Vienna Symphonic Library Forum
Forum Statistics

184,538 users have contributed to 42,365 threads and 255,344 posts.

In the past 24 hours, we have 0 new thread(s), 6 new post(s) and 63 new user(s).

  • MIR in VI Pro vs VE Pro

    I'm currently experimenting with the demo, and was wondering wether I can expect any difference in CPU performance by adding MIRx directly in VI Pro, vs adding MIR Pro as an insert in the mixer window.

    I'm using a metaframe with 5-6 instances usually, and 1-2 VI Pro instruments in each instance.

    Anything else to watch out for when choosing between using MIRx inside VI Pro vs MIR Pro as Insert in VE Pro?

    A related question: Is it possible to have one MIR Pro running, showing all MIR Pro inserts across different VE Pro instances? (i.e on the metaframe level)

    Thanks a lot!


  • https://forum.vsl.co.at/topic/36481/MIR PRO V S MIR X/224338

    /Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library
  • Hi Dietz

    Ok, now I understand perfectly! I think :)

    My colleague is mixing with MIR Pro on the main computer, but I want to have the reverb while working on the compositions on the slave, which also saves CPU on the main computer, so I think MIRx is perfect for me (when using the MIR Pro demo I was only using the MIRx presets anyway)

    One question though. If I do decide to go with MIR Pro after all, I'll probably go with the MIR Pro 24 option to save money. In that case is the number of instruments (24) limited within each instance of MIR Pro, or across all instances?

    In my case, I was experimenting with one VE Pro instance per string instrument (one for VI1, one for VI2 etc), with MIR Pro running on each. Because I was using every single dimension strings player, that would have hit the 24 count for a string ensemble if counting the total amount of instruments per instance. I couldn't really tell if some voices got dropped out or not.


  • Sorry, yet one more question. I was experimenting with using 8 separate channels for Dimension violins, one player each, with MIRx activated on each player individually, vs one patch with "All violins" and corresponding "violin all" setting in MIRx.

    From what I could hear, it was very hard to discern any difference in sound. Would you agree this is true for most cases? I.e. I could save a bit of CPU building my Violin patch within one instance of VIP, rather than having 8 different VIP instances, one for each player.

    Or would you recommend separating the players within different channels for authenticity in MIRx?


  • last edited
    last edited

    @Rasmus Faber said:

    [...] One question though. If I do decide to go with MIR Pro after all, I'll probably go with the MIR Pro 24 option to save money. In that case is the number of instruments (24) limited within each instance of MIR Pro, or across all instances? [...]

    That's indeed across all instances on one machine. 


    /Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library
  • last edited
    last edited

    @Rasmus Faber said:

    Sorry, yet one more question. I was experimenting with using 8 separate channels for Dimension violins, one player each, with MIRx activated on each player individually, vs one patch with "All violins" and corresponding "violin all" setting in MIRx.

    From what I could hear, it was very hard to discern any difference in sound. Would you agree this is true for most cases? I.e. I could save a bit of CPU building my Violin patch within one instance of VIP, rather than having 8 different VIP instances, one for each player.

    Or would you recommend separating the players within different channels for authenticity in MIRx?

    The differences depend on the chosen setting, of course. Strictly spoken, MIR only works as intended when individual sources are put into one of its Venues, and as a matter fo fact I always felt more "glue" and space between the single players at the same time when using this approach.

    But then, I have put considerable amount of time into the creation of MIRx presets, and I tried hard to achieve believable results when using the "All Players" version of Dimension Instruments. This is why you might be satisfied when comparing the two approaches with each other. Rest assured that the differences get more noticeable as soon as you leave the paved "MIRx Preset" territory. 😉 

    Kind regards,


    /Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library
  •  

    Thats crystal clear Dietz, thank you!

    I'll probably go with MIRx on the slave, and deal with the most challenging situations with MIR Pro (full version) running on our main machine, in the mixdown stage.

    Based on your suggestion, I might use the 8 player approach as opposed to the All players..

    Thank you so much again for this amazing product! It has truly given us remarkable results in very challenging mix situations; multiple libraries and electronic sources combined, different quality stems, all coming together in a wholeness, because of MIR!


  •  

    Oh another question! Does latency behave any differently in these different setups? When using MIR Pro, of course the latency you set in the VEP preferences is what counts, but what about MIRx inside VIP? Does it run by the same latency buffers as the VEP Server interface?


  • Assuming that all the respective Preferences are set to identical values, MIR Pro and MIRx will behave the same latency-wise. Just be aware that the involved setups and environmental variables might differ considerably, which will lead to different delay times in the end.

    HTH (and thaks a lot fot the kind words in your previous message!),


    /Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library