194,319 users have contributed to 42,915 threads and 257,954 posts.
In the past 24 hours, we have 1 new thread(s), 13 new post(s) and 80 new user(s).
Anybody used MIR in Pop/Rock-mixes? Thinking about using it for certain elements, especially for mixes that involves orchestral sounds. Any thoughts on possible routing hassles with DAWs like Pro Tools - one mixing environment on top of another? Q: Is there any way to mix the completely dry signal of, for example, a vocal, with the MIR output? The wet/dry control in MIR only affects the reverberation, as far as I understand, and not the positioning and basic character.
/Hakan
Hi Hakan,
there was a thread on a similar topic just recently: -> http://community.vsl.co.at/forums/t/30812.aspx ... maybe one should add that MIR Pro is _so_ new that not many people will have integrated the new tool into their ongoing productions yet.
Regarding routing, there are many, many options - ranging from a whole MIR-mix on a stereo-channel, to submixes, dry and wet stems, up to individual returns of individual signals. In case you haven't done so already, please feel free to take a look in MIR Pro's manual, which contains a whole tutorial section with routing examples (p. 33 ff). -> http://dl.vsl.co.at/downloader.aspx?ID=7628
[...] Q: Is there any way to mix the completely dry signal of, for example, a vocal, with the MIR output? The wet/dry control in MIR only affects the reverberation, as far as I understand, and not the positioning and basic character.
Aehmmmm ... I'm not sure that I understood the question, sorry.
Maybe I should point out that MIR doesn't create a "reverb signal" that you you would add to a dry signal like you would in a conventional AUX-send scheme on a mixing console or in a DAW. The dry signal has to be handled by MIR too, to create a perfect match between the virtual stage positioning of the dry signal component and the actual set of impulse responses from that position.
Did this answer your question?
Kind regards,
Hi Dietz, thanks!
I understand the difference between a conventional AUX-send scheme and the 3-dimensional positioning of MIR, but still I would like to be able to alter the mix between the dry signal component and the set of impulse responses, to make a signal be "less in the room". Maybe this is just hypothetical, but for example, I would like to take a vocal in Pro Tools and blend/position it with the rest of the (MIR-)mix, to get a bit of the same ambience and a sence of depth, and simultaneously make it stand out a bit, and be more upfront. If that's not possible within MIR, maybe I could leave a bit of the dry signal in Pro Tools in the mix. (If the Delay Compensation between Pro Tools and VEP works, so that it lines up without phasing).
Best, Hakan
This is actually very easy to achieve and very much the way MIR Pro is intended to be used.
Process the vocal track like you usually would. Use the "Audio Input" plug-in to send the signal to VE Pro / MIR Pro. Within MIR Pro, simply adjust its individual dry/wet mix to your liking (... look at it as the blend between a room-mic and and a close mic). Send the "MIRed" signal back to ProTools on a dedicated output for easy further handling.
That's it. :-)
HTH,
Thanks again for rapid answers, Dietz!
I think maybe you misunderstood me. [*-)]
Would it be possible to blend the "MIRed" signal with the "unMIRed" signal, regardless of the dry/wet mix inside MIR?
Technically it would be possible, of course only within the margins of ProTools' latency compensation abilities, and as long as you don't use any kind of processing that changes the phase of the dry signal (EQ, Character Presets, etc.).
Conceptually it doesn't make much sense as long as you're not aiming for some kind of special effect. :-)
Kind regards,
Ok, I see, I think I better get MIR and start working with it, to find out how to make the best use of it with my setup. [:)]
I know it's a different concept, with MIRs 3-dimensional positioning and whatever, but I still I don't understand why it's not possible to have separate controls for dry, wet, early-, and tail-IRs, as in Hybrid Reverb for example. But hopefully that's a non-issue.
Now, let's decide what libraries to buy in the Holiday Offers! [:D]
Happy New Year, Hakan
When I briefly tried the demo, with the wet/dry set to 100% dry, I thought it still was to much room sound/color on some sources. I could alter that to some degree by moving the source around, but not enough for what I had in mind. Even though it's much more than a reverb, it would be nice to be able to blend in some of the original source in some situations.
I see, if that's the case, it explains the confusion. Either I'll just buy it, or apply for a new demo-period. After my initial test, I installed OS X 10.7.2 with lots of reboots of VEP and Pro Tools, so that I quickly ran out of MIR-starts.
