Vienna Symphonic Library Forum
Forum Statistics

194,047 users have contributed to 42,907 threads and 257,904 posts.

In the past 24 hours, we have 3 new thread(s), 19 new post(s) and 99 new user(s).

  1. Home
  2. Software
  3. Vienna MIR & Vienna Suite
  4. creating the right depth

  • creating the right depth

    M
    M
    one of thing i am struggling with is is this: creating the right depth between brass and woodwinds. for example lets say i narrow the stereo image of various WW intruments ( maybe to 20- to 40 percent using waves S-1) and pan them to various places at that width.
    now i want my horn section BEHIND the WW, but seated across the back row of the orchestra. So in a sense the sound is FAR but WIDE. so the stereo image can't ( or should'nt ) be more
    then the woodwinds. othere wise its tends to sound right along side of them.
    i am experimenting with various IR's but still i find this a challenge.
    any thoughts on this??

    mike
  • T
    T
    Hi Mike,

    Its not only depth - the real spacial relationship is depth and height! (MIR perhaps will cure this). IR Reverb cetainly helps.

    I have had some degree of success with depth (still on the learning curve) using multiple instances of Space Designer IRs - The technique is quite easy - create multiple copies of the same space and make slight adjustments in the Reverb length to give near - mid and far images. Assign each SD to its own bus (SD automatically sets this to WET only when in INSERT Mode) and then mix etc. (have a look at the Space Designer for Depth post on the VSL Forum)

    Altiverb (which has a better range of IR's available for it) can also be used. I particularly like using the SOH behind the stage image to give that additional rumble effect to large Timp.

    I have noted that the S1 can give rise to some destructive phase shifts on narrow images (particularly on high register instruments). Of late I have swapped to using the mda Image tool (Free download VST Plug).

    Addtionally using M-S and M-S-EQ matrixing techniques can give a feeling of depth but needs to be used with care.

    My new approach is to mix/master to 5.1 or 7.1 and then reduce to stereo - I am still working on this - when time allows - but getting some good results.

    tattie
  • N
    N
    Jacques, are you using M-S eq on the entire mix or on front and rear submixes separately? Surround mixing for stereo is an interesting idea.

    Second, what's SOH?

    Third, how can you mix for height? I always understood that height wtih two speakers was an accident related to the individual's ears, and it only works when you're using speakers with incredible dispersion.

    Some people had a system with 4-speaker stereo (i.e. front and rear are the same) that was amazing. 3-d every which way. I'll try to remember the name, but the product ever got of the ground. It ran on Creamware hardware.

    Anyway, that was an exception.
  • F
    F
    "Second, what's SOH?"

    Sydney Opera House
  • D
    D
    I dont find mda image tool on the web
  • R
    R
    Hi dkala...
    I think it is there:
    http://www.mda-vst.com/
    under "VST effects"...
  • T
    T
    Nick,

    On M-S Eq - Selective Front and Rear - using M-S on the whole mix tends to make the whole picture really muddy. I tend to use it for emphasis of solo passgages.

    Height - this is an interesting one. About 30 years ago, around the time that early experiments with consumer Quadraphonic sound systems was underway, some interesting work was done with 3D speaker systems. Quad, once the phase coding was sorted out, went on to become Surround Sound.

    However other innovations have been made/tried (most failed) - Tomita (anyone remember him?) did some interesting work - he developed a five speaker system with the 5th speaker being mounted above the listener. I attened a demo in Tokyo at the time and it was ideal for his style of mostly moog work - needless to say it did not catch on. Remember SONAB - they tried with some success to develop a true omni direction system. QUAD did wonders for the home and studio with their Electro Static Moniors. The real interesting thing about most of these systems was the attempt to optimise the phase relationship between depth and height in a 3D space. (Additionally look at all the psychoacoustic research of reccent years)

    Yes any sound can be defined as an accident between the sound source and the listener and in a perfect world every instrument would have its own unique speaker and could be placed such as to mimic its position in the orchestra.

    Recently attended a demo with a 22(5).1 system (17 front, 5 rear and 5 100hz ABR) - the real interesting thing about this demo was the height relationship of the front speakers, these were mounted on a arch. The matrix base processing system was capable of placing a sound more or less anywhere in the 3D space.

    Most of my stuff is bland interstitial stuff for broadcasting and as such does not warrant the work required for Film or performance work - however I find the whole area of working with samples (and the problems that that presents) most interesting and the possibilities as ever are endless.

    tattie