@Dietz said:

So do I, but it looks like we have a shortage of available developers on the VSL software team ATM. 8-/ ... the conversion of all VSL products to iLok-based copy protection seems to be much more challenging than expected. *sigh* ... it doesn't look like the targeted release date of "later this year (2021)" is realistic anymore.

For what it's worth, this particular customer is patient and content.  All things worth doing are worth doing right, and that takes whatever time it takes.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Thanks, Sam!

... a great opportunity to say "THANK YOU" to everyone who is participating in this thread and sharing their anticipation and interest with me. It really means a lot to me and everyone working on this unique project.

Keep your faith!! ;-)

Just dropping in to say "hey!" and that I'm thinking about MIR 3D on a daily basis as I mix now.

I can't wait!

Since I own actually all the instruments I need for the next 20 years of experiments, and some more just for the pleasure of collection 😳 , the only reason tempting me to store some vienna-vouchers this year was to be prepared to the MIR 3D upgrade...

Reading the honest but disheartening news by Dietz by the way I refrained from buying them to challenge the Murphy law:

- If I had vouchers and I was ready to get very good discount, the update should never pop up, I know.

- Now I have none: so it can be launched soon, and I will regret that I didn't maximize discount... LOL

(... but the happiness for the new product to test will compensate for money loss... 😄 )

So please... punish me and launch it as soon as possible... 😉

*sigh* Thanks for your ongoing interest! I'd really, really like to announce a release date for MIR 3D today (or even better yesterday), as I'm already doing actual work here with a great-sounding, surprisingly stable, yet terrible-looking beta version. However, these final touches (and especially some missing GUI elements) may well make or break this application, so they will need the full attention of the VSL development team. As you know by now, the latter is tied up with urgent work related to the transition from eLicenser to iLok; I have no idea when this will be completed.

There is no doubt that MIR 3D _will_ see the light of day. I just can't say for sure when.

Thanks for your patience,

@Dietz said:

*sigh* Thanks for your ongoing interest! I'd really, really like to announce a release date for MIR 3D today (or even better yesterday), as I'm already doing actual work here with a great-sounding, surprisingly stable...

There is no doubt that MIR 3D _will_ see the light of day. I just can't say for sure when.

LOL thank you for the kind update, and just keep doing.

I was joking, but just because several supporters can't wait, and in general I think lot of MIR enthusiasts have the update in the wishlist. Looking forward to it.

@Dietz said:

*sigh* Thanks for your ongoing interest! I'd really, really like to announce a release date for MIR 3D today (or even better yesterday), as I'm already doing actual work here with a great-sounding, surprisingly stable, yet terrible-looking beta version. However, these final touches (and especially some missing GUI elements) may well make or break this application, so they will need the full attention of the VSL development team. As you know by now, the latter is tied up with urgent work related to the transition from eLicenser to iLok; I have no idea when this will be completed.

On both counts (the licenser transfer and the development of MIR 3D), I personally would much rather it take a long time to and come out the gates bug-free than rush development and encounter an onslaught of issues and crashes.  As I've said before, anything worth doing is worth doing right, and that takes whatever time it takes.

Personally, the feature I'm looking forward to the most is the ability to change the reverberation time and the secondary microphone volume offset for each track. It will make a big difference. I can't wait.

Best,
David

@daviddln said:

Personally, the feature I'm looking forward to the most is the ability to change the reverberation time and the secondary microphone volume offset for each track. It will make a big difference. I can't wait.

Thanks for sharing your anticipation! I really hope that your patience will be rewarded, ultimately. 😊

While there won't be different reverb length and/or mic offsets on a per-instance basis (read: per Icon), you will be able to open multiple instances of the same Venue with different settings in one session (a.k.a. "tabs"). This should do the trick.

Hi Dietz,

@Dietz said:

While there won't be different reverb length and/or mic offsets on a per-instance basis (read: per Icon), you will be able to open multiple instances of the same Venue with different settings in one session (a.k.a. "tabs"). This should do the trick.

Oh, I see. Will we be able to create as many instances of the same Venue as we want or is there a limit? I was hoping we could change the settings for each icon but it should do the trick, as you said. For my projects, I create several instances of VE Pro with different settings in MIR Pro for each instance. So it's great that we will be able to do all this directly in MIR 3D. Thank you!

Best regards,
David

Well - using a separate Venue for each individual instrument certainly defies the most basic idea of MIR, which is to bring all instruments together in the _same_ room, but why not :-D

Oh, I just create two or three VE Pro instances with the same Venue in MIR Pro but with a different reverberation time. I noticed that some instruments sound better with a smaller amount of reverberation time than others, at least to my ears. So that's why I said it would be easier if we could change the reverberation time for each icon. But I don't know much about mixing, I'm not an expert at all. Have a nice day.

Best,
David

That sounds reasonable. I think the "tabbed" Venues are exactly what you need then. 

... another approach is to add different types of "sweeting" reverb to enhance different sections in specific ways. That's how it's done on real recordings, where all the players are actually sitting in the same room at the same time.

Your solution makes better use of the possibilities offered by the virtual world, of course. :.)

Oh yes, I use MIRacle a lot. Thanks for your reply Dietz.

Best,
David

So, does this mean more than two microphone positions, or should we say, speaker positions? The biggest limitation of MIR to my ears is the lack of stereo field from the ambient microphones and the inability to have a more realistic approach to capturing what an orchestra sounds like both in the room while still capturing a more intimate sound from an instrument.

For this reason, I typically have to use two to three recordings and merge the audio, and mix carefully (two microphones, one at the conductor location and one near the front of the room, the so-called 7th row microphone, another recording with two microphones at the left and right of the room about 1/3 of the way back starting from the front row of the audience, and a final stereo set of mics at the far back of the room on the back left and right walls).

I then mix this in 7.1, using the conductor location as the center, the 7th row also mixed in as center, and I eq the 7th row microphone to under 120 Hz as the sub, and the additional sets as the mid rears and rears. Maybe it's overkill, but the reason we are working with samples and impulse data is for ultra realism, ultra near perfection that is not possible in a live, one take recording.

@littlewierdo said:

So, does this mean more than two microphone positions, or should we say, speaker positions? [...]

I'm not sure I understood the question correctly. The positions of the microphones and the impulse-generating speakers in a recording venue are both very important, but they are by no means interchangeable.

Kind regards,

Hi Dietz, 

I have a question about the new MIR 3D software release. As I understood reading this thread, is going to be a new an independent software with his own roompacks. 

I understand that MIR PRO is going to be also available separately with the roompacks that we already know. 

In my case, I only could afford Mirx with my VI Series instruments and I love it. With the Synchron series I lost the capacity to use The Sage Mirx in Synchron Player and for that reason I was waiting to reunite enough money to buy it, but I'm not sure If it would be better buy MIR 3D over MIR PRO. 

I understand that is going to be a taste thing, but I understand also that MIR 3D is going to be the future in positioning, so, in your expert opinion about audio standards and If you could pick only one of them, which would you choose?

Thanks and sorry for the long question!

Antonio Z

MIR 3D will replace MIR Pro, that's for sure. I don't know about plans to integrate MIRx with Synchron Player (... which doesn't mean that it won't happen at all). In any case, it is quite obvious that the idea of "burnt-in" spatial information, on which VSL's Synchron series is based, requires different workflows and different tools.

Best,

Thanks for your response Dietz, 

So in this case I can wait until the release of MIR 3D. What I really like about Mirx is that I don't have to think much about the positioning and I can focus in composing.

Thanks a lot for the info!

Cheers!

Any news here? Release anytime soon?