If you want to migrate your setup from one DAW to another, your safest bet is always to print tracks from 00:00. In case of MIR you would bounce tracks either with the actual settings (i.e. dry and wet) in one pass, or you do two passes (dry and wet separated). That's what the Global Dry/Wet Solo in MIR's Output Panel is meant to be used for. 

... the latter approach will keep all options intact when it comes to the final fine-tuning of spatialisation as well as any other kind of aspect relevant during mixing, but it will of course double the amount of tracks. 

HTH,

PS: I would still suggest to look into the possibilities of MIR 3D's Venue Presets. It's a novel approach, but a very elegant one, as you can indeed migrate complete mixing setups between Nuendo and ProTools. ;-)

Hi Deitz

The venue presets I get.  I can see that one can replicate the environment. I think my workflow issues come before this part of the process. 

I have struggled to find a tutorial that makes sense to me in respect of my multi machine setup. Will play some more.............

Sorry, maybe I misunderstood your question. But basically it's really simple: "Use one Instance of MIR for one instrument / signal source" is the paradigm. People who use VE Pro a lot tend to have it loaded there, directly with their virtual instruments. Others (like me) prefer to have it in the DAW directly. 

... there's not much more to take into account there ... 8-/ 

Hi

Its definitely me - not you :)

Im building a small session in 7.1.2 using stereo VEP7 and creating stereo inputs in my daw from VEP . Then adding an insert to that return in the daw for MIR Pro which turns each return into a 7.1.2 output. Just a bit concerned about resources. Activity monitor seemed ok at  4 sets. I will continue to build this session as a test to see how far I can go. Nuendo is my biggest draw on resources, suggesting that MIR is using the DAws resources. The MIR app is using very little resources (10% of 64gb ram at most)

At the same time Im doing a comparison with three of my 7.1.2 reverbs using the conventional send and separate return channel for the FX. 

I do question why I would need my instruments to even be in stereo given the fact that Mir takes over positioning responsibility - Mono would be better if possible and also no point having any room mics or internal reverbs within the sample players. 

Given my two machine set up this would appear too be the best setup - would you agree?

@Another User said:

I do question why I would need my instruments to even be in stereo given the fact that Mir takes over positioning responsibility - Mono would be better if possible and also no point having any room mics or internal reverbs within the sample players.

One might think so, but my own experience (from many years of mixing with MIR) has taught me differently. For some reason or the other MIR seems to "like" it better when the input signal is in stereo, with the Icon's width wide enough to trigger more than a single IR position. 

You're totally right about the use of room mics and internal reverbs in MIR. OTOH I _do_ some times send a room mic to the far back of a MIR Venue's stage for an increased feeling of depth.  😊

appreciate your input 

I'll check that thread in the morning....

Hi

Im looking at the demo in Nuendo 12 - Im still finding my Feet in Nuendo - I cant seem to get a plain 7.1.2 output from the session. Ive disengaged the stereo down mix - 1 set up a 7.1.2 group that feeds my outs but obviously Im not doing it right - can you point me in the right direction?

UPDATE : Ive sorted it - listening now.......

👍 😊

when its purely audio the whole thing is so much easier to manage than the live composition.

Its cleared up a few things for me....

I wish there were more 7.1.2 examples in other rooms. Sounds very good though - Its amazing really when you listen to the source and bypass MIR. Its like turning the Duracell bunny into King Kong....

@Another User said:

Sounds very good though - Its amazing really when you listen to the source and bypass MIR. Its like turning the Duracell bunny into King Kong....

:-D 

No - I meant 7.1.2 versions for those who have larger speaker setups....appreciate the work that went into it

Hi Deitz!

Just checking the Pro Tools 7.1.2 version of this demo. I don't have dear VR so I loaded the session - Updated the IO to my IO. removed Dear VR which reverted it ti my 7.1.2 master buss. Im not getting any Surround Right channel from this mix. (not rear surround right) 

My outputs are functioning - it appears to be missing from the mix?....

Hi DEY,

I still don't really know what you mean by "this demo", sorry. Please share some screenshots so we can be sure we are talking about the same thing.

(Off-topic side note: It is an interesting and quite funny fact that especially US-Americans consistently seem to read my nickname as "Deitz" instead of "Dietz" ;-D ...)

Oh, I see. Will check ASAP. Thanks for your patience!

Just to add to my previous post. What I have noticed is the send from the insert plug in is active on all channels. the issue is with MIRs returns. 

I started a new session and imported one stereo file. (I did notice that  some audio files import as dual mono and some as stereo - If the tracks were bounced out of cubase this is a common issue with Cubase to PT output Ive read). Anyway the issue with surround right replicated in this new session. 

I think Im going to bite the bullet and purchase however a few things concern me. Here is my take on it.....

I think compositionally its beneficial to build the composition in the MIR environment as the difference inside these rooms is night and day and I would suggest that if one does,  one is less likely to layer sample libraries to the extent one generally does without MIR. This is a saving on resources so that's good. Nuendo seems to handle those resources in common with most DAWs quite well....

Pro Tools on the other hand is not so great at handling resources. The demo wouldn't play properly at 512 sample buffers on my system. It was fine at 1024 however playback in the system usage meter did hit 100% at one busy passage. This is without the benefit of any other plug ins whatsoever in play and of course in a mix you would be adding stuff.  I don't know enough to understand if MIR works with its own resources independent of the DAW in plug in mode. 

In short its a new dawn - be good if MIR was networkable.....

Anyway Id be interested to know if you find the same issue I have identified in my system with PT and MIR in 7.1.2.

@DEY said:

[...]be good if MIR was networkable.....

Well - it is! MIR 3D runs happily inside Vienna Ensemble Pro. 😊 In earlier days this version has been considered the "full version" of MIR Pro, actually. 

Hi DEY,

I think I could reproduce the issue in ProTools. I have already informed the software engineers at VSL, and I am waiting for their reply.

Thanks for reporting!

Hi 

Thanks for confirming - I purchased last night - hopefully they will fix it quickly as no one will be able to use this in 7.1.2 in Pro Tools until its sorted. 

By the way - Is there a way to adjust the return balance of the output in 7.1.2 in MIR? In the output mic set up there are faders for each channel but I couldn't get it to impact on channel level....I was looking for a way to boost the height channels for example.....