New update MIR: the new feature "Simulate Air Absorption"

[MMKA]

Hello,

I write this message just to say, that in my experience the new feature "Simulate Air Absorption" for the direct signals is a subtle but in the meantime a very useful, audible improvement. More depth in the stereo soundstage (more natural sound!) but it is also very easy to make little changes in the sound of especially solostrings by changing the direction a little (I was working on a piano quintet). For me it means being at work on my music with even more joy. Also the possibility to switch that feature on or off for every instrument independently is very useful. I used that possibility in a piece for choir and orchestra. It is a recording of a real choir combined with a VSL symphony orchestra. To keep the words understandable as much as possible, I switched off the feature for the choir. So, a thankful user!

 

[Dietz]

Thanks for the friendly feedback!

I think your approach is pretty much the one I have taken: Sometimes the Air Absorption filter (which of course only affects the dry signal) is indeed the ideal refinement for increased perception of depth and distance. - On rare occasions, I use the Directivity Profiles for the dry signal too, to make the rotation of an instrument more obvious.

In other cases, the clear, unaltered dry signal is just what I'm looking for. :-)

Kind regards,

[Tensivity]

Didn't even realize this new feature was there.  How is "Air Absorption" different from "Distance Scaling"?

[Dietz]

@Tensivity said:

How is "Air Absorption" different from "Distance Scaling"?

Distance Scaling affects the level, Air Absorption the frequency response of the direct signal component.

HTH, 

[Pyre]

Sorry to take a slight tangent, but could I just check something quickly please?

I know that when you move an instrument in MIR further away from the microphone, the (wet) signal gets quieter. Am I right in thinking that there is also an effect of the reverb mix increasing on the wet signal? As in, the further the instrument is from the microphone, the greater the percentage of the wet mix being made up of reflections from the room rather than of the direct sound of the instrument itself? I'm not saying this has anything to do with the actual dry signal, or the balance between the two, more the raw instrument sound as picked up by the MIR microphone.

I'm not sure I have explained that very well, and I'm pretty sure that that's exactly what MIR does, as I think that's what happens in a real room (or my grasp of basic physics is more tenuous than I'd thought), I was just hoping to check. Sorry to slightly hijack a thread.

[Tensivity]

Makes sense, thanks!