I wrote a few months ago regarding the use of Distance-Dependent Scaling in MIR Pro.
1. This seems to mainly effect the volume of the dry signal as the instrument is moved around in
the room. If this option is off, The actual instrument's position in the room does not really matter
and you would have to use it's dry/wet slider to change the perceived distance.
2. After some additional testing, I noticed that regardless of this setting, placing an instrument
closer or further back in the room also effects the perceived stereo location and width. This makes
sense since the stereo field tends to narrow the further the sound source is. I was trying to determine
the exact setting where the stereo positioning is equal to the original input signal. In the Teldex room,
if I place an instrument at exactly 0-depth with a width of approx. 14 meters (around the width of the
room) the original stereo image of the input signal is exactly the same. As the depth decreases though,
(closer to the mics) the stereo width actually widens beyond the original signal, and the opposite is true
as the depth increases (further from the pics). Unfortunately this 0-setting for depth does not seem to be
the same for other rooms such as Sage Hall. I assume each room is different in this respect. In fact, the
farther you increase an instrument's depth in certain rooms, the instruments width may have to be increased
dramatically (beyond the width of the actual room itself) in order to maintain the full stereo width of the
original input signal.
I'm just trying to figure out at what point the actual original stereo signal is becoming effected by its
placement in certain rooms, and by what amount (increasing or lessening the stereo field). This may
not seem as important when using VSL instruments with MIR Pro, but can be quite important when using
other libraries, especially ones that are recorded "In Situ' and already have some room sound to them.
