Best Point To Alter Instrument Volumes?

[Pyre]

Hi there,

I'm currently mixing down an orchestral project using MIR, and am just wanting to confirm the best point for adjusting the instrument volumes for the most realistic result.

Obviously the first answer is to change velocity rather than volume, which I have done as far as possible. However, in the places where I would like the tone of one velocity level at the volume of another, a more traditional volume adjustment is necessary. Am I correct in thinking that more natural results can be obtained by adjusting the volume in VI (traditionally CC#7), rather than the channel fader in VE? As far as I can see, the VE inline send to MIR is pre-fader, (so the fader essentially controls the level of the virtual microphone in MIR), so while the overall level would drop if I lowered the fader, the MIR reflections would still be that of the louder sound. Is this correct? Am I therefore right in thinking that lowering the CC#7 volume in VI would be like the instrument within the MIR environment being played more quietly, with reflections to match? Making the VI volume the best place to change an instrument's level for the most natural/realistic sounding result?

Many thanks!

[civilization 3]

@Pyre said:

Am I therefore right in thinking that lowering the CC#7 volume in VI would be like the instrument within the MIR environment being played more quietly, with reflections to match? Making the VI volume the best place to change an instrument's level for the most natural/realistic sounding result?

It is more like the 'instrument's level' than a fader, part of the mixer paradigm. I think of instrument volume as the amount of energy given to the virtual instrument.

[Dietz]

Hi Pyre,

@Another User said:

Am I correct in thinking that more natural results can be obtained by adjusting the volume in VI (traditionally CC#7), rather than the channel fader in VE?

I would start with the volumes of the MIR Icons (which is reflected by VE Pro Channel Faders too, BTW) - MIR's "Natural Volumes" could be helpful in case you're working Vienna Instruments. Once the "static" balance is sounding good, you could begin to use the MIDI controllers for Volume or Expression to write dynamic adjustments. - The good thing about this approach is that actual MIDI-data and volume control can reside on the same track in your sequencer. And it's still easy to do global adjustments by correcting the static balance in MIR Pro.

... another approach would be to automate MIR Pro / VE Pro's actual volume faders by means of VE Pro's Remote Control / MIDI Automation feature, but personally I think that this might be a bit more demanding in case of complex arrangements (although it might have other advantages, like finer resolution, and the possibilty to use it for plain audio channels w/o MIDI instruments, or Group Channels / busses.

In case of MIR Pro plug-in (opposed to full MIR Pro in VE Pro), it might be generally easier to use the DAW's own channel automation for dynamic mixing, though.

As far as I can see, the VE inline send to MIR is pre-fader, (so the fader essentially controls the level of the virtual microphone in MIR), so while the overall level would drop if I lowered the fader, the MIR reflections would still be that of the louder sound. Is this correct? [...]

No. Once MIR Pro is inserted in one of VE Pro's channels, the volume control of the MIR Icon will reflect any change of the channel's volume fader, and vice-versa. ---- Sidenote: That's maybe one of the biggest differences between MIR Pro (used in VE Pro) and MIR Pro's plug-in version: In the latter case, there is of course no link between the DAW's channel fader and the fader of the MIR Icon.   

HTH,