MIR vs. Vienna Suite

[noldar12]

I am about to send my main samples computer to the DAW builder (ADK) to have it upgraded to a 930 i7, with 12 gigs of ram.  It seems like a good time to potentially revamp my overall setup as part of the upgrade process.

I would appreciate advice on whether it would be best to get the Vienna Suite or MIR.

I can see real advantages with both programs, but I can only afford one.  My interests lie in composing Classical/Romantic period orchestral and chamber works (not late Romantic, 20th century, or cinema styles that call for huge orchestras).  At present, I own the four VSL SE libraries.

I cannot claim to be good with the engineering side of things.  The Suite would provide many helpful tools, and I know that I would find many of the presets to be of considerable use (and also good tools for learning).  OTOH, MIR would provide an ideal mixing environment.  Note that at present, the only plugins that I have are the ones that come with Sonar.

Realistically, a dual Xeon computer with 24-48 gigs of ram will never be in my future, so if I were to get MIR, I would always be running it on a lower end system.  That would also potentially point in the direction of the Suite, but I am really torn both ways about this decision.

Thanks for your advice and comments.

[DG]

 I think that in order to answer this question the first thing to decide is how big a template do you need for your samples? MIR takes up a fair amount of memory and with only 12GB (did I really say only?) that would realistically give you 4-5GB at most for sample loading.

The next thing to ask is that you will need to make sure that your soundcard is multi-client. if not then that's another expense to take into consideration.

The last thing is to get the guys at ADK to tell you how many instruments the system they are building will run and at what latency. if you can't run enough instruments, then the choice is easy.

DG

[Dfx]

Hello! Im new to the world of Vienna instruments. I don't know what software to buy, so i have some (probably stupid) questions.. 1) How does Vienna MIR work? Is it possible to use this software as a vst plug-in? If not, then how do i apply the accoustic of Vienna Konzerthaus to my mix? 2) Is it necessary to have both Suite and MIR installed to be able to record a mix using MIR's reverberation controll possibilities? 3) I'm sorry for my english, but i hope you understand what i mean.. If there is any other information that i probably need to know, please tell me.. I want to make the right choice.. =) Thanks.

[Dietz]

Thanks for you interest in our software products, Noldar12!

@Another User said:

Realistically, a dual Xeon computer with 24-48 gigs of ram will never be in my future, so if I were to get MIR, I would always be running it on a lower end system.  That would also potentially point in the direction of the Suite, but I am really torn both ways about this decision.

Thanks for your advice and comments.

You're welcome! As I wrote above: Don't expect wonders from 12 GB RAM, but it's a valid solution. Ideally you would get MIR _and_ the Suite (... as MIR will happily host all 64-bit compatible VST plugins), but I I were in your place, I would choose the MIR route.

Kind regards,

[Dietz]

@Dfx said:

Hello! Im new to the world of Vienna instruments. I don't know what software to buy, so i have some (probably stupid) questions.. 1) How does Vienna MIR work? Is it possible to use this software as a vst plug-in? If not, then how do i apply the accoustic of Vienna Konzerthaus to my mix? 2) Is it necessary to have both Suite and MIR installed to be able to record a mix using MIR's reverberation controll possibilities? 3) I'm sorry for my english, but i hope you understand what i mean.. If there is any other information that i probably need to know, please tell me.. I want to make the right choice.. =) Thanks.

Welcome DFX,

While I'm very fond of Vienna MIR 😉 , a good description of its goals and features would go beyond the scope of a short forum message.

Please visit MIR's product pages for a first impression: -> [URL]http://vsl.co.at/en/211/497/1687/455/1666/1328.htm[/URL] (... don't miss the subpages on the left, like MIR "Control Icon", "Product Details" and so on.)

A first video tutorial is available, too: -> [URL]http://vsl.co.at/en/211/497/1687/455/1717/1325.htm[/URL]

Alternatively, feel free to download MIR's manual from your User Area; it contains a dedicated section explaining the ideas and principles behind this absolutely unique application: -> [URL]http://vsl.co.at/en/68/428/709/239.htm[/URL] ... see the "Think MIR"-chapter.

HTH,

[noldar12]

DG, thanks for the comments. 

I can answer a couple of your questions (and those answers will indicate why I am having trouble making a decision).  I will be running my sequencer on a different computer, so the multi client issue is of less concern.  Nevertheless, I will double-check to make sure those drivers are multi-client (soundcard will remain a Gina 3G).  Using SE, my present template is small enough that it would fit into 4-5 gigs ram.  The motherboard would support up to 24 gigs of ram, and the new 6 core i7 processor, so there would be at least some headroom for long-term expansion, if eventually needed.

Any further thoughts, given those additional comments?

Thanks again.

[noldar12]

Dietz, any suggestions or comments regarding my situation and options?

Thanks.

[Dietz]

@noldar12 said:

Dietz, any suggestions or comments regarding my situation and options?

Thanks.

What did I forget to say in my answer above?

[noldar12]

Dietz,

A big oops.  I somehow missed your post to me when I went through the thread.  I also may have been in the middle of writing my posts at the same time you were writing yours (I tend sometimes to write rather slowly and deliberately).

Thanks for your comments.  They are indeed most helpful, and appreciated.

At present my "largest" templates are only around 35 instruments or so, and most are smaller, so it sounds like MIR would work well.

[Dietz]

@Another User said:

Thanks for your comments.  They are indeed most helpful, and appreciated.

At present my "largest" templates are only around 35 instruments or so, and most are smaller, so it sounds like MIR would work well.

35 instruments should pose no real problems for the system you outlined above, that's for sure.

Re: RAM ... be aware that the amount of RAM needed by MIR itself for its hundreds (or thousands) of impulse responses varies a lot, depending on the typical reverb length of the chosen Venue as well as its size (... and thus the number of individual positions recorded). The cathedral of upcoming RoomPack 3 with over 10 seconds of reverb obviously needs more memory than ORF Studio 2 of RoomPack2 with less than 0.7 seconds.

To make things easier we supply smaller versions of the big venues, without all those special off-stage "HotSpots"; these RAM-saving versions are marked with the addition "Stage" in MIR's Room Editor.

HTH,

[noldar12]

Dietz, I do have a follow-up question.

Although I could not start there (I will have to start with 12 gigs ram), would an i7 930 processor with 24 gigs of ram instead of 12 gigs make a major difference, or would the i7 processor start to choke? 

Latency is not a huge concern, as I compose in notation and then do more detailed adjustments in a sequencer.  I never actually play parts in live in real time (severely reduced eyesight precludes it).

Thanks again.

[Dietz]

Of course there will come the moment when you run into another bottleneck, even with huge amounts of RAM. CPU speed is one factor as well as the speed of the HDs you're streaming your instruments from. There will always be the one weakest link within a system.

Finally, the maximum number of individual instruments MIR will handle is 128 (... which is not the same as "people on stage", of course, as an "instrument" in the MIR- and VI-sense of the word may consist of dozens of humans in reality, like Appassionata Strings).

Re: eyesight - One word of warning: MIR relies a lot on its graphical interface. I really hope that this doesn't hinder you from using it

Kind regards,

[noldar12]

Dietz, it seems good to respond to your last comment, although if you would like more detail, please feel free to PM me, and I would be happy to respond.

The one control that could give me some real difficulty is the MIR Control Icon.  However, since sliders are available as alternate controls, that would serve as a good workaround if needed (note that I read things by getting my nose up to the screen, concentrating on small areas, and using as large a screen image as possible).

One of the things I most appreciate about VSL's interface designs, is that instead of going for "eye-candy" you choose clean fonts and layouts.  While I find nothing (by anyone) to be "easy", VSL color schemes and designs actually do work for me.  The large sans serif fonts of the VI instrument pages are excellent, and as a result, combinations that often cause me trouble are at least ok.  Even the small fonts (that really are difficult) are at least cleanly designed, and that is a significant help.  Interestingly, the color scheme of the old VE 2 mixer page is as close to ideal as I have ever found for my sight issues - clean light colored fonts on a black background.  The fact that you almost always use light fonts on dark backgrounds really helps. 

At least for my own visual impairment (and this probably can be generalized for other types of visual impairments), the design choices outlined above truly help.  Poor font size, poor font design, and poor contrast are often main obstacles when trying to use any software in conjunction with a visual impairment.

By contrast, the font choice and overall GUI design of the new player for your most often mentioned main rival will strain my eyes out completely within about three or four minutes.  Also, in general, too much information, displayed in too small an area (even if clean fonts are used) can cause problems.

I hope you find these comments to be of some constructive use.