Hi,

I programmed Nimrod by Elgar. I only used the VI Series (mainly SE1+2 and Apa-Strings).

For Mixing I used the TeldexMirx, some EQs, Parallel Compression and Saturation.

I think, the programming itself is quite good, but I am not a Mixing Engeneer. I feel like, it sounds a bit flat (and not only because of the Parallel Compression, but because of the Saturation).

What are your opinions on this? Honest feedback would be really appreciated.

Greetings, Jan

Thank you, it was indeed, that I had not installed all the content there.

Problem solved ;-)

Originally Posted by: Bill

Make sure it's activated in the iLok Manager

The License Status is Active. Does this mean, it is activated?

I just bought the full C-Trumpet VI-library. I created an i-lok account some days ago and everything worked fine first. On i-lok it shines green and I could download and install the new library in the Vienna Assistent. However after downloading and installing, it is not shown as installed in the installed tab. I can only find it under Brass I in the NEW-tab and there it shows as installed with a green light. The main problem, of course, is, that it is not shown in the VI-player either.

Does anyone know a solution to this?

Thanks in advance, Jan

PS: Could it be, that this counts as an upgrade since I own the SE Vol I? I have read, that there can be problems with upgrades.

Hey,

I have some questions on how the micropones in MIR work.

1) As far as I read it, the Sec-Mic does not contain any spatial information. But what does it contain? does it have a distant depending delay?

2) Can there be phasing issues, when the signals from the Main-Mic and Sec-Mic are merged in MIR?

3) At which virtual hights are the main and sec mics situated (e.g. in Grosser Saal).

4) Does it make sense, to put the Sec-Mic ABOVE an Orchestra and the Main-Mic infront of it? I tried that and I found, that it had a full, dense sound, but at the same time, it sounded a bit strange (I cannot clearly say, what it is; maybe a time-synchronisation problem, when putting the Sec-Mic before the other?)

Thanks, Jan

Hi,

I am just building a new template and one thing, I wanted to integrate there, was the possibility to use the combination of "Disable Samples (all instances)" with "Activate on MIDI-Activity". This way I would save some resources, I suppose. The problem now is, that I am using Interval-Mapping in some matrices. And this does not work properly. Some slots are activated and some are not, when I start playback in Cubase. When I play in stuff via my MIDI-Keyboard (M-Audio-Oxygen) directly it works without problems.

Do you have any hint, what I could be missing?

Edit: I just realized, that it does not work properly with Keyboard, too.

I absolutly adore these MIRx-Character-Presets. You have done a great job there. I could never do it. The instruments in a venue blend together so well without loosing the touch to the others. And my question was indeed very specific. I would really like to have a look at the EQ-settings of the MIRx-Presets for "Großer Konzertsaal". Is there any way to find this data? I would really appreciate it.

And I have one additional question regarding EQs. Besides the character-presets there are room-EQs for many instruments in MIRPro. What purpose do they serve?

btw.: I have time. You can write texts as long as you wish. I will read them ;-)

Originally Posted by: Paul

Those are already resampled / pitched variations of the most important existing samples. 

One more thing on this question: Do you know, if they were pitched up or down and by how much? I like to layer 2 chamber-string-instances on top of the orchestral strings.

Hi,

I have a question regarding the MIR PRO character presets especially the MIRx-Presets. What kind of processing are you using there and is there any documentation on this subject (e.g. EQ settings etc.)?

Greetings, Jan

Ok, thanks

Hello,

I have a short question regarding the Standard-Edition of the Chamber Strings I.

In the Patch-Folder I found a Subfolder, that says: Violins 2. There are some articulations listed there, that you can find in other folders, too. I was wondering now, if those were different recordings, so that you do not have to transpose-pitch the second violins to avoid phasing, when playing unisono with the first violins. I feel, that those samples sound a bit darker, but I wonder, if they are just differently processed (EQ etc) or really different recordings.

Greetings and thanks in advance, Jan

I think, that James Horner was just quite pragmatic. Producers needed big amounts of music fast and he did offer them that. There are so many examples of him taking complete passages from classical works. The 3rd of Schumann in the Willow-Theme is certainly one of the most obvious.

And I think, it is all about expectations here. If you want a filmscore to be absolutly innovative, then Horner could cause headaches. Personally, I liked some of his melodies so much, that I was just happy to hear them in other soundtracks, too. Although always slightly changed (e.g. Star Trek II and Aliens). Over the decades, he invented some own themes and repeated those, too. And I did not mind, as long as there was something new to each soundtrack. Especially in the 90's there were some of those (e.g. The perfect storm, Deep Impact), where there was not much innovation. They were mostly boring. But I can absolutly forgive the parallels between Titanic, Braveheart, The devils own, Legends of the fall, Avatar etc. Especially the Titanic-Suite has some awesome moments, that sound like absolute classic Hollywood.

Concerning the comparisons between mainly orchestral composers (like Shore, Horner, Williams or Elfman) and the Remote-Control-Group around Hans Zimmer, I would say, that this is somehow like apples and oranges. The reason for me is the following: The orchestra has developed over hundreds of years now, so the fundamentals for the "orchestral composers", if you want to call them this, are set in terms of instrumentation. You can read about how to balance an orchestra in very old literature already. So the main point for those composers has to be melodies and rhythms and orchestral craftship. The HZ-Guys are more like trying to invent the wheel again. Not completely, but in certain aspects. If you take the Amazing-Spiderman2-Soundtrack for example, you hear so many different sounds involved. And they all have to be balanced well. The orchestra has 2 main settings: european or american (2nd vlns next to first vlns or next to DB). But when you mix synthesizers and orchestra, you always have to think about a new concept. Where do I put which instrument inside the room? And then all those sounds, they create there. This is not easy at all. The classical instruments were developed over such a long time. And the HZ-Guys invent new instruments the whole time. When you hear Horner or Williams scores with synth in them (Amazing Spiderman1, Star Wars), you realize, that they do not feel that comfortable with that. They know, how to balance an orchestra, but I am pretty sure, they don't know so much about Mixing as Zimmer and friends do.

Finally a video of The dark Zebra-Soundset here. I don't own Zebra2, but HIVE from U-He. And I know, there is still a long way to go, until I will be able to craft own usable instruments there, so I just take presets. I find this video so impressive, because here you can see, how much work there has been to do the DK-Soundtracks.

Hi,

I have two different questions, so the subject of this thread might be a bit misleading. Sorry for that. ;-)

First I wanted to ask something about the problem, that when I use a sustain-pedal and I play a VSL-Patch and I retrigger a note, while holding the pedal, the first note seems to stay on and it increases in Volume every time, I keep holding down the pedal and playing the same note. You might ask, why someone would do that? The thing is, that when I play, for example, a sustain-string patch and I want to play chords and those chords are not possible to be played bound to each other without the use of a pedal, this happens very frequently. E.g. I play 2 chords in a row, that have one identical note. This note gets so prominent then, that it is not useful. I do not know how to solve this problem. Does anyone have an idea what to do here?

And second a totally different question: When I have different instances of VIPro within one VE-Instance and I want to disable, for example, MIRx in every instance, is there a way to do that? Note, that I do not have VEPro.

Thanks for every thought on that.

Jan

Thank you very much, I will keep that in mind. I just wasn't sure, if I had overlooked some button to be able to see other library manuals.

Greetings, Jan

Hey,

I have two questions regarding the Solo Cello 2.

First, I wanted to ask, how many velocity layers the legato and portamento-patches have.

And second: Is it possible to download manuals for products, I did not purchase? Because maybe it is all standing there, but I can't read it.

Thanks, Jan

Ah, now I get it.

Thank you very much, Paul!

Hi,

I do not completly understand this feature in the APPS of VI Pro 2. E.g. I choose to switch between Maj and Min chords and set the vel-switch to change at velocity 100; does this mean, that I can only play Minor-Chords in high velocities and Major ones in low velocities when vel-x-fade is disabled? Can I only do the dynamics then via Modwheel or other controllers?

Thanks in advance,

Jan

Thanks, Paul!

Sorry, I just realized, that I cannot upload VIPro-files here. To the admins: Is this forbidden or is it just not possible? May I offer a download link on this forum?

Jan

Hey,

I think, it would be really great, to see how other persons use the VIPro (or standard VI). So I decided to post my Solo-Horn preset here. The text below gives some instructions on it. I hope it can inspirate someone.

Triple Horn (legato)- User Preset

This is a preset for playing Legato-Horn-passages with the VIPro2-Player, assuming you own all the SE Vol1- and Vol1+-Articulations for the Triple Horn (and the MIRx for Teldex maybe). I designed it for me to accompany scores of other composers for fun. For this purpose, I added an EQ with a major cut around 4100Hz and the Miracle-Teldex-Hybrid to avoid conflicts with the original score and to make it fit better into already mixed and mastered music (The EQ-cut is also good, when watching a soccer game and wanting to be able to hear the commentators and playing for fun at the same time, without having the feeling, that horn and TV-sound fight against each other the whole time ;-) ). You won't find this in my preset, so it is to be applied by yourself if you like.
I will now list some things, you have to know, when wanting to use this preset properly.

1) There are 5 Matrices in this Preset, which you should be able to have access to. Personally I use the Pitch-Wheel for that. I lowered the Data3 of it in my MIDI-Keyboard to 04, so that in the middle position I can play the normal legato. The other articulations I chose are from top to bottom: Perf-Leg-Sus, Rep-Leg, Portato, Sustain. You will find, that I use CC5 for changing matrices, so you would have to change the controller of your Pitch-wheel as well, but of course, you can choose personal preferences here, too.

2) I only assigned CCs to parameters, I really need for my purpose. And I automated as much as possible, so that, a do not have to use too many faders. In the end, I came up to only use CC7 (Volume), CC2 (Expression, Vel-X, Filter, Dyn-Range, Y-Axis-change), Speed (x-Axis change, humanization) and CC74 (MIRx dry/wet). You will notice, that especially the legato-matrix is quite huge. I played around with some parameters there like Streching, Start-Offset, Attack and Release. This makes it possible to play slowlier and faster stuff, without changing anything manually, because attack times etc are adjusted to need. Most things, I did in this matrix, are done for reasons of humanisation and automation. Feel free to play around there. It might be confusing for You, that the other articulations contain 2 slots, although they are identical. I chose to do this, because I felt the need to mark a certain point, where, for my ears, all articulations sound similar in their timbre and to have a visualisation for that. This way, it is easier for me to see this point in the Basic view of VIPro2 when playing.

3) I use the Modwheel to control CC2. Be sure to set Data 3 there to 88 so that it does not cover all velocities. The preset is adjusted to that.

Thanks a lot, Dietz! Your ThinkMIR looks great. I will read it in the next days. :-)

Thanks for the fast reply, Dietz.

In fact, I have read this already. The thing is just, that I really think, that I do not understand, what might be everyday-stuff for you. Maybe it has to do with my false understanding of how MIR(x) works, so I try to explain, how I think about it and you can correct me.

I imagine a certain space (maybe a church or something) and there, at a certain spot, I let a sound play. When I now increase the volume of this certain sound inside the church, it sounds different, than normalizing the mixed dry/wet signal afterwards. And somehow I believe, that MIR(x) works similar, but I am not sure, if it really does. So in my understanding, it would make a difference, where the Volume-Fader is set inside the chain. If it is applied before the Reverb it would have a different Outcome, than when applied afterwards. Or to take another example: If I put a speaker inside a church with a recorded cello and I let this play much louder than a normal cello would be, it would sound unnatural. The more I think about it, the more I have the feeling, that I have a wrong understanding of what IRs are. For example in my head, the Expression is set before the reverb and the Volume afterwards. But I do not really know, where I got this from. If this topic is too big, could you maybe give me a hint, where I could read more about IR and convolution. I have read some stuff from Beat Kaufmann already (which was really helpful) and all around the Internet. But maybe, you know something more (I will reread it in the manuals anyway). Thanks a lot in advance.

Jan

PS: Concerning the filter, I know what it does technically, I was just interested, how people use it. For example, when playing live, I have it on the same CC as V-Xfade and Expression, because it makes the getting quieter of an instrument more "round" (I dont know, how to explain this in english).

Hello,

I have 2 different questions concerning the VIPro.

First, I would like to know, how you guys use the filter-feature - or maybe someone of the developers could tell me, what it was designed for; what you had in mind. At the moment, I am using it in Mixing automation - combined with slight MIRx-dry/wet changes to achieve diversity and make space for other instruments at certain points.

This brings me to my second question. I do not completly understand the concept of MIR(x) or of IR/Convolution-stuff in General. And maybe it is not necessary, but some practical things confuses me a bit. For example the routing inside VIPro. When I apply MIRx and then I change the Overall-Volume-fader, what is the effect? I mean, is the volume increased before MIRx in the chain? Does the chain even have an effect on this matter? The thing is, I have the feeling, that when lowering the Overall-Volume, the instrument sounds not only quieter but also more lost inside the room. And what does "natural volume" do? Where does it interveine?

Thanks a lot!

Jan

I just tried out the new cello and violin on audition. Am I getting that right, that the legato-patches are all looped?

Hey,

I own the Strings and Strings+ Special Edition Vol 1 and I use VI Pro.

I have some questions regarding the legato performances.

I have read, that there are two types of legato files: Solo notes (for the first note) and transition notes for the performance. My question now is, if it is just a problem with my computer or did I get something wrong about the legato-first-note, because I have the feeling, that this first note is just a normal sustain note? Am I wrong in my hearing here?

Second question: If this is indeed just a Sustain patch, how do you solve the problem of the different timbres in these articulations? I tend to first play a silent note and then use the following one as the first hearable. Then it sounds coherent.

And a third question: Am I hearing right, that Woodwinds and Brass have first notes, different from the sustain patches?

Greetings, Jan