# MIR demo



## Rob Elliott (Jan 23, 2009)

Frederick - take this post off if not cool but just in case you guys haven't heard these


half way down the page

http://community.vsl.co.at/forums/t/205 ... ageIndex=3


the Zara stereo is the next level IMHO.

Rob


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Jan 23, 2009)

Yeah... Although I'm still not convinced you can't do this with by other means. 

What we need is a demo where they A/B different positions on the sound stage. 1 instrument, then perhaps a few... We need to hear the depth of it in such an isolated case. 

I'm sure they are working on all that though


----------



## Jack Weaver (Jan 23, 2009)

Uhh...

Has anyone questioned whether virtual hall simulation like this is the best thing for your production?

Granted it seems like a wonderful mental construct and all. Maybe it's fun for doing quasi-realistic orchestral recreations of classical music for a college seminar or something. 

But having to put your whole production under the control of a Mir output stage to mix to stereo or surround? 

The concept is captivating but how useful will it be to working composers? Perhaps a post house might find some useful applications for this - especially in its surround modes - when the final version (I forget the name of the version right now) comes out this fall - the one the supports other VSTi's.

_And you know that I'm a VSL advocate for 'way back. _


----------



## Frederick Russ (Jan 23, 2009)

These are the links to the audio movies:

http://vsl.co.at/downloader.asp?file=vi ... Stereo.mov
MIR - Wondering Why Stereo (QuickTime 18.8 MB)

http://vsl.co.at/downloader.aspx?ID=2025
MIR - Wondering Why 5.1 (QuickTime 49.2 MB)

http://vsl.co.at/downloader.asp?file=vi ... Stereo.mov MIR - Zarathustra Stereo (QuickTime 25.9 MB)

http://vsl.co.at/downloader.aspx?ID=2027
MIR - Zarathustra 5.1 (QuickTime 70.3 MB)


----------



## dogforester (Jan 23, 2009)

I just don't hear it, sounds like altiverb. Granted I'm listening on normal average headphones. I like the idea of an ultra realistic concert hall to play my magnum opus in, But It just doesn't sound anymore real than something like altiverb, could be my equipment though.


----------



## Angel (Jan 23, 2009)

dogforester @ Fri Jan 23 said:


> But It just doesn't sound anymore real than something like altiverb, could be my equipment though.



Didn't listen to the demos yet, but perhaps it sounds like that, because a weak point is that it's just SAMPLES again? 

Angel


----------



## chimuelo (Jan 23, 2009)

Using Native porcessing to achieve this is a major feat actually.
They are delving into the DSP/hardware based arena now.
If they pull it off, it would be monumental actually, especially since it's multichanneled.
They are somewhat attemping to replace a Lexicon 960L.
They should probably release a remote surface also, as tweaking this on a QWERTY and mouse would be painful.
The quailty just isn't there yet, but what a giant step in the right direction.
When they can get the quality of the Stone Quarry preset of a Bricasti Model 7, I will sell my boat for one these.....
Besides we only get Glass 8 times a year in Lake Tahoe... o=<


----------



## dogforester (Jan 23, 2009)

Angel @ Fri Jan 23 said:


> dogforester @ Fri Jan 23 said:
> 
> 
> > But It just doesn't sound anymore real than something like altiverb, could be my equipment though.
> ...



You could be right, never thought of it that way.


----------



## Fernando Warez (Jan 23, 2009)

I'm impress!


----------



## Pietro (Jan 23, 2009)

Maybe a funny conclusion, but I think it would sound much better played with different orchestral library . Or maybe I'm not a big fan of full VSL. (Tell me these timpani sound good to you... :?)

- Piotr


----------



## FireGS (Jan 23, 2009)

Jack Weaver nailed it, imo. It's not that I'm not impressed, but it seems very... specific. As in any sort of modern/cinematic sound might be hard to achieve with this. I fear that it may just bring out your sample's flaws a bit more.

I dunno.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jan 23, 2009)

None of you would be saying any of this if you'd heard it in person. The sound is pretty spectacular.


----------



## artinro (Jan 23, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Fri Jan 23 said:


> None of you would be saying any of this if you'd heard it in person. The sound is pretty spectacular.



Nick is absolutely right. I'm not sure these demos do MIR full justice simply because mixes are a very personal thing. I had a chance to see MIR in person and the quality is unbelievable. I've tried a bunch of different options for VSL (including using altiverb for ER and a Bricasti M7 for tail) and I think MIR is a step ahead of any of these options. Really looking forward to this!


----------



## koolkeys (Jan 23, 2009)

chimuelo @ Fri Jan 23 said:


> Using Native porcessing to achieve this is a major feat actually.
> They are delving into the DSP/hardware based arena now.
> If they pull it off, it would be monumental actually, especially since it's multichanneled.
> They are somewhat attemping to replace a Lexicon 960L.


The VSL rep told me(I said this in another thread) that MIR will require an i7 processor. I asked him if he thought that people would want to buy a new system to run it, and he said that the overall price of MIR plus a new system will be less than an equivalent hardware reverb. MIR will be over $1,000 for the download version, and around $1,500 for the boxed version(subject to change, of course).

So while it IS software, it seems that it will almost be required to run as hardware. But if you are spending that much on your audio stuff, it's probably well worth it.

Somebody mentioned that it sounds like Altiverb. That may be because the core code IS based around Altiverb. Made by the same dev team at least.

Brent


----------



## artinro (Jan 23, 2009)

koolkeys @ Fri Jan 23 said:


> Somebody mentioned that it sounds like Altiverb. That may be because the core code IS based around Altiverb. Made by the same dev team at least.
> 
> Brent



Brent, I think this was true for an early build of MIR. I'm fairly certain that the VSL team have rewritten the engine from scratch and that the core is now purely VSL, not based on altiverb. I think I saw Dietz make a post on this on the VSL forum some time back. I could be mistaken, though.


----------



## koolkeys (Jan 23, 2009)

artinro @ Fri Jan 23 said:


> koolkeys @ Fri Jan 23 said:
> 
> 
> > Somebody mentioned that it sounds like Altiverb. That may be because the core code IS based around Altiverb. Made by the same dev team at least.
> ...


Well, it's entirely possible that they started with Audioease code and tweaked it, basically just using it as a framework. Who knows. I do know that Altiverb is already EXTREMELY CPU efficient(better than most algo reverbs), so it would have been a good base to start with.

But you are probably right. I just know that it WAS at some point.

Brent


----------



## Jack Weaver (Jan 23, 2009)

Nick,

I heard it in person. Albeit not the whole demo. Somewhat thru it I realized I had misplaced my cell phone and had to go find it. 

It sounds good, very good. Its usefulness in production might be another issue.

Best regards,
Jack


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jan 23, 2009)

"Its usefulness in production might be another issue"

If you're using all VSL then nothing can touch it. I haven't heard it with other libraries, which won't sound as good since it knows a lot about the VSL instruments that it doesn't know about other things.


----------



## Jack Weaver (Jan 23, 2009)

Hi Nick,

In the past I have used all VSL and currently I tend to combine it with other things. 

'How it sounds' is not really the issue. Even when it will be able to use other VSTi's it will need to be the final output 'space' for a composer's production. 

I question the idea that many of us will want our recorded output to sound like its a quasi-replica of some concert house somewhere. It's still kinda like comparing a CGI movie effect to real life. I mean c'mon, we are all using samples. 

The way VSL has conceived of Mir is as the final arbiter of a mix situation. Mir is meant to output as the stereo mix bus or one of the versions of surround as the final mix. 

Even AI's Space program is meant only as a spatial location device to feed other reverbs. It's not meant to be the final say on the acoustic space(s) of the production. 

What if I want my drums to have a plate and my flutes to be in outer space? What if I want to put my brass out of phase so it sounds like they're coming from outside the speakers? Well, I guess I could bus Mir back into my mix and add other sonic environments and instruments. Maybe not, if there's latency. 

However, hats off to all the good people at VSL for creating an incredible device. I think its effectiveness is multiplied in the surround modes. That was the cool part of the demos. 

IMO Mir sounds good. IMO Mir seems limiting to everyday production techniques.


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Jan 24, 2009)

Pietro @ Fri Jan 23 said:


> Maybe a funny conclusion, but I think it would sound much better played with different orchestral library . Or maybe I'm not a big fan of full VSL. (Tell me these timpani sound good to you... :?)
> 
> - Piotr


The Timpani were quite tame, I noticed that as well. But that's a matter of turning up the volume, and playingh around with the width etc. I'm pretty happy with the VSL timpani in my own setup.


----------



## Dave Connor (Jan 24, 2009)

Jack Weaver @ Fri Jan 23 said:


> What if I want my drums to have a plate and my flutes to be in outer space? What if I want to put my brass out of phase so it sounds like they're coming from outside the speakers?



Well you can do that now in any number of ways and that kind of approach has been around and available forever. The holy grail of orchestral samples is having them truly sound and behave like they would in a world class hall. If the technology to get things sounding like that has arrived, then that's a good thing. It may seem like a limitation but it's intended to fill a very specific niche that is still wanting (although Altiverb sounds pretty darn good.)

Keep in mind that VSL users would be all too happy to have presets that place everything where they belong in space with all the proper EQ-ing etc. It's quite a chore to do that individually with each instrument in that huge library. 

If MIR really does end up sounding incredible with VSL samples, it really is more of a completion of the library and fulfillment of it's original potential than a cool new mixing tool for audio people. Though it could end up being that in some way as well.


----------



## Angel (Jan 24, 2009)

Now I listened to the first stereo-demo... and I DO hear it... it's really impressing 
I love it


----------



## Pzy-Clone (Jan 24, 2009)

Hm, im not realy impressed by these demos.
But the VSL demos tend to be very understated anyway.

I dunno, the idea is great, super-multi sampling reverb would seem like a logical next move, but...at the same time, having all those impulses piled on top of eachother hm, i dunno....i trust that VSL will deliver something great after all those years. 

But in all fairness, does it realy matter what the reverb sounds like when you have timpani that sounds like buckets?? 
Im sure MIR is great, but if the sound of these demos are the sonic ideal, im not interested.


----------



## Rob Elliott (Jan 24, 2009)

Great and healthy discussion boys :D Thanks for all your balanced opinions.


Hey just one thing I have used on the VSL timps. I set up Fox stage (far mikes) on ER and tail (so I have ultimate flexibility) BUT also run some of the CLINTON studio on another FX bus - really gives nice body to the timps.


Hope it helps.


Rob


----------



## germancomponist (Jan 24, 2009)

Isn`t MIR not only a new interface to do that what we can do with other/multiple plugs?

Gunther


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jan 24, 2009)

Can someone explain to me what is going on exactly in that first video? What is being done to the symbolic representations of the individual instruments?


----------



## germancomponist (Jan 24, 2009)

If you want to positon an instrument on exactly one place on a stage, usually you use an extra ER impulse or a instance for example from True-Verb, balance it out, use panning, adding main reverb and so on... . Many steps to do it.

If I am right, MIR will all do that for you and you have only to position the instrument... .


----------



## Angel (Jan 24, 2009)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Sat Jan 24 said:


> Can someone explain to me what is going on exactly in that first video? What is being done to the symbolic representations of the individual instruments?



I think these are the virtual positions within the stage/room of the single instruments/sections.
You create a slot named "Horns", position that sexy circle wherever you want on the stage, assign the Slot "Horns" to your VI-Output and there you go.

If I understood it correctly.

Angel

P.S.: Doesn't Wallander use a similar technique? You place your single(!) instrument somewhere on stage and ERs and pan are calculated depending on that position?


----------



## hbuus (Jan 24, 2009)

Hm, I have my doubts that the average consumer/listener cares if an instrument is placed a few feet to the left or right on the virtual sound stage. The main question is: Does it sound good?

Take my big brother for instance. He's an accountant and has never been to an orchestral hall, let alone heard any music in one. But he likes movies, especially Spielberg's, and through those movies he has come to know and love the music of John Williams - so much, in fact, that he has bought the soundtracks for some of the Indiana Jones-movies, plus a CD with Williams' greatests works.

Now, the other day I e-mailed my brother a link to the VSL forum, where a guy has made a pretty damned good mock-up of the main theme of Star Wars. My big brother was very excited! "It's amazing it can be done", he said, and "It must have taken ages to make!"

My point, I guess, is this: With todays music technology (Altiverb and so on), it's already possible to make convincing music which will satisfy the average consumer - hell, not just satisfy, but _excite_. In that sense, MIR, at least to my ears, does not deliver anything groundbreaking. Therefore the crucial point must be if it lets you, as a prof. composer, work quicker, more efficient - or ?


----------



## Angel (Jan 24, 2009)

perhaps it's all about nuances?
Give TJB the Special Edition. It will surely sound more convincing than my productions.

MIR in average hands will sound average. MIR in pro hands will sound pro.
And MIR in pro hands will sound more pro than Freeverb in Pro hands.

Angel


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Jan 24, 2009)

germancomponist @ Sat Jan 24 said:


> Isn`t MIR not only a new interface to do that what we can do with other/multiple plugs?
> 
> Gunther



No. Try go to the VSL page and read about MIR. It has multiple Impulses per position, taking into acounts all kinds of things. If it sounds better, time will show. But it definately does things todays technology cannot do.


----------



## germancomponist (Jan 24, 2009)

Oops, I thought using some/many different plugs/rev-effects and combine them into only one interface... .

That would not be new... ! A Porsche is constructed from many individual parts. :mrgreen:


----------



## Pzy-Clone (Jan 24, 2009)

I think there might be two different things (kinda) going on here.

the first thing, and the one that i suspect will be very effective, is the placement of the intruments.
Im sure you can get very realistic reflections , signals bouncing off all the walls in all the righ places and a very realistic positioning of sounds.

What im not so sure about, is the actual sound of the impulses.
I mean, you get 1 orchestra hall for a thousand bux, and that one better sound damn good if its going to be a worthy investment.

Becouse, who can realy tell wich walls are reflecting what in a busy orchestration, ist not like you can REALY tell the difference once you layer a few instruments.?

So lets hope it sounds great as it is, not just "natural" and accurate ...but production friendly out of the box as well.


----------



## PolarBear (Jan 24, 2009)

I think it will come down to the effect of midi panning vs. stereo matrix panning. There is only a fixed amount of information in a single hall impulse. You could pan that impulse and use it over and over again for far back timpani and upfront violin (sections) as well as mono woods or go the native route and have special impulses for every possible position on the stage factoring in any wall reflections and so on. It's a matter of processing power and lastly will be determined by the impulses quality. If they didn't get those right, it may have scientific but not practical value.

I just don't understand all the picking... as it's going to make a complete orchestra setting exchangable between composers with very little hassle and the use of it seems also not so difficult. At least it's easier to use in the simple mode they show (I guess there would also be another level) than having three or four different verbs doing the thing. If it would sound better, well, we tend to think mixed libraries give a better sounding mockup, so that has still to be determined. If you don't like VSLs tonality you won't like MIR in conjunction with VSL samples, that's for sure.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jan 24, 2009)

"The way VSL has conceived of Mir is as the final arbiter of a mix situation. Mir is meant to output as the stereo mix bus or one of the versions of surround as the final mix"

I see what you're saying, Jack, but I don't think there's a better interface for what VSL is doing even if you send the entire orchestra into a mixer (onscreen or hardware) and add the other stuff there. Their interface controls the position, level, wet/dry balance....for each instrument, and you need that all that.

You don't have to use it as a mixer replacement, in other words.


----------



## Jack Weaver (Jan 24, 2009)

Hi Nick,

Well, is guess the proof will be in the pudding. When it comes out and people beyond the orbit of Planet VSL start using it in hybrid mixes then we'll see what's real and what's conjecture. 

I was seriously thinking of going this way until I ran into these limitations (well, at least limitations in my mind) of how it would really integrate into my setup. 

I'll just leave it here. However, it certainly is a technical magnum opus for the folks at VSL and a boon for those who wish to replicate an orchestra in place. 

Best regards,
Jack


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (Jan 24, 2009)

When the previous MIR finally came down to earth, it burnt and crashed... :D

I think the concept of MIR is way over the top.

And if it works, it will start a renaissance for hardware reverb units, which were just meant for the same purpose. There is no notion of "realism" in the concept of MIR, it all boils down to "tweaking" instrument tracks so that they will render a coherent and realistically sounding orchestra.

You can do the same with other plugins. There is no magic in VSL + MIR. VSL already contains quite some ERs from the silent stage, that are embedded in the samples. All instruments and groups have been recorded in non-orchestral placements and MIR will have to "fix" this?

MIR may be a great tool, but as long as it tied to VSL, I will not believe in it. With good ears and good plugins you will be able to get similar if not better results (for less money).


----------



## Fernando Warez (Jan 25, 2009)

Yes i can see why some people would say it is over the top. But you got to hand it to the guys at VSL: they make no compromise. I just love that! 8) 

Come guys! We should all be happy to see developers make such meticulous work. And I'm saying this even though I'm not planning on buying it.


----------



## Rob Elliott (Jan 25, 2009)

Great discussion. For me it boils down to two things (price really is a distant third)


1. My workflow improvement / efficiency

2. Final Production value



Time / further demos will hopefully shed light on these two issues for me.


Rob


----------



## dannthr (Jan 25, 2009)

Don't forget that this thing, this whole thing, is just about placing instruments on the stage and letting it do it's magical thing.

No sitting there for weeks trying to get that perfect IR combination--just put them on the stage and let the stage take care of the panning and reflections.


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Jan 25, 2009)

dannthr @ Sun Jan 25 said:


> Don't forget that this thing, this whole thing, is just about placing instruments on the stage and letting it do it's magical thing.
> 
> No sitting there for weeks trying to get that perfect IR combination--just put them on the stage and let the stage take care of the panning and reflections.



Although the timps in the demo show it's not that simple. However I'm pretty sure that it is easy to tweak. 

And as Fernando says - you gotta love how VSL keep raising the bar.


----------



## Frederick Russ (Jan 25, 2009)

I think I'm going to stay with impulse response chains instead. I'm hearing a little mud in these demos but I think it has more to do with stereo widths being too wide and EQ frequencies that make the instruments appear to lack definition. A cool addition to VSL's current line could be to provide some sort of sonic modeling to do this for you - for example, narrowing the stereo width to push back instrument sections and reducing harsh frequency buildup by EQ modeling. Precision EQs & stereo widths are really important for granting mixes greater dimensionality especially with VSL.

I think its cool that this will be available for universal sample libraries in Q3 2009. Only time will tell how this goes especially since getting decent demos of competing libraries using MIR may be a bit politically charged to say the least. Looking forward to hearing the MIR engine on other libraries besides VSL.


----------



## Dietz (Feb 2, 2009)

Hi all,

thanks for this vivid discussion.  ... I've taken a short vacation after my Vienna MIR-presentations at NAMM, that's why I didn't reply earlier. Please allow for a late, but partly "official" answer, for the sake of completeness. 

I can perfectly understand that the upcoming first version of Vienna MIR might not be for everyone. Let me just point out those aspects where there seem to be the most widespread misunderstandings.



- The Vienna MIR's convolution core is not based on any licenced code. While we had a very fruitful and positive cooperation with AudioEase (the developers of AltiVerb) during an early phase of the MIR's development, we have now a completely new engine running in the background, written from the scratch by our own developers. 

- Vienna MIR is much more than "just a reverb" - it's actually a complete mixing engine for virtual orchestral music. The reverberation-part is something we happily take along with it.  

- That said, it is important to understand the conceptual differences between the Vienna MIR and (say) the - fantastic! - AltiVerb from AudioEase: The Vienna MIR "knows" a lot about the incoming signals, like the instrument's or ensemble's size, its intial volume, and most important: MIR knows about the spatial frequency-profile of each instrument. - For example: a trumpet has a very different radiation pattern than a horn or a snare-drum, thus the room will react very differently to each of those. The "mixing" will happen by itself in many cases, just by putting an instrument at the proper spot on the stage.

- These spots all rely on _individual impulse responses_, not on algorithmic deduction from the same single IR. In certain cases, the output-signal is the product of about 1.000 individual impulse responses, taken from a real hall or soundstage.

- The MIR's graphical interface as well as its engine are completely dedicated to one task - realizing orchestral music in the digital domain. There's no other product (or combination of products) available that takes this basic idea that far.




Peter Roos said:


> [...] MIR may be a great tool, but as long as it tied to VSL, I will not believe in it. With good ears and good plugins you will be able to get similar if not better results (for less money). [...]



Personally, I dare to answer: No. You might be able to get good results, without doubt, but not "similar", not in the same time, and especially not for less money. The D/L-version of Vienna MIR will cost you around 800 Euro, the proper i7-based computer around 1.500,- (plus housing, monitor and stuff). 

... apart from that: The VSL already announced that a later version of Vienna MIR will be able to work with _any_ external signal (although with a reduced set of possibilities due to the inner logic of the MIR's concept), so the "tie to VSL" is a temporary one. 

Thanks for your interest,

________

/Dietz Tinhof - Vienna Symphonic Library - MIR Project Leader


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jul 3, 2009)

I'll be honest here, until recently I never looked into MIR because it was too far down the road. I just listened to both video demos, it was "Wondering Why" that sold me. I thought it was very efficient. It would of been interesting to hear the same piece but not using MIR to see the difference. But I don't recall hearing VSL sound as spacial as that through my speakers.

I don't know what Nick meant when he said he have to hear it live. Live?


----------

