Vienna Symphonic Library Forum
Forum Statistics

182,322 users have contributed to 42,218 threads and 254,754 posts.

In the past 24 hours, we have 2 new thread(s), 9 new post(s) and 51 new user(s).

  • MIR Pro 24...Enough For Orchestral Template?

    I am a hobbist using the Special Edition Vol 1 Bundle and VI Pro with VE Standard hosted in Cubase on a single PC. I also have the MIRx Bundle. Funds are limited. Always. But with my birthday staring me in the face I have the opportunity to consider another VSL purchase.

    So I downloaded demos of VE Pro, MIR Pro, and Vienna Suite and I've copied my template into a "sandbox" where I can play around. I've set up my demo VE Pro Server to support Cubase, and I've just finished a short spell of playing around with MIR Pro to begin to figure things out. I must admit I am blown away by MIR Pro, more than I thought I would be. I don't know why, but it seems to me like the preset sounds in the same hall, Grosser Saal, sound much better in MIR Pro than in MIRx, and that's just messing around a bit.

    I went into this assuming MIR Pro would be put off until after Vienna Suite, which would be put off until after SE Vol 2 Bundle, which would be put off until after VE Pro. That was based in part on the assumption that MIR Pro 24, being limited to 24 instruments, would not allow sufficiently for a fairly full orchestral template. MIR Pro (full) and Vienna Suite are just too much right now. But perhaps with the March Voucher special I might possibly contemplate getting both VE Pro and MIR Pro 24 if I though there was a way to make the 24 instrument limit work.

    Has anyone else tried? Perhaps tried to use MIR Pro 24 for key instrument channels and then MIRx for additional channels? Or some other method?


    Hobbyist ... Sy Woods, Brass, Perc I, Str Pro, Elite Str, Duality Str & Sordino, Prime ... Sy-ized Woods, Perc, Solo Str, Ch Str, App Str, Harps, Choir, Dim Brass, Dim Strings ... VE Pro, MIR Pro 3D, Vienna Suite Pro ... Cubase 12, Studio One 6, Dorico 5
  • I can only speak for myself of course, but I don't see the benefit in using both MIR Pro 24 and MIRx in tandem. What's the point? To me, it would make more sense to go all MIRx. It gives you a uniform sound and doesn't get in the way. That's what I love about it. It sounds good and lets me write music, instead of being held up by technicalities that ultimately bore me.

    If you really perceive some kind of difference between MIRx and the Pro 24 presets, using both would mean having different sounding "room tones" in the same template, which kind of defeats the point of MIR/MIRx in the first place. Or you would end up having "A list" and "B list" instruments in your template. I understand the economics of it, but it's a strange mentality to work with, for me personally. And it's a kind of a non-streamlined mishmash.

    I believe that having everything sitting in the same room and sounding the same is most important and has the greatest effect on the perception of authenticity, even if the means of creating the room are simple (e.g. a simple algo verb bus). So, personally, if the 24 channels of the MIR Pro 24 don't suffice, I think I'd rather save up for a full MIR Pro. Or just go with a simpler solution/stick to what I have.

    My personal priority would put additional libraries and articulations on top. I think that's where the music ultimately comes from. It has the greatest effect on the writing, the inspiration, creative decisions and the detail of expression IMO. The rest is "just" tools.

    For example, you mentioned VE Pro: as long as you're staying on one machine, I don't see it as a priority. What for? I know people who use a bunch of VSL stuff in addition to ridiculous amounts of GBs of other sample libraries - an obscene amount of samples - and they want or have to cram it all into a single template that consists of hundreds upon hundreds of tracks. Those guys obviously need a slave computer and VE Pro to manage all that.

    I don't want that, luckily I don't need it and I never got the appeal. I try to keep things as simple and compact as possible, and my basic template is less than 100 tracks. I don't want these things to become too distracting and too fiddly, because I feel it's harmful to the creative process. As long as you're staying on one machine - which is absolutely viable, especially if you're working with the SEs - I don't see a big need for VE Pro.

    Then the Vienna Suite: I had demoed it, and I worked on a project where it got used in the post production quite a bit and I've seen it in action. It's a great product, I especially really liked the reverbs and the compressor. But in the end, it's a collection of audio plug-ins. You have those in Cubase. It's not like you're in dire need of acquiring EQs, compressors and reverbs because you don't have anything to work with.

    The stuff that's included in Cubase is good. The EQ is absolutely fine, the compressor does what it's supposed to, even the new algo reverb is really nice. And you have the MIRx bundle on top of that. One can always expand in this department later on along the way, and the Vienna Suite can be a great complement, but for someone who's on a budget and already has proper processing tools at their disposal, I wouldn't view it as a priority either.

    It most certainly isn't gonna elevate your music to an audibly higher level at this point. In fact, I'd argue that any hobbyist should first spend a lot of time researching, practicing and learning to use good stock plug-ins like the ones Cubase comes with before spending money on third-party software. Stuff like EQ, compression etc., is really something one needs to learn to listen to and work with first, in order to even be able to make educated judgements and choices on additional products.

    So personally, I'd prioritise acquiring additional sounds. The SE2 bundle makes a lot of sense if you're working with SE1+. There's also a lot of great expansion options with the download instruments. As far as software and processing goes, if you really like what MIR has to offer and have a lot of fun working with that, I'd rather save up for the "big" MIR Pro before spending limited funds on VE Pro or Vienna Suite. I think it just has more to offer in your particular situation.


  • last edited
    last edited

    @DaddyO said:

    [...] Perhaps tried to use MIR Pro 24 for key instrument channels and then MIRx for additional channels? 

    This could make sense, especially for cases where you would like to modify a few MIRx settings, or need to add 3rd-party virtual instruments or real recordings (like vocals, solo instruments etc.).

    Kind regards,


    /Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library
  • Jimmy.

    I appreciate you comments, especially re: the priority of instruments and the problems inherhent in mixing MIRx with MIR Pro 24 if the latter's settings are different.

    Re: "Saving up," in general you are right. But it depends on one's circumstance. My personal situation means that I must avail myself of limited purchase opportunities, and what is saved in one opportunity is not necessarily available in the next.


    Hobbyist ... Sy Woods, Brass, Perc I, Str Pro, Elite Str, Duality Str & Sordino, Prime ... Sy-ized Woods, Perc, Solo Str, Ch Str, App Str, Harps, Choir, Dim Brass, Dim Strings ... VE Pro, MIR Pro 3D, Vienna Suite Pro ... Cubase 12, Studio One 6, Dorico 5
  • Dietz,

    At this point my template is VSL only. I don't do any audio recording. I used to be a pretty good solo singer, actually, but in the years since a heart attack I have come to sound more like a wounded wildebeest.  

    Hopefully today I'll have a chance to mess around some more with MIR Pro and try to clarify what it is that sounded better to me than MIRx. It could be the addition of a secondary microphone, I'm not sure.


    Hobbyist ... Sy Woods, Brass, Perc I, Str Pro, Elite Str, Duality Str & Sordino, Prime ... Sy-ized Woods, Perc, Solo Str, Ch Str, App Str, Harps, Choir, Dim Brass, Dim Strings ... VE Pro, MIR Pro 3D, Vienna Suite Pro ... Cubase 12, Studio One 6, Dorico 5
  • As you will see yourself by using MIRx-Mode in MIR Pro, all MIRx-setups use a Secondary Microphone. There should be no difference between MIRx and MIR Pro, assuming that all settings used are identical.

    Kind regards,


    /Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library
  • Ah, okay. thanks Dietz. Didn't know that. Of course, the secondary mic type and location is baked in, so perhaps it was a particular setting I stumbled that I liked so much.

    At this point it appears to me that it might be best to stick with my original plan and forgo MIR Pro until I can get the full version, contenting myself with MIRx, since I, duh, already have it :). I'd rather not be "half pregnant" with MIR 24. At least I know what I have to look forward to should the day come when I can graduate to MIR Pro.


    Hobbyist ... Sy Woods, Brass, Perc I, Str Pro, Elite Str, Duality Str & Sordino, Prime ... Sy-ized Woods, Perc, Solo Str, Ch Str, App Str, Harps, Choir, Dim Brass, Dim Strings ... VE Pro, MIR Pro 3D, Vienna Suite Pro ... Cubase 12, Studio One 6, Dorico 5
  • I would also be inclined to suggest going with more sounds.  While MIR 24 probably would be enough when paired with SE 1, adding SE 2 instruments into your compositions within MIR 24 could prove problematic.

    Adding SE 2 would provide considerable additional options with your composing.  For example, you could more easily do divided string parts, layering orchestra and chamber string sections, and splitting them out as needed.  The additional woodwind and brass instruments would also be useful.  However nice the software tools are, if you don't have the actual instrument samples, the net benefit of the software drops.

    Remember too, if you purchase a version of MIR, you also need to buy at least one hall, since the halls are no longer included within MIR, but are now separate.


  • Yeah, I get that argument. Especially because Volume 2 really does round out the basic instrument repertoire, to where you get woodwinds in a3, muted horns, and as you indicated, the chamber strings.

    I took advantage of the Voucher promotion today to get one free. I'll wait and see what transpires in the next few months and hope something comes along that might allow me to get the Vol 2 bundle.

    Thanks for all the input, guys.


    Hobbyist ... Sy Woods, Brass, Perc I, Str Pro, Elite Str, Duality Str & Sordino, Prime ... Sy-ized Woods, Perc, Solo Str, Ch Str, App Str, Harps, Choir, Dim Brass, Dim Strings ... VE Pro, MIR Pro 3D, Vienna Suite Pro ... Cubase 12, Studio One 6, Dorico 5
  • I thought of one way that might have the potential to allow MIR PRo 24 work for a full orchestra, and I wonder if anyone thinks it is feasible.

    What if I put MIR on 16 busses as follows to create a general spatial framework for each instrument and collect the channels of the various iterations of that instrument. Then I would use power pan in each channel to spread the iterations of that instrument within the instrument framework.

    Flutes and Piccolos

    Oboes

    Clarinets

    Bassoons

    Horns

    Trumpets

    Trombones

    Tuba

    Percussion

    Keys

    Violins I

    Violins II

    Violas

    Cellos

    D.Basses

     

    So for example, with the Horns, I would use a Horns bus with MIR Pro 24 to place the entire horn section in a space, then I would put Horns 1, 2, 3 and 4 each on their own channel and use Power Pan on those channels to place them left to righ in the Stereo spectrum that would fill that Horns space.

    Busses with MIR Pro 24 would be a pie, and each Horn in it's channel would be a piece of that pie.

    Does this sound feasible?


    Hobbyist ... Sy Woods, Brass, Perc I, Str Pro, Elite Str, Duality Str & Sordino, Prime ... Sy-ized Woods, Perc, Solo Str, Ch Str, App Str, Harps, Choir, Dim Brass, Dim Strings ... VE Pro, MIR Pro 3D, Vienna Suite Pro ... Cubase 12, Studio One 6, Dorico 5
  • last edited
    last edited

    @DaddyO said:

    So for example, with the Horns, I would use a Horns bus with MIR Pro 24 to place the entire horn section in a space, then I would put Horns 1, 2, 3 and 4 each on their own channel and use Power Pan on those channels to place them left to righ in the Stereo spectrum that would fill that Horns space.

    Busses with MIR Pro 24 would be a pie, and each Horn in it's channel would be a piece of that pie.

    Does this sound feasible?


    That's exactly what I was about to suggest.


  • last edited
    last edited

    @DaddyO said:

    So for example, with the Horns, I would use a Horns bus with MIR Pro 24 to place the entire horn section in a space, then I would put Horns 1, 2, 3 and 4 each on their own channel and use Power Pan on those channels to place them left to righ in the Stereo spectrum that would fill that Horns space.

    Busses with MIR Pro 24 would be a pie, and each Horn in it's channel would be a piece of that pie.

    Does this sound feasible?


    That's exactly what I was about to suggest.

    So you think it might work? If so, I think I still have demo time left, and I'll give it a try next week. Still, I may just opt to go for the SE Vol 2 Bundle for now.


    Hobbyist ... Sy Woods, Brass, Perc I, Str Pro, Elite Str, Duality Str & Sordino, Prime ... Sy-ized Woods, Perc, Solo Str, Ch Str, App Str, Harps, Choir, Dim Brass, Dim Strings ... VE Pro, MIR Pro 3D, Vienna Suite Pro ... Cubase 12, Studio One 6, Dorico 5
  • Well, clearly it isn't going to give the particularity of individual reflections for each horn there but as a way to get more in there, it's a good compromise. It's how I used it demoing it. I don't really have the resources to do more than MIRP 24 and I did decide on other expenditures, but I was enjoying a difference with it vs what I do now with that very approach.
    I was using the Vienna Suite PP, not the one in the mixer of VEP. Which gives a little more owing to the post- and pre- faders.


  • last edited
    last edited

    @civilization 3 said:

    Well, clearly it isn't going to give the particularity of individual reflections for each horn there but as a way to get more in there, it's a good compromise. It's how I used it demoing it. I don't really have the resources to do more than MIRP 24 and I did decide on other expenditures, but I was enjoying a difference with it vs what I do now with that very approach.
    I was using the Vienna Suite PP, not the one in the mixer of VEP. Which gives a little more owing to the post- and pre- faders.

    I conducted an experiment as follows: (1) Disable MIRx on my individual Horn channels, then routed Horns 1 and 2 to a bus Horns A, Horns 3 and 4 to a bus Horns B, then routed Horns A & B to an All Horns bus. I also set up an a4 Horns channel routed to All Horns.

    I panned Horns 1 and 2 where each took just over half the stereo field, one to the left and one to the right. I did the same thing with Horns 3 and 4.  I then panned Horns A and B, one just over half the stereo field to the left, the other to the right. The All Horns bus was set for a full stereo pan.

    Finally, I inserted a Grosser Sall MIR Pro instance on the All Horns bus. It defaulted to a Cardiod mic preset front left, so I set it to the Section Horns preset and moved it to the appropriate stage placement.

    I then experimented with with the channels individually and in combination. The results were less than satisfying. What sounded good in concept did not seem to go so well sonically. Individual instances of MIR Pro for each Horn channel did sound much better than a single instance on a Horns bus, where things just sounded muddier. I suppose that's to be expected, or maybe it's just my lack of skill with the tools.

    Conclusion? I think I'll wait on MIR Pro until I can get the unlimited version.


    Hobbyist ... Sy Woods, Brass, Perc I, Str Pro, Elite Str, Duality Str & Sordino, Prime ... Sy-ized Woods, Perc, Solo Str, Ch Str, App Str, Harps, Choir, Dim Brass, Dim Strings ... VE Pro, MIR Pro 3D, Vienna Suite Pro ... Cubase 12, Studio One 6, Dorico 5
  • Well, choosing horns for the exercise is one of the best ways to come away with a negative if you're trying to not buy it. Horns would tend to get muddy.

    I don't blame you, I would need a whole 'nother computer to really make MIRP a smart buy versus extended libs for me.

    But I would EQ french horns quite a bit and give them each a really narrow field in their own channels.
    And choose the tailored mic for them and see if that wasn't better than generic cardioid.


  • Civilization3,

    I'll try again, thanks for the encouragement and help. I think my computer will handle more than 24 instances of MIR Pro (see specs below). But if I can just demonstrate to myself that MIR 24 will be satisfactory enough for now until I can upgrade to full (perhaps next year?), then I will seriously consider prioritizing it over SE Vol 2. It will be a close decision, those.


    Hobbyist ... Sy Woods, Brass, Perc I, Str Pro, Elite Str, Duality Str & Sordino, Prime ... Sy-ized Woods, Perc, Solo Str, Ch Str, App Str, Harps, Choir, Dim Brass, Dim Strings ... VE Pro, MIR Pro 3D, Vienna Suite Pro ... Cubase 12, Studio One 6, Dorico 5
  • I've figured out that, if I stick with SE Vol 1 for now, all my Woodwind and Brass individual instruments combined total 24. If I put my Brass Ensemble instruments, all my Percussion, Keys, and Mallets, and Strings on MIRx, I can make MIR Pro 24 work. This seems a better alternative than using MIR Pro 24 stricly on busses. This way I can perhaps upgrade to the Full version of MIR Pro next year. Still debating whether or not to do this, but it seems doable.


    Hobbyist ... Sy Woods, Brass, Perc I, Str Pro, Elite Str, Duality Str & Sordino, Prime ... Sy-ized Woods, Perc, Solo Str, Ch Str, App Str, Harps, Choir, Dim Brass, Dim Strings ... VE Pro, MIR Pro 3D, Vienna Suite Pro ... Cubase 12, Studio One 6, Dorico 5
  • This is basically how I use it too.  That is I try to give individual channels a MIR24 channel and when I run into limits I make a decision on what to bus.  Typically it's trumpets and Trombones depending on how many channels I need to free up and the function those instruments play in the piece. 

     

    And you do all this in Notion correct?  Not to hijack the thread but I'm considering Notion for the simple reason I have so many playback problems with Finale.  On my computer the combination of Finale and VSL cause Finale to crash without fail.  With XML I can toggle between the two for composing and playback and still work in a notation environment.....at least in theory. 


  • last edited
    last edited

    @winknotes_282 said:

    This is basically how I use it too.  That is I try to give individual channels a MIR24 channel and when I run into limits I make a decision on what to bus.  Typically it's trumpets and Trombones depending on how many channels I need to free up and the function those instruments play in the piece. 

     

    And you do all this in Notion correct?  Not to hijack the thread but I'm considering Notion for the simple reason I have so many playback problems with Finale.  On my computer the combination of Finale and VSL cause Finale to crash without fail.  With XML I can toggle between the two for composing and playback and still work in a notation environment.....at least in theory. 

     

    Re: hijacking, don't worry. I started the thread, and I don't mind.

    I have owned Notion for several years but never successfully integrated VSL until recently, so I'm just getting started with it. But there's no reason you can't integrate MIR with a Notion / VSL setup. Check out the Presonus Notion forum, you'll see some threads there. Also, there's a Notation section to this forum.


    Hobbyist ... Sy Woods, Brass, Perc I, Str Pro, Elite Str, Duality Str & Sordino, Prime ... Sy-ized Woods, Perc, Solo Str, Ch Str, App Str, Harps, Choir, Dim Brass, Dim Strings ... VE Pro, MIR Pro 3D, Vienna Suite Pro ... Cubase 12, Studio One 6, Dorico 5