@Dietz said:

Hi DaddyO,

Your question is a very important one: MIR is indeed meant to take over all panning tasks, as this is THE most fundamental aspect of positioning a signal in a virtual room. This means that you will leave your DAW's channel panning device untouched (... you could even switch it off, in case of Cubase/Nuendo). Under certain circumstances it might be advisable to use a panning device _before_ the signal enters MIR, either to re-center a pre-panned source, or to create a virtual ensemble (like Alan explains by means of the violin overdubs).

Only on very rare occasions you might want to "overrule" MIR panning-wise, which is what Alan Meyerson did when narrowing MIR's output to (almost) mono for that retro-mid-century vibe "Mank" is all about.

... does this answer your question?

(PS: Did you know that you share a quite unique talent with Mr. Meyerson? Dear Alan misspells my nickname in the very same way as you do - persistently, since many years. ;-D ... )

Perfectly answers the question, messaged received.  Not advisable to attempt what Alan does except in exceptional circumstances which probably do not apply to me.

Thanks Deetz, I mean Deitz, I mean Dietz. (Gotta remember that!)

;-D ... 🍸

Just watched and enjoyed that Dietz and Alan Meyerson video.

Dietz, you're a star. We know this. Your MIR is becoming ever more famous; deservedly so. Well done Sir !

Meanwhile, I'm gritting my teeth more and more as I struggle relentlessly onwards in designing and constructing my ideal localisation/spatialisation facilities in my new template. Yes, yes I know, MIR would put an end to these struggles and let me concentrate on other pressing aspects of my system. But it's a point of pride for this stubborn old engineer to do his damnedest to try it his way first. Then no doubt I'll consider buying MIR. :-)

By the way, let me make it clear here, my other post in which I slag off Mank's screenplay and score is in no way referring to the excellent and much in demand craftsmanship of Alan Meyerson, nor any of the other unsung heroes whose devotion to their craft has been lavished generously on pre-production, main production and post-production work for that film. Of course Alan is waaay too professional to bite the hand that feeds him; I would never expect to hear a public word of criticism from him on the artistic quality (or gross lack thereof) of the music he was mixing. Even so, I wouldn't mind betting he had his doubts about what those old NIN troopers had turned out as the score for Mank, lol.

@Dietz said:

Under certain circumstances it might be advisable to use a panning device _before_ the signal enters MIR, either to re-center a pre-panned source, or to create a virtual ensemble (like Alan explains by means of the violin overdubs).

Hi Dietz,

Am I understand this correctly in the way MIR takes over the panning duty? If Alan Meyerson kept the panning default on each of the violin tracks he had and put a MIR insert on each track instead of the group you could achieve the similar result by tweaking each of the individual objects that would be represented on the MIR stage?

And a 2nd question. Is the choice between using MIR insert on each virtual instrument vs an instrument group come down to what sound you're trying to achieve and the sound sources your feeding into MIR?

Like I wrote above: Yes, MIR is meant to take over all panning tasks, in stereo, surround, whatever. Positioning is mainly about panning and distance, and this is where MIR excels. Like I wrote an hour ago in another forum: 50% of MIR is having an instrument interact with the room _specifically_, dependent on its position and the way it emanates sound into all three dimensions. (... the other half would be the way the virtual microphone(s) capture this interaction.)

Vienna Instrument's Dimension Series are a good example: Of course it's possible to use one single, wide "Icon" (i.e. one instance) of MIR Pro for the whole section eight violin players. But as soon as you assign a single instance to each of them and spread them across a meaningful area of the stage, there will be an almost magical kind of increased "glue" between the eight players that's hard to achieve otherwise.

The answer to your second question is a simple "yes", but I should add that for MIR Pro 24-users grouping is a plausible way to deal with the restrictions of 24 instances. ;-)

HTH,

Excellent video, nice to see both Dietz and Martin on video...

Love the "role" feature idea you hinted about Dietz.  Looking forward to hearing more...

You have a good ear! :-D

Of all the important things in that video, this was the most important to me that I picked up on as well :).  Can't wait to see how that works giving each instrument it's own personal relationship with a microphone!

Thank you for the reply. I really do appreciate your willingness to keep sharing how this all works even though newbies like me probably ask you the same question(s) over and over.

@cgernaey said:

Of all the important things in that video, this was the most important to me that I picked up on as well 😊.  Can't wait to see how that works giving each instrument it's own personal relationship with a microphone!

We don't know yet in every detail how all the loose parts will fit together in the end, but the basic idea is to give the user the possibility to create his/her "customised MIRx" for any Venue, so to speak. I coined the provisional term "Roles" for this concept. A trivial example: The same sample set can have the "Role" of Vi1 or Vi2. The positioning parameters will vary in different Venues, but due to the "Role" assigned by the user the Icon will find its related positions (again pre-defined by the user) when switching Venues or Venue presets.

... but I'm talking about things at a much too early stage right now. Please keep in mind that this is work-in-progress which I won't discuss further ATM. Thanks for your patience!

The video was very good and informative. Thank you! And we could see and hear Dietz in person. I only "knew" him from the MIR venue photos. :)

Actually, I don't understand that "role" feature, but I'm really looking forward to an updated MIR Pro and that we would be able to make our own MIRx settings.

I really like the MIRx Synchron settings. Very well done, Dietz! But somehow I would be very interested how an Alan Meyerson "Hollywood" MIRx would sound like. I guess not that much of a difference, but who knows. Different engineer, different taste, different ears. And Alan said he works longer at his home studio, trying out things and that he don't need to be paid ... so when can we expect his MIRx settings? ;P Or maybe a tutorial?

Thanks for our friendly words! Highly appreciated.

@Pixelpoet1985 said:

[...] But somehow I would be very interested how an Alan Meyerson "Hollywood" MIRx would sound like. I guess not that much of a difference, but who knows. Different engineer, different taste, different ears. And Alan said he works longer at his home studio, trying out things and that he don't need to be paid ... so when can we expect his MIRx settings? ;P Or maybe a tutorial?

😄 ... yesyesyes, brilliant idea! We'll ask Alan to do six weeks of mining work for free! Sounds like a plan.

@Pixelpoet1985 said:

[...] But somehow I would be very interested how an Alan Meyerson "Hollywood" MIRx would sound like. I guess not that much of a difference, but who knows. Different engineer, different taste, different ears. And Alan said he works longer at his home studio, trying out things and that he don't need to be paid ... so when can we expect his MIRx settings? ;P Or maybe a tutorial?

😄 ... yesyesyes, brilliant idea! We'll ask Alan to do six weeks of mining work for free! Sounds like a plan.

Haha... but, wait, I forgot that "he actually has no technical skills" and "knows nothing". 😄