Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Forum Jump  
MIR PRO: Around the corner?
Last post Sun, Oct 16 2011 by Dietz, 229 replies.
Options
Go to last post
12 Pages«<34567>»
Posted on Tue, Jun 14 2011 07:54
by Dietz
Joined on Tue, Aug 06 2002, Vienna / Europe, Posts 8106

FredB wrote:
Ok

So will it be possible to feed audio from a VE Pro slave computer to the host that runs MIR?

Fred, thanks for your interest. Like stated several times before: Yes, MIR Pro will have all features found in the next generation of VE Pro.

Kind regards,

/Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library
Posted on Tue, Jun 14 2011 08:01
by Dietz
Joined on Tue, Aug 06 2002, Vienna / Europe, Posts 8106
patrik wrote:

Hi Dietz,

thank you for your answers...

You're welcome! :-)

Quote:

 I guess as long as the sequencer will integrate the latency, this will be a huge advantage.... I assume then, it will be possible to do bounces with MIR pro without manually recording the MIR output as an audio file?

Yes, of course.

Quote:

 and, do I get it right, that MIR Pro is pretty much adding a "network plug" to the standalone MIR... so that I could use my current setup (no remote desktop), and simply sync it to the sequencer....?

Yes and no. MIR Pro is not Vienna MIR as we know it now, but a complete rewrite (... so in this sense it's not just "adding a network plug"). But you will be able to use MIR Pro stand-alone as you could do with VE Pro.

Quote:

 Is this in a way like with VE pro, when I prepare templates and then later connect them to the master...?

Exactly.  But I think the real beauty of MIR Pro will be found in the directintegration of the engine into a DAW.

Quote:

 But what I don't understand:  with VE Pro I only have so many different VIs per instance... how will this be reflected in MIR pro?

... sorry for being dense, but I don't understand the question ...? :-/

/Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library
Posted on Tue, Jun 14 2011 08:07
by Dietz
Joined on Tue, Aug 06 2002, Vienna / Europe, Posts 8106
DG wrote:

Unfortunately Nuendo isn't currently a very good option for my album mixes, as each track takes at least an extra hour and a half to mix, when compared with Pro Tools. This really takes its toll when dealing with over two hours of material. Sad

DG

But Daryl ... how could we overcome one of the most fundamental technical limitations of ProTools? I know that an automatic latency compensation that allows for only 4096 samples is a severe restriction nowadays, but there's not much we can do about it.

Best,

/Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library
Posted on Tue, Jun 14 2011 09:53
by DG
Joined on Wed, May 12 2004, Posts 8608
Dietz wrote:
DG wrote:

Unfortunately Nuendo isn't currently a very good option for my album mixes, as each track takes at least an extra hour and a half to mix, when compared with Pro Tools. This really takes its toll when dealing with over two hours of material. Sad

DG

But Daryl ... how could we overcome one of the most fundamental technical limitations of Pro Tools? I know that an automatic latency compensation that allows for only 4096 samples is a severe restriction nowadays, but there's not much we can do about it.

Best,

 

I totally understand. Just musing on the unfairness of life. Sad

I would, however, suggest that you make sure that this information is prominently displayed, to make sure that PT users know why MIR won't work properly in their set-up, unless they have nothing else loaded, or are prepared to shift audio tracks around to accommodate the latency.

DG

Nuendo 6.03, 4.3
2 x Intel Xeon x5675 3.07GHz Hex Core
48GB RAM
Windows 7 (x64)Pro
RME Multiface II
Intensity
ATI HD5400 series graphics card
Posted on Tue, Jun 14 2011 12:56
by Vagn Luv
Joined on Sun, Apr 02 2006, Copenhagen, DK, Posts 271
DG wrote:

I would, however, suggest that you make sure that this information is prominently displayed, to make sure that PT users know why MIR won't work properly in their set-up, unless they have nothing else loaded, or are prepared to shift audio tracks around to accommodate the latency.

I second this, otherwise ppl would be led to believe that the MIR instantiation would create a latency that Pro Tools was able to deal with.

What latency do you commonly deal with when using MIR Pro so far, and at what buffer size, of course?

Pro Tools 9.0.6 HD2, 3x192

Windows 7 64bit Ultimate (with SP1)

PC, Asus P6T Delux v2 MoBo, i7 920 D0 @ 3.8 stable, 24GB RAM, GeForce 285 using 285.38 driver, Intel X25-M G2 120GB SSD sytem drive, Intel SSD and Raptor HDDs for sample streaming.
Posted on Tue, Jun 14 2011 13:28
by DG
Joined on Wed, May 12 2004, Posts 8608
Vagn Luv wrote:
DG wrote:

I would, however, suggest that you make sure that this information is prominently displayed, to make sure that PT users know why MIR won't work properly in their set-up, unless they have nothing else loaded, or are prepared to shift audio tracks around to accommodate the latency.

I second this, otherwise ppl would be led to believe that the MIR instantiation would create a latency that Pro Tools was able to deal with.

What latency do you commonly deal with when using MIR Pro so far, and at what buffer size, of course?

 

I don't have MIR Pro (obviously) but with standalone MIR the buffer and latency is totally dependent on how many instruments. MIR has a buffer multiplier, so that even when your soundcard can't do large buffers, MIR is able to work.

Maybe if you state how many instruments you are intending to run, Dietz will be able to give you an idea.

FWIW I can't run my template at any buffer with the current version of MIR. Sad

DG

Nuendo 6.03, 4.3
2 x Intel Xeon x5675 3.07GHz Hex Core
48GB RAM
Windows 7 (x64)Pro
RME Multiface II
Intensity
ATI HD5400 series graphics card
Posted on Tue, Jun 14 2011 17:08
by Dietz
Joined on Tue, Aug 06 2002, Vienna / Europe, Posts 8106
DG wrote:
[...] Maybe if you state how many instruments you are intending to run, Dietz will be able to give you an idea. [...]

With my 3 years old development machine (basically an INTEL Core i7-965 XE 3.20GHz Quad-Core with 12 GB RAM and a RME Hammerfall DSP for audio), I usually use MIR with 1024 samples latency and a buffer multiplier of 1 for 30 to 50 instruments. For more instruments I need higher buffer multipliers.

512 samples latency would work, too, in most cases, while with 256 (and a multiplier of 1) things get messy with more than a dozen of instruments. 1024 is smooth and responsive for mixing. - This makes for a total latency of 2048 samples.

HTH,

/Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library
Posted on Tue, Jun 14 2011 17:14
by Dietz
Joined on Tue, Aug 06 2002, Vienna / Europe, Posts 8106

Another example: These are results of a more powerful system, posted on the beta-list by user "Wolfgang" about two years ago:

Quote:

Primary System: I really have not been able to stress it

128 latency: roughly 50-55 instruments @ 65-70% cpu

512 latency: 80 @ roughly 65-70%

1024: over 100 instruments @ 75%

Like Dietz, I used Perf Legato patches for each instrument. Same line with adjusted ranges. Buffer @ 1. Bringing buffer up allowed me even more cpu room to work with.

Note: This was a stress-test , with all instruments playing at the same time! In real life, one can achieve better numbers than that due to the fact that MIR is able to switch off convolution threads that aren't used at the moment.

/Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library
Posted on Thu, Jun 16 2011 13:26
by Vagn Luv
Joined on Sun, Apr 02 2006, Copenhagen, DK, Posts 271

That eases my mind. Smile 2048 buffer is usualy enough in my sessions in protools, 4096 when the going gets tough. Worst case one can alway bump protools up to 8192 samples, but of course it would be nice to avoid this for the sake of playability.

One more question, since you are so wonderfully forthcoming about the development:

Previously you have exclusively recommended memory controllers in the X58 league, but have you done any tests or have any opinions regarding any of the dual memory interface options like the i7-based H67, P67 or Z68s? Will they struggle coping with the engine, and if so, do you think overclocking would make them able to handle the high throughput? Obviously the X79/LGA2011 platform will be a fantastic rig for running things like MIR if the rumored specs have any truth to them, but the Sandy Bridge-based platforms does offer quite a bit more value for money than enthusiast ones like the X58 and, very likely, X79s do.

Any thoughts much appreciated. Cool

Pro Tools 9.0.6 HD2, 3x192

Windows 7 64bit Ultimate (with SP1)

PC, Asus P6T Delux v2 MoBo, i7 920 D0 @ 3.8 stable, 24GB RAM, GeForce 285 using 285.38 driver, Intel X25-M G2 120GB SSD sytem drive, Intel SSD and Raptor HDDs for sample streaming.
Posted on Thu, Jun 16 2011 20:01
by Dietz
Joined on Tue, Aug 06 2002, Vienna / Europe, Posts 8106

Whew! I have to admit that I'm not the local hardware guru (I'm just an audio guy ;-) ...) To be honest we are developing on the same machines since quite some time now, and new hardware-tests won't take place before the software itself isn't feature-locked. But I will ask around, maybe our IT-guys can offer an educated opinion.

Kind regards,

/Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library
Posted on Thu, Jun 16 2011 20:02
by Dietz
Joined on Tue, Aug 06 2002, Vienna / Europe, Posts 8106

BTW ... which flavour of ProTools offers more than 4096 samples of latency compensation?

/Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library
Posted on Thu, Jun 16 2011 20:12
by DG
Joined on Wed, May 12 2004, Posts 8608
Dietz wrote:

BTW ... which flavour of ProTools offers more than 4096 samples of latency compensation?

 

All flavours. It depends on the sample rate you're working at. However the actual amount of ADC allowed is still the same in ms, so it solves nothing.

DG

Nuendo 6.03, 4.3
2 x Intel Xeon x5675 3.07GHz Hex Core
48GB RAM
Windows 7 (x64)Pro
RME Multiface II
Intensity
ATI HD5400 series graphics card
Posted on Thu, Jun 16 2011 20:45
by Dietz
Joined on Tue, Aug 06 2002, Vienna / Europe, Posts 8106

Ok, thanks, that's what I thought too, but Vagn Luv's message seems to imply that there are other possibilities I'm not aware of.

/Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library
Posted on Fri, Jun 17 2011 22:43
by Errikos
Joined on Tue, Jun 12 2007, Posts 1115

I hope MIR Pro development is taking into account Mac OS Lion's imminent release, as hopefully it does for all VSL software.

If you can't notate/MIDI it yourself, it's NOT your music!

In these modern days to be vulgar, illiterate, common and vicious, seems to give a man a marvelous infinity of rights that his honest fathers never dreamed of. - Oscar Wilde
Posted on Sun, Jun 19 2011 10:00
by patrik
Joined on Thu, Apr 05 2007, near Frankfurt, Germany, Posts 144
Dietz wrote:
Quote:

 But what I don't understand:  with VE Pro I only have so many different VIs per instance... how will this be reflected in MIR pro?

... sorry for being dense, but I don't understand the question ...? :-/

...sorry, I kind of read over this... sorry what I meant was the following:

 when I open one instance of VEPro as a logic-plugin, I can only use 16 MIDI channels (or VIs) per instance. As this is a limitation caused by logic rather than VSL software I would be curious, how MIR PRO will deal with this limitation (as my current template includes around 60 instruments). Will I have to use multiple instances of MIR (as in VEpro) or will there be a possibility of extending channels like a multi-multi instrument.... 

and then, will I be able as in VEPro to route the individual instrument output to a separate bus (I am not sure if I would want to do this, as in a way this seems against the primary MIR concept to me (another external mixing point)... but anyway, it would be interesting, if it would work)? 

Greetings,

Patrik

Master:
Intel Xeon E5-2620 (x2)
Win 7 64bit
48 GB RAM
Behringer X32 (connected via USB 2)
Cubase 7.03

Slave 1 (MIR):
2 x Intel Xeon E5530; 2,4 GHZ
24 GB RAM
Windows 7
ASIO: EMU PCIe, ASIO4all
midi: M-Audio 4x4

Slave 2 (VEPro):
I7 940; 2,93 GHz
12 GB RAM
Windows VISTA SP2

Woodwinds 1 +2 extended, Brass 1 extended, Dimension Brass, Percussion extended, Elements standard, Vienna Imperial., Konzerthaus Organ, Special Keyboards, Vienna Choir extended, Solo Strings 1 + 2 extended, Chamber Strings 1 extended, Orchestral Strings 1 + 2 extended, Appasionata Strings 1 extended, Harps extended, Vienna MIR, Room Pack 2 + 3, Vienna Ensemble Pro
Posted on Sun, Jun 19 2011 10:15
by Dietz
Joined on Tue, Aug 06 2002, Vienna / Europe, Posts 8106

There will be a built-in solution especially for those poor souls who have to use Logic. Geeked A workaround, of course, but it will work.

/Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library
Posted on Sun, Jun 19 2011 10:54
by Sami Boman
Joined on Wed, Mar 23 2005, Jyväskylä, Finland, Posts 207
Dietz wrote:

those poor souls who have to use Logic.

Posted on Sun, Jun 19 2011 13:20
by Errikos
Joined on Tue, Jun 12 2007, Posts 1115

I don't understand it either. Apple is always years ahead in design and architecture, how are they so far back with this AU limitation, especially when they do take themselves seriously in this industry (building programs like Logic, Soundtrack, and Final Cut PROs).

If you can't notate/MIDI it yourself, it's NOT your music!

In these modern days to be vulgar, illiterate, common and vicious, seems to give a man a marvelous infinity of rights that his honest fathers never dreamed of. - Oscar Wilde
Posted on Sun, Jun 19 2011 15:19
by musos
Joined on Sun, Dec 08 2002, Johannesburg, South Africa, Posts 916
Dietz wrote:

There will be a built-in solution especially for those poor souls who have to use Logic. Geeked A workaround, of course, but it will work.

This is really not an appropriate or polite statement from someone who works for VSL. Dietz, you usually try to deflect discussions away from platform wars and this comment shows a rather unfortunate bias. It also tells tells me that Mac/Logic users are possibly regarded as second-class citizens by VSL and even that development for Mac takes a reluctant second place in your priorities.

Very unfortunate indeed.

Posted on Sun, Jun 19 2011 15:34
by jammusique
Joined on Wed, Aug 04 2004, Paris, France, Posts 262

Logic is so behind in some domaines, because they are years ahead in others (64 bit). Hopefully the new Logic X (slated for this summer) will give us lots of surprises!

WW complete. MirX Teldex, Cubase, PC
12 Pages«<34567>»
You cannot post new threads in this forum.
You cannot reply to threads in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.