.

HTH,

@Dietz said:

ad 5. MIR Pro will allow any modern host to compensate for its latency.

Dietz, are you able to expand on how this will work with Pro Tools? I have enough trouble compensating for latency with normal plugs, and it seems to me that the huge latencies that MIR currently requires will be a problem when you are reduced to a mere 4096 samples ADC.

DG

Hi Dietz,

Will you deliver more than one licence to use MIR on two computer? Since I have no more than 16gb of RAM on each computer, it will be limited to host all the instruments and MIR on a single computer.

Thanks

Fred

@Dietz said:

ad 5. MIR Pro will allow any modern host to compensate for its latency.

Dietz, are you able to expand on how this will work with Pro Tools? I have enough trouble compensating for latency with normal plugs, and it seems to me that the huge latencies that MIR currently requires will be a problem when you are reduced to a mere 4096 samples ADC.

DG

This limit will remain as it is, of course. ... at least I don't have to tell _you_ to get Nuendo *harharhar*  [6]

@FredB said:

Hi Dietz,

Will you deliver more than one licence to use MIR on two computer? Since I have no more than 16gb of RAM on each computer, it will be limited to host all the instruments and MIR on a single computer.

Thanks

Fred

Right now, VSL has no plans to deliver more than one MIR Pro licence as a package, sorry to say so.

@FredB said:

Hi Dietz,

Will you deliver more than one licence to use MIR on two computer? Since I have no more than 16gb of RAM on each computer, it will be limited to host all the instruments and MIR on a single computer.

Thanks

Fred

Right now, VSL has no plans to deliver more than one MIR Pro licence as a package, sorry to say so.

Ok

So will it be possible to feed audio from a VE Pro slave computer to the host that runs MIR?

It has already been stated that MIR Pro will be able to receive audio input. However, I guess that the number of streams will depend on the speed of your network as well as the power of your computers.

DG

Hi Dietz,

thank you for your answers... I guess as long as the sequencer will integrate the latency, this will be a huge advantage.... I assume then, it will be possible to do bounces with MIR pro without manually recording the MIR output as an audio file?

and, do I get it right, that MIR Pro is pretty much adding a "network plug" to the standalone MIR... so that I could use my current setup (no remote desktop), and simply sync it to the sequencer....?

Is this in a way like with VE pro, when I prepare templates and then later connect them to the master...? 

But what I don't understand:  with VE Pro I only have so many different VIs per instance... how will this be reflected in MIR pro? 

Greetings,

Patrik

@FredB said:

Ok

So will it be possible to feed audio from a VE Pro slave computer to the host that runs MIR?

Fred, thanks for your interest. Like stated several times before: Yes, MIR Pro will have all features found in the next generation of VE Pro.

Kind regards,

@Another User said:

 But what I don't understand:  with VE Pro I only have so many different VIs per instance... how will this be reflected in MIR pro?

... sorry for being dense, but I don't understand the question ...? 😕

@DG said:

I would, however, suggest that you make sure that this information is prominently displayed, to make sure that PT users know why MIR won't work properly in their set-up, unless they have nothing else loaded, or are prepared to shift audio tracks around to accommodate the latency.

I second this, otherwise ppl would be led to believe that the MIR instantiation would create a latency that Pro Tools was able to deal with.

What latency do you commonly deal with when using MIR Pro so far, and at what buffer size, of course?

@DG said:

I would, however, suggest that you make sure that this information is prominently displayed, to make sure that PT users know why MIR won't work properly in their set-up, unless they have nothing else loaded, or are prepared to shift audio tracks around to accommodate the latency.

I second this, otherwise ppl would be led to believe that the MIR instantiation would create a latency that Pro Tools was able to deal with.

What latency do you commonly deal with when using MIR Pro so far, and at what buffer size, of course?

I don't have MIR Pro (obviously) but with standalone MIR the buffer and latency is totally dependent on how many instruments. MIR has a buffer multiplier, so that even when your soundcard can't do large buffers, MIR is able to work.

Maybe if you state how many instruments you are intending to run, Dietz will be able to give you an idea.

FWIW I can't run my template at any buffer with the current version of MIR. [:(]

DG

@DG said:

[...] Maybe if you state how many instruments you are intending to run, Dietz will be able to give you an idea. [...]

With my 3 years old development machine (basically an INTEL Core i7-965 XE 3.20GHz Quad-Core with 12 GB RAM and a RME Hammerfall DSP for audio), I usually use MIR with 1024 samples latency and a buffer multiplier of 1 for 30 to 50 instruments. For more instruments I need higher buffer multipliers.

512 samples latency would work, too, in most cases, while with 256 (and a multiplier of 1) things get messy with more than a dozen of instruments. 1024 is smooth and responsive for mixing. - This makes for a total latency of 2048 samples.

HTH,