Hello, I can’t help you with your problem, I’m starting with Mir3D pro. I would like to know how your computer performance is with Nuendo and Mir 3D Pro. I have a Mac Pro 5.1 (12 cores, 64Gb ram, ssd, etc) but I can’t use the demo project of Mir 3D pro (without dear VR Monitor), even raising the buffer of the audio interface (Rme UFX) to the maximum the sound stutters and breaks. Thank you
To @VV1 and everyone who intends to use Vienna MIR Pro 3D as a panning device for mono- or stereo-to-multichannel tracks: Cubase and Nuendo seem to need a dirty workaround that makes sure this very peculiar implementation works reliably:
Please create a plain audio-track with the intended channel count / intended fomat (e.g. 3rd Order Ambisonics) as a dummy and move it to the top of the project (i.e. “Track 1”). Now instantiate MIR 3D as a conventional insert effect in this channel before (!) starting to add other instances as panning devices in the following tracks. You can hide this dummy instance in Nuendo as well as in MIR 3D itself, but it must not be deactivated, bypassed, deleted or moved from the top position of the track list. - When re-loading a project Nuendo will now “tell” MIR 3D about its intended format right from the beginning, before the mono- or stereo-tracks’ panners interfere with the actual format settings.
Hi @salfuman , what OS are you using? What are MIR’s own buffers set to? Does this also happen whit another audio interface (… USB audio devices are known to be the source for all kinds of problems when high data throughput is mandatory)?
Hi @Dietz your workaround brings a couple of questions:
I have done similar but used a group track instead of audio track. Does this matter, will I get better performance if I use an audio track?
The dummy group-track instance I have setup with MIR3d instanciated is in the top “split off” section of tracks (you know how we can have a top and bottom “window” of tracks). It is amoungst the video, tempo and marker tracks, but not currently at the top.
Are you saying it should be at the very top of this top section (if there is one) or can it be at the top of the bottom (main) list as well?
On vi-control forum there are composers whose are using Mir3d during the writing stage, when they are playing parts in. But a buffer of 2048 seems an unworkable latency for that. Is there another setting to give good latency for live playing in of parts or should it never deviate from 2048? Does this internal buffer in Mir3d need to be matched by the sound device ASIO latency, so it is also at 2048?
Due to the fact that this instance won’t do anything at all it shouldn’t matter. Just make sure that you have “Dynamic Processing” activated in MIR 3D’s Prefs. - You can even move the MIR Icon away from the “valid” HotSpot-areas to avoid that it triggers the creation of positional IRs. That way you won’t even “waste” RAM.
The dummy group-track instance I have setup with MIR3d instanciated is in the top “split off” section of tracks (you know how we can have a top and bottom “window” of tracks). It is amoungst the video, tempo and marker tracks, but not currently at the top.
Are you saying it should be at the very top of this top section (if there is one) or can it be at the top of the bottom (main) list as well?
That’s a question that has to be addressed at the knowledgeable people @Steinberg. The important part is that it should be loaded first. Might very well be the the top area of a “split” project will be loaded first. Personally I mainly use the top area for markers, rulers, mix busses, reference tracks and similar stuff that I always want to keep in sight, so I never tried.
No, these values aren’t tied to each other. 2048 is just a value we often use for mixing, as it offers a healthy balance between “real-time feel” and “CPU load”. For recording MIDI on a track that has MIR 3D in an insert I strongly suggest to switch it off for this task anyway.
