@Beat Kaufmann said:

OK, this topic treats another theme. But I could not resist, to chime 'in...

I firmly believe that any online thread has to go off topic after a while....

Anyway since we are here i wish to add a couple of things.. the 3 depths method seems a logical thing to me.. (and i've read your explanation of how the signal is routed into the related Bus with the ER etc.. without sending anything).. i also remember you saying that post-fader is most convinent (in most of the cases) and i agree with that because you mantain the dry/wet ratio... with this method i can simply decide to make a 0db send for the Cello Ensemble and a 1.5db send for the D.Basses which i want a bit further (for ex.) and then play the whole string section and mix the volume of the Basses 'til they sound where i expect to..

Another thing is that i tried the Teldex converb for this piece and, since i have the 3 mic positions for that place, i tried to route the Strigs/Winds/Percussions to the respective stage depth..but i was not happy with the results (and i don't know why).

At that point i listened better to the Special Edition demos and i found that they sounded convincing and powerful to my ears so i downloaded the project files and discovered that they were mixed with a lot of room...more than i expected... it would be nice to learn some details about the Kardeis method, this topic has already been discussed on this forum but no one seems to know precisely why they used pre-fader and there is no way to contact the composer.

Thank you for reading

Francesco

There might be some improvements..

Hi Francesco

I see you are looking for a bit another mix... probably closer to the "Classic Rock Lonodon Symphonic Orchestra"-style.

Your last example has some more pressure... nevertheless it is still drown in the depth of MIR.

Even if MIR supports you in mixing VSL- and other projects and even if it is an easy to use software - for really good results you need to be a master-user with a lot of experiences. So why not trying the way via a conventional mix as well. Group instrument sections / create 3-4depths / route the sections through those depths and youse for all those thepths the necessary EQs, Compressors, Loudmakers and so on until you have reached your personal sound. Once you have it save the project as a staring point for next projects.

This example shows such different rock and classical mixing possibilities:

http://www.beat-kaufmann.com/VSL_New_VI_U/BK_Melody_On_Tour.mp3 (done the classical mixing way)

Have fun

Beat

Hi Beat and thank you for the reply

despite my bad english i feel that "some more pressure" is a positive thing for a mix.. 😊 

just to check i got it: i create a bus (e.g. Strings) set is as the output for all the String Instruments, insert a reverb through the bus and set the wet/dry ratio. For the other sections i use the same convolution (same mic...for example for Grosser Saal i've just one mic) and set a longer tail (e.g. 2.5 for the strings an 2.8 for the winds) ?

Is it what you meant? Or did you refer to that method with just ER in the bus with tail added in the mastering chain?

Francesco

Dear Beat

First of all thank you for the dedication. Please find attached the new sample with the following setup which should be closer to your criteria:

4 Bus (Strings, Woodwinds, Brass+Harp, Perc) and 4 Reverb Bus. Each instrument is routed to the respective section Bus, part of each instrument is sent to the respective section's Reverb with post-fader send (this way i can have slight differences within a section)..then for each section i have a fader which controls the dry signal and another one to control the wet signal.

Far sections have less high frequencies and their respective reverbs have a bit more tail.. the reverb is from Vienna Suite Hybrid Reverb, it's a Hybrid Grosser Saal and i modified only the amount of tail. No comp on the groups, just a bit on single instruments like Timpani, Bass Drum and Snare.. just to avoid the main peaks.

For the mastering chain there is Eq, a bit of Compression (1.5 ratio), Exciter, multiband compressor (without the integrated limiter), finally the limiter and analyzer. No final reverb in the mastering chain.

Does it make sense?

@civilization 3 said:

...Typically algorithmic reverb presents coloration issues that convolution does not. ...

I normally accept that different people have different opinions.

But your statement needs - at least - an addition for saving the algorithmic reverbs.

May be that some algorithmic reverbs colour the sound when those echos and refelections have calculated "colours" or when filters shall add such wanted colours. But Calculating an echo or echos does normally not add any colour at the same time...

On the oposit: Convolution reverbs (IRs) always contain the colour of a certain room, of the speakers which delivered the sweep sound and also the colour of the microfones which recorded those sweeps for finally gitting the IR. If you don't believe that listen to the first IRs of Altiverb they sound horrible.

Well, if you take what I said for what it says rather than reinterpret I think we don't disagree very much. "Coloration that convolution does not" does not say that convolution does not color. The color of a room vs the coloration of a filter, then. I wasn't impressed with the Altiverb so far myself.

My point as to drums is beyond consideration of particular reverbs, in general I treat drums with the same 'ear' as the rest, I said I don't really agree with insistence on algo 'verb for drums just because it's the way we always did it.
For me, algo 'verb particularly for drums [while the rest of the mix is 'real' room?] creates a concern I'd prefer not to spend time on. YMMV. You appear to have such reverbs you love that you're going to stick with. I don't. 😊

In service of a tip, Hybrid Reverb has a setting "X-FEED" which tells the reflections how focused to be.
100% is fully diffuse; 0 % means the reflections focus on where you've placed the thing, as narrowly as possible.
So in conjunction with Power Panning I find this a seriously useful tool.

Hi Francesco

 I believe you have found the way how to use MIR and other Reverbs to get the sound you are looking for. You are now able to place the brass instruments in front or behind another section of instruments. You know how it sounds with MIR without MIR, what algorithmic reverbs can do and also convolution reverbs.

Why do I believe that? Your last version shows it. Congratulation! What a step forward. So you will improve the technique more and more until you have founf your style of mixing your music - I am sure.

@Francesco Pirrone said:

For the mastering chain there is Eq, a bit of Compression (1.5 ratio), Exciter, multiband compressor (without the integrated limiter), finally the limiter and analyzer. No final reverb in the mastering chain.

Does it make sense?

Yes.

 The next mixing step you could take: Where shall I place instruments (left to right)?

I can only make out 3-4 main positions between the speakers (L-R) within your music example but we could make out up to 6-8 of such positions even if we have with bad speakers. So this matter could be done with paying a bit more attention. This PDF contains some thoughts about this matter. See page 12,13,14,15. The PDF summed up: It shows and improves the fact that instruments in the front can cover instruments in the back. This can specially happen when both instruments are using the same frequency range. As an example: Let us assume flutes are placed at the same position in the mix like the violins but "behind" those violins. In this case the flutes will disappear in the mix when they are playing similar notes. What to do... the PDF tells the solution.

All the best

Beat

Hi civilization 3

Thanks for your feedback.

Beat

@Another User said:

In service of a tip, Hybrid Reverb has a setting "X-FEED" which tells the reflections how focused to be.
100% is fully diffuse; 0 % means the reflections focus on where you've placed the thing, as narrowly as possible.
So in conjunction with Power Panning I find this a seriously useful tool.

Wow! I didn't notice it..thank you for sharing this tip, i think it will be very helpful to achieve a clear placement of the instruments and to avoid the overlap issues.

This thread is very useful

@Francesco Pirrone said:

...I am just doubtful about a point: for far instruments i have to increase the amout of tail, its lenght, the wetness, the kind of ER or some misterious combination of these things?

You can do what you like to do as long the result simulats the effect you are looking for.

But also: I would try to simulate the reality in a first step. So increasing the tail is not a natural effect... Reduced to the two main facts which tell us whether an instrument sounds from far away or close to us in a room are

A) the ratio "direct sound"/"reflections (ERs+tail)"

B) the damped frequency in the hights (depending on the distance)

I for having the possibility to place instruments really far away I would select an IR which can serve this purpose. Switch the Convolution Reverb to 100% wet and and compare severa IRs. You will have no problem to find some better ones and some of them which are not very helpful.

Finding a good IR can vary the Distance between close and far in a very different way: Example

If you the also use the EQ for damping the high frequencies (just as seen with the mix of Celtic Woman somewhere above here) you will be successful. BTW: I often use MIRx for Instruments which should be far away (percussion).

Beat

I see what you say, that's perfect... let me try to put these notions into practice..

Thanks a lot

Francesco

Hi Beat

I like very much the 2nd Violins on the right and the new placement in general.. i need to refine the power panning though.. it will take a bit of practice but the PDF placement solutions are really good.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ny2x6z1sjvbe2cj/Francesco%20Pirrone%20-%20VY%20CMa%2013%2005.wav?dl=0

it's a wave file so i uploaded it on dropbox, thank you for listening to my countless samples.

@Francesco Pirrone said:

Hi Beat

I like very much the 2nd Violins on the right and the new placement in general.. i need to refine the power panning though.. it will take a bit of practice but the PDF placement solutions are really good.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ny2x6z1sjvbe2cj/Francesco%20Pirrone%20-%20VY%20CMa%2013%2005.wav?dl=0

it's a wave file so i uploaded it on dropbox, thank you for listening to my countless samples.

Hi Francesco

What shall I say? Nice! Go on your way. Compare your mix over and over again with other mixes - also with real recordings. Listen to a lot of music-mixes and how those mixes are done. Try to "copy" all the things you liked into your own mixes. 

Further: Draw the placement of your virtual orchestra players on a virtual stage. This helps even more to trim, screw and adjust your sound until the instruments appear acoustically at their "right" places.

With such a draw you always know exactly what you should achieve.

Beat

Dear Beat

Your precious suggestions leaded me to get my mix very close to what i had in mind. The 4 Bus Groups and the 4 Depths are useful to create a good perception of space and to clarify the mix in general. This whole thread has been helpful and i will try to use Hybrid and Algo Reverbs when i will mix some piece for band and orchestra.

Again thank you for the positive comments and for the guidance.

Francesco