# Once and for all: SPAT vs. MIR PRO vs. ??



## tarantulis (Feb 1, 2016)

I'd like to know if anyone here swears by a particular spacializer, and if possible, to hear a track he/she has done using that spacializer for processing. I'm sort of torn between MIR Pro and SPAT at the moment. Virtual Sound Stage isn't cutting it for me anymore.

SPAT seems like a better overall product but I'm worried it'll eat my CPU alive.


----------



## jason.d (Feb 1, 2016)

tarantulis said:


> I'd like to know if anyone here swears by a particular spacializer, and if possible, to hear a track he/she has done using that spacializer for processing. I'm sort of torn between MIR Pro and SPAT at the moment. Virtual Sound Stage isn't cutting it for me anymore.
> 
> SPAT seems like a better overall product but I'm worried it'll eat my CPU alive.



I have MIR and demo'd SPAT. I think Mir is great for VSL instruments, but only ok for everything else. I had really nice results when demoing spat. If I could go back in time I'd get spat.

Mir is convo based though, so if you're set on having tracks set at telex or another one of their venues, then go with Mir. If your going for clean spatialization and you don't care for a particular room/space- go with spat.

I would highly recommend demoing both.
You don't need an ilok to demo spat, I think you might need an elicenser key to demo MIR.


----------



## FriFlo (Feb 1, 2016)

They both have pros and cons. With Spat you have to use a lot of single instances for individual instruments, since there is no way to get multi IO instances in most DAWs to work. That is handled way better with MIR. Spat is pretty good for positioning some dry instruments and model the room response for each individually. While you can change e.g. the decay time of the room it is not as flexible as Spat in that arena. I'd say it comes down to how many and what sorts of instruments you need to spatialize. If you use in situ libraries like Berlin series or spitfire for the most parts and only add a few dry libraries to that, I'd say you should go with spat. But if you use a lot of VSL or other dry libraries primarily, MIR might be better to get all of those together in one room and to not go nuts on CPU consumption.


----------



## afterlight82 (Feb 2, 2016)

I've found spat a little easy to overdo. I've heard some "overspattered" demos where someone went a bit nuts with it.

That said, spat + verb...play nicely together. The basic, standard, out of the box reverb setting, set to 2.2 secs, with a little highs rolled off before hitting the reverb, is pretty darn good as an orchestral verb...


----------



## jamwerks (Feb 2, 2016)

I'm really happy with SPAT. Use it for the close mic's of Adagio-Agitato, Symphonic Sphères, Claire & VSL WW's. Imo, SPAT gives a l-r, front-back diminsion that is far better than panning with verb. Haven't tried MIR.


----------



## muk (Feb 2, 2016)

Hourses for courses. Both seem to be great, and both seem to be resource hungry. I use a little known gem that is somewhat similar to VSS2 in concept, but sounds seriously good to my ears: Magix Independence Origami. The GUI is horribly outdated, but it is still conveniently easy to use and gives great results. It features graphical stage placement, with the option to load your own IRs. For me that's a big advantage. It's considerably less expensive than the other two options as well. In fact, it is even included in Indepence Free, though I don't know whether that version has some limitations.


----------



## Scrianinoff (Feb 2, 2016)

I am using Altiverb 7, MIR Pro, The convo and hybrid reverbs in VSLs Vienna Suite (which are highly tweakable and can also load custom IRs), Valhalla Room, Breeze and B2, Spaces.

The three that I like best, that I use most often, and in conjunction are: Altiverb, Valhalla Room and Spaces.


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (Feb 2, 2016)

muk said:


> Hourses for courses. Both seem to be great, and both seem to be resource hungry. I use a little known gem that is somewhat similar to VSS2 in concept, but sounds seriously good to my ears: Magix Independence Origami. The GUI is horribly outdated, but it is still conveniently easy to use and gives great results. It features graphical stage placement, with the option to load your own IRs. For me that's a big advantage. It's considerably less expensive than the other two options as well. In fact, it is even included in Indepence Free, though I don't know whether that version has some limitations.



Hi Muk,
That seems like a interesting twist to the MIR and Spat software. The independence software suite ( basic or pro) costs around €49,- bucks.
You do say the quality of origami reverb is even better then VSS2? And have you compared it to Spat to Mir?

And so: is Origami actually to be used as AU in LogicX?


----------



## muk (Feb 2, 2016)

Well, the quality stands and falls with the IRs you are using - there come a few with it that are quite good. The spatialization sounds great to my ears, and the options to alter the IR length are very good as well. I run it in Cubase and Vienna Ensemble pro, where it runs as a vst. But on the product page AU is listed, so that should work. You can try the free version before buying to see if/how it works and whether you like it.

In terms of functionality I'd say it is comparable to VSS2 (with the difference that Origami is convolution, and has the option to load and alter custom IRs, but no microphone sets or such). In terms of sound and sonicality, I like Origami better. In my opinion it doesn't only excel in lateral, but also in front to back placement. Something that seems to be difficult to achieve. Your preferences may vary.

I have only demoed Mirx very briefly, and found it too demanding on the cpu for the setup I had in mind at the time. But then I never felt the urgent need to add new reverb software since I use Origami. I also dabbled with the demo of SPAT. It has a few tricks up it's sleeve that can't be done with Origami. You can automate the stage position, for example. For post pro, SPAT has a clear edge over Indepence. For orchestral positioning I found both to be equally good. But Origami is faster to use (might only be due me being familiar with it. But SPAT has a lot more features and parameters, so it's definitely harder to learn), and it's less expensive.

Here is a short snippet of a fun little track I'm working:



It's VSL Dimension Strings only. So it's dry samples that weren't recorded in place. Stage placement and reverb is done with Origami.


----------



## Scrianinoff (Feb 2, 2016)

Don't forget that Altiverb has stage placement too. Two complaints that I often hear about Altiverb are 1) that it can sound boxy, and 2) that to some ears it can sound low-fi. In my opinion, both complaints stem from the approach they took in making Altiverb. If you would make a real recording in the venue you select in Altiverb, with the same source and mic placements, you will get the exact same sound and thus the exact same boxiness, and low-fi EQ characteristics. It's is up to the mixing stage to get the best out of the reverb signal, by using some well placed EQs adjustments. Some other convolution reverbs have these adjustments baked in. To my ears some other reverb's IRs are often far too bright, which makes them appear to be hifi compared to Altiverb. I consider that trick nothing more than good salesmanship. I would say, first EQ them to taste and only then make the comparison. There are a few IRs in Altiverb that are to die for, and that cannot be found elsewhere, for example the Concertgebouw in Amsterdam, Todd AO, Disney Hall, Teldex, although I am not sure about that last one.


----------



## re-peat (Feb 2, 2016)

Muk, would you mind if I did a version with SPAT of that pizz-example of yours? Also with the DimensionStrings of course. Just for comparison.
(No need to upload the midi-file.)

_


----------



## muk (Feb 2, 2016)

That would be great Piet, feel free to do so.


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (Feb 2, 2016)

So now it gets interesting!
I am sure there will be differences, but quality of sound and convincing placement is vital......as well as ones wallet....

If results would be similar, or in proximation similar it is a nice comparison.
Since mr piet seems a long time user of Spat I presume both of you have enough experience with the software.
So thats comparable too.....

How is the CPU consumption of Origami, Muk?

And: what sections of DIM strings were used( to get an idea of placement)
If possible add in extra sections because it sounds like one only....

Anyway.......that would be my request. 
Looking forward to the results.


----------



## re-peat (Feb 2, 2016)

Quick-ish effort: http://users.telenet.be/deridderpiet.be/DS/Muk_SpattedPizz_SmallHall.mp3 (Muk_SpattedPizz_SmallHall.mp3)
(Sorry, Muk, for the many inaccuracies in my interpretation of what you wrote.)

SPAT set to small/medium hall, and there's 8 instances of the plug-in: Vlns1A, Vlns1B, Vlns2A, Vlns2B, ViolasA, ViolasB, CelliA, CelliB and Basses. Each of these sections is positioned in sort of demi-circle around the listener, with the B-desks somewhat further away than the A-desks. Distance: between 1,5 and 2m. Violas are positioned a bit more to the right than is customary, but I did that to have a some mid-range activity over there as well, otherwise it would have been only the celli over at that end. The basses are seated behind everybody else, also slightly to the right.

_


----------



## dgburns (Feb 2, 2016)

Well....have to admit I prefer the one Re-peat did


----------



## muk (Feb 2, 2016)

Silence-is-Golden said:


> How is the CPU consumption of Origami, Muk?



The program itself uses next to nothing. The cpu hit increases if you load up true stereo impulses of course. Still my machine is able to handle many instances before I start to get pops and crackles. It's a totally unscientific estimation, but overall I'd say it is not very high.

My setup for Dimension strings 10 first violins front left, 8 second violins left center, 6 celli right center, 4 double basses behind, 6 violas front right. It's not the 'standard' orchestra seating - that would be with the celli front right and the violas center right - but it is quite common and often used as well.
At 0:15 the violas are pizzing divisi, three continuing the syncopated chords, three pizzing a minor variant of 'Old McDonalds'.

That sounds seriously good, Piet. Open and airy. It's also a nice and fun variant of what I wrote. Aren't the Dimension Strings lovely?
One big difference is that my example sounds duller and a bit veiled. That's the IR of course, not Origami. Mine is also pushed further back into the room and has a wider stereo image. Slightly different approaches, I would say. Piet's example is more direct, as if listened from a front row in a relatively small hall. Mine is more like from a seat somewhere in the middle of a slightly larger hall. If I had a tendency to nitpick I could say that you can hear that groups are placed in the SPAT example, whereas in the Origami each player is placed separately. Mine sounds a bit clouded in comparison though.
If you can get such an excellent result as quickly as Piet obviously did with SPAT that speaks for itself, I find.

If anybody is interested there's a thread a while back where I posted a short snippet with violins and celli. Once with two instances of Origami, once with an instance for every player. The difference is not night and day, but if you listen for it it's not subtle either. It definitely makes a difference:

http://vi-control.net/community/threads/vsl-dimension-strings-template-tutorial.44806/

If somebody who owns Dimension Strings and MIR could take the time to add a short example that would be great. Doesn't have to be the same silly snippet, just something short with entirely pizzicato.


----------



## tack (Feb 2, 2016)

FriFlo said:


> With Spat you have to use a lot of single instances for individual instruments, since there is no way to get multi IO instances in most DAWs to work.


Is it really true that this fails in _most_ DAWs? I mean I understand this is somehow a problem in Cubase, but it was trivial with REAPER.


----------



## jamwerks (Feb 2, 2016)

Nice example of Diminsion Strings through SPAT !


----------



## tack (Feb 2, 2016)

Also take a look at EAReverb2, which does positioning. I use it because I can't afford SPAT.


----------



## jamwerks (Feb 2, 2016)

I picked up SPAT for less than $500 during a December sale. You also get the Verb3 bundled in!


----------



## tack (Feb 2, 2016)

jamwerks said:


> I picked up SPAT for less than $500 during a December sale. You also get the Verb3 bundled in!


Damn. I was even looking for sales during this time. I'd have bought it for that.


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (Feb 2, 2016)

re-peat said:


> Quick-ish effort: http://users.telenet.be/deridderpiet.be/DS/Muk_SpattedPizz_SmallHall.mp3 (Muk_SpattedPizz_SmallHall.mp3)
> 
> _



Sounds with a lot of clearity, which as Muk said is also due to the closer positioning then his version.
If you have the time and are willing piet, could you do a second version with more distance and a bigger hall. Doesn't necesarrily have to resemble the same hall.

Since this has become an interesting comparison between two different pieces of software it would be good to compare from a similar spacing.

Obviously asked as a forum member who at this moment has done nothing else then commenting.....and doing none of the work you are doing.

My main interest comes from Muk's software..... since I am indeed not too enthusiastic anymore about my current VSS2. It seems to alter sound in a way that I cant put my finger on, but takes away instead of adds to a clearity and spacial feeling.

And I know, I know, it is also the "knight wielding the sword" but still..... if one can't afford as yet Spat and its needs upon a proper workstation be it Mac or PC, the best alternatives are welcomed.

@muk : thank you for the CPU explanation!


----------



## jason.d (Feb 2, 2016)

muk said:


> f somebody who owns Dimension Strings and MIR could take the time to add a short example that would be great. Doesn't have to be the same silly snippet, just something short with entirely pizzicato.



I can do this when I get home


----------



## re-peat (Feb 2, 2016)

Silence-is-Golden said:


> a second version with more distance and a bigger hall


http://users.telenet.be/deridderpiet.be/DS/Muk_SpattedPizz_LargeHall.mp3 (Muk_SpattedPizz_LargeHall.mp3)

_


----------



## tarantulis (Feb 2, 2016)

jason.d said:


> I have MIR and demo'd SPAT. I think Mir is great for VSL instruments, but only ok for everything else. I had really nice results when demoing spat. If I could go back in time I'd get spat.
> 
> Mir is convo based though, so if you're set on having tracks set at telex or another one of their venues, then go with Mir. If your going for clean spatialization and you don't care for a particular room/space- go with spat.
> 
> ...



I'm a little confused. What is "telex"? I use Altiverb currently so if I was thinking of using that on top of SPAT and just turning SPAT's reverb off.



FriFlo said:


> They both have pros and cons. With Spat you have to use a lot of single instances for individual instruments, since there is no way to get multi IO instances in most DAWs to work. That is handled way better with MIR. Spat is pretty good for positioning some dry instruments and model the room response for each individually. While you can change e.g. the decay time of the room it is not as flexible as Spat in that arena. I'd say it comes down to how many and what sorts of instruments you need to spatialize. If you use in situ libraries like Berlin series or spitfire for the most parts and only add a few dry libraries to that, I'd say you should go with spat. But if you use a lot of VSL or other dry libraries primarily, MIR might be better to get all of those together in one room and to not go nuts on CPU consumption.



Yikes. In my mind all the instruments would be going to a bus with a single instance of SPAT. But since you're placing each one that wouldn't make sense. Wow, so this changes a lot in terms of CPU usage. 30 instruments = 30 SPAT instances? Ouch.

Thank you, repeat and muk, for the postings. At first I was I inclined to favor Origami because of the wider stereo space and veiled acoustic sound, but after hearing the latest upload, I'm very impressed with SPAT's larger sound, which is sort of heavy on the early reflections but more convincing as an overall room.

This is tough. Couple things:

1.) It sounds like Origami is a fairly light software that my CPU can handle. For those of you using MIR/SPAT, what kind of setup do you recommend? Will I be able to run either of them on Logic in my host (2012 Mini quad-core w/ 16GB RAM) or is this pushing it?

2.) I'm taking Visual Orchestration 2 via Alexander Publishing and one thing that was mentioned was using a third-party verb called "Forti/Serti" with Vienna Suite. The lecture put a lot of emphasis on the possibilities this combo creates and suggests that it may be just as if not more powerful than SPAT (though with an equally steep learning curve). Does anyone have any experience with this? The reason I want to like SPAT is the fact that I don't have to chase down three different bundle packages like it seems I'd have to do with Vienna. (MIR + Vienna Suite + Forti/Serti?? My brain hurts.)

This whole thing is a headache. I don't know what to do. I'll probably end up demoing all four of these bad boys and just spending a whole lot of time on the ordeal before deciding. I'd love some more feedback and/or demos from other spacializer users if you have the time. The discussion thus far has been very helpful.


----------



## Per Lichtman (Feb 2, 2016)

tarantulis said:


> I'm a little confused. What is "telex"? I use Altiverb currently so if I was thinking of using that on top of SPAT and just turning SPAT's reverb off.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



There's going to be pros and cons to any of the approaches. Personally, I use the VSS2 with FORTI/SERTI (or other NumericalSound IRs) approach more often than any other.

I'm curious, though: with VSS2 I've got a VSS2 instance as an insert on every virtual instrument track, but you were talking about trying to use a single SPAT instance. How do you currently employ VSS2 in your workflow?


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (Feb 2, 2016)

re-peat said:


> http://users.telenet.be/deridderpiet.be/DS/Muk_SpattedPizz_LargeHall.mp3 (Muk_SpattedPizz_LargeHall.mp3)
> 
> _


Much obliged!

Most likely all kinds of ways to play with the placement but it does clarify and add to this comparison.

I also don't know to what degree f.e. audio converters or other hardware/ software components will play a role in the overall sound quality, but one does hear a clear spacial sound with lots of detail from this example.

Now up to some further testing of my own.... VSS2 again .....and Muk's suggestion with Origami possibly.

This has been most learningful!
Glad to have joined in. Hopefully the OP gets something out of it all?


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (Feb 2, 2016)

tarantulis said:


> What is "telex



I think its a typo.... most likely refers to the "teldex" scoring stage in berlin. Is part of MIR's range of different venue's to choose from.


----------



## tarantulis (Feb 2, 2016)

I use VSS that way too, Per. Not sure why I thought that.

I also realize I've been using VSS to refer to Vienna Symphonic Suite and that it's sounding like Virtual Sound Stage which must be extra confusing . To be clear: I'm using Virtual Sound Stage and Altiverb; considering SPAT or the several Vienna combinations discussed.


----------



## Vin (Feb 2, 2016)

SPAT hands down in my opinion, although I abandoned all of the positioning plugins and now use only one master (algorithmic) reverb on a send and additional ER insert reverb if it's a dry library (VSL/SM).


----------



## patrick76 (Feb 2, 2016)

This is great stuff. Thanks for the demos gentlemen.



tarantulis said:


> I'm using Virtual Sound Stage and Altiverb; considering SPAT or the several Vienna combinations discussed.


Have you tried Altiverb for positioning? I was wondering how this sounds, but of course Altiverb does not offer a demo of its software.


----------



## maestro2be (Feb 2, 2016)

Did I miss the midi file somewhere to this? I have MIR Pro and MIRx and curious as to what it would sound like against these previous 2 (I also own SPAT and it's absolutely my favorite of those mentioned).


----------



## jason.d (Feb 2, 2016)

So this is a dimension strings + MIR Pro test.
I wasn't brave enough to make something from scratch, so I took a midi of an old pizzicato piece from Final Fantasy 8 (nerdy, I know) haha. I didn't do much to it other than massage the midi and split them up into Desks of Violins, Violas, Cellos, Basses. Then arranged them in a semi circle around the mic. I used the Teldex Studio "wide" venue.

I'm down to do another test with another midi file if you guys want to compare the same piece as re-peat's.



tarantulis said:


> I'm a little confused. What is "telex"?



yeah this was a typo, sorry for the confusion. I believe the Teldex studio is the same stage that the Berlin strings are recorded.

(in case the upload didn't work)
http://d.pr/a/1jpN3

[AUDIOPLUS=http://vi-control.net/community/attachments/blue-fields-mp3.5077/][/AUDIOPLUS]


----------



## Saxer (Feb 2, 2016)

In Logic you can route 6 mono signals into SPAT using the 5.1 surround buses and place them separately into one instance. You can also pair the inputs to stereo signals (at least 3xstereo... I don't know if Logic/SPAT can pair the center and sub channel).
By routing a stereo signals per instance you can also bring a row of instruments into room (i.e. woodwinds or horns). So there's no need for one SPAT per instrument.


----------



## chimuelo (Feb 2, 2016)

Reverb on a Sub...?
Jeez do people really bathe in reverb tails that much that the sub frequencies must now be treated...?

Ixxy....


----------



## marclawsonmusic (Feb 2, 2016)

re-peat said:


> http://users.telenet.be/deridderpiet.be/DS/Muk_SpattedPizz_LargeHall.mp3 (Muk_SpattedPizz_LargeHall.mp3)
> 
> _



Sounds really lovely, Piet.


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (Feb 2, 2016)

chimuelo said:


> Reverb on a Sub...?
> Jeez do people really bathe in reverb tails that much that the sub frequencies must now be treated...?
> 
> Ixxy....


What is your view on that chimuello? I thought to EQ the hell out of it if one likes......

But seriously, how do you not do the bus thing? Or is it not what you mean?


----------



## chimuelo (Feb 2, 2016)

I have some really great Surround Mixers and Plug Ins in the Scope DSP Platform.
I tried messing with this stuff using a 10k Blue Sky Surround System live and it was a nightmare.
Vocals feeding back Bass Hum constantly, so I gave up.
But the LFE Channel on the S|C 5.1 Room Reverb could be ticked off/on and we disabled it.
Solved most problems, but I use that plug in Live now and use 4 of the 5 channels for an excellent wide
sounding reverb in stereo.
I did click on the LFE Channel through our QSC KW 181 Array (3 way stereo)
and heard what I call big ass breath.
Hardly useable, even made octaves on the bottom of PianoTeq rumble.
I never understood why LFE on any Reverb was necessary. That frequency just ruins any mix, even our dual 18" Subs
without FX sounds overwhelming so I use a dual mono ancient DBX EQ and re adjust the crossover to 160.
The dual 15"s sound better and the boominess is dissipated too.
But in stereo I find the Surround Reverbs with LFE disabled have a wider more pristine quality.

I was the only guy in Vegas playing in Surround.
Nobody knew, nobody cared, I failed miserably and still have these massive Mid Fields.
I'd like to believe I learned something, but all I got out of it was a great sounding 4 channel Reverb.


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (Feb 3, 2016)

I get it now chimuelo,

You refer to a live situation whilst in this thread so far its been on virtual placement of vi's

But you knew that....., right?


----------



## Saxer (Feb 3, 2016)

chimuelo said:


> Reverb on a Sub...?
> Jeez do people really bathe in reverb tails that much that the sub frequencies must now be treated...?
> 
> Ixxy....


I'm talking about normal stereo. It's just for using the surround buses to have more than a stereo bus to get into the SPAT plugin. It's nothing but a workaround because SPAT has no multiple ins like Virtual Sound Stage.


----------



## chimuelo (Feb 3, 2016)

Why yi youghtta....


----------



## lucor (Feb 3, 2016)

re-peat said:


> http://users.telenet.be/deridderpiet.be/DS/Muk_SpattedPizz_LargeHall.mp3 (Muk_SpattedPizz_LargeHall.mp3)
> 
> _


Piet, you always provide the best audio and video examples when it comes to stuff like this. Be it reverb comparisons, spatialisation, blending different libraries, etc. Unfortunately these examples always seem to get deleted within a few hours.
Any chance you could upload them to somewhere, where they actually last? Would be awesome for people late to the party or people like me, who like to go back to listen to them again.


----------



## maestro2be (Feb 3, 2016)

I do have to agree with that. Re-peat has a master level ear to me. His mixes always seem to settle nicely in my ears and mind. I cannot stand mixes drowning in reverb or the feeling I am standing 4 miles away listening to an orchestra recorded in an underground swimming pool. I much more prefer the in your face experience and Re-peat absolutely delivers. More of a conductors perspective.

I would be more than happy to give other demos since I own everything mentioned including several should anyone wish to provide the midi file.


----------



## muk (Feb 3, 2016)

Am I the only one who didn't like the larger SPAT hall too much? It still had that great clarity, but I thought I heard something not entirely convincing in the tail. Also I couldn't hear too much depth on first quick listen. I would have liked to relisten to doublecheck that though. Apart from the clarity which is impressive in SPAT I like the spatialisation of Origami better. The stereo field is wider, and it sounds more like a concert hall to my ears. Might still be due to a different approach though.
The MIR demo sounds very good as well. Again I can hear that groups are placed on the stage instead of individual players. Apart from that it has nice separation, all sounds can be located accurately, and the depth is very nice as well.

@maestro2be never mind the midi file. Any short snippet of pizzicato strings (DS preferably) should do.


----------



## jamwerks (Feb 3, 2016)

I didn't care much for the larger SPAT example either. SPAT is extremely tweekable, and that just needed a littly touch up to my ears. SPAT has very intuitive and musical controls.


----------



## tarantulis (Feb 4, 2016)

Some really great input thus far, and yet I'm still undecided.

SPAT seems to be the only thing I can actually demo, so I'll probably do that and report my findings.


----------



## tack (Feb 4, 2016)

tarantulis said:


> SPAT seems to be the only thing I can actually demo, so I'll probably do that and report my findings.


You can demo EAReverb2.


----------



## CDNmusic (Feb 4, 2016)

tack said:


> You can demo EAReverb2.


And to my ears sounds fantastic. Customization is great and the positioning algorithm looks, feels and sounds very well. Price is right too!


----------



## muk (Feb 4, 2016)

tarantulis said:


> SPAT seems to be the only thing I can actually demo, so I'll probably do that and report my findings. You can demo EAReverb2.



If you have an elicenser you can also try MIR, and you can use Origami for free...

Here's the same track again, spatialized a bit differently, but still with Origami. It's a bit closer now, and clearer:


----------



## tarantulis (Feb 4, 2016)

muk said:


> If you have an elicenser you can also try MIR, and you can use Origami for free...
> 
> Here's the same track again, spatialized a bit differently, but still with Origami. It's a bit closer now, and clearer:




Sounds really good.

Guess I'll be demoing all three then


----------



## tarantulis (Feb 4, 2016)

Has anyone used VSS + Forti/Serti?

Links for the latter appear to be dead, though the demos sound good.


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (Feb 5, 2016)

tarantulis said:


> Has anyone used VSS + Forti/Serti?
> 
> Links for the latter appear to be dead, though the demos sound good.



If you push the purchase link you will find out that the forti/serti is VSL's reverb in the software suite. Also not a cheap option. Most likely a good sound.


----------



## tarantulis (Feb 5, 2016)

Silence-is-Golden said:


> If you push the purchase link you will find out that the forti/serti is VSL's reverb in the software suite. Also not a cheap option. Most likely a good sound.



Still not seeing it. Do you mean it's part of the Vienna Suite Pro package or the Vienna Software Package (complete software bundle)? So confused.


----------



## Chandler (Feb 5, 2016)

Apparently Melda Productions is working on something like this too, but there is no ETA on it. He is one of the fastest plugin developers, however these types of plugins are a bit complex, so it could come out next week, or next year(maybe even next decade). I wish I could have heard how SPLAT sounded. Is re-peat using snap-mix or something?


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (Feb 6, 2016)

tarantulis said:


> Vienna Suite Pro


That's the one. 

And therefore also the complete software package

@chander .......SPLAT: the new spacial placement flattener! 
Good one!


----------



## tarantulis (Feb 10, 2016)

This is probably a beginner's question but I've got to ask:

Do these spacial placement programs even work for libraries with fixed positioning? I'm realizing that the only 'variable seating' library I own is Sample Modeling, and that includes brass only.


----------



## muk (Feb 10, 2016)

It depends. Theoretically it does work, you just have to center pan those libraries before feeding them into the spatial positioners. If there is a natural reverb on the sample this gets centered and repositioned as well, which usually doesn't sound too good. You can do it, but it is a bit of a stopgap and won't sound as good as without the repositioning. My advice: don't mess with something that already works, unless you absolutely have to.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Feb 10, 2016)

Chandler said:


> I wish I could have heard how SPLAT sounded.



Gniiihihi..! Ever heard of onomatopoesis? Take a bucket, fill it with rotten tomatoes and then yank them out on a tiled floor. That's how SPLAT sounds.


----------



## muk (Apr 5, 2016)

Just in case anybody is interested: I worked on my template and changed a few things about the spatialization. Here is a new version of that snippet:



I am now very happy with the clarity, stereo width, and how clearly the instruments are localizeable. Still using Origami by the way.


----------



## Ashermusic (Apr 5, 2016)

muk said:


> It depends. Theoretically it does work, you just have to center pan those libraries before feeding them into the spatial positioners. If there is a natural reverb on the sample this gets centered and repositioned as well, which usually doesn't sound too good. You can do it, but it is a bit of a stopgap and won't sound as good as without the repositioning. My advice: don't mess with something that already works, unless you absolutely have to.



Good advice IMHO.


----------

