Sorry that I'll take this thread OT for a moment ...

@littlewierdo said:

[...] Honestly, its high time that the MIR Pro engine should be free anyway, especially considering you cant do anything with the engine itself. Yes, MIR Pro would have to be upgraded to support more than two microphone positions, however, I consider that a huge bonus, one that MIR Pro desperately needs. Compared to other convolution reverbs on the market, the lack of more than 2 microphone positions leaves MIR Pro a bit behind. This isnt to say MIR Pro isnt amazing, but it certainly needs an upgrade in number of mic placement positions.

Great to hear that you like MIR Pro! I know that there is always room for improvement, but let's get a few things straight:

- MIR as a whole "thinks" Ambisonics, thus you can de-code up to eight individual microphone capsules of both microphone positions. Most Venues offer four (at least three) Main Mic positions you can choose from, some of them oriented in more than one main axis.

- After all these years there is still not a single competitor's product on the market which is able to deal with literally thousands of individual impulse responses from a real stage or studio, allowing for free source-placement and rotation (of both the source and the microphones!) - let alone in (close to) real-time.

- Plus, there is no comparable (IR-based) product which is able to take into account the directivity of the recorded sources, much less the actually measured frequency profiles of real instruments.

... I would _love_ to make MIR a free product, but looking at the 15+ years of development which were necessary to realize the features mentioned above (and all the other ones, too), I would say that it's highly unlikely this will happen any time soon.

Kind regards,

"Compared to other convolution reverbs on the market, the lack of more than 2 microphone positions leaves MIR Pro a bit behind. " - littleweirdo

That is absurd

MIR is so much better than  other reverb/acoustic environments.  There is nothing that even remotely compares in sound quality, in flexibility, in ease of use.  A total non-engineer musician can use it easily to create a world-class mix.  It is the only one perfectly designed for orchestral sound mixing.  And the microphone positions are adjustable from many different perspectives. 

+1

Thanks everybody for chiming in - no need to get angry, though! MIR is the industry's best-kept secret for one reason or the other, so its Ins and Outs are not necessarily common knowledge. ;-)

Kind regards,

Hello

My Reasen for buying Synchron Player was the abelity to use (finally) AFTERTOUCH.

And its new possibilitys in the DIM/Ctr.. Now you can manage more then 2 (VI Pro) Matrices with the "SlotX/Fade".

The Handling of the "Matrix" (VI Pro) in SP is in my Opinion better.

But the Upgrade Price for the Libs should be more fair.

MIR is Great, espacialy in conjunction with VEP6. I use it also as Digital FX-Rack (as "Send-effect") in live Situations.

VSL team, please, make a range of humanizing parameters in SY player same as (not smaller then) in VIPro

Also feature requests for SY player:
Indication of impulse Bypass mode for impulse button on the mixer
Master Impulse bypass button in mixer

@Mathematics said:

Synchron upgrade to Bundle owners should rather be an addition to, rather than a replacement.

I believe you misunderstand things. Paul can confirm, but I think he's specifically said that the Synchron series upgrades do NOT replace your VI series, they are additional products. You can run either one.

Hi,

The VI Special Editions and SYNCHRON-ized Special Editions are independent products, each with their own license and sample content, with additional sample content for all 4 volumes and with more than attractive upgrade/crossgrade prices. 

So you can keep your original VI Series files around (also to open older projects) and work with your SYNCHRON-ized Special Editions from now on OR additionally. Simply as you like :)

Best, 
Paul 

Hello VSL,

I want to come back to my second post in this thread, concerning some of the features in the Synchron Player.

Is it possible to have the stretch feature and interval map?

These are the only reasons why I'm NOT USING and UPGRADING to the SY-libraries (Dimension Brass & Strings). Especially interval map is the essential controller of my matrices/presets when it comes to playability.

You would really make me happy if these will be integrated in the future. 😃

@littlewierdo said:

[...] Honestly, its high time that the MIR Pro engine should be free anyway, especially considering you cant do anything with the engine itself. Yes, MIR Pro would have to be upgraded to support more than two microphone positions, however, I consider that a huge bonus, one that MIR Pro desperately needs. Compared to other convolution reverbs on the market, the lack of more than 2 microphone positions leaves MIR Pro a bit behind. This isnt to say MIR Pro isnt amazing, but it certainly needs an upgrade in number of mic placement positions.

Great to hear that you like MIR Pro! I know that there is always room for improvement, but let's get a few things straight:

- MIR as a whole "thinks" Ambisonics, thus you can de-code up to eight individual microphone capsules of both microphone positions. Most Venues offer four (at least three) Main Mic positions you can choose from, some of them oriented in more than one main axis.

- After all these years there is still not a single competitor's product on the market which is able to deal with literally thousands of individual impulse responses from a real stage or studio, allowing for free source-placement and rotation (of both the source and the microphones!) - let alone in (close to) real-time.

- Plus, there is no comparable (IR-based) product which is able to take into account the directivity of the recorded sources, much less the actually measured frequency profiles of real instruments.

... I would _love_ to make MIR a free product, but looking at the 15+ years of development which were necessary to realize the features mentioned above (and all the other ones, too), I would say that it's highly unlikely this will happen any time soon.

Kind regards,

I want to be clear, I was referring to the engine, not the roompacks. I understand charging for roompacks. In other words, when you buy a roompack, I think you should get the engine, even if the engine is the limited 24 channel version and have to pay to upgrade for more than 24 channels (similar to how Instruments and Instruments Pro work - if I buy a soundfont, I get a feature rich engine free (ie. Vienna Instruments), then I can pay to unlock a few additional features ie. Vienna Instruments Pro).

At no point did I say MIR wasnt amazing. It absolutely is, probably one of the best convo reverbs out there. Its very flexible and customizable, it just makes no sense to charge for an engine that you can do nothing with.

I also am unsure how effective MIR is with anything non-vienna, or let alone the Synchron libraries for that matter, I havent had a chance to do much with it since I have been trying to pass Calculus, Physics, and Chemistry classes this past Fall and Spring semesters. Rest assured, Ill mess with it some more over the summer.

A few days ago I ordered the Synchronized Special Edition bundle upgrade from the VI SE bundle. It was such a good price ($160 US) I couldn't pass it up.

I must say that after some initial play-around with the Synchron Player I have begun to appreciate it's capabilities and usefulness.

Just wondering, I use mir pro in each channel that represents one instrument or set of intruments and by that i can decide where my 2 Mic position to, so why do we need to have MIR Pro support multiple mic positioning if i can use it the way i described it above? so if i decide i would have 32 channels for my song, then i can have at least 32 mic positions

What am i missing?

-John

Because 2 mic positions per instrument doesnt capture the full room sound. Im sure Ill get pushback on this, but in our church, we place microphones at the instrument location, and microphones in the left, right, and rear balconies. The result is astonishing, and since audio coming into these balcony microphones contains a mix of all instruments, there are nuances that you just dont get having each instrument mic'd in its own, isolated channel.

Having re-read what I typed several months ago, I wasnt exactly clear on this, but I dont want 4 mic positions for 1 single instrument, I would like 3 additional microphone positions that emulate all of the sound being produced by all instrumentation at the same time. Hence, a microphone on the stage would capture that instrument, relatively isolated from all the other instruments. The other 3 microphones placed say in the balconies on the left and rear would capture and produce the audio one would hear if they were standing at that microphone position while the entire orchestra is playing (these microphones would not merely capture the sound of just one instrument, they would capture the sound produced by any instrument that is currently playing).

As I understand it, the processing is done on a per instrument basis, so, if I place a microphone in the balcony and I dont tie it to say the timpani, isolating that microphone will result in not hearing the timpanis at all.

In the business, we call these room microphones, and I would like the ability to place at least 3, and have them function like a room microphone would in a live setting.