Mellotronists

>      There has been a touch of confusion as to my
>response to a link of my EMI's previous exploits.  I
>would like to make it very clear that the recent work
>done on my machine was my own hard sweat and toil,

Absolutely.  Jack has taken #103S from the previous owner and is bringing 
it back with his own skills.  Jack is into the vintage scene and is 
interested in preserving it.  We're lucky that a machine like #103S wound 
up with someone who has carpentry and electronics skills and loves to do 
this kind of work.

The EMI's history since 2003, in short:

- The former owner of EMI #103S contacted me via Jerry Korb to see if I'd 
have a look at the machine.  Jerry sent him to me because I happen to live 
pretty close to where the machine was.  The machine had a re-capped power 
supply and an SMS-5, but it had been handled by people who didn't know too 
much about 'trons.  Aside from wonky adjustment and buried adjustment 
screws, the biggest problems were unstable pitch, knackered rollers due to 
misadjustment (and age), an out-of-square frame, some cabinet issues, etc.

Even after I did some basic work on it, it was playable but still showing 
signs of promiscuity:

http://www.kleonard.com/emi/EMITest.mp3 (w/ its original DK tape set...some 
improvement was noted w/ a brick red set, but you still got the chugging in 
the pitch and pitch sags especially on anything more than a close triad)

Bleccchhhh!!!

- I did what I could with the machine and improved it to be fully playable, 
but it was not enough to get the pitch entirely stable, even w/ an SMS-5.

http://www.kleonard.com/emi/EMITest.mp3 (3:43-end is the best I could get 
it w/ the original machine (including original pinch rollers) w/o tweaking 
the SMS-5...note the pitch sag when chords were played)

It turns out that the remaining work was indeed the SMS-5, which I was 
advised not to tamper with as the SMS controllers are generally set right 
from the factory.  The thing I should have realized was the person who put 
in the SMS-5 could have diddled with it, so it should have been 
checked.  (Jerry Korb and I had a look at the controller later on in the 
M400 to which it was transferred anyway and sure enough it needed to be 
tweaked.  There's a test point on the controller where you look for a 
particular voltage, and it was way off.  Eventually Jerry and I got the 
voltage right, and the machine sounded much more stable.)

- The EMI's former owner purchased a nice M400 to replace the EMI.  Per the 
former owner, I moved the motor controller and power supply over to the 
M400 to replace the CMC-10 that was in the M400.  The EMI was left in a 
disassembled state at that time.

- The owner asked that the EMI and the M400 be taken to Vermont where Jerry 
and I worked on the machines.  We got the M400 working nicely, and I got 
the EMI into running condition with the M400's power supply and CMC-10 
motor controller.

- The EMI was sold, and Jack is now the new owner.

- Current work on the EMI is all Jack.  He's getting the parts and doing 
the work.  The machine has been brought even more to playable condition and 
is waiting for an SMS and refinishing.  It's great to see the machine 
improved---and it'll get plenty of use.  If you listen to the MP3s from 
when I was diddling with the machine and can ignore the instability, it has 
a very 'tronny tone to it which I like, full but not harsh.  The single 
card preamp, perhaps?

Much of this is documented on my web site, and Jack will have a web site 
going at some point as well to document his work on the machine.

No more confusion.  :-)

...kl...
M400 #805 - got an sms-4 from someone, somewhere, sometime
M400 #1037 - got an sms-2 and new motor from kl