Thank you Dietz (and Alain). Yes I did go slightly overboard with the wetness I guess, as you always do when you discover a new tool. I had to use a lot of subgroups indeed, because I have MIR24, not the full MIR (budget reasons and also an older Mac Pro, which amounts to one single reason I suppose...) So I had one position for flutes, another for oboes & english horn etc. Not ideal but the best I could manage with my current setup.

I also did some live cello & violin recordings for this film and positioned the audio channels using MIR24. It's such an easy process to get the sound you're looking for that it seems a little bit like cheating... And not a single crash after weeks of heavy editing of around 30 cues (compared to around 10 Cubase crashes per day). Great work on your side as well!

Thanks again.

Thanks for the friendly words! Always appreciated. 😊 

@Talino said:

[...] I had to use a lot of subgroups indeed, because I have MIR24, not the full MIR (budget reasons and also an older Mac Pro, which amounts to one single reason I suppose...) So I had one position for flutes, another for oboes & english horn etc. Not ideal but the best I could manage with my current setup. [...]

This explains the roomy feel indeed. In my experience, MIR can be used quite wet with individual Icons, but running the application in a more conventional "reverb mode" (which means: With lots of subgroups of different sources) needs some extra work to achieve the same clearness. Most of the time, a small change of the wet/dry-ratio is all that's needed, but there are occasions when more attention has to be paid to individual EQing, too.

Kind regards,

@Talino said:

...I had to use a lot of subgroups indeed, because I have MIR24, not the full MIR (budget reasons and also an older Mac Pro, which amounts to one single reason I suppose...) So I had one position for flutes, another for oboes & english horn etc. ...

Hi Talino

... In the early days of VSL we also had to treat instrument by instrument because of not enough fast computers or not enough RAM. 😊

A tipp for a next piece: Try to put together those instruments which have more or less the same distance from a virtual listener. Groups could be: Strings, Woodwinds, Brass, Percussion. Now take the tip from Dietz - not quite the way as he mentioned it but with the same background: For the Strings you choose the dryest "dry/wet ratio". For each new (farther away) group you increase the wet part a bit.

This action will lead to an even more "depth-feeling" than now and the mix will be more interesting...

Happy music

Beat

@Another User said:

I'll try the reverb gradient tip next time for sure.

Thanks a lot.

The good news is that MIR takes care for that all by itself, of course - as long as you didn't switch off the option for "Distance Dependent Scaling" in the Global Dry Volume Handling-section of MIR's Output Channel. 😉

... you can always exaggerate the effect by manually changing the Dry/Wet-ration of individual Icons, though.

Kind regards,

@Dietz said:

...The good news is that MIR takes care for that all by itself, of course - as long as you didn't switch off the option for "Distance Dependent Scaling" in the Global Dry Volume Handling-section of MIR's Output Channel. 😉

... you can always exaggerate the effect by manually changing the Dry/Wet-ration of individual Icons, though.

Hello Dietz

I gave this hint because most of the mixes of MIR-users tend to sound from far away in my opinion ("balcony-sound" so to say). I admit that I like to listen to an orchestra in the second row...😳 You see more, you smell more and of course you hear more - bad of course when the singer spits...

So yes: Exaggerate the effect by manually changing the Dry/Wet-ration for all the groups will lead to mixes with MIR which are even closer to current recordings of classic orchestras.

In my opinion one could amplify this depth-factor a bit within MIR. For example: When I play just in front of the conducter mic then it doesn't sound as close as I would expect. What do you think, Dietz?

Liebe Grüsse nach Wien

Beat

I *did* feel that placing the microphone anywhere other than the conductor's position resulting in a much too-distant sounding mix, but maybe that's just the Mozartsaal. I'm still learning the software, remember. I haven't had time to delve into the other spaces in my roompack. 

@Talino said:

I *did* feel that placing the microphone anywhere other than the conductor's position resulting in a much too-distant sounding mix, but maybe that's just the Mozartsaal. I'm still learning the software, remember. I haven't had time to delve into the other spaces in my roompack. 

The whole distance issue is relative and should always be taken with a grain of salt (imo). What is a percieved optimal listening perspective will always depend either on your taste/listening habits or the taste/requirements of your client. Beat already mentiond he prefers his orchestras upfront, I myself am more of a middle and back audience seating area perspective guy.

Which is all fine and well as long as you are doing something with your own sound aesthetics preferences in mind - however, as soon as you are doing something for a client with specific requirements, you have to know exactly how to set up a perspective that the client wants to hear. In this regard, you'll find different RoomPacks as well as their different microphone positions to be invaluable.

Hi Talino,

You did a great job, and the music is really good.

It is just a question a taste when you have achieve such a result.

I've listened to it at work with headphone so the reverb is perfect for that!

You really can't do much better than thaT.

Congrats!

Jean Roy