# Who here works with MIR PRO and feels like they have made sense of it?



## Virtual Virgin (Sep 2, 2019)

There are some things about this plug in that I find quizzical.
What is the input dry/wet setting doing? What is the dry signal and what is the wet signal in this part of the mix?
Why does it sound terrible when cranked? I get lots of nasty low frequency information. 
Why am I selecting mics for the input signal? Most samples have already been through a mic.

Why does moving the mic only affect the (global) dry mix? Doesn't that defeat most of the realism they are trying to achieve?
Why do sources 2 feet from the mic generally sound like they are still at the back of the stage?

I have spent numerous sessions now trying to get a live string quartet chamber room sound using some of the chambers in the Roompack 1.
Theoretically, if this plug in is to live up to its stated pedigree I should be able to use an output mic setup at 100% wet in the conductor's position or just off the stage and get a crisp presence from a tightly arranged semicircle of strings. This is not the case. The room sound is always blaring away and overpowering when used against reference recordings (in live chamber settings mind you, not dry studios with direct micing). Maybe I am doing something wrong, but so far I am disappointed with the lack definition in this type of setup. 
Yes, I know I can mix in the dry signal, but that certainly compromises the setting I am trying to achieve and seems as though should be attainable through this software given its claims.


----------



## al_net77 (Sep 3, 2019)

This is a Dietz related question 
Go to VSL "My Downloads" -> Software manuals -> Think MIR! – Background Knowledge pdf file.
It is an addendum to the manual to understand how MIR "thinks"


----------



## ProfoundSilence (Sep 3, 2019)

You need to understand how it was sampled to use it effectively.

Also you apparently need to know what am impulse actually is and how it's recorded. An impulse is recorded with a microphone, because it's not an algorithm magically divined - it's an actual recording used to calculate/approximate other sound sources being put through the same process of the original impulse material.

One common method is a sine sweep - which has a sine wave that pitch shifts up played trough a speaker of some kind - and then recorded by a microphone. A program takes the original sine sweep and then the recorded signal of it being played through a speaker at a location and recorded on a micrphone - and then calculates what "happened" to the original signal = thus creating a process it can apply to incoming sounds.

MIR(Multi Impulse Response) is a product where every x number of feet - an impulse was taken - on multiple micrphones(thus different frequency responses based on microphone used) and then MIR's magic is essentially allowing you to crossfade(or morph?) between each impulse response based on the location you place it. I'm not sure if the impulses are individually sampled on the grid lines, or in the middle of the grid spaces - but that's probably the best place to position them if you're attempting to avoid phasing.

One thing I've noticed about the "dry" slider on an instrument - is that it seems to essentially collapse the signal to mono - and then pan it based on your positioning. Depending on the other settings you apply - it seems to apply the general "EQ" curve of the impulse without the ER/tail.

As a result - it's generally much better sounding to use MIR on in sittu recorded material as a send, and not an insert, and simply use it 100% wet, but blended in with a dry signal.

The microphone choice should be entirely based on what makes sense to record an instrument with, and is a quick way to alter the general frequency build ups on an instrument level that don't sound correct, however the individual instrument presets seem to do a great job of this in general. That said, you can manually create EQ curve profiles for each one to use, if you're just trying to fix a problem area/create a general starting point for where you want instruments in a mix.

If you put for instance an albion 1 spiccato sample through an IR in the back right of the TELDEX mir - it's not going to sound like albion 1 was recorded in teldex, it's going to sound like you played albion 1 spiccatos out of a speaker in the back right corner of teldex and recorded it with a mic set up on the other side of the room.

MIR's technology works great on anechoic recorded material recorded direct/center in a controlled enviroment. That's because it's literally designed for their products in the first place.

It can be used on non-VSL dry stage products, but you need to understand how the technology works - rather than whatever buzzword filled product page(of lets face it, basically any IR software).

The next example is a use case that makes more sense.
1.) LASS bass spiccato
2.) 100% wet using the default "mic" when you load up MIR and place it
3.) 100% wet in the same spot, but with an IR that's better suited to the source(dimension basses seemed like a good starting point)
4.) approximately 20% wet within the plugin - so 80% "dry" signal is still effected by mir and obviously panned significantly despite the original signal from LASS being recorded in sittu
5.) the same settings, except 100% wet, but only 20% of the actual MIR signal is blended in with the original dry signal not being processed at all by MIR.


----------



## muk (Sep 3, 2019)

Virtual Virgin said:


> Theoretically, if this plug in is to live up to its stated pedigree I should be able to use an output mic setup at 100% wet in the conductor's position or just off the stage and get a crisp presence from a tightly arranged semicircle of strings.



There's your problem right there. MIR is not intended to use 100% wet. Think of it this way: MIR represents the room sound only. If you use it on 100% wet, you completely cut the direct sound. Which never happens in reality. It is as if you put a wall between the string quartet and the audience, which absorbs the direct signal completely. That's what you get when using MIR 100% wet: only the room sound, i. e. the sound that is bouncing from the walls back to the audience. The direct sound is completely cut. And that's not not realistic.

In a string quartet recital, the audience hears the direct signal first. That is the sound projected from the instruments, travelling directly to the listeners ears. After a short time, early reflections arrive at the listeners ears. These are the sounds from the instruments traveling to the nearest wall, and being reflected to the listeners ears from there. After that, it's the late reflections (or reverb tail). That's the sound bouncing from several walls in the room.

If you use MIR 100% wet, you get the early reflections and the late reflections, but no direct sound. That is bound to sound dull, muffled, boomy, you name it. A more sensible setting would be to use MIR at around 15-20% wet.

As to your other questions, I hope other people will chime in who know MIR PRO better than I do. If you are lucky @Dietz will answer them himself.


----------



## shawnsingh (Sep 3, 2019)

Virtual Virgin said:


> Why am I selecting mics for the input signal?



It's not a mic, it's a directivity pattern of how the source sound might radiate sound in all directions. I've seen the cardioid pattern used as default, but you can select instruments from that input list too. Best example would be horns that would actually direct much of their sound to the back side if the player.




Virtual Virgin said:


> Yes, I know I can mix in the dry signal, but that certainly compromises the setting I am trying to achieve and seems as though should be attainable through this software given its claims.



Agreed with @muk - you will be more likely to get the sound you want by including some dry mix and not relying on the wet mix to do everything perfectly. For example, there is an unavoidable and necessary approximation to take the stereo sampled source and convert it into an approximation of how is sound would propagate in 3d. That's not MIR's problem, just the reality that sampled instruments are sampled in stereo. The only way to avoid that approximation would be to sample the instrument's 3d sound, e.g. with high order ambisonics, which is not something orchestral sample libraries have done yet.

Despite the reality of approximations, the primary value of MIR is still strong in my personal opinion: being able to have unique impulse responses that do represent different positions of the space.

So yeah, set the right input source directivity, use dry mix too, should help you get what you want from it.


----------



## ceemusic (Sep 3, 2019)

muk said:


> There's your problem right there. MIR is not intended to use 100% wet.
> A more sensible setting would be to use MIR at around 15-20% wet.



This


----------



## Dietz (Sep 3, 2019)

ceemusic said:


> This


Exactly.  ... although 30% might give you nice results, too. The default 50% are very conservative/classcial.

@*Virtual Virgin:* I'm a bit in a hurry right now, so I can't talk you through your first MIR project myself. But I seem to remember that I wrote something like "10 Easy Steps" for MIR Pro's manual - that's how I would start. 

All the best,


----------



## Dietz (Sep 3, 2019)

PS: Just found it:



> *Easy steps to work with Vienna MIR Pro / MIR Pro 24 *(... well, actually, this list goes to 11  ...)
> 
> _0 Please make sure that your audio system, your Vienna Instruments (or any other virtual instruments), Vienna Ensemble Pro 5 and MIR Pro RoomPacks are installed properly; make sure that all dongles are in place and that all drivers are up-to-date._
> 
> ...




... and of course there's the section "*Collected hints for your daily work with Vienna MIR Pro / MIR Pro: Getting “that” sound* " on p.60 ff.

HTH! I'm sure that fellow MIR users will chime in, too.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Sep 3, 2019)

You have asked a lot of questions that require long winded answers in order to answer properly. There are some threads on vsl’s Forum that already got into a lot of detail to fill in the blanks. The manuals and docs provided with mirpro already provide a lot of info, start there. Then read all the vsl forum posts you can find there, just read through the mirpro section for a bit.

Mirpro sounds great! But it also has quite a lot of flexibility and does it in a way no other plugin really does. Once you wrap your head around it, it will make more sense but understanding how to use it will require a complete read through of all available docs and probably some more time reading through the mir section of the vsl forum. It is very much setup to emulate the techniques employed by a real engineer recording a real orchestra in a real space and then allowing you as the engineer to modify the mic placements and other things that a real engineer would do in a situation like that. The flexibility is incredible but it does require you to learn a bit about how orchestras are recorded in real life and to think like a recording engineer somewhat.

In the end you will find it’s not that complicated. Just a bit overwhelming to see all those parameters and wonder how to use it but the defaults are usually very good!


----------



## ProfoundSilence (Sep 3, 2019)

Idk I felt like I gave a good enough breakdown. along with a clear example of how to use it with sampled instruments(and audio example)


----------



## ceemusic (Sep 4, 2019)

Dietz said:


> Exactly.  ... although 30% might give you nice results, too. The default 50% are very conservative/classcial.
> 
> All the best,



30%- that's where I set it at.

Don't forget about using MIRacle along with it for more of an analog vibe.


----------



## Markus Kohlprath (Sep 4, 2019)

I really loved the idea of MIR and used it at least 2 or 3 years exclusively, with a lot of trying out all possible settings. Then when I needed a second computer and wasn’t allowed to use my pretty expensive license on two computers I just tried out what happens when I leave it out. Guess what! Everything that always bothered me about the sound back then and which I blamed exclusively to my underdeveloped mixing skills suddenly disappeared magically.
I can’t explain what it is and I don’t say that MIR always sounds bad. It can sound good. But something especially if used exclusively somehow degrades the overall sound a bit too much to my ears. It’s very hard to get it right since there is no way to A/B different settings fast which is crucial even for experienced engineers to really judge what it does. So unfortunately to me it was not the spacial solution I hoped to get.


----------



## ProfoundSilence (Sep 4, 2019)

Markus Kohlprath said:


> I really loved the idea of MIR and used it at least 2 or 3 years exclusively, with a lot of trying out all possible settings. Then when I needed a second computer and wasn’t allowed to use my pretty expensive license on two computers I just tried out what happens when I leave it out. Guess what! Everything that always bothered me about the sound back then and which I blamed exclusively to my underdeveloped mixing skills suddenly disappeared magically.
> I can’t explain what it is and I don’t say that MIR always sounds bad. It can sound good. But something especially if used exclusively somehow degrades the overall sound a bit too much to my ears. It’s very hard to get it right since there is no way to A/B different settings fast which is crucial even for experienced engineers to really judge what it does. So unfortunately to me it was not the spacial solution I hoped to get.


here's an alternative perspective. 

if you dont know how to use EQ properly, and make poor EQ choices on every instrument - your mix would improve by simply disabling the EQ. 

the common denominator is not likely MIR. 

in my own experience with a good amount of reverbs is that finding the right IR and tweaking it is the best method. Its entirely source dependent - and there is no 1 size fits all. 

I won't even use the same reverb for brass and strings, even if they are the same product line.

mir works great for somethings and doesn't work great for others


----------



## Dietz (Sep 5, 2019)

Markus Kohlprath said:


> It’s very hard to get it right since there is no way to A/B different settings fast


If you just want to get rid of the room's response and keep MIR's instrument positioning, then the "Dry Solo" button in MIR's Output Panel would have been the proper tool. (Hint: "Wet Solo" is a great method to isolate resonances or boomy frequencies in the room's response.)

If you want to A/B the effects of MIR altogether, it's a good habit to keep all instances of MIR in identically numbered insert slots of the host; like that it's easy to bypass/re-enable all those inserts of selected channels at once (... the actual method depends on the host, of course).

Kind regards,


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (Sep 5, 2019)

100%? That's intense.


----------



## Ben (Sep 5, 2019)

Take a look at these threads for more of Dietz' wisdom: 
https://www.vsl.co.at/community/posts/t51017-meaning-of-instrument-wet-dry
https://www.vsl.co.at/community/posts/t48491-Some-help-before-purchasing-Mir-Pro


----------



## Virtual Virgin (Sep 18, 2019)

"
It's less complicated than it might seem at the first glance, although I admit that the parameter labelling might be misleading. 

There are only three "states" of a signal which are of interest for MIR Pro:

- "Wet" is the sound of the Venue derived from the pre-rendered IRs for an Icon/Instrument (or any other signal source) on a MIR stage. - _IMPORTANT: The direct signal component (i.e. the part of the impulse that reaches microphone first, before any reflection from the wall/floor/ceiling) has been cut away from all IRs, to avoid the ugly phasing artifacts that would occur when mixing all the IRs from a chosen position._

- "Dry" is the readily positioned and pre-processed version of the input signal which is put into the place of that cut-out direct signal component mentioned above. This means that the all-important Ambisconics-processing has already taken place, plus width, rotation and all chosen ways of pre-filtering, like Instrument Profile, Air Absorption, Character and so on. - _IMPORTANT: This is NOT like bypassing MIR!_

- "Bypassed" would be just that. 

The Global Wet Dry Offset in the Output section technically controls the same feature like the individual, Icon-based crossfader, but for all Icons on the MIR stage at hand. - _IMPORTANT: This offset does NOT allow for "more than 100%" or "less than 0% wet" on individual Icons, for obvious reasons. It's an offset, not a multiplicator._

... it might be worth emphasizing again that "Full Wet" is _NOT_ the sound you would hear in the hall, as the (often very quiet) direct signal component would be missing.

If you want to dig a bit deeper, there is a little add-on to MIR Pro's manual, called "Think MIR!" available in the donwload-section of your _My_VSL user area on this site.

HTH"

This is a joke right?


----------



## ProfoundSilence (Sep 18, 2019)

what's a joke?


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (Sep 18, 2019)

Virtual Virgin said:


> "
> It's less complicated than it might seem at the first glance, although I admit that the parameter labelling might be misleading.
> 
> There are only three "states" of a signal which are of interest for MIR Pro:
> ...


sure.


----------



## ProfoundSilence (Sep 19, 2019)

I hate to be that guy, but maybe you just need to put in the work, I can't help but feel you thought this was going to be magic - and while I agree it's not obvious on paper that dry doesn't mean dry, it just means no reverb - the effect is immediately obvious. 

all the other controls are kind of self explanatory and if they aren't, turn them on and off and use your ears... after all using your ears is literally more important than any plugin to begin with.


----------



## Virtual Virgin (Sep 19, 2019)

ProfoundSilence said:


> what's a joke?



All of it. "Dry" is a pre-processed signal? What kind of labeling is that?

"... it might be worth emphasizing again that "Full Wet" is _NOT_ the sound you would hear in the hall, as the (often very quiet) direct signal component would be missing. "

And exactly what started the thread and the crux of my initial critique.
This is a weak point for the design of the plugin itself.
For all the trouble they have gone though with their stated goal of recreating the sound of sources in a real acoustic space, this is not how the plugin should be behaving.

Again, theoretically, based on the objectives of the plugin virtualization, the 100% wet mix should be the output that contains all of the desired information for the most naturalistic representation.

Now, I can accept that the plugin makes compromises for the sake of CPU limitations by implementing input processing stage, but that is not well described by the layout of the GUI and the concepts presented.

It is not a "wet" and a "dry" signal. It is an A/B mixer of two wet signals. There is no one "wet" signal.
That's a huge linguistic mistake in the design of the primary functions of the user interface.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Sep 19, 2019)

VV, I think you're missing how MIR works you should spend more time with it before being so critical. I think the word "DRY" in their GUI was perhaps a poor choice. They should have labeled it as "DIRECT" or something like that....perhaps... but the word "DRY" works perfectly fine to once you understand how it all works. Maybe to avoid confusion they shouldn't use the word "WET" either... they could have labeled the slider as DIRECT/ROOM and maybe that would have been ok with you?


----------



## Ben (Sep 19, 2019)

You should use MIR on mono or centered stereo signals.
What would be the point of a dry slider that mixes the centred and unaltered sound with the panned and reverberant sound?

It would be also a big limitation to say 100% is the perfect natural representation. With 50% being the natural representation you can even go over the top, if you want.

Maybe this will help to get the idea behind the dry-wet value:
MIR mixes two altered signals, the main room microphones and the close instrument microphone (original signal that was only panned). Altering the dry-wet value will change the ratio of the virtual close and virtual main microphones.

The naming of the labels could be better, but you should get the idea of them when you read the manual.


----------



## Dietz (Sep 19, 2019)

Virtual Virgin said:


> That's a huge linguistic mistake in the design of the primary functions of the user interface.


Well, that's my mistake then.  Sh*t like that happens when you try to be kind to the world and design a GUI in your third language rather than your first. Sorry to hear that this detail upset you.

Kind regards,


----------



## ProfoundSilence (Sep 19, 2019)

Dietz said:


> Well, that's my mistake then.  Sh*t like that happens when you try to be kind to the world and design a GUI in your third language rather than your first. Sorry to hear that this detail upset you.
> 
> Kind regards,


I was going to point it out, maybe he doesn't know were Vienna is? 

that said, worth mentioning mir works on non mono sources on a send pretty well too


----------



## Dewdman42 (Sep 19, 2019)

if you host MIR inside VEP, then you don't have to worry about it, VEP automatically converts stuff to mono when feeding the built in MIR. If you host the mir plugin directly in your daw, then use a free third party plugin such as bx_solo to squeeze them down to mono for sending into MIR.


----------

