185,306 users have contributed to 42,390 threads and 255,487 posts.
In the past 24 hours, we have 1 new thread(s), 19 new post(s) and 57 new user(s).
Paolo, the underlying, basic principles of MIR Pro won't change in MIR 3D: Take a source signal (centered and as dry as it makes sense) and put it into a virtual (now three-dimensional) space by means of IRs captured by Ambisonics mics (now able to be decoded in HOA). While it sounds tempting to add it as an additional "magic" ;-) feature, there's no way in MIR to cancel existing spatial information inherent to the input signal.
As one who is developing his own recipe for a "poor-man's 3D" (actually 2D) reverb solution in stereo (using Precedence and Breeze plugins), I'll be fascinated to hear demos of VSL's forthcoming MIR 3D.
Have to say I've never been particularly enamoured of any kind of surround sound solution. Gamers are probably the biggest potential market for ambisonics, because (theoretically) it can help the player's own internal 3D situational awareness. But in listening to orchestral music, I've never felt any want or need for that kind of situational awareness - indeed it can sometimes be an unwelcome distraction. Perhaps I'm odd in that way, or maybe just not a terribly good consumer. (Well, at least Harry Gregson-Williams seems to have a similar opinion.)
Nevertheless, I certainly do love a rich and interesting stereo field, most especially one in which the direct sound from each instrument, section or subsection (usually a dry mono source, although a little wetness - as in the Synchron close/mid mics - seems to help rather than hinder) is placed in the azimuth/distance field by differences of time and HRTF (Head-Related Transfer Function) in each channel of the stereo outcome. Simply-modelled HF air absorption, along with the plain old-fashioned loudness/distance law can also help HRTF in conjuring a pretty fair sense of distance.
Stereo-to-stereo reverb (I much prefer today's algorithmic type) is then icing on the cake. I like to have two aizimuth generator/HRTF plugins and two stereo-to-stereo reverb plugins for each instrument section, which I find helps enormously with the sense of 2D placement. And I like to put slight algorthmic differences in each of the pair of reverbs.
But I'm very curious to hear what difference to the stereo field can be made by today's ambisonics. I've been happy enough to posit that direct sound paths are primarily what the ear uses for azimuth detection and for best (HRTF-derived) sense of distance, while the whole sound including (stereo-to-stereo) reverb gives the ear other, more general clues about distances. Does ambisonics treat reflected paths such that the ear receives yet more, definite clues about exact placement of the sources, as compared to the solution I've described above?
Wow Dietz, thank you so much for sharing all these great news. I have to say, I am surprised that there will be new venues since I thought VSL was very focused on creating new Synchron products. Among these new venues, can you tell us if there will be a Synchron Stage B roompack? Thanks again! I wish Paul and Ben were as talkative as you are about upcoming products đ
Best,
David
Thanks again! I wish Paul and Ben were as talkative as you are about upcoming products đ
đ .... well, they have to take care for hundreds of products, while I'm in the luxurious position to concentrate on very few of them. (Oh, and please don't tell anybody that we're talking about unreleased *gulp* stuff here. đ¤ đ
Dietz, thanks for all the details! Very looking forward to this release, and also to the new venues. Hope there will be more scoring stages, even though I think you can't surpass the Synchron Stage. It's the best sounding room so far, in my opinion, especially with the MIRx settings. It seems poor Dietz has to do some more MIRx settings! :D
I have a question for MIR 3D:
Since one highlight is an easier preset management, I would like to know if it will be possible to have different output settings for the instruments, i.e. reverb length and volume of the secondary microphone. At the moment I have several MIR Pro instances each with different settings, but it would be nice to have all instruments in one instance.
Will Room Packs bought for MIR PRO be available in MIR3D as well?
All existing RoomPacks have been reworked for MIR 3D. MIR Pro RoomPacks won't do, as they neither support Higher Order Ambisonics nor the three-dimensional Venue Maps.
As far as I know there will be very friendly upgrade paths for MIR Pro Venue licenses you already own. đ
Will we be able to load an existing MIR Pro project with MIR 3D, like what we can do in VE Pro when moving from Vienna Instruments Player to VI Pro? If not, that is a shame as I have spent many hours setting up templates for all the MIR Pro Room Packs. I am not sure I am looking forward to setting up 60 + instruments again for 8+ Room Packs.
No need to put shame on anyone. ;-) As a matter of fact we spent countless hours to make sure that existing MIR Pro setups will load without additional user interaction, while sounding as close to the original mix as possible (usually within a +/- 1 dB). All that without sacrificing any of the new possibilities.
If you need bit-identical recalls you can always re-install the (then) legacy version of MIR Pro.
How is the decorrelation of the original signals actually improved by the new engine?
By an sophisticated procedure developed for VSL by the ingenious minds of the Institute of Electronic Music and Acoustics (IEM) at the University of Graz, raising the original 1st order Ambisonics IRs to Higher Order Ambisonics (HOA) up to 7th Order, if I remember correctly. However, we stick to 3rd order because otherwise the sheer amount of convolutions would overwhelm even the most powerful modern CPUs with only a few instruments. 8-)
Sorry but what does 'raising' mean? Is this an improvement to an algorithm or a signal path or...???
I just ask because before I spend another 1000 euros on a program I would like to know a bit more about it.
Otherwise I will download the trial and be like 'oh yeah, that sounds way better' even though the human ear might not be capable of discerning the difference between 1st and 7th order let alone 1st and 3rd order.
I assume there are audio examples of results from experiments by IEM. Any chance of we could hear such results?. I searched the link you provided but came up with nought.
I searched the link you provided but came up with nought.
Well, that's probably because this proprietary development is on the cutting edge of technology. đ Examples will be published once MIR 3D is ready for release.
Thanks for your patience!
64 bit audio engines were cutting edge too (on paper) though they had zero audible benefit.
If you want to work in stereo only, you'll mainly benefit from the new preset system, improved usability, and of course compatibility with new operating systems, CPUs, and GPUs. If you're working in surround, the sonic advantage will be enormous. If you're working in 3D, then there's no comparison anyway.
If you work in stereo only, you'll mainly benefit from the new preset system, improved usability, and of course compatibility with new operating systems, CPUs, and GPUs. If you're working in surround, the sonic advantage will be enormous. If you're working in 3D, then there's no comparison anyway.
Looking forward to tabbed instances with different reverb tails, in particular!
Also, Dietz, a question (that you've probably answered before, apologies in advance):
The secondary mic is a fantastic, demonstrably beneficial feature, but I've always wondered...why stop at a secondary? Why not a third or fourth to simulate outriggers and whatnot?
