# Orchestra panning and reverb - Mir Pro, Spat, VSS?



## muk (Jan 28, 2014)

Searching for an easy to use spatializaton plugin. I like the visual approach of Mir Pro and VSS, but Spat seems to be reasonably easy to learn too. 

It will be used for classical orchestral/chamber music only, so no need for effects. I'm after a realistic room sound, which should be achievable quickly and easily. I'm not an audio engineer and would like to focus on composing music.
Currently I have the Vienna Suite, including Power Pan and Hybrid reverb. With Power Pan I'm able to place instruments on the stage horizontally. However, I'm unable to create a realistic depth. Also it's a bit cumbersome to blend different libraries together (VSL, LASS, BWW, SM etc.).

I can see MIR/Spat/VSS making this job a lot easier (are there others out there that I missed?). Spat seems to be very good, but it's very expensive too. MIR has the disadvantage that it can be difficult to use with pre-panned and wet libraries, right? What about VSS? Can it compete with the other two products sonnically? Also there's a rumour about VSS 2 around somewhere. Any news on that?

Which one would you choose if you were in my shoes, and why? Thanks for your help.


----------



## Daryl (Jan 28, 2014)

It is totally dependent on what sample libraries you are using.

D


----------



## muk (Jan 28, 2014)

VSL, LASS, BWW, SM mostly. I hope to add some Spitfire stuff over time.


----------



## The Darris (Jan 28, 2014)

Obviously your ultimate goal is to get all of your samples sounding in the same room. SPAT is very great for spatial placement and reverb, you can deactivate the reverb which is nice if you don't like it but then you basically just paid out the ass for what VSS can do. VSS is incredibly nice and easy to use, also I think the developer is working on a 2.0 version as we speak. Anyway, MIR is great to as you can not only position the player but you can do the same for the listener. I personally use mainly Spitfire so I can get by with VSS and VerbSession on the non-SF libraries and then mix everyone into a section specific instance of QL Spaces. Works well for my template and really super minimal as far as tweaking goes.


----------



## EwigWanderer (Jan 28, 2014)

Daryl @ 28th January 2014 said:


> It is totally dependent on what sample libraries you are using.
> 
> D



Not true at all! Not even close.


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (Jan 28, 2014)

Working on a new plugin for this ^>|


----------



## Vlzmusic (Jan 28, 2014)

I used to have VSS before moving up to MIR. Its nice plugin, sure, but for truth sake, I can`t see it making anything with wet/pre-panned samples, that MIR can`t. Its different price range, and believe me - MIR works hard for every dollar you spend on it.

Technically speaking, I would not advise strong "ER" engines (MIR, VSS) for handling wet samples. Working with accordance to initial mic`ing should be more natural. You can pan (love S1 imager from Waves the most), maybe adjust some of the releases here and there, to make things less roomy, EQ should help too, and for those recorded in relatively modest studio (as Hollywood Strings for example) I add reverb tail (Spaces being my favourite).


----------



## EwigWanderer (Jan 28, 2014)

Many people seems to have an impression that MIR is only for VSL samples and that MIR is just another reverb. Both are wrong. I use MIR for Orchestral Tools, Cinebrass, Spitfire and other libraries. I own VSS also, but I didn't get results what I was after with it.

Couple of things that many have missed is that in MIR you can change the Main microphone array in two ways: distance from the orchestra (example: conductor, 4th row, back of the hall, gallery etc, depends on the venue) and what kind of array you wanna use (Blumlein, M-S, triple 8-spaced, virtual ORTF etc) in stereo or for example in glorious 5.1 surround. You can also add a second microphone array. I usually use first one at conductor and the second in 4th row to get more depth.

When you place your instrument at the stage you will choose a microphone to it. There are many VSL instrument presets that can be used also with 3rd party samples, but they are tweaked for VSL. They are good starting points, but I usually use general profiles where you can choose omni, cardioid, hyper cardioid, 8-figure etc. and that's fun. They all sound different and help you to get that sound you are after. You can also automate the wet/dry ratio for let's say you will have a flute solo and you want the flute stand out more you can automate the dry/wet slider to get more definition for the solo passage.

There are also RoomEQ inside MIR and with the new update you can use different RoomEQ settings for different sections. MIRacle algo reverb is also included as a separate plugin to sweeten the sound for you liking. 

Using MIR isn't just a walk in the park. You need to understand what kind of microphones are used in different instruments. Don't use cardioid a for everything. I like to use cardioid for 1st and 2nd violins and figure-8 for cellos and basses. But you can choose you own. Listen some of your favorite scores and match the sound, it's easy with MIR.

What mics to use from your samples? Close ones work pretty well (remember to pan them to center before routing through MIR with plugins like Waves S-1 or PowerPan) but try with others too. I find that using mixed mics in Cinebrass gets that Jerry Goldsmith The Edge soundtrack sound in Sageshead Hall1 venue which I use. 

I learned a lot from this PDF about space in orchestral recordings 
http://cdn.audioimpressions.com/OrchestralRecordingTechniques_R4.pdf (http://cdn.audioimpressions.com/Orchest ... ues_R4.pdf)

I'm still learning to use MIR but it's really has been fun. I'm rarely smiling when trying to mix...I usually rage, cry and feel down, but now it's easier. And one thing more: no need to put everything inside MIR. Try different things and let your ears decide.


----------



## muk (Jan 29, 2014)

Great input so far, I'm still undecided though.

Peter Emanuel, is it a spatialisation plugin you're working on or 'just' reverb? If it does spatialisation (as VSS, Mir, or Spat) I may want to wait for it. Can you give an eta already?

Also, does anybody know something more about VSS 2?


----------



## Daryl (Jan 29, 2014)

EwigWanderer @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> Daryl @ 28th January 2014 said:
> 
> 
> > It is totally dependent on what sample libraries you are using.
> ...


It is true. For example, if you are using an ambient library, such as Spitfire, MIR is useless, VSS doesn't really serve any purpose, and neither does SPAT. Are you able to give a reasons why you think the opposite?

D


----------



## Daryl (Jan 29, 2014)

muk @ Tue Jan 28 said:


> VSL, LASS, BWW, SM mostly. I hope to add some Spitfire stuff over time.


OK. SO here are my views:

VSL:
All of those plugs will be useful for some things. For me it is dependent on which family of instruments.

LASS:
AFAIK LASS is recorded in position, so VSS could work, providing that you do a little messing around with panning, same with MIR and if you use SPAT dry, and like the colouring of the sound, it could work well if you want to push things around the stage.

BWW
I don't know enough about this library to have an opinion.

Spitfire:
As long as we are talking about the stuff recorded in AIR, you don't need any of those plugs.

D


----------



## Vlzmusic (Jan 29, 2014)

+1


I believe its just counterproductive to try "redoing" the room information that was put by the sound engineers in the first place. Thats why VSL were recorded in a specific way. And there are SM or Wallander, which are anechoic by design.


----------



## muk (Jan 29, 2014)

Vlzmusic @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> +1
> 
> 
> I believe its just counterproductive to try "redoing" the room information that was put by the sound engineers in the first place.



I agree with that, but that's not my intention in the first place. What I would want to do is bring VSL, LASS, BWW, SM etc in the same room as Spitfire, for example.


----------



## EwigWanderer (Jan 29, 2014)

muk @ 29th January 2014 said:


> What I would want to do is bring VSL, LASS, BWW, SM etc in the same room as Spitfire, for example.



Might be difficult to achieve and depending on how accurate you want it to sound even impossible. Best to get only libraries that are recorded at the same place, but even that doesn't always work. There are problems when trying to get BWW and Berlin Strings to sound together at least some are saying so here at the forum. Mainly because of depth of feel.


----------



## EwigWanderer (Jan 29, 2014)

Daryl @ 29th January 2014 said:


> EwigWanderer @ Wed Jan 29 said:
> 
> 
> > Daryl @ 28th January 2014 said:
> ...



Do you understand that they are tools? Different tools for different tasks. I'm not saying that someone would need those plugins to get certain sound but for me MIR has helped a lot and I'm happy that I bought it. It speeded up my work and now I can spend more time on writing than mixing.

Are you saying that I blew my money for useless plugin?


----------



## Daryl (Jan 29, 2014)

EwigWanderer @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> Daryl @ 29th January 2014 said:
> 
> 
> > EwigWanderer @ Wed Jan 29 said:
> ...


If you think that they have helped you, that's all that matters. As you said, different tools for different tasks and that's exactly what I implied. It really depends on what sample library one is using which tool is necessary.

D


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (Jan 29, 2014)

muk @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> Great input so far, I'm still undecided though.
> 
> Peter Emanuel, is it a spatialisation plugin you're working on or 'just' reverb? If it does spatialisation (as VSS, Mir, or Spat) I may want to wait for it. Can you give an eta already?
> 
> Also, does anybody know something more about VSS 2?



No ETA yet, as I cannot work full time on it.

The concept is in between MIR and Spaces (but not as big as MIR). It is especially meant for positioning instruments and sections, using True Stereo IRs from European orchestral recording stages in combination with a stereo panner (and lots of other options, including reading external IRs). 

The plugin will likely also contain a hybrid approach for subtle algo tail modulations. The engine is highly efficient and can be used as insert on many channels/tracks.

Here are some early demos with my Teldex Studio (Berlin) impulse responses:

https://soundcloud.com/peter-emanuel-ro ... -ir-reverb

https://soundcloud.com/peter-emanuel-ro ... o-irs-demo

https://soundcloud.com/peter-emanuel-ro ... oid-demo-2

Cheers,


----------



## muk (Jan 29, 2014)

Sounds great, Peter! I hope I can buy it when it comes out.

MIR and Spat are very tempting. But considering the fact that I have a very good reverb plugin already (Vienna Suite Hybrid Reverb), I'd only need a spatializer really. So maybe VSS could do the job just fine?

Can anybody compare the workflow between MIR, Spat, and VSS plus a reverb? Which would be easiest to use? Which sound do you like best?


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (Jan 29, 2014)

muk @ Thu 30 Jan said:


> Sounds great, Peter! I hope I can buy it when it comes out.
> 
> MIR and Spat are very tempting. But considering the fact that I have a very good reverb plugin already (Vienna Suite Hybrid Reverb), I'd only need a spatializer really. So maybe VSS could do the job just fine?
> 
> Can anybody compare the workflow between MIR, Spat, and VSS plus a reverb? Which would be easiest to use? Which sound do you like best?



I wouldn't discount MIR purely because you already have a good reverb. It is a lot more than just panning and reverb.


----------



## Daryl (Jan 29, 2014)

muk @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> MIR and Spat are very tempting. But considering the fact that I have a very good reverb plugin already (Vienna Suite Hybrid Reverb), I'd only need a spatializer really. So maybe VSS could do the job just fine?


All I can say is that it will depends on what you have trouble achieving with your current tools, what you feed into it, and what you expect to hear from it.

D


----------



## Vlzmusic (Jan 29, 2014)

Actually, if bringing VSL into hall comparable to the wet libraries is your main concern - Mirx would help you with that as well. Its a "presets" kind of workflow, but very powerful for the task. Depends if you use VI pro already, the price for the venues themselves is not high. BTW there is a demo to try each one of them for a month! 

-Edit: Just reminded that it has Teldex, so Berlin stuff should go fine with it.--


----------



## re-peat (Jan 29, 2014)

Muk,

I doubt my opinion tells the whole true story, but I have never heard VSS do something good. Particularly when used on samples which have already spatial definition baked in. Things often come out sounding poorly aligned (phase-wise) and thus hollow-sounding, totally mono-incompatible and, well, simply unattractive.
It might very well work great on a dryly sampled harp or some other lone animal in the orchestra that isn’t sampled too spaciously, I guess, but for the placement and depth-suggestion of an entire virtual orchestra, I really do think that VSS will often do more damage than good. VSS2 might correct that situation of course.

(Also: don’t believe that VSS equals SPAT-with-its-reverb-turned-off. People who say that, haven’t got the faintest idea of what SPAT is all about.)

MIR is supposedly the queen bee among spatializers, but so far, I haven’t heard much, if anything, that makes me even remotely interested in this software. Rather the opposite, in fact. It’s not that I find MIR bad or anything, of course not, I actually firmly believe it is exceptionnaly good at what it was created to do, but I still have to hear the first example of MIR doing something which (a) is exclusive to MIR and at the same time essential to the well-being of a mock-up, AND (b) can’t be done with SPAT just as well and much simpler …

… because, once you’re familiar with SPAT, just about every other existing solution for spatial and placement issues, seems either toy-ish, inadequate or heavy-handed. At least, it does to me.
SPAT is expensive, yes, but it’s also very, very good. I could wax lyrical about SPAT for twenty more long paragraphs, if no one stops me. 
Anyway, to get some idea of SPAT, here a link to *a video* I made a couple of months ago. Now, I’m terribly bad at doing these videos, and this first (and thusfar only) result of my screengrabbing activities, is at least 10 boring minutes too long, but I think it does give a not entirely unhelpful overview of what makes SPAT so unique nonetheless.

But, like Daryl says, it all depends on what you have, what you think is needed and what you hope to hear.

_


----------



## muk (Jan 29, 2014)

Hi Piet, thank you for the video, it's very helpful. I'm of the impression that MIR could be of limited use in my case, as it uses a lot of computer resources and may be more difficult to use with pre-panned/wet sample libraries.
What I hear from Spat sounds fantastic so far (and better than anything I can achieve with the VSS demo). But the price...


----------



## apessino (Jan 29, 2014)

I thought VSS was basically useless. The effect is minimal (really, just pan + a bit of EQ) or colored. 

I used MIR Pro for a good while and I like it a lot. For some things it is hard to beat, and the inteface/integration are fantastic. You can't go wrong with it. Where I think it starts to break down a bit is as the ensemble builds up. When lots of sources are present the sound gets colored - I found it difficult to back off the room to an extent I found satisfactory without sacrificing tone and placement (and vice-versa).

And then there is SPAT... the interface is not quite as elegant as MIR, not it is as robust (found a few little bugs here and there in the UI, including an easy to reproduce way to crash it, but the workarounds are simple) but man, the functionality is phenomenal. It is as transparent as you can dream of. You place sources, dial in the parameters (including the amazingly clever perceptual factors) and that is it. What you want is what you get, always linear and predictable - quite amazing. 

It is also reasonable on the CPU; my PC is top of the line, but I am able to run my full template with 4 instances of SPAT on section busses, each with 5 or 6 mono sources in, reverb on for all of them.

Re-peat... your video is a great intro to the plugin. If I can may just answer your point about the "pitch" parameter, and why it is so named...

It comes from aeronautics - yaw/pitch/roll is an old fashioned way of describing an orientation using Euler angles. In the case of a SPAT source, distance + elevation define the position of a source's center, while yaw and pitch describe its orientation ("roll" is fixed at 0 in the case of SPAT). Here is a pic to illustrate:







With orchestral sounds minor changes in pitch are not going to make much of a difference - but if you are placing sound effects in surround then the more precise 3D control of placement and emission would be essential.

Finally, those parameters also highlight the biggest shortcomings in SPAT - that is, the UI is not as effective as it could be. There is no way to name the sources, for example (small thing, but it would be nice to be able to), and since the only view is a 2D projection evaluating 3D placement and directionality is not as intuitive as it could be (no way to visualize the pitch of the source, for example).

All small nitpicks, of course... as it is SPAT is brilliant at what matters most, which is to execute on its promise of spatialization and room simulation. It is also eminently usable and intuitive as it is, so any and all criticisms are just wishing for further improvements rather than complaints. 8)


----------



## apessino (Jan 29, 2014)

muk @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> Hi Piet, thank you for the video, it's very helpful. I'm of the impression that MIR could be of limited use in my case, as it uses a lot of computer resources and may be more difficult to use with pre-panned/wet sample libraries.
> What I hear from Spat sounds fantastic so far (and better than anything I can achieve with the VSS demo). But the price...



MIR Pro is VERY easy on the CPU - more so than SPAT for an equal number of sources.


----------



## re-peat (Jan 29, 2014)

apessino @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> (...) It comes from aeronautics - yaw/pitch/roll is an old fashioned way of describing an orientation using Euler angles.


Hey, thanks! I didn't know any of that, Apessino.

_


----------



## rayinstirling (Jan 29, 2014)

apessino @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> I used MIR Pro for a good while and I like it a lot. For some things it is hard to beat, and the inteface/integration are fantastic. You can't go wrong with it. Where I think it starts to break down a bit is as the ensemble builds up. When lots of sources are present the sound gets colored - I found it difficult to back off the room to an extent I found satisfactory without sacrificing tone and placement (and vice-versa).



I get what you're saying here and I agree. The more instances added the more backing off the amount of effect until I start to wonder if it was worth using it in the first place.


----------



## PMortise (Jan 29, 2014)

Thanks for the video Piet! It is very helpful.



muk @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> Hi Piet, thank you for the video, it's very helpful. I'm of the impression that MIR could be of limited use in my case, as it uses a lot of computer resources and may be more difficult to use with pre-panned/wet sample libraries.
> What I hear from Spat sounds fantastic so far (and better than anything I can achieve with the VSS demo). But the price...



I remember seeing this thread not too long ago. Shoot him a PM.


----------



## Beat Kaufmann (Jan 29, 2014)

All of you are full of praise for MIR... Nothing against this fact.
But is there really no disadvantage with MIR?
It is...

It's true, on the one hand MIR is easy to use and it's easy "to mix" with it but on the other hand the result can also sound very colored. 
Badly colored, "poty" or also "cheesy" just colored. 

_How can you check your MIR-Mix about this fact?_
- Listen for a minute to a real orchestra recording session (Deutsche Grammofon, Decca or to any other Label). 
- Then quickly switch to your MIR-mix and you will immediately get the feedback about this matter (colored result).
Sometimes the sound is extremely far away from neutral. If it should sound neutral is another question. But
all the real recordings do not sound so different as MIR sometimes does...

My experience is, that we still not have a PlugIn today which will make the mix for us without any help of ourselves. 

Therefore a vote here from my side for the more common Convolution Reverbs + Algos.
If you are able to handle the effects there is nothing against the use of of these common tools. 
BTW
Peter: Your Teldex-Reverb seems to sound very natural... I'm keen on it...

All the best
Beat


----------



## muk (Jan 29, 2014)

MIR is out of the race, I think. Ideally I'd love to have a plugin with the sonic qualities of Spat, the ease of use of MIR, and at the price of VSS 
Maybe I'll wait for Peter's Teldex IR and try and learn VSL Hybrid Reverb better in the meantime. But creating depth with it seems very difficult to me, and it takes a lot of time I'd rather spend composing.
It's a pitty that there are not more plugins with a graphical approach like MIR and VSS - it would be so much easier to use for the ones with no deep knowledge of audio engineering.


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (Jan 29, 2014)

re-peat @ Thu 30 Jan said:


> Muk,
> 
> I doubt my opinion tells the whole true story, but I have never heard VSS do something good. Particularly when used on samples which have already spatial definition baked in. Things often come out sounding poorly aligned (phase-wise) and thus hollow-sounding, totally mono-incompatible and, well, simply unattractive.
> It might very well work great on a dryly sampled harp or some other lone animal in the orchestra that isn’t sampled too spaciously, I guess, but for the placement and depth-suggestion of an entire virtual orchestra, I really do think that VSS will often do more damage than good. VSS2 might correct that situation of course.
> ...



Nice video Piet. For a second there I thought we were gonna get to hear your voice .

Ircam does look fantastic. I recall recently they had it going for around 700? That would have been nice to jump on board.


----------



## Diffusor (Jan 29, 2014)

SimonCharlesHanna @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> re-peat @ Thu 30 Jan said:
> 
> 
> > Muk,
> ...



I got it around a year and a half ago when they were running a special with the Ircam Tools bundle for like $600.

Speaking of which.... Have they made SPAT 64 bit yet? I've gotten emails for about every other Ircam plugin becoming 64 bit but not SPAT yet. Did I miss it?

Also, I tend to echo Beat's feelings on MIR. It's great software but I go from liking the sound to not liking it. I used to own MIR Pro but sold it last last year. I have been demoing MIR 24 again since I was interested in using the Teldex to integrate everything with OT Berlin Strings, and wanted to revisit it. Demo just ran out tonight and I don't think I will buy it again. Replaced the MIR 24 stuff with SPAT and I can't say I miss it. There's definitely something "colored" with it. Really interested in Peter's Teldex stuff which sound way better than MIR but not telling when that will come out trying to code a plugin from scratch. Also, MIR is just too damn expensive still, even with MIR 24 which is still 800 USD with a room pack. It should be more in the $300 range imo.


----------



## apessino (Jan 29, 2014)

It is 64 bit on Windows. No idea about the Mac side...


----------



## Jack Weaver (Jan 29, 2014)

I got this on January 17th in response to an email to Flux support:



> Hi,
> 
> Yes, it's coming, SPAT is a fairly complex software, and in order to
> get things up and running in 64-bit IRCAM have to re-write some code
> ...




Now, please remember that they also said that it would be available in Summer, 2012.

.


----------



## apessino (Jan 29, 2014)

All right - maybe I am wrong... not really sure if it is 64 bit on Windows. :D I think I recall a "VST bridge" being involved when SPAT crashed, so maybe it is actually still 32 bit.

But... why does it matter? I mean, for things like samplers that require access to massive amounts of memory it is important to be able to address all the RAM, but for a purely algorithmic plugin like SPAT the benefits of going 64 bit would be minimal. 

Of course it'll be nice if they do update it... 8)


----------



## Diffusor (Jan 29, 2014)

apessino @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> It is 64 bit on Windows. No idea about the Mac side...



When did that happen? I totally missed it and I was getting Ircam email updates. Cool though! I will go grab it.

Edit: I just checked Flux's site and all the Ircam plugs are all at version 3 except SPAT, and there is no mention of 64bit.


----------



## Jack Weaver (Jan 29, 2014)

Hi apessino, 

Greetings, we haven't talked before but a belated welcome to the forum and and I look forward to your continuing contributions. 

Regarding SPAT, purely selfishly speaking, on Mac the new version of Logic doesn't have a 32-bit bridge built-in. Also until Flux comes up with an AAX 64-bit version it won't be able to be used within Pro Tools 11. 

SPAT has become such an integral part of my production technique that I'm holding back from jumping to Logic X or Pro Tools 11 - my main two vehicles. Yes, I could bus tracks from either of those applications via a couple different workarounds. But I really want the full meal deal. 

I have MIR, (not overly impressed to date with VSS compare to SPAT or MIR) and some other hardware and software reverbs - but nothing does what SPAT does. 

.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Jan 29, 2014)

apessino @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> It is 64 bit on Windows. No idea about the Mac side...



Spat is not 64bit native yet.


----------



## PMortise (Jan 29, 2014)

Peter Alexander @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> apessino @ Wed Jan 29 said:
> 
> 
> > It is 64 bit on Windows. No idea about the Mac side...
> ...



I've been using it with 32 Lives without any issues. Spat was buggy with jBridge.


----------



## Jack Weaver (Jan 29, 2014)

Hi PMortise,

Yes, I have heard of this before but haven't tried it to date because I'm still on 10.6.8 and it wants to see 10.7.5. I do plan to update to Mountain Lion soon and will give 32 Lives a whirl. If it works it will solve half of my current DAW issues. Things will be nice when I can finally go to Logic X and PT 11. I have a feeling it might coincide with the purchase of a new Mac Pro. 

Thanks for the info. It's definitely bookmarked now. 

.


----------



## apessino (Jan 29, 2014)

Jack Weaver @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> Hi apessino,
> 
> Greetings, we haven't talked before but a belated welcome to the forum and and I look forward to your continuing contributions.
> 
> ...



Thank you for the clarification and sorry for the confusion! :mrgreen: 

It all makes sense now - on Windows I really couldn't even tell it was still 32 bit (and foolishly assumed it was indeed 64 bit), Cubase just runs it without drama. Thank you for educating me on the Mac/Logic/PT side of things - I know very little of either. I can see how beneficial it would be for you to have a full 64 bit version! 

I am in full agreement regarding the quality of SPAT's output. There is really nothing else that can do what it does. 8)


----------



## apessino (Jan 29, 2014)

Diffusor @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> apessino @ Wed Jan 29 said:
> 
> 
> > It is 64 bit on Windows. No idea about the Mac side...
> ...



Yup, SORRY! I had a brain fart... I feel better now. :mrgreen:


----------



## Peter Alexander (Jan 31, 2014)

I'll be doing an article on this soon, you just have to remember that Spat is not MIR. MIR is based on convolution and selecting a recognizable scoring stage or concert hall. Spat is algorithmic and is based on creating a room in cubic meters (m3). On the presets Alexander Publishing give with Verb Session or Verb, we worked out the m3's for a variety of rooms along with reverb decay, and other items. 

Translate these into Spat and you can "emulate" Abbey Road 1 and 2, Teldex, and other scoring stages. I also came up with a preset for the Vienna Musikvarensaal (sp?) which is 15000m3. 

For stage placement, in Logic in 7.1 surround, you can assign either 8 mono or 4 stereo pairs which you can spatially position. There is room for 8 pairs, but my understanding that beyond the 4 pairs, you need Pro Tools. So in a sense, you can place stereo objects spatially in Spat.

However, my best success for what I _personally_ write is using Spat individually by insertion. So in my Vienna template, I can spatially place not just an articulation, but Violins 1 and all the V1 articulations in a single instance. Five instances and my section is placed. 

I am the ONE, btw, that often turns reverb OFF because since I can turn it off within Spat, I save resources by placing the sections which mostly use FORTI/SERTI and then putting Verb on the mains since you build the room the same way as you do in Spat - by cubic meters.


----------



## muk (Feb 1, 2014)

Looking forward to the article, Peter. I'm looking to add Spat to my palette, but I'll have to wait for some kind of special offers. I can't justify more than 1000$ for placement/reverb, especially as I already have the Vienna Hybrid Reverb.


----------



## rayinstirling (Feb 1, 2014)

Well I thought, go buy Spat or have a week at Lake Garda?
Damn it, Lake Garda won the day. 8)


----------



## muk (Feb 5, 2014)

Is anybody using Sonnox Reverb? It has some nice parameters for ER's (the shape of the room, for example).
But how is it sonically as a spatial placement plugin?


----------



## muk (Feb 5, 2014)

Stumbled upon Magix Origami, and that thing is fantastic! It sounds so good in fact, that I'd love to hear a comparison with the much more expensive IRCAM Spat.


----------



## fratveno (Feb 8, 2014)

muk @ Wed Feb 05 said:


> Stumbled upon Magix Origami, and that thing is fantastic! It sounds so good in fact, that I'd love to hear a comparison with the much more expensive IRCAM Spat.



Hello folks,

I did likewise (stumble upon Origami) - it's included with Independence Free, and liked it so well that I purchased the Pro version at EUR 49 right away.

When trying to Activate it on my Win 7 64bit machines: Nothing happens... I've manually replaced some installation files based on info from tech support, diabled virus etc. - still no go...

Then tried to activate it on a Win 8.1 32-bit machine, and it worked as expected... but I don't need it there...

Anyone got it working on Windows 7 64-bit?

thanks!


----------



## muk (Feb 10, 2014)

Sorry I can't help you, I'm on Windows 8.1.

I really hope you get Origami to work. It is fantastic!


----------



## jamwerks (Feb 10, 2014)

Using Spaces for the moment, but looking forward to the 64 bit version of SPAT (PC), and who knows, maybe even a price drop!.... :roll:


----------



## muk (Feb 10, 2014)

jamwerks, why not trying Origami before buying SPAT? With Spaces you have a great reverb plugin already. And Origami handles the stage placement exceedingly well.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Feb 10, 2014)

EwigWanderer @ Tue Jan 28 said:


> Daryl @ 28th January 2014 said:
> 
> 
> > It is totally dependent on what sample libraries you are using.
> ...



Completely true IMHO.


----------



## wexberg (Jul 30, 2014)

FYI: Spat v3 is out now, 64bit, 30% off.
http://www.fluxhome.com/products/plug_ins/ircam_spat-v3


----------

