1. Didja accidentally blow through the whole, "We're using our real names" thing on registration? No problem, just send me (Mike) a Conversation message and I'll get you sorted, by which I mean hammered-into-obedient-line because I'm SO about having a lot of individuality-destroying, oppressive shit all over my forum.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Discussion areas for the individual classes are unlocked for all users. Let's see if this makes it any more useful. If not, we'll drop this or organize under a single banner to save space and lean things out.
    Dismiss Notice

Compared to MIRPro

Discussion in 'Template Balancing' started by Steve Schow, Mar 4, 2019.

  1. I just watched this video, my first Verta class. Very very interesting and valuable discussion. I am wondering how people feel about this Z plane approach compared to say, MirPro? I have purchased MirPro and still learning it and I guess its attempting to automatically do a lot of the stuff that Mike was advocating in this video, just automatically using the ambisonic information captured in the spaces...but I am wondering. Mike's discussion about using EQ both pre and post Reverb to get a "no bullshit" representation of the Z plane was very useful, but I can also see that a lot of work can go into developing this aspect of a template. It started getting considerably more complex when he started throwing in some pre-delay manipulation in some cases...stereo widening of the tail, and things like that. I did really like the sound he was getting in this video...in terms of all the balancing he did..and also including the Z plane aspect. It has very open sound. I think his ability to manipulate the low and hi shelving to taste, among other things, for each instrument..is part of how he is getting a very open sound...where MirPro is a bit more of a black magic box.. But then on the other hand, there is not much effort involved in dialing in MirPro, as opposed to "hours and hours" of tweaking that mike described in this video.

    What are ya'll's thoughts about MirPro compared to the manual approach explain so well by Mike?
     
  2. As a secondary question, wondering if anyone had used panagement or virtual sound stage software to pursue these approaches. Seems like panagement does exactly what Mike is endorsing in terms or rolling off highs and lows for distance. Just in an easy interface with a distance fader.

    Virtual sound stage seems interesting also, but I guess I am impressed with mike’s approach, which doesn’t really capture a real actual acoustic space per say but does result in a pleasing mix of orchestra while essentially immitating the primary elements that make a recorded orchestra sound real. You dial it in until it sounds great, rather then immitating any particular actual acoustic space. I intend to play around more with this, but just wondering about software that may make this process a little easier
     
  3. I'm using panagement quite frequently, but only for stereo width tweaking and sometimes distance, but I try to avoid panning left/right. I've read binaural panning and haas effect panning can cause phasing issues, and since I don't have super advanced mixing and mastering knowledge, I try to stay away from stuff that looks like it might backfire in the wrong hands.

    I also haven't watched the template balancing class, so I can't comment on that part of your question, and I don't have any of the other software that you mentioned.
     
  4. #4 Steve Schow, Mar 7, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2019
    In case anyone is interested I have been digging into this a little bit. What I can say about MIRPro is that it does a lot of automatic stuff by moving an icon around on a stage. However, its a bit of a closed box, so you have less flexibility then if you setup your spatialization manually using the tricks laid out by Mike (and others). Quite a bit easier though for some of us. One area that MirPro is specifically deficient is related to the proximity effect LF rolloff that Mike talks about a lot in this video, in order to make close mic'd samples sound authentic at the back of the stage in a room with a lot of reflections. MirPro doesn't do anything. It has one setting you can choose to turn on called distance, which will apply a generic Low shelf, but that's it. I would presume that most VSL instruments already have a lot of proximity warmth already removed from the samples in the instruments, so perhaps this LF rolloff is not needed with VSL instruments on typical stage arrangements. Just guessing. Using other close mic'd sample libraries with MirPro would probably be more problematic, per Mike's explanation of the "PA" effect.

    MirPro does handle some HF rolloff called air absorption, and it does a lot of other really cool things in terms of moving stuff around the room and having the reflections all happen as you would expect, panning and all the rest...but the Z-Plane Low Shelf..not there. It can be added in a pre and/or post eq though..not to worry.

    At some point I will look more into VSS, that looks to give more control then MirPro, but I hear the Room IR's are not that great and clearly the engineering that went into MirPro is way way beyond VSS, both in terms of the ambisonics technology and all of the various encoded files and IR's they created to support it. The MirPro rooms are excellent.

    I also have to say that another advantage of the manual approach to spatialization is that you can create any kind of virtual room you want. You just widen things, spread things, make some room in the middle, use mid-side processing, EQ, haas panning or whatever...and create a virtual space that sounds the way you want it to sound...convincing like an orchestra..but not necessarily based on a particular room other then the reflections to a certain extent. What I don't like about the manual approach is all the fiddling and until I spend more time with an actual orchestra, I don't trust myself to set it up properly either. Also, many of the manual tricks can lead to all manner of interesting unintended consequences in the mix.
     
    Martin Hoffmann likes this.
  5. #5 Tim van de Laar, Nov 7, 2019
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2019
    I`m wondering about quite the same thing with Altiverb. Does the Stage Positioning tool inside Altiverb do the same trick Mike is after in his Balancing masterclass?
    I`m not afraid of putting in this amount of effort doing it manually but this could potentially save me tons of time and give me another reason to buy Altiverb. I probably go nuts A > B-ing
    endless amounts of tracks to hear if the Z-depth is correct for each library. I`m grateful for this wonderful masterclass though, i bought it at the right time.. I probably would have made a mess.

    I would have used early reflection altiverb instances on each instrument group and have a send to a tail instance. At least this was my initial idea before i watched the masterclass.
     
    Matthias Calis likes this.

Share This Page