@Sergino Futurino said:

 I can't understand the sense of splitting outputs of MIR.

The program is made for blending as best as possible the instruments, so why do you want to separate them again?

 But  doesn't  you loose the MIR concept goal?

Just a question[8-|]...

yes, DG, you are dead on. For film work we need to send stems. Maybe there is some way that this gets addressed as things progress. For now I will do multiple passes and record into cubase. 

As to loopback, sadly the 9652 is not capable of doing this. Apparently not room on the eprom to add this functionality.

Jay

Yes, I've asked about this on these forums umpteen times, and unfortunately no one at VSL has yet answered this basic question of standard workflow in the context of film scoring: We must deliver stems most of the time.  So, how does MIR help in this process?

Now, the folks at VSL tend to think things through to the nth degree, so this is not doubt on my part.  I'm sure it has been thought through, but, I don't yet see the answer, and nobody seems to be providing one either.  It has been asked by myself and many others and over and over again, the only answer that I see is something along the lines of "MIR is an all-inclusive mixing and reverberation solution."  However, most of the production gigs that we see in film do not allow us to be "all-inclusive."

When I asked the question on the VI-Control forum, someone chimed in and said "well, you have mute/solo on your midi tracks coming out of your DAW, right?"  THAT would be a VERY cumbersome workaround for producing stems. 

Since there are instrument groups within MIR, perhaps the audio can simply be solo'd/muted on the way out?  That would certainly be simpler than dealing with all of the indivual midi tracks coming out of the DAW.  It seems like the solution is not really all that complicated, I would just love for someone to clarify once and for all...or at least for now.[;)]

Dietz, any thoughts?

Thanks,

O

Yes :-)

Right now, MIR features just one output bus (with up to eight channels). When you need stems, you will have to solo the MIDI-tracks, sorry to say so - but we were already discussing the possibility to add solo and mute to the groupable aspects within MIR.

Dietz,

thanks for staying on top of this thread (as you guys always do). I think the group solo possibility would be a respectable workaround. But, it sure would be great to be able to send tracks out of different stereo outs, like you suggest Vienna Pro (which I am very excited to get my hands on) will be able to do. Or, is there some way that vienna Pro would insert inside of MIR?

BTW, not being a programmer, I have no idea if what I am asking for is ridiculous or not.

Jay

Thanks for the quick and very clear response Dietz!  Mir seems to be such a lofty project and concept that it has not yet reached the stage of seemlessly integrating with existing setups/workflow/etc.  However, this is obviously just the first public version, so I imagine it will only grow and get refined from here, especially as sheer computing power becomes less and less of an issue.  The focus could then swing more in the direction of integration rather than how-can-we-get-this-to-run-on-a-non-Cray-machine.

 I perfectly understand the needs for stems but I continue to not understand the sense of splitting a MIR output

@Sergino Futurino said:

 I perfectly understand the needs for stems but I continue to not understand the sense of splitting a MIR output

If you don't, you would need to do at least 4 passes. Waste of time.

DG

I know, we truly are a demanding bunch, eh? [;)]

Or as they say in Wien: A Wohnsinn d' Laite (trying to spell out the Wienerisch Dialekt with my very limited Californian perspective...it's been a while since I lived there!)

Right you are Dietz!  And, no one pronounces it quite like the Kronen Zeitung Verkaufer in the U4 Stadtsoper Station.  This guy in particular, I swear I wanted to follow him around with manuscript paper and pencil like Bartok doing musicology in the countryside taking dictation of his speach.  The musicality of this guy's dialect was incredibly fascinating.  One day I'll make a sample library of Austrian dialects! ; ) Very cool indeed.  Here, we are stuck with The Guvornator. ; )

I need to ask something regarding instrument width in MIR pls. The width of a VI in MIR, should be treated depending on a real ensemble space(area) consumption on a real stage? Or as per instrument directivity and perception?(like what we do with panners).

Err ... I'm not sure if I really understand the question, but I'll try to answer it anyway. :-)

With "ordinary" panning, you are more or less restriced to "left/right" and "more reverb/less reverb". As MIR offers individual impulse reponses for almost every spot on a stage, we are able to think in much more meaningful terms of "nice position for violins", "nice position for a flute". So if this is what you are asking for, then the answer is: Yes the width of an VI should be treated like on a real stage - as long as you think it sounds nice, of course, because nothing hinders you from doing it in a way that nobody dared to try on the actual stage.

HTH,

hmm. I guess, not really sure what you mean by the "nice position" term though. But I think I got the point.[8-)]

@hose said:

hmm. I guess, not really sure what you mean by the "nice position" term though.

ok ic, great! Dietz, and MIR users I need to you ask you something, and I would like you to be frank with me. Basically, my new workstation for MIR should arrive by next week. As a general rule I don't change my work flow in a middle of project, and right now I have 7 more episodes left to finish scoring this project. Anyway, long story short, since this is the first official release of MIR, I would like to know if it is stable, and reliable enough to work with. BTW, for now I intend to run it on Vista. Thanks