Vienna Symphonic Library Forum
Forum Statistics

185,255 users have contributed to 42,390 threads and 255,473 posts.

In the past 24 hours, we have 4 new thread(s), 21 new post(s) and 44 new user(s).

  • Mir Pro Mixing Multiple Mic Positions in VE Pro 5

    I am thinking of buying MIR Pro and already have VE Pro 5 and several other VSL licenses. I would like to be able to mix multiple mic positions of a venue, as is so common in real world recordings. This question came up before during the past few years, for example here http://community.vsl.co.at/forums/p/23952/161110.aspx and here http://community.vsl.co.at/forums/p/29169/188204.aspx Now that MIR Pro sits within VE Pro is this now possible? For example can I route the audio from a VI Pro 2 instance (or a Kontakt instance) into two MIR Pro instances, one for a closer mic position (conductor position) and one for a far mic position? Or can the surround mic be used in some way, such that the back channel gives the far sound? And, if this is technically possible, will it sound OK, or will there be phasing problems that might be hard to get rid off? I know that Dietz posted more than a year ago that he got some really sweet sound out of the original MIR by using two machines getting the same midi but set to different MIR mic positions. I could not find the post back anymore. Further, I know I can try MIR Pro for 30 days, but miximg mic positions is not possible with the MIR trial roompack, since it does not contain multiple mic positions. I really like the reverberation sounds of most of the venue previews on the MIR Pro page. But I am not always convinced by the mix of the dry sounds and those reverberation sounds, especially in some of the demos, some intermediary stage sound (from the venue that is) is missing to my ears. And I say to my ears, because some people are really content with the sound. Yet, I think it is undeniable that the 'real' Vienna Philharmoniker sound vastly different in their mix of the sound fields. I think this is achievable with MIR Pro, according to the quality I hear in the reverberation of MIR Pro. I think this is anyway possible in post-processing, by simply bouncing sequentially the wet signals of different mic positions and then mixing them at will. Yet it would be so much more efficient and so much more inspirational to have an even more realistic and awesome sound right out of the template. Sorry for the long post and the information overflow. Please tell me there is a way.

  • I can't seem to find the thread Dietz responded to, but I am certain I remember him teasing us that a future update will have multiple microphone setups (he said this recently in the last few months).  I specifically remember how much I loved hearing it because I typically find myself wanting instruments to have an extremely close and crisp sound, but when you do that you lose a tremendous amount of tail reverb.  I remember thinking how much I wanted to balance say 100% close mic, and then 30% audience mic position.

    I think what you are asking for is coming, but Dietz will jump in and correct me if I am wrong.  I too, am curious where we stand on this as it will push my life even more close to simplicity within the single box in a matter of moments, instead of weeks and months it took me before MIR.

    Maestro2be


  • It's not just rumor! ;-) We're testing and optimizing the "Secondary Microphone Position" for MIR Pro at the moment.

    Kind regards,


    /Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library
  • This is great news Dietz!  I am so excited for this update!  This will remove one entire layer from my workflow process!  It has been many years since I have had butterflies in my stomach waiting on something, but you just gave them to me in this picture!

    Maestro2be


  • last edited
    last edited

    @Dietz said:

    (... I hope ImageShack isn't playing tricks on me again 😉 ...)

    Kind regards,

    ImageShack is playing tricks, we get my picture instead (French = Froggys LOL LOL LOL)


    MacBook Pro M3 MAX 128 GB 8TB - 2 x 48" - 1 x 27" screen --- Logic Pro --- Mir Pro 3D Dolby Atmos --- Most of the VI libs, a few Synch... libs --- Quite a few Kontakt libs --- CS80 fanatic
  • Should work better now (hopefully) ....


    /Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library
  • last edited
    last edited

    @Dietz said:

    Should work better now (hopefully) ....

    yes it is working fine

    Do you have any idea of when it will be availlable ? what about Vi 2.2 ?


    MacBook Pro M3 MAX 128 GB 8TB - 2 x 48" - 1 x 27" screen --- Logic Pro --- Mir Pro 3D Dolby Atmos --- Most of the VI libs, a few Synch... libs --- Quite a few Kontakt libs --- CS80 fanatic
  • Thanks a lot, Dietz! That's wonderful news, I hope you'll release it soon. Good luck with testing and optimizing! Perhaps a dumb question: Let's say I have 3 slaves that are producing dry sounds on different busses within VE Pro hosts and send the busses over to a master PC with VE Pro receiving all those busses of dry sounds. Can I then in this receiving VE Pro, route a single bus of dry sounds, for example the Violins, to multiple MIR Pro instances, where each MIR Pro instance is producing a single (or soon a double) mic position?

  • The route is ;

    DAW or equencer or Notatio program on x machines are sending Midi or audio to VE

    If it is midi VE will send to a VI

    MIR PRO is an insert in the VE MIXER that will treat your VI and your audio

    You can have several computer with a MIR Pro that you will be mixing, but you need to BUY ON LICENSE PER MIR PRO ! 

    Best

    Cyril


    MacBook Pro M3 MAX 128 GB 8TB - 2 x 48" - 1 x 27" screen --- Logic Pro --- Mir Pro 3D Dolby Atmos --- Most of the VI libs, a few Synch... libs --- Quite a few Kontakt libs --- CS80 fanatic
  • Thanks Cyril. I know that is the way you're supposed to use it. In fact, when MIR was released, it could only reverberate the VSL library. After that, instruments of other vendors were welcome in MIR. Now, I believe, you can channel any type of audio into MIR, like Paul's voice in the MIR Pro demo. Therefore, I think the answer to my dumb question in my previous post is: "yes". Or am I forgetting something? The VE Pro audio busses from slave PC 1 and slave PC 2 go over the network into a single VE Pro instance running on the Master (Mixing) PC. In this Master PC VE Pro instance thoses busses are now audio input channels, that are going into MIR. What I would want, is that instead of those audio inputs to go into a single instance of MIR, that they go into multiple instances of MIR, one for stage, one for audience, one for surround, for example. I could imagine that some things going wrong here, for example, only one instance of MIR can be running in VE Pro, or even only one instance or MIR on a single machine, so starting up multiple VE Pro instances would not circumvent this. But I don't want to start imagining things. Can this work at the moment?

  • You can run as many instances of MIR Pro as you want on a single machine with one license, so this is perfectly possible.


  • last edited
    last edited

    @Dietz said:

    It's not just rumor! 😉 We're testing and optimizing the "Secondary Microphone Position" for MIR Pro at the moment.

    Amazing news! Thinking about, it would be interesting to know what's happen with the dry signals - (for both mics?? that seems complicated to me regarding phasing issues), will there be an off time or latency between first and second mic position (like in reality) and so on...Maybe we can get some information in advance? Just curious! Frank

  • last edited
    last edited

    @Bas10 said:

    Thanks Cyril. I know that is the way you're supposed to use it. In fact, when MIR was released, it could only reverberate the VSL library. After that, instruments of other vendors were welcome in MIR. Now, I believe, you can channel any type of audio into MIR, like Paul's voice in the MIR Pro demo. Therefore, I think the answer to my dumb question in my previous post is: "yes". Or am I forgetting something? The VE Pro audio busses from slave PC 1 and slave PC 2 go over the network into a single VE Pro instance running on the Master (Mixing) PC. In this Master PC VE Pro instance thoses busses are now audio input channels, that are going into MIR. What I would want, is that instead of those audio inputs to go into a single instance of MIR, that they go into multiple instances of MIR, one for stage, one for audience, one for surround, for example. I could imagine that some things going wrong here, for example, only one instance of MIR can be running in VE Pro, or even only one instance or MIR on a single machine, so starting up multiple VE Pro instances would not circumvent this. But I don't want to start imagining things. Can this work at the moment?

    Hi Bas10 and Karel 

    Bas10, did I understant what you want to do  ?

                                                   ------> slave PC or Mac 1 with VE====>

    Master PC or Mac with DAW                                                                 back to the Master PC + VE + MIR----> DAW

                                                   ------> slave PC or Mac 2 with VE====>

    ------> = Midi

    ====> = Audio

    The Master PC running the DAW sends Midi to 2 slave, the 2 slaves convert Midi to audio with  VE and VI sends back audio to Master PC, the Master PC adds MIR PRO, the 5.1 channels are going back to the DAW

    I dont see how you could do that !

    Karel, can you confirm you can do that ? how comme ?

    If yes how many audio chanels can be treated by slave ?

    How many input audio can be treated by MIR ?

    Best

    cyril


    MacBook Pro M3 MAX 128 GB 8TB - 2 x 48" - 1 x 27" screen --- Logic Pro --- Mir Pro 3D Dolby Atmos --- Most of the VI libs, a few Synch... libs --- Quite a few Kontakt libs --- CS80 fanatic
  • That's very close to what I am referring to, Cyril. I'll explain.

    Karel wrote: "You can run as many instances of MIR Pro as you want on a single machine with one license, so this is perfectly possible." 

    If we are optimistic then the word "this" in his reply refers to my whole question, the routing I am proposing and that you have schematized 90% correctly.

    However, if we're pessimistic Karel's "this" only refers the first part of his own sentence. I am optimistic though. Here's why. Have a look at this video on the VSL site: http://dl.vsl.co.at/downloader.aspx?ID=7621  It's the download link for the "Vienna Ensemble PRO 5 Overview" video on the videos page. Skip to 3:30 where Paul explains the use of the audio plug-in feature. Also have a look at page 19 of the MIR Pro Preliminary manual.

    If I understand the VE Pro manual, the MIR Pro manual and the video correctly, the following is 'perfectly possible'.

               ---> DAW VE VST 1 ---> Slave 1 VE Host ==> DAW VE VST 1 ==>

    DAW                                                                                                              DAW ==> VE Audio Plug-in ==> VE ==> MIR ==> DAW

               ---> DAW VE VST 2 ---> Slave 2 VE Host ==> DAW VE VST 2 ==>

    (  ------> = Midi  )

    (  ====> = Audio  )

    Now, is the following possible?:

               ---> DAW VE VST 1 ---> Slave 1 VE Host ==> DAW VE VST 1 ==>                                                     DAW VE 1 ==> MIR 1

    DAW                                                                                                              DAW ==> VE Audio Plug-in ==> DAW VE 2 ==> MIR 2 ==> DAW

               ---> DAW VE VST 2 ---> Slave 2 VE Host ==> DAW VE VST 2 ==>                                                     DAW VE 3 ==> MIR 3

    I believe this is possible. Look at page 14 of the VE Pro manual. There it says "you will be asked to assign your Audio input plug-in to an existent Server interface". The figure shows the VE Pro Server selection window. If you look at a similar window on page 11, you see that you can choose one from multiple VE Pro Server instances on the same IP, thus the same machine, thus VE 1, VE 2 and VE 3 in my diagram above.

    So what could be the catch, the snag? Processing power. What system can run 3 instances of MIR Pro, a 2600K based system? An overclocked 3930K or 3960X?


  • Note that I am using no less than 5 VE Server instances and you get 3 licenses when buying VE Pro. You can buy extra licenses though. So I might need to buy an extra VE Pro, giving me a total of 6 VE Pro Server licenses.


  • If you could load multiple independent MIR Pro instances in a single VE Pro instance, than this might obviate the need for extra VE Pro licenses. The diagram would then look like this:

               ---> DAW VE VST 1 ---> Slave 1 VE Host ==> DAW VE VST 1 ==>                                                                    ==> MIR 1

    DAW                                                                                                              DAW ==> VE Audio Plug-in ==> DAW VE ==> MIR 2 ==> DAW

               ---> DAW VE VST 2 ---> Slave 2 VE Host ==> DAW VE VST 2 ==>                                                                    ==> MIR 3

    I am not that optimistic that this might work. I see no hint in the manuals that you can add a MIR Pro instance with other settings than the one you already started. Also the manual indicates that when you change the venue, the instruments might not be positioned correctly due to the venue being of a different size, etc. This leads me to believe that there is only one MIR Pro instance possible per VE Pro instance. But I would like to be wrong about this.


  • You can load multiple independent MIR Pro instances in a VE Pro Server. Each VE Pro instance in the server represent a MIR Pro engine instance. Both the VE Pro 5 and MIR Pro licenses are per machine, so you can run as many as you want on a single machine. Note that using the Audio/Event Input plugin adds an additional buffer of latency to the equation though.


  • To be able to compare the diagrams more easily, I am copy-pasting my previous diagram-post below:

    That's very close to what I am referring to, Cyril. I'll explain.

    Karel wrote: "You can run as many instances of MIR Pro as you want on a single machine with one license, so this is perfectly possible." 

    If we are optimistic then the word "this" in his reply refers to my whole question, the routing I am proposing and that you have schematized 90% correctly.

    However, if we're pessimistic Karel's "this" only refers the first part of his own sentence. I am optimistic though. Here's why. Have a look at this video on the VSL site: http://dl.vsl.co.at/downloader.aspx?ID=7621  It's the download link for the "Vienna Ensemble PRO 5 Overview" video on the videos page. Skip to 3:30 where Paul explains the use of the audio plug-in feature. Also have a look at page 19 of the MIR Pro Preliminary manual.

    If I understand the VE Pro manual, the MIR Pro manual and the video correctly, the following is 'perfectly possible'.

               ---> DAW VE VST 1 ---> Slave 1 VE Host ==> DAW VE VST 1 ==>

    DAW                                                                                                              DAW ==> VE Audio Plug-in ==> VE ==> MIR ==> DAW

               ---> DAW VE VST 2 ---> Slave 2 VE Host ==> DAW VE VST 2 ==>

    (  ------> = Midi  )

    (  ====> = Audio  )

    Now, is the following possible?:

               ---> DAW VE VST 1 ---> Slave 1 VE Host ==> DAW VE VST 1 ==>                                                     DAW VE 1 ==> MIR 1

    DAW                                                                                                              DAW ==> VE Audio Plug-in ==> DAW VE 2 ==> MIR 2 ==> DAW

               ---> DAW VE VST 2 ---> Slave 2 VE Host ==> DAW VE VST 2 ==>                                                     DAW VE 3 ==> MIR 3

    I believe this is possible. Look at page 14 of the VE Pro manual. There it says "you will be asked to assign your Audio input plug-in to an existent Server interface". The figure shows the VE Pro Server selection window. If you look at a similar window on page 11, you see that you can choose one from multiple VE Pro Server instances on the same IP, thus the same machine, thus VE 1, VE 2 and VE 3 in my diagram above.

    So what could be the catch, the snag? Processing power. What system can run 3 instances of MIR Pro, a 2600K based system? An overclocked 3930K or 3960X?


  • See my answer above. In terms of processing power, the amount of MIR Pro engines makes little to no difference in terms of both CPU and memory use. The amount of running MIR Pro plugins inside VE Pro is what really matters.


  • Thanks a lot Karel!!! That's great news. It's 22:00 by the way, what a commitment. Very much appreciated!

    So I understand now, the DAW runs a single VE Pro server, from which I start the VE 1, VE 2 and VE 3 instances on that same DAW. Each of those VE instances runs a separate MIR Pro engine instance. And all that without requiring extra licenses. That sure proofs I was not optimistic enough.

    Thanks again, for your answers and not to forget, for your work that helped produce this wonderful software.