I would also be inclined to suggest going with more sounds.  While MIR 24 probably would be enough when paired with SE 1, adding SE 2 instruments into your compositions within MIR 24 could prove problematic.

Adding SE 2 would provide considerable additional options with your composing.  For example, you could more easily do divided string parts, layering orchestra and chamber string sections, and splitting them out as needed.  The additional woodwind and brass instruments would also be useful.  However nice the software tools are, if you don't have the actual instrument samples, the net benefit of the software drops.

Remember too, if you purchase a version of MIR, you also need to buy at least one hall, since the halls are no longer included within MIR, but are now separate.

Yeah, I get that argument. Especially because Volume 2 really does round out the basic instrument repertoire, to where you get woodwinds in a3, muted horns, and as you indicated, the chamber strings.

I took advantage of the Voucher promotion today to get one free. I'll wait and see what transpires in the next few months and hope something comes along that might allow me to get the Vol 2 bundle.

Thanks for all the input, guys.

I thought of one way that might have the potential to allow MIR PRo 24 work for a full orchestra, and I wonder if anyone thinks it is feasible.

What if I put MIR on 16 busses as follows to create a general spatial framework for each instrument and collect the channels of the various iterations of that instrument. Then I would use power pan in each channel to spread the iterations of that instrument within the instrument framework.

Flutes and Piccolos

Oboes

Clarinets

Bassoons

Horns

Trumpets

Trombones

Tuba

Percussion

Keys

Violins I

Violins II

Violas

Cellos

D.Basses

So for example, with the Horns, I would use a Horns bus with MIR Pro 24 to place the entire horn section in a space, then I would put Horns 1, 2, 3 and 4 each on their own channel and use Power Pan on those channels to place them left to righ in the Stereo spectrum that would fill that Horns space.

Busses with MIR Pro 24 would be a pie, and each Horn in it's channel would be a piece of that pie.

Does this sound feasible?

@DaddyO said:

So for example, with the Horns, I would use a Horns bus with MIR Pro 24 to place the entire horn section in a space, then I would put Horns 1, 2, 3 and 4 each on their own channel and use Power Pan on those channels to place them left to righ in the Stereo spectrum that would fill that Horns space.

Busses with MIR Pro 24 would be a pie, and each Horn in it's channel would be a piece of that pie.

Does this sound feasible?

@DaddyO said:

So for example, with the Horns, I would use a Horns bus with MIR Pro 24 to place the entire horn section in a space, then I would put Horns 1, 2, 3 and 4 each on their own channel and use Power Pan on those channels to place them left to righ in the Stereo spectrum that would fill that Horns space.

Busses with MIR Pro 24 would be a pie, and each Horn in it's channel would be a piece of that pie.

Does this sound feasible?

So you think it might work? If so, I think I still have demo time left, and I'll give it a try next week. Still, I may just opt to go for the SE Vol 2 Bundle for now.

Well, clearly it isn't going to give the particularity of individual reflections for each horn there but as a way to get more in there, it's a good compromise. It's how I used it demoing it. I don't really have the resources to do more than MIRP 24 and I did decide on other expenditures, but I was enjoying a difference with it vs what I do now with that very approach.
I was using the Vienna Suite PP, not the one in the mixer of VEP. Which gives a little more owing to the post- and pre- faders.

@civilization 3 said:

Well, clearly it isn't going to give the particularity of individual reflections for each horn there but as a way to get more in there, it's a good compromise. It's how I used it demoing it. I don't really have the resources to do more than MIRP 24 and I did decide on other expenditures, but I was enjoying a difference with it vs what I do now with that very approach.
I was using the Vienna Suite PP, not the one in the mixer of VEP. Which gives a little more owing to the post- and pre- faders.

I conducted an experiment as follows: (1) Disable MIRx on my individual Horn channels, then routed Horns 1 and 2 to a bus Horns A, Horns 3 and 4 to a bus Horns B, then routed Horns A & B to an All Horns bus. I also set up an a4 Horns channel routed to All Horns.

I panned Horns 1 and 2 where each took just over half the stereo field, one to the left and one to the right. I did the same thing with Horns 3 and 4.  I then panned Horns A and B, one just over half the stereo field to the left, the other to the right. The All Horns bus was set for a full stereo pan.

Finally, I inserted a Grosser Sall MIR Pro instance on the All Horns bus. It defaulted to a Cardiod mic preset front left, so I set it to the Section Horns preset and moved it to the appropriate stage placement.

I then experimented with with the channels individually and in combination. The results were less than satisfying. What sounded good in concept did not seem to go so well sonically. Individual instances of MIR Pro for each Horn channel did sound much better than a single instance on a Horns bus, where things just sounded muddier. I suppose that's to be expected, or maybe it's just my lack of skill with the tools.

Conclusion? I think I'll wait on MIR Pro until I can get the unlimited version.

Well, choosing horns for the exercise is one of the best ways to come away with a negative if you're trying to not buy it. Horns would tend to get muddy.

I don't blame you, I would need a whole 'nother computer to really make MIRP a smart buy versus extended libs for me.

But I would EQ french horns quite a bit and give them each a really narrow field in their own channels.
And choose the tailored mic for them and see if that wasn't better than generic cardioid.

Civilization3,

I'll try again, thanks for the encouragement and help. I think my computer will handle more than 24 instances of MIR Pro (see specs below). But if I can just demonstrate to myself that MIR 24 will be satisfactory enough for now until I can upgrade to full (perhaps next year?), then I will seriously consider prioritizing it over SE Vol 2. It will be a close decision, those.

I've figured out that, if I stick with SE Vol 1 for now, all my Woodwind and Brass individual instruments combined total 24. If I put my Brass Ensemble instruments, all my Percussion, Keys, and Mallets, and Strings on MIRx, I can make MIR Pro 24 work. This seems a better alternative than using MIR Pro 24 stricly on busses. This way I can perhaps upgrade to the Full version of MIR Pro next year. Still debating whether or not to do this, but it seems doable.

This is basically how I use it too.  That is I try to give individual channels a MIR24 channel and when I run into limits I make a decision on what to bus.  Typically it's trumpets and Trombones depending on how many channels I need to free up and the function those instruments play in the piece. 

And you do all this in Notion correct?  Not to hijack the thread but I'm considering Notion for the simple reason I have so many playback problems with Finale.  On my computer the combination of Finale and VSL cause Finale to crash without fail.  With XML I can toggle between the two for composing and playback and still work in a notation environment.....at least in theory. 

@winknotes_282 said:

This is basically how I use it too.  That is I try to give individual channels a MIR24 channel and when I run into limits I make a decision on what to bus.  Typically it's trumpets and Trombones depending on how many channels I need to free up and the function those instruments play in the piece. 

 

And you do all this in Notion correct?  Not to hijack the thread but I'm considering Notion for the simple reason I have so many playback problems with Finale.  On my computer the combination of Finale and VSL cause Finale to crash without fail.  With XML I can toggle between the two for composing and playback and still work in a notation environment.....at least in theory. 

Re: hijacking, don't worry. I started the thread, and I don't mind.

I have owned Notion for several years but never successfully integrated VSL until recently, so I'm just getting started with it. But there's no reason you can't integrate MIR with a Notion / VSL setup. Check out the Presonus Notion forum, you'll see some threads there. Also, there's a Notation section to this forum.