Mellotronists

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WU1x_4yFD4

I can't put my finger on it, but something seems to be missing. Soul?

Bernie wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WU1x_4yFD4
>
> I can't put my finger on it, but something seems to be missing. Soul?
>   
Reverb, probably. :-)

-- 

Mike Dickson (tron@...) M400 #996
The Official Cynic of Streetly Electronics
Streetly Sample Library http://www.blackcat.demon.co.uk/tron/

What Is Soul?

  To be fair, If you'd dropped this machine in my lap before I played a real 
Mellotron I'd have kissed you. With tongues.. It's the sounds that matter 
and I can remember getting excited when I played a Vintage Keys module and 
got 3 violins and the 8 choir in my ears in 1996, a year before I finally 
saw and bought a real tron but already worshipping the sounds that I knew 
came from this mythical beast. I recorded the thing at college and managed 
to get 'the tingle' so it can't have been that sterile.

  Mellotrons-the 'host' machines- just happen to be 'special' too, like 
B.S.A. motorcycles or tonewheel Hammonds, and the idea of a dedicated 
machine that feels right to Mellotronists and plays sounds from the 
Mellotron library.. is bloody great, snobbery aside. Isn't that what every 
variation on the original theme has been about since the MkII, especially 
the digital attempts of the 1980s?

Essentially - CONCEPTUALLY-  it IS a Mellotron. And I think I want to try 
one. Even though I own a really nice, restored, reliable, magical, early 
M400. I think these guys should get a big hug, 'cos they're obviously true 
believers.

  The scene has NEVER looked so healthy for the Mellotron 'sonic tradition'. 
Everyone who wants to use the sounds- and it's the sounds that got us all in 
the first place- CAN in some form and the machine itself has a future. I 
don't think the Memotron is any threat to Streetly's or DK/MR because those 
who want new tape-based trons will buy them if and when we can. If Streetly 
had made the Memotron you'd all have bought one. I'm just glad that SOMEBODY 
did it- with respect too, and it looks like a nice job was made. I would 
definitely like a closer look.

I bet it would sound great through a valve Watkins Copicat, with proper use 
of a swell pedal.

Regarding the 'soul' aspect.. surely the sounds come from real live wowing/ 
fluttering tron tapes in the first place- and as far as I'm aware every note 
recorded onto the real live moving tapes in MY M400 has sat inside a 
computer at some point...  so it's down to what you make of it.

   I know for a fact that it's perfectly possible to make a Mellotron sound 
crap. You just have to play and articulate crappily. it's THAT easy!




Love and Scones,

Mark

M400 no151

www.MySpace.com/markstuartwallis


>From: Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@...>
>Reply-To: mike.dickson@...
>To: Bernie <kornowicz@...>
>CC: Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [Mellotronists] Memotron Video Clip
>Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2007 23:05:02 +0100
>
>Bernie wrote:
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WU1x_4yFD4
> >
> > I can't put my finger on it, but something seems to be missing. Soul?
> >
>Reverb, probably. :-)
>
>--
>
>Mike Dickson (tron@...) M400 #996
>The Official Cynic of Streetly Electronics
>Streetly Sample Library http://www.blackcat.demon.co.uk/tron/
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
Could you be the guest MSN Movies presenter? Click Here to Audition 
http://www.lightscameraaudition.co.uk

> From: "Mark Wallis" <markstuartwallis@...>
   > Sender: Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com
   >
   > Essentially - CONCEPTUALLY-  it IS a Mellotron. 

This must be a use of the word "conceptually" that I am unfamiliar
with. 

   > Everyone who wants to use the sounds- and it's the sounds that
   > got us all in the first place- CAN in some form and the machine
   > itself has a future.

Speak for yourself.  No, the sounds didn't get us all here in the
first place; for me, the music got me here.  There's a difference.

   > Regarding the 'soul' aspect.. surely the sounds come from real
   > live wowing/ fluttering tron tapes in the first place- and as far
   > as I'm aware every note recorded onto the real live moving tapes
   > in MY M400 has sat inside a computer at some point...  so it's
   > down to what you make of it.

That's the Casio-is-a-Steinway argument; it's all sound, we copy the
sound, therefore a Casio CONCEPTUALLY IS a Steinway.  Yet remarkably,
a Casio is nothing like a Steinway.

You're abstracting out all the interesting stuff.  The feedback from
the touch of the keyboard, the feel of the tape under the keys, the
ability to use pressure to control the dynamics, separate pressure
control for individual notes ("polyphonic aftertouch"), a direct
connection to the sound-making process as opposed to going through
that ridiculous midi protocol, the delightfully quirky behavior of the
tape handling mechanism, the relationship the musician has with the
instrument's intrinsic workings that inspires the music.

  -- Don

-- 
Don Tillman
Palo Alto, California
don@...
http://www.till.com

** First post warning! **

I'm a Virtual Mellotronist, who currently can't afford / has no room for /
lacks the basic skills to maintain - a real live Tron (M5000 one day when
the kids have grown up, though!), so I have to live with just the sound and
not the feel of a Tron for my own music.

I guess the debate will always come down to whether you enjoy the Mellotron
for the playing experience, or for the resultant sounds, or both.  I can't
comment on the former, but from everything I've read, I get the impression
that the Tron is a remarkably responsive machine.

As a pianist I can appreciate the nuances of playing a real piano live and
solo over even the best quality sampled piano, but down on tape, mixed in
with other instruments, the audio result of using either will be much the
same (if not slightly biased towards the samples, since someone else has got
the mics right for you!).  I guess that playing a real Mellotron versus
samples is a similar experience.

Maybe "soul" comes into it in two different ways - there's soul in the joy
of playing (where a real piano/tron will always feel nicer than the
samples), and there's soul in the result of a recording, where the
presentation of the sound in a finished work is the important thing.

So Memotron - not maybe something you'd sit at home and play for hours,
unlike the real thing, perhaps, but maybe something that would gig more
conveniently than the real thing or a raft of computer equipment.  Although
I was disappointed to read (elsewhere) that the "classic" sound bank has had
noise and pinch-clicks _added_ to the raw sound...

Owen
-- 
Thinking Aloud

http://www.thinking-aloud.co.uk/

On 4/6/07 07:19, "Donald Tillman" <don@...> wrote:

>> From: "Mark Wallis" <markstuartwallis@...>
>> Sender: Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com
>> 
>> Essentially - CONCEPTUALLY-  it IS a Mellotron.
> 
> This must be a use of the word "conceptually" that I am unfamiliar
> with. 
> 
>> Everyone who wants to use the sounds- and it's the sounds that
>> got us all in the first place- CAN in some form and the machine
>> itself has a future.
> 
> Speak for yourself.  No, the sounds didn't get us all here in the
> first place; for me, the music got me here.  There's a difference.
> 
>> Regarding the 'soul' aspect.. surely the sounds come from real
>> live wowing/ fluttering tron tapes in the first place- and as far
>> as I'm aware every note recorded onto the real live moving tapes
>> in MY M400 has sat inside a computer at some point...  so it's
>> down to what you make of it.
> 
> That's the Casio-is-a-Steinway argument; it's all sound, we copy the
> sound, therefore a Casio CONCEPTUALLY IS a Steinway.  Yet remarkably,
> a Casio is nothing like a Steinway.
> 
> You're abstracting out all the interesting stuff.  The feedback from
> the touch of the keyboard, the feel of the tape under the keys, the
> ability to use pressure to control the dynamics, separate pressure
> control for individual notes ("polyphonic aftertouch"), a direct
> connection to the sound-making process as opposed to going through
> that ridiculous midi protocol, the delightfully quirky behavior of the
> tape handling mechanism, the relationship the musician has with the
> instrument's intrinsic workings that inspires the music.
> 
> -- Don

That's ME told, then..

   Press the key, get the sound, big grin. That's all I meant. If I didn't 
appreciate the quirks of the Mellotron I wouldn't have bought one. If I 
didn't REALLY appreciate them I'd have sold the thing by now. There have 
been assorted occasions in the last ten years where such a course would have 
made life easier.

I don't want to start bickering, I'm not the competitive sort.. but I don't 
play a Hammond any differently because of my intimacy with the workings of 
tonewheel generators and vibrato scanners. I just play the thing. Sometimes 
I'm great, sometimes I'm shit.

  'the music got me here- There's a difference'....

I was a prog snob for a while too. ;-)

I play music - 'handmade' and recorded- every day and have done since I was 
a kid. I think I have a fairly balanced relationship with music. I happen to 
particularly love certain Mellotron sounds and I wasn't being remotely 
snotty about them.

  I was just expressing my approval of another limited-market machine -that 
presumably cost somebody quite a lot to realise and might well bankrupt them 
if it doesn't take off- that was designed FOR 'people like us'. Maybe it 
wasn't, then.. whatever.

Ah well. I'll get back to fixing my car. Good honest muck. Jimmy Smith on 
the stereo.

See ya, etc.

MSW xxx







>From: Donald Tillman <don@...>
>To: "Mark Wallis" <markstuartwallis@...>
>CC: mellotronists@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [Mellotronists] Memotron Video Clip
>Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2007 23:19:14 -0700
>
>    > From: "Mark Wallis" <markstuartwallis@...>
>    > Sender: Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com
>    >
>    > Essentially - CONCEPTUALLY-  it IS a Mellotron.
>
>This must be a use of the word "conceptually" that I am unfamiliar
>with.
>
>    > Everyone who wants to use the sounds- and it's the sounds that
>    > got us all in the first place- CAN in some form and the machine
>    > itself has a future.
>
>Speak for yourself.  No, the sounds didn't get us all here in the
>first place; for me, the music got me here.  There's a difference.
>
>    > Regarding the 'soul' aspect.. surely the sounds come from real
>    > live wowing/ fluttering tron tapes in the first place- and as far
>    > as I'm aware every note recorded onto the real live moving tapes
>    > in MY M400 has sat inside a computer at some point...  so it's
>    > down to what you make of it.
>
>That's the Casio-is-a-Steinway argument; it's all sound, we copy the
>sound, therefore a Casio CONCEPTUALLY IS a Steinway.  Yet remarkably,
>a Casio is nothing like a Steinway.
>
>You're abstracting out all the interesting stuff.  The feedback from
>the touch of the keyboard, the feel of the tape under the keys, the
>ability to use pressure to control the dynamics, separate pressure
>control for individual notes ("polyphonic aftertouch"), a direct
>connection to the sound-making process as opposed to going through
>that ridiculous midi protocol, the delightfully quirky behavior of the
>tape handling mechanism, the relationship the musician has with the
>instrument's intrinsic workings that inspires the music.
>
>   -- Don
>
>--
>Don Tillman
>Palo Alto, California
>don@...
>http://www.till.com

_________________________________________________________________
The next generation of Hotmail is here! http://www.newhotmail.co.uk/

Before I found out that I was still co-owner of an M400S that had 
been in storage for almost 20 years, I had a similar experience. My 
first keyboard was an Alesis QS6.1 that had Tron strings and flute. 
Adding the Classic Keyboards Q-Card gave me some other Tron samples. 
This is what got me interested n Trons again. Next was the M-Tron. 
In comparison, the Alesis samples sounded terrible. I guess it's all 
relative. When I had nothing to compare to, the Alesis samples 
sounded great.

Then came the M400, followed by more samples to make up for the 
sounds the M400 didn't have: Crime Sounds, the Pinder CD and several 
others. While the Pinder CD was the best, it still couldn't match 
the sound quality of my M400. Some of the sounds pop or click at the 
beginning, as do some of the Memotron sounds, leading me to believe 
that the start positions of those tapes were not optimum.

For someone who is Tronless, sure, the other options are fine. If I 
didn't have the real thing, I would settle for a Memotron and I'm 
sure I wouldn't notice the sterility of the sound. I also agree that 
it's possible to get a better recorded sound with samples than with 
the real thing. We've all heard horribly-recorded Trons.

Bernie (still a "Prog" snob)


--- In Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Wallis" 
<markstuartwallis@...> wrote:
>
> What Is Soul?
> 
>   To be fair, If you'd dropped this machine in my lap before I 
played a real 
> Mellotron I'd have kissed you. With tongues.. It's the sounds that 
matter 
> and I can remember getting excited when I played a Vintage Keys 
module and 
> got 3 violins and the 8 choir in my ears in 1996, a year before I 
finally 
> saw and bought a real tron but already worshipping the sounds that 
I knew 
> came from this mythical beast. I recorded the thing at college and 
managed 
> to get 'the tingle' so it can't have been that sterile.
> 
>   Mellotrons-the 'host' machines- just happen to be 'special' too, 
like 
> B.S.A. motorcycles or tonewheel Hammonds, and the idea of a 
dedicated 
> machine that feels right to Mellotronists and plays sounds from 
the 
> Mellotron library.. is bloody great, snobbery aside. Isn't that 
what every 
> variation on the original theme has been about since the MkII, 
especially 
> the digital attempts of the 1980s?
> 
> Essentially - CONCEPTUALLY-  it IS a Mellotron. And I think I want 
to try 
> one. Even though I own a really nice, restored, reliable, magical, 
early 
> M400. I think these guys should get a big hug, 'cos they're 
obviously true 
> believers.
> 
>   The scene has NEVER looked so healthy for the Mellotron 'sonic 
tradition'. 
> Everyone who wants to use the sounds- and it's the sounds that got 
us all in 
> the first place- CAN in some form and the machine itself has a 
future. I 
> don't think the Memotron is any threat to Streetly's or DK/MR 
because those 
> who want new tape-based trons will buy them if and when we can. If 
Streetly 
> had made the Memotron you'd all have bought one. I'm just glad 
that SOMEBODY 
> did it- with respect too, and it looks like a nice job was made. I 
would 
> definitely like a closer look.
> 
> I bet it would sound great through a valve Watkins Copicat, with 
proper use 
> of a swell pedal.
> 
> Regarding the 'soul' aspect.. surely the sounds come from real 
live wowing/ 
> fluttering tron tapes in the first place- and as far as I'm aware 
every note 
> recorded onto the real live moving tapes in MY M400 has sat inside 
a 
> computer at some point...  so it's down to what you make of it.
> 
>    I know for a fact that it's perfectly possible to make a 
Mellotron sound 
> crap. You just have to play and articulate crappily. it's THAT 
easy!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love and Scones,
> 
> Mark
> 
> M400 no151
> 
> www.MySpace.com/markstuartwallis
> 
> 
> >From: Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@...>
> >Reply-To: mike.dickson@...
> >To: Bernie <kornowicz@...>
> >CC: Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: Re: [Mellotronists] Memotron Video Clip
> >Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2007 23:05:02 +0100
> >
> >Bernie wrote:
> > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WU1x_4yFD4
> > >
> > > I can't put my finger on it, but something seems to be 
missing. Soul?
> > >
> >Reverb, probably. :-)
> >
> >--
> >
> >Mike Dickson (tron@...) M400 #996
> >The Official Cynic of Streetly Electronics
> >Streetly Sample Library http://www.blackcat.demon.co.uk/tron/
> >
> >
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Could you be the guest MSN Movies presenter? Click Here to 
Audition 
> http://www.lightscameraaudition.co.uk
>

--- In Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com, Donald Tillman <don@...> wrote:

> You're abstracting out all the interesting stuff.  The feedback from
> the touch of the keyboard, the feel of the tape under the keys, the
> ability to use pressure to control the dynamics, separate pressure
> control for individual notes ("polyphonic aftertouch"), a direct
> connection to the sound-making process as opposed to going through
> that ridiculous midi protocol, the delightfully quirky behavior of the
> tape handling mechanism, the relationship the musician has with the
> instrument's intrinsic workings that inspires the music.

Always an interesting debate.  I think that it has more to do with
what a player is comfortable and familiar with.  People like Richard
Barbieri, John Hawken, Pinder, McDonald, Banks...etc have become
familiar/comfortable with modern sampler keyboards.  McCartney, Julian
Cope, Woolly Wolstenholme... etc prefer to use mellotrons.

There's no right or wrong answer here Don.  There's nothing ridiculous
about midi.  Some of the modern samplers are better than others.  The
good ones are definitely valid musical intruments and tons of fun to play!


Clay

Here's my 2 cents worth(with rebate). It all comes down to what the 
individual percieves as acceptable. I cannot think of anyone who has 
the real thing that wants a memotron, of course there will be 
exceptions.  The other side of the coin is that competition is healthy 
and because of that may inspire those to eventually get the real thing.
To Tron owners, it translates to good investments.  Had it not been 
for Streetly and Kean keeping things going, we would be in the same 
resale category as  say a Mirage, with tapes you could read a 
newspaper through.  Another point you don't hear mentioned much, name 
another keyboard of that era that you can still get any part for. 
In all fairness, the average audience could not tell the real thing 
from a sample, yet they can identify the sound. Last Sat, had the 400 
out playing.  The regular keyboard player could not make it and 
brought a substitute. During the first break he wanted to know what 
the white "organ" was.  So he got the mini-tour.  Then he says, 
seriously, "I have those sounds in my computer at home, did you record 
those from your computer?"  Now this guy has been playing for over 25 
years. (possibly a polka band) 
It is easy for us to be judgemental, and most of us think of the 
clones as mostly garbage, infecting the sanctity of our realm, but in 
reality the Mellotron is sitting pretty at this time and I believe it 
is more identifiable now than it was 30 years ago.     Doug

Donald Tillman wrote:
>    > From: "Mark Wallis" <markstuartwallis@...>
>    > Sender: Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com
>    >
>    > Essentially - CONCEPTUALLY-  it IS a Mellotron. 
>
> This must be a use of the word "conceptually" that I am unfamiliar
> with. 
>   

It sounds like a Mellotron and looks a bit like one too. That's fairly 
'conceptual' by most standards.

> You're abstracting out all the interesting stuff.  The feedback from
> the touch of the keyboard, the feel of the tape under the keys, the
> ability to use pressure to control the dynamics, separate pressure
> control for individual notes ("polyphonic aftertouch"), a direct
> connection to the sound-making process as opposed to going through
> that ridiculous midi protocol, the delightfully quirky behavior of the
> tape handling mechanism, the relationship the musician has with the
> instrument's intrinsic workings that inspires the music.
>   

I'm pretty sure you are speaking for yourelf here, Don. I like the sound 
of (say) a Hammond, but none of that is based on the knowledge that it's 
the output from a bunch of hugely amplified magnetic fields being 
distorted by some little toothed wheels. The feel of the instrument 
inspires almost nothing to me at all. I might *like* it, but it's not 
the inspiration; that comes from the sound and knowing where to fit it 
in, or how to phrase it. As a case in point, the Ian McDonald flute has 
an attack and a 'per-note' phrasing that makes it almost impossible to 
play anything other than some lyrical-sounding stuff. None of that comes 
from the mechanics of the machine - it comes entirely from the sound.

Anyway - I think the Memotron looks and sounds like a hoot, albeit a 
rather expensive one compared to (say) the M-Tron. I'm just glad that 
the beauty of these sounds persist.

-- 

Mike Dickson (tron@...) M400 #996
The Official Cynic of Streetly Electronics
Streetly Sample Library http://www.blackcat.demon.co.uk/tron/

Oh my, it's all kicking off.

Let's not forget that we (Mellotron owners) are the lucky ones. There aren't 
that many of these machines on the planet so naturally demand outstrips 
supply. Most of the folk that want one won't get to own one. Or even SEE 
one, for that matter. Not all of the people who DO own them use them. Some 
will disappear into collections and never come out again. I can think of one 
in particular with at least 15 in one room. Fair play- but there are so few 
of these out there and they get more expensive all the time.

Exclusivity is .. fascism.

Clones feed peoples' desire for the real thing. Every effective performance 
or recording helps to spread the word. Some will try the real thing and 
decide that they don't want one after all. Some may not want to lug several 
thousand pounds or dollars' worth of bulky, rare, fragile, beloved Mellotron 
from gig to gig- but they'll still want to play Mellotron sounds as part of 
their music. That's why I would consider a Memotron. Not INSTEAD of my 
beloved M400 but as a tool to enable me to play Mellotron in adverse 
circumstances. And I've personally dragged mine around enough times and will 
do again. The same goes for my Hammond C3, which I cut in half just so that 
I could gig with the beast- and gig it I did.  I'm still completely f**ked 
though if nobody will help me carry it up the stairs. And this has happened 
on more than a few occasions. Try taking a Tron or a C3 on a train or bus 
when your car packs in. Or running down the road with one if a gig turns 
ugly! Not all of us have roadies or label support. Some of us don't even 
make any money from gigging. But we still carry on.

  And let's face it, MkVIs and M4000s are necessarily expensive hand-built 
precision machines -built by individuals - that will never be made in 
sufficient numbers for everyone who wants a Mellotron to be satisfied.

Imagine if there were only 2500 electric guitars in the whole world...

Go on...

Yeah... I think that makes the point.

So someone tries to make it easier, more attainable, less of a worry, less 
hassle.. raising awareness in the process, engendering respect for the 
original achievement and appreciation of the new tape-replay machines..

And people sneer at them for doing it, as if it's a form of ...pollution. 
Pissing in the bath.

  It's for US, you know. That's why it's got 35 keys and funny little knobs. 
  I bet there are more people making music nowadays involving Mellotron 
sounds because of things like the M-tron package. Many of those would give 
their right arms for the real thing. But there are only so many to go round 
and often they just get redistributed amongst the existing cognoscenti. If I 
could have more Mellotrons I know I would. So I'm just as bad.

Bloody Hell, I've gone on a bit. No offence is ever meant and none of this 
questions Streetly and DK/MR in any way whatsoever. Beyond criticism.

Foaming at the fingers,

MSW
xxx

>From: "Doug Berg" <caddyfam@...>
>To: Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [Mellotronists] Re: Memotron Video Clip
>Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 16:24:05 -0000
>
>Here's my 2 cents worth(with rebate). It all comes down to what the
>individual percieves as acceptable. I cannot think of anyone who has
>the real thing that wants a memotron, of course there will be
>exceptions.  The other side of the coin is that competition is healthy
>and because of that may inspire those to eventually get the real thing.
>To Tron owners, it translates to good investments.  Had it not been
>for Streetly and Kean keeping things going, we would be in the same
>resale category as  say a Mirage, with tapes you could read a
>newspaper through.  Another point you don't hear mentioned much, name
>another keyboard of that era that you can still get any part for.
>In all fairness, the average audience could not tell the real thing
>from a sample, yet they can identify the sound. Last Sat, had the 400
>out playing.  The regular keyboard player could not make it and
>brought a substitute. During the first break he wanted to know what
>the white "organ" was.  So he got the mini-tour.  Then he says,
>seriously, "I have those sounds in my computer at home, did you record
>those from your computer?"  Now this guy has been playing for over 25
>years. (possibly a polka band)
>It is easy for us to be judgemental, and most of us think of the
>clones as mostly garbage, infecting the sanctity of our realm, but in
>reality the Mellotron is sitting pretty at this time and I believe it
>is more identifiable now than it was 30 years ago.     Doug
>

_________________________________________________________________
PC Magazine\ufffds 2007 editors\ufffd choice for best Web mail\ufffdaward-winning Windows 
Live Hotmail. 
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_pcmag_0507

With all of the debate about Mellotron samples in general and the Memotron 
in particular, there seems to be one data point prominently missing.  Has 
anybody here actually played one to be able to give a review from 
experience?

Good point!

NO, I haven't. I didn't know it existed until a month ago!

;-)




>From: "jonesalley" <jonesalley@...>
>To: "Mellotronists" <Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com>
>Subject: Re: [Mellotronists] Memotron Video Clip
>Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 12:34:41 -0500
>
>With all of the debate about Mellotron samples in general and the Memotron
>in particular, there seems to be one data point prominently missing.  Has
>anybody here actually played one to be able to give a review from
>experience?
>

_________________________________________________________________
Play your part in making history - Email Britain! 
http://www.emailbritain.co.uk/

> From: "ceccles_ca" <ecclesreinson@...>
   > Sender: Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com
   > 
   > Always an interesting debate.  I think that it has more to do with
   > what a player is comfortable and familiar with.  

I don't see that at all.  The first time I played a Mellotron it was
hardly comfortable or familiar.  "What the hell, these keys feel like
sponges!"

And I can't think of any musical instrument that worked differently
than one I'd played before that was either comfortable or familiar.  

   > People like Richard Barbieri, John Hawken, Pinder, McDonald,
   > Banks...etc have become familiar/comfortable with modern sampler
   > keyboards.  McCartney, Julian Cope, Woolly Wolstenholme... etc
   > prefer to use mellotrons.

Maybe so, but did their playing on digital samplers inspire you the
way their actual Mellotron playing did?  Would the "Watcher of the
Skies" intro be what is without the Mellotron?  Or would it even exist
at all?

   > There's no right or wrong answer here Don.  

I think there is... and I think there's something very profound and
significant behind the answer.

   > There's nothing ridiculous about midi.

MIDI has neither the vocabulary, the resolution, nor the speed to deal
with real music.  MIDI's vocabulary abstracts everthing down to
note-on and note-off events, but the music might not be limited to
just notes.  Imagine any of the truly great solos played over MIDI;
I'm thinking Coltrane's "Giant Steps", Miles' "All Blues", or
Hendrix's "Voodoo Chile Slight Return".  It'd be a trainwreck.  And
for keyboard work, the resolution of MIDI is such that the nuances and
subtleties of the performance are missing entirely, so you really
can't tell if it's Horowitz or someone unskilled like myself playing
the piano sample over a MIDI stream.

  -- Don

-- 
Don Tillman
Palo Alto, California
don@...
http://www.till.com

> From: "Mark Wallis" <markstuartwallis@...>
   > Sender: Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com
   > Mailing-List: list Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com; contact Mellotronists-owner@yahoogroups.com
   > Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 17:34:16 +0000
   > 
   > Let's not forget that we (Mellotron owners) are the lucky
   > ones. There aren't that many of these machines on the planet so
   > naturally demand outstrips supply.

Economics 101: If that were true, the price of Mellotrons would be
significantly higher than they were in their heyday.  Yet they're
about the same price; significantly cheaper if you account for
inflation.  So no, demand is not outstripping supply.

   > Most of the folk that want one won't get to own one. 
   > 
   > Exclusivity is .. fascism.

What exclusivity?  There are two companies building real live
Mellotrons right now.  Compare that to the number of companies
building tone wheel organs, electric pianos, electric clavichords,
etc.

   > Clones feed peoples' desire for the real thing. 

I see absolutely nothing to indicate that.  

At the same time digital samplers are the main reason that the
keyboard companies are no longer making tonewheel organs, electric
pianos, electric clavichords, etc.  

And digital samplers have also completely halted the development of
new and more interesting keyboard instrument technologies.

So for fascism, it's hard to beat digital samplers.  They steal the
sounds of other instruments, steal the names of the instruments for
the names of their products and patches, drive the instrument makers
out of business, keep new keyboard instruments from being developed,
demand that everything be delivered as a digital sampler.  They've
even got you doing their propaganda for them.

(I'm joking, of course... well, somewhat.)

  -- Don

-- 
Don Tillman
Palo Alto, California
don@...
http://www.till.com

Oh Gawd.. If only THIS one lasted for 8 seconds..


>From: Donald Tillman <don@...>
>To: "Mark Wallis" <markstuartwallis@...>
>CC: Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [Mellotronists] The Clone Wars (was Memotron etc..)
>Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 11:29:54 -0700
>
>    > From: "Mark Wallis" <markstuartwallis@...>
>    > Sender: Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com
>    > Mailing-List: list Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com; contact 
>Mellotronists-owner@yahoogroups.com
>    > Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 17:34:16 +0000
>    >
>    > Let's not forget that we (Mellotron owners) are the lucky
>    > ones. There aren't that many of these machines on the planet so
>    > naturally demand outstrips supply.
>
>"Economics 101: If that were true, the price of Mellotrons would be
>significantly higher than they were in their heyday.  Yet they're
>about the same price; significantly cheaper if you account for
>inflation.  So no, demand is not outstripping supply."
>
>    > Most of the folk that want one won't get to own one.

The number of trons on the planet is quite low, not everybody who would 
really like one can afford one.. Like I said, imagine if there were less 
than 2500 guitars on earth and only 10,20, 30 per year being built. Every 
time an M400 comes up on Ebay at least 10 people try to buy it. So 9 are 
disappointed.
>    >
>    > Exclusivity is .. fascism.
>
>"What exclusivity?  There are two companies building real live
>Mellotrons right now."

Yes, true, genuinely GREAT! but 4 pairs of hands can only do so much at a 
time. ??
I was celebrating the availability of Tronsounds to the Tronless, because 
the music comes first, apparently. Denying them access to the astral chords 
is what I was describing as a form of fascism. Like 'Keep Out' signs in the 
middle of nowhere... :-)

"Compare that to the number of companies
>building tone wheel organs, electric pianos, electric clavichords,
>etc."

The Electro-mechanical Rhodes is once again in production. The Clavinet 
seems a likely contender for reanimation, given it's comparative simplicity.
>
>    > Clones feed peoples' desire for the real thing.

"I see absolutely nothing to indicate that."

I know plenty of people who have finally played real Clavinets, Wurlitzers, 
Hammonds etc, who fell in love with the originals having only known the 
sounds as digital recreations...I took a Minimoog to my workshop at our 
studio to repair and EVERYBODY who played it wants one now. 4 people at the 
same studio use the M-tron and everybody loves my 400, even those who 
previously didn't know about the machine behind the sound.  All feel that 
\ufffd4500 for an M4000 is fair for a piece of engineering of that quality and 
with that much character, having been shown the new Streetly pics by myself 
(in my role as unpaid guerilla Streetly propagandist). All would spend \ufffd2000 
on an M400 if they had the cash spare.
>
>
>
>"At the same time digital samplers are the main reason that the
>keyboard companies are no longer making tonewheel organs, electric
>pianos, electric clavichords, etc."

  Tonewheel organs went out of production because of the advent of cheap 
electronic substitutes (however effective or otherwise)and the costs 
involved in building TWGs in the face of then heavy competition. Economics 
did for most electro-mechanical keyboards. Streetlys went into liquidation 
in 1986 because Novatrons/Mellotrons were very much out of fashion at the 
time and they weren't selling. Nostalgia ain't what it used to be, i.e.  
irrelevant in the early 80s. Example- the Wurlitzer 'wurlitz'ed' and that 
was that. Gary Numan didn't use one and stuff like that mattered in the 
early 80s.
I thought everybody knew this stuff, to be honest.
>
>"And digital samplers have also completely halted the development of
>new and more interesting keyboard instrument technologies.
>
>So for fascism, it's hard to beat digital samplers.  They steal the
>sounds of other instruments, steal the names of the instruments for
>the names of their products and patches, drive the instrument makers
>out of business, keep new keyboard instruments from being developed,
>demand that everything be delivered as a digital sampler. "

Nah, that's just the soup of the day.

" They've
>even got you doing their propaganda for them."

I know that you're not having a dig there. I defend my right as an 
Englishman to defend anything that I can justify defending. I think I have 
discharged my duties honourably.
>
>"(I'm joking, of course... well, somewhat.)
>
>   -- Don"

I should bloody well think so!

No offence meant and none taken. MSW


www.MySpace.com/markstuartwallis
>
>--
>Don Tillman
>Palo Alto, California
>don@...
>http://www.till.com

_________________________________________________________________
Play your part in making history - Email Britain! 
http://www.emailbritain.co.uk/

>> Clones feed peoples' desire for the real thing.
> 
> I see absolutely nothing to indicate that.

Living proof - right here!

:-)

And now that a new cycling double-keyboard machine is coming, the only thing
stopping me is ... ah yes, the bank balance.  And the wife.  And the kids.
And the pre-requisite house extension...  But ONE DAY!

I knew there would be a catch.  Oh well, back to the VSTs...

Owen

-- 
Thinking Aloud

http://www.thinking-aloud.co.uk/
http://www.myspace.com/thinkingalouduk

--- In Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com, Donald Tillman <don@...> wrote:

> MIDI has neither the vocabulary, the resolution, nor the speed to deal
> with real music.  MIDI's vocabulary abstracts everthing down to
> note-on and note-off events, but the music might not be limited to
> just notes.

MIDI has been utilized to compose and produce a boat load of real
music.  Hans Zimmer has produced soundtracks which are primarily
digital sampler / midi.  He has won Academy awards for about 12 of
them.  Zimmer's main sampler is Tascam's GigaStudio.

Sample resolution and latency were significant issues 15 years ago. 
The new sample libraries are much better in the vocabulary department
too.  (tons of articulations to choose from).

Donald Tillman wrote:
>    > There's nothing ridiculous about midi.
>
> MIDI has neither the vocabulary, the resolution, nor the speed to deal
> with real music.  
Don, Don, Don...that is patently absurd. Actually, it's worse than that; 
it's patently untrue. I had to struggle with MIDI for a while, but it 
was down to my lack of understanding rather than anything else. As for 
the terms 'vocabulary' and 'resolution'; these are essentially 
meaningless, emotive terms. Holy mokes, they would have been used 
against Mellotrons not all that long ago.

> MIDI's vocabulary abstracts everthing down to
> note-on and note-off events, 
>   
That is also patently downright absurd. This could also be said of a 
drum. Or a piano. Or a bugle. Or a whole orchestra. You start. You make 
a noise. You stop. Whether you *like* the result is either down to taste 
or the skill of the player, but it's entirely wrong to pitch the 
argument against the technology. *And even if it were true* MIDI has 
given a -huge- scope to empower the player into places they'd never have 
enjoyed before.

> And for keyboard work, the resolution of MIDI is such that the nuances and
> subtleties of the performance are missing entirely, so you really
> can't tell if it's Horowitz or someone unskilled like myself playing
> the piano sample over a MIDI stream.
Is it beyond you to say that this tool doesn't lower Horowitz but 
instead elevates Tillman? Have you ever used a high-end sampler? If you 
can tell the difference then you're not the player you think you might 
be. I can *get by* but I am certainly am no great shakes at playing, yet 
even I am inspired by what I can do with MIDI.

I'm much in favour of old stuff if it sounds better, but your personal 
form of Luddism is strange to my ears and even harder to justify. My 
M400 sits under a MIDI keyboard and they both co-exist perfectly well. 
It's not what you do, but the way that you do it, as three bubble-heads 
would have put it.

-- 

Mike Dickson (tron@...) M400 #996
The Official Cynic of Streetly Electronics
Streetly Sample Library http://www.blackcat.demon.co.uk/tron/

> From: "Mark Wallis" <markstuartwallis@...>
   > Sender: Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com
   > 
   > The number of trons on the planet is quite low, not everybody who
   > would really like one can afford one..
   >
   > Every time an M400 comes up on Ebay at least 10 people try to buy
   > it. So 9 are disappointed.

So it's down to price then; you just want one cheap.  Gee, that's just
being greedy.  :-)

I'm well aware that the number of 'trons on the planet is quite low,
but that doesn't change the fact that the demand is also very low.  If
the demand increases, than MA and Streetly can ramp up production and
enjoy the profits.  And that would be great.  But if the demand isn't
enough to cover production costs plus profit for the guys doing the
work, then the demand really is not there.

   > I was celebrating the availability of Tronsounds to the Tronless,
   > because the music comes first, apparently. Denying them access to
   > the astral chords is what I was describing as a form of
   > fascism. 

I'm not denying anybody anything.  Mellotron samples have been
available for over 25 years, just as samples of all other instruments
have been available, and I'm not going to be telling anybody what to
use.  Neither am I interested in putting sampler companies out of
business.  I don't actually blame the sampler companies, they're just
riding the market.

If anybody, I'd blame the musicians.  The ones who refuse to pay more
for a better instrument, the ones who refuse to lift an instrument
that weighs more than a few pounds, and the ones who won't buy it
unless it has 10,000 patches and plays by computer.  And I'd blame the
music industry which is much more eager to promote goofy turntable
spinners than keyboard players.

   > The Electro-mechanical Rhodes is once again in production. The
   > Clavinet seems a likely contender for reanimation, given it's
   > comparative simplicity.

The new Rhodes is not available for puchase yet, so I wouldn't say
it's fully "in production".  I'm hopeful, of course, that it will be a
great instrument and a great success.  I agree that the simplicity of
the Clavinet affords a lot of potential, but I see nothing to indicate
actual production.

  -- Don

-- 
Don Tillman
Palo Alto, California
don@...
http://www.till.com

Donald Tillman wrote:
> Economics 101: If that were true, the price of Mellotrons would be
> significantly higher than they were in their heyday.  Yet they're
> about the same price; significantly cheaper if you account for
> inflation.  So no, demand is not outstripping supply.
>   
I may be wrong, but you are probably not the p;erson to ask about this. 
Messrs Smith, Bradley and Kean probably are. I wonder what their opinion 
would be. I know what two of them would say, and it is in contrast to 
what you think. How many Mk II Mellotrons are there about? How many 
people would like one? How many people cannot get one? If the answer to 
the last quiestion is greater than zero then your argument is rendered 
nonsensical.

>    > Clones feed peoples' desire for the real thing. 
>
> I see absolutely nothing to indicate that.  
>   

Me neither, and that seems to negate your earlier assessment. If they 
don't want the real thing then surely that means that the clones fill 
that niche and hence are as good as their 'real' counterparts for that 
purpose.

> At the same time digital samplers are the main reason that the
> keyboard companies are no longer making tonewheel organs, electric
> pianos, electric clavichords, etc.  
>   
That's just such utter tosh! The Hammond is the reason why no one is 
making the Teleharmonium any more. Am I weeping about this? I think not. 
This is an evolutionary process. The Mellotron has obviously come 
through this.Why? Because people want *that sound*. It has -fuck all- to 
do with the mechanism by which that sound is created, but nearly 
everything to do with the sound itself. A denial of that leaves me 
wondering why peope want to hear the instrument at all.

> And digital samplers have also completely halted the development of
> new and more interesting keyboard instrument technologies.
>   
Such as what?

-- 

Mike Dickson (tron@...) M400 #996
The Official Cynic of Streetly Electronics
Streetly Sample Library http://www.blackcat.demon.co.uk/tron/

Don, I'm not in the habit of insulting people I haven't met.

But you do sound like such a twat.

Bests,

MSW





>From: Donald Tillman <don@...>
>To: "Mark Wallis" <markstuartwallis@...>
>CC: Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [Mellotronists] The Clone Wars (was Memotron etc..)
>Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 14:30:05 -0700
>
>    > From: "Mark Wallis" <markstuartwallis@...>
>    > Sender: Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com
>    >
>    > The number of trons on the planet is quite low, not everybody who
>    > would really like one can afford one..
>    >
>    > Every time an M400 comes up on Ebay at least 10 people try to buy
>    > it. So 9 are disappointed.
>
>So it's down to price then; you just want one cheap.  Gee, that's just
>being greedy.  :-)
>
>I'm well aware that the number of 'trons on the planet is quite low,
>but that doesn't change the fact that the demand is also very low.  If
>the demand increases, than MA and Streetly can ramp up production and
>enjoy the profits.  And that would be great.  But if the demand isn't
>enough to cover production costs plus profit for the guys doing the
>work, then the demand really is not there.
>
>    > I was celebrating the availability of Tronsounds to the Tronless,
>    > because the music comes first, apparently. Denying them access to
>    > the astral chords is what I was describing as a form of
>    > fascism.
>
>I'm not denying anybody anything.  Mellotron samples have been
>available for over 25 years, just as samples of all other instruments
>have been available, and I'm not going to be telling anybody what to
>use.  Neither am I interested in putting sampler companies out of
>business.  I don't actually blame the sampler companies, they're just
>riding the market.
>
>If anybody, I'd blame the musicians.  The ones who refuse to pay more
>for a better instrument, the ones who refuse to lift an instrument
>that weighs more than a few pounds, and the ones who won't buy it
>unless it has 10,000 patches and plays by computer.  And I'd blame the
>music industry which is much more eager to promote goofy turntable
>spinners than keyboard players.
>
>    > The Electro-mechanical Rhodes is once again in production. The
>    > Clavinet seems a likely contender for reanimation, given it's
>    > comparative simplicity.
>
>The new Rhodes is not available for puchase yet, so I wouldn't say
>it's fully "in production".  I'm hopeful, of course, that it will be a
>great instrument and a great success.  I agree that the simplicity of
>the Clavinet affords a lot of potential, but I see nothing to indicate
>actual production.
>
>   -- Don
>
>--
>Don Tillman
>Palo Alto, California
>don@...
>http://www.till.com

_________________________________________________________________
The next generation of Hotmail is here! http://www.newhotmail.co.uk/

The mellotron does things!  I'm not about to describe in detail but it  does 
things that no sampler has ever done. Unless the person programming  
understands that the mellotron does things then no sampler, however  sophisticated will 
ever sound like a mellotron.  Memotron, Mtron, Akai,  Trubshaw 30 or the 
Grosvenor.  It doesn't matter.  The mellotron does  things and modelling that will 
always be tricky.   It's not just a  question of a seemingly familiar 
timbre...........................it's SO much  more.
 
M
Streetly Electronics - All Things Mellotronic

_www.mellotronics.co.uk_ (http://www.mellotronics.co.uk/) 
_www.mellotronics.com_ (http://www.mellotronics.com/) 
US Sales  East: Jimmy Moore _JMoore6397@..._ (http://JMoore6397@.../) 
US Sales West:  Paul Cox _pjc56@..._ (http://pjc56@.../)

Sorry about that. Most uncool of me.

MSW

_________________________________________________________________
Play your part in making history - Email Britain! 
http://www.emailbritain.co.uk/

In an awkward way, you illustrated an important point: nobody gets that 
passionate about DX-7's or D-50's...




> Sorry about that. Most uncool of me.

In a message dated 6/4/2007 5:56:41 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
markstuartwallis@... writes:

Don,  I'm not in the habit of insulting people I haven't met.

But you do  sound like such a twat.

Bests,




What kind of twat? A nice lathery juicy one, or a quiffing one,  or....
 
Hmmm. Are there enough twat sounds to make up a tape set?
 
Now a twit... that's a different story. There are lots of sounds that twits  
make. One might easily fill dozens of frames with twit sounds. And you could  
probably blend them with other sounds. How about mixing, "Hey, that Memotron  
sounds just like the real thing..." with Russian Choir? Or, "you sound like 
such  a twat..." with mixed brass? I know, how about, "... Ah...yes...The 
M4000...The rarest Mellotron of them all. Are all you M4000 owners happy?" with the 
somewhat melancholy Sad  Strings?
 
Any ideas?
 
I've gone back over every email I have ever written and  couldn't find 
anything I've said that qualifies. Drat!
 
 
Ned Needleman
 
 



************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

Ah, the exception that proves the rule.  Three million sold, can hardly give 
them away today...

> Says who? the DX7 was huge and I am here to tell you
> from my own work on it that its potential went
> unrecognized despite the fact that most everybody had
> one. You oughta hear my hammer dulcimer sometime.

Dickson's post is far too incomprehensible and rude to address as
such.  But this part is interesting...

   > From: Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@...>
   > Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 22:28:19 +0100
   >
   > I'm much in favour of old stuff if it sounds better, but your
   > personal form of Luddism is strange to my ears and even harder to
   > justify.

Actually no; my band's album was the first to feature a physical
modeling synthesizer, and I was the first to present a design for a
well-behaved thru-zero quadrature synth VCO.  And I have much more in
the works.  I am keenly interested in advancing the state of the art
of electronic musical instruments.

But it is true that I am not fond of the current crop of modern
digital synths.  Why?  Because after 25 to 40 years of digital music
development (depending on how you count it) the best they can do is to
make bad copies of great instruments that are no longer in production.
This is with all the research, all the funding, all the technological
advances trickled down from the computer and other high tech
industries, including Moore's law.  

That, my friend, is the real Luddism.  And a total lack of creativity
and imagination.  

Although it's not as bad as guitar players.  The three most popular
guitar models (the Stratocaster, the Les Paul and the Telecaster) were
introduced between from 1948 and 1953, and haven't changed
significantly since.  And then they plug that into a vacuum tube amp.

  -- Don

-- 
Don Tillman
Palo Alto, California
don@...
http://www.till.com

--- In Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com, Donald Tillman <don@...> wrote:
>
> 
> Dickson's post is far too incomprehensible and rude to address as
> such.  But this part is interesting...
> 
>    > From: Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@...>
>    > Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 22:28:19 +0100
>    >
>    > I'm much in favour of old stuff if it sounds better, but your
>    > personal form of Luddism is strange to my ears and even 
harder to
>    > justify.
> 
> Actually no; my band's album was the first to feature a physical
> modeling synthesizer, and I was the first to present a design for a
> well-behaved thru-zero quadrature synth VCO.  And I have much more 
in
> the works.  I am keenly interested in advancing the state of the 
art
> of electronic musical instruments.
> 
> But it is true that I am not fond of the current crop of modern
> digital synths.  Why?  Because after 25 to 40 years of digital 
music
> development (depending on how you count it) the best they can do 
is to
> make bad copies of great instruments that are no longer in 
production.
> This is with all the research, all the funding, all the 
technological
> advances trickled down from the computer and other high tech
> industries, including Moore's law.  
> 
> That, my friend, is the real Luddism.  And a total lack of 
creativity
> and imagination.  
> 
> Although it's not as bad as guitar players.  The three most popular
> guitar models (the Stratocaster, the Les Paul and the Telecaster) 
were
> introduced between from 1948 and 1953, and haven't changed
> significantly since.  And then they plug that into a vacuum tube 
amp.
> 
>   -- Don
> 
> -- 
>

 Allright Don, you seem to be in the know of electronic instruments, 
and I agree that there is very little in new keyboards that is 
exciting.  If you viewed my assortment in the photo section, there 
is only one fairly new piece there.   For my tastes, the "old stuff" 
each has it's own unique quality. Yet after all these years since, 
nothing comes close to these originals, yet we are bombarded with, 
and I'm sorry if this offends, shitty samples.  When I got my E4 
sampler, it came with a cd of EMU classics, some from the EII 
library, yet the funky ol EII 8bit sounds are more alive than 
playing the same sample through the E4. From a novice point of view 
it seems that once these instruments are in the sample domain, they 
lose whatever expression the host instrument was capable of.  That 
little Pro Soloist is a very expressive instrument, no MIDI, no mod 
wheel, yet you can get a lot out of it, and how would a clone sample 
replicate that?  So what has "state of the art" become?    Dazed and 
sometimes confused.... Doug

So what has "state of the art" become?   


"Dazed and sometimes confused...."

--- In Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com, "jonesalley" <jonesalley@...> wrote:
>
> Ah, the exception that proves the rule.  Three million sold, can
hardly give them away today...

> > Says who? the DX7 was huge and I am here to tell you
> > from my own work on it that its potential went
> > unrecognized despite the fact that most everybody had
> > one. You oughta hear my hammer dulcimer sometime.

Who is giving away a DX-7?  Send it to me!  Better yet a DX-11.
Four oscillators, eight waveforms for each OSC, eight algorithms per
voice plus three LFO waveforms.  A noisy beast with a bitch of an
interface BUT capable of some incredible sounds.  Not just percussive
bells and e-pianos.  It can emulate a Hammond and a clav nicely too.
Tons of potential...The trouble is most people don't have the patience
to deal with that Yamaha interface!

Clay

--- In Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com, Donald Tillman <don@...> wrote:
>
> 
> Dickson's post is far too incomprehensible and rude to address as such.

This must be a use of the word "rude" that I am unfamiliar with.

Don, I thought that your original reply to Mark was impolite
(disrespectful).

That is what "lowered the tone" and caused the sniping.

Clay

In a message dated 04/06/2007 23:03:57 GMT Standard Time, tronbros@...  
writes:

The  mellotron does things!  I'm not about to describe in detail but it does  
things that no sampler has ever done. Unless the person programming  
understands that the mellotron does things then no sampler, however  sophisticated 
will ever sound like a mellotron.  Memotron, Mtron, Akai,  Trubshaw 30 or the 
Grosvenor.  It doesn't matter.  The mellotron  does things and modelling that 
will always be tricky.   It's not  just a question of a seemingly familiar 
timbre...........................it's  SO much more.


Strange but true but in the early days of developing the instrument that  
finally became the M4000 Streetly tried and rejected...
 
1. A VST plug in - a sample replay job using the sounds from the library.  
Scrapped for several reasons, it would sound the same as any other sample replay 
 plug-in, it would have been cracked in weeks and Streetly are not really in 
the  business of selling software.
 
2. A table top keyboard using digital replay technology. Prototyped but  
rejected as a single note played on either would sound very similar but as soon  
as more than one note was played the 'real thing' sounded so much better.  
Without going into detail (don't bother asking as the results of  the research is 
now a Streetly secret) each time you play a note on a tape  replay instrument 
you get a 'performance' that is different each  time even if it is the same 
note! Scrapped - just didn't sound good enough  (but Streetly are fussy!).
 
So the realisation in the end was that the M4000 had to use tapes or  else it 
would not have the characteristics that Streetly wanted the instrument  to 
have.
 
In this case improving the technology was felt to be a step  backwards.
 
Meanwhile I'm pleased that the other alternatives have been developed by  
others and that Streetly have stuck to their guns - the M4000 is an instrument  
that everyone who has been involved can be very proud of.
 
Norm
(who also uses M-tron and Vintage Keys depending on the  assignment)

In a message dated 06/06/2007 11:48:50 GMT Standard Time, NormLeete@...  
writes:

2. A  table top keyboard using digital replay technology. Prototyped but 
rejected as  a single note played on either would sound very similar but as soon 
as more  than one note was played the 'real thing' sounded so much better. 
Without  going into detail (don't bother asking as the results of the research is  
now a Streetly secret) each time you play a note on a tape replay instrument  
you get a 'performance' that is different each time even if it is  the same 
note! Scrapped - just didn't sound good enough (but Streetly are  fussy!).


John still has the prototype - I just asked him.  Maybe we can dig it  out 
and send you all some photos.  Nick Magnus was also in on this project  with 
Norm at the software end.  Thank goodness we went the M4000  route.
 
Best,
 
Martin  

Streetly Electronics - All Things Mellotronic


_www.mellotronics.co.uk_ (http://www.mellotronics.co.uk/) 
_www.mellotronics.com_ (http://www.mellotronics.com/) 
US Sales  East: Jimmy Moore _JMoore6397@..._ (http://JMoore6397@.../) 
US Sales West:  Paul Cox _pjc56@..._ (http://pjc56@.../)

--- In Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com, NormLeete@... wrote:

>...a single note played on either would sound very similar but as
soon as more than one note was played the 'real thing' sounded so much
better.

I've noticed this with the Pinder CD samples vs 'tron.  Especially
with choir voices.  The digital sampler chords sound a bit thinner,
like a smaller choir.

My indepth technical analysis has determined that it has something to
do with those tapes n heads n pads n stuff.

Clay

> From: "ceccles_ca" <ecclesreinson@...>
   > Sender: Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com
   >
   > MIDI has been utilized to compose and produce a boat load of real
   > music.  Hans Zimmer has produced soundtracks which are primarily
   > digital sampler / midi.  He has won Academy awards for about 12
   > of them.  Zimmer's main sampler is Tascam's GigaStudio.

Interesting example, certainly.

I can't say I know his work; I don't watch many movies.  But I was
speaking of a musical instrument performance while the awards for
Zimmer's soundtracks are more about composition, arrangement, scoring,
orchestration, the contribution to the movie, the movie itself, and
these days, politics.  And I don't know if Zimmer's work with
GigaStudio actually uses much MIDI; I mean, I understand that
GigaStudio uses MIDI style settings, but the connection from the score
representation to the audio rendering has got to be straight software.
And I'm sure he's got all sorts of tools he's developed.

My point is that MIDI is a very primitive and severely limited
protocol, with timing limitations built into the definition, with very
modest goals and designed for ease of implementation in 1982
technology.  And that MIDI cannot represent the subtleties of a
player's personal style and cannot come anywhere near representing
some of our most cherished musical performances.

And unfortunately MIDI has been adopted as a vital link in the chain,
the pipeline between keyboard and synth engine, for just about all
digital keyboards.  

So I (and remember I'm supposed to be the snobby fascist luddite twat
in this conversation) am saying the adoption of MIDI is a not a good
thing for a musical instrument.  We should use the technology to
leverage creativity and personal expression, not regiment everything
into a byte stream.  We should be using a diversity of technologies,
and enjoy the features and quirks of each, and not be forcing
everything into a microprocessor, advanced as it may be.

  -- Don

-- 
Don Tillman
Palo Alto, California
don@...
http://www.till.com

ceccles_ca wrote:
> I've noticed this with the Pinder CD samples vs 'tron.  Especially
> with choir voices.  The digital sampler chords sound a bit thinner,
> like a smaller choir.
>
>   
I've got some of the Pinder sounds here converted to WAVs. The choir 
(and the strings) lack an awful lot, IMO. They both soud very much as 
though someone has been overenthusiastic with the noise reduction.

-- 

Mike Dickson (tron@...) M400 #996
The Official Cynic of Streetly Electronics
Streetly Sample Library http://www.blackcat.demon.co.uk/tron/

Donald Tillman wrote:
> So I (and remember I'm supposed to be the snobby fascist luddite twat
> in this conversation) am saying the adoption of MIDI is a not a good
> thing for a musical instrument.  We should use the technology to
> leverage creativity and personal expression, not regiment everything
> into a byte stream.  We should be using a diversity of technologies,
> and enjoy the features and quirks of each, and not be forcing
> everything into a microprocessor, advanced as it may be.
>   
So what musical protocol design would you have preferred to have seen,. 
given the fact that there was never any going back to recording audio again?

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

>Donald Tillman wrote:
I (and remember I'm supposed to be the snobby fascist luddite twat)


Sorry Don, I haven't yet personally apologised to you for the first and last 
parts of that one. You're obviously a very accomplished,knowledgable kind of 
guy and passionate too. I didn't actually call YOU a fascist and as far as 
Luddism is concerned,well... I only own 1 digital keyboard, the rest are 
profoundly steam-age. Some require regular oiling, two have starter motors 
and another runs on pedal-power. Three of them contain strange mechanical 
stuff smacking into other strange mechanical stuff with varying degrees of 
finesse and one seems to involve odd flat wormy things that have to kept 
separate lest they attempt to mate with each other.

  And I really shouldn't come back from the pub and call a complete stranger 
names from behind a keyboard 4000 miles away. Last word!

Yours, Mark Wallis.

_________________________________________________________________
The next generation of Hotmail is here! http://www.newhotmail.co.uk

In a message dated 6/6/2007 2:19:03 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
markstuartwallis@... writes:

And I  really shouldn't come back from the pub and call a complete stranger 
names  from behind a keyboard 4000 miles away. Last word!

Yours, Mark  Wallis.




See!!!! There are other gentlemen on this list besides me.
 
Frank



************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

I distinctly recall that MIDI was supposed to have constant improvements and 
yet it seems to have painted itself into a corner so that companies could 
offer backward compatibility.  Another short-sighted move.

>   >
>   > MIDI has been utilized to compose and produce a boat load of real
>   > music.  Hans Zimmer has produced soundtracks which are primarily
>   > digital sampler / midi.  He has won Academy awards for about 12
>   > of them.  Zimmer's main sampler is Tascam's GigaStudio.
>
> Interesting example, certainly.
>
> I can't say I know his work; I don't watch many movies.  But I was
> speaking of a musical instrument performance while the awards for
> Zimmer's soundtracks are more about composition, arrangement, scoring,
> orchestration, the contribution to the movie, the movie itself, and
> these days, politics.  And I don't know if Zimmer's work with
> GigaStudio actually uses much MIDI; I mean, I understand that
> GigaStudio uses MIDI style settings, but the connection from the score
> representation to the audio rendering has got to be straight software.
> And I'm sure he's got all sorts of tools he's developed.
>
> My point is that MIDI is a very primitive and severely limited
> protocol, with timing limitations built into the definition, with very
> modest goals and designed for ease of implementation in 1982
> technology.  And that MIDI cannot represent the subtleties of a
> player's personal style and cannot come anywhere near representing
> some of our most cherished musical performances.
>
> And unfortunately MIDI has been adopted as a vital link in the chain,
> the pipeline between keyboard and synth engine, for just about all
> digital keyboards.
>
> So I (and remember I'm supposed to be the snobby fascist luddite twat
> in this conversation) am saying the adoption of MIDI is a not a good
> thing for a musical instrument.  We should use the technology to
> leverage creativity and personal expression, not regiment everything
> into a byte stream.  We should be using a diversity of technologies,
> and enjoy the features and quirks of each, and not be forcing
> everything into a microprocessor, advanced as it may be.
>
>  -- Don
>
> -- 
> Don Tillman
> Palo Alto, California
> don@...
> http://www.till.com
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

In a message dated 6/6/2007 9:26:56 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
jonesalley@... writes:

I  distinctly recall that MIDI was supposed to have constant improvements and 
 
yet it seems to have painted itself into a corner so that companies could  
offer backward compatibility. Another short-sighted  move.




Yet it is backward compatibility on which the development and manufacture  of 
future Mellotrons as well as the survival of those that exist today  depends. 
So here we come full circle.
 
Interesting.
 
Frank



************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

----- Original Message -----

From: chris.dale@...

To: don@... ; markstuartwallis@... ; tronbros@...

Cc: Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 8:40 AM

Subject: Re: [Mellotronists] The Clone Wars (was Memotron etc..)

Another aspect of this Don doesn't mention is fraudulently passing samples off as the real thing just for 'coolness factor' / selling more 'records'.

I'm sure I'm in the minority here, but that lack of integrity really annoys me if I'm spending some hard earned dosh on expensive CD's, especially when you can tell the sound is faked, and one of the reasons you're buying is that you want to hear real mellotrons. And yes you can tell if you know what to listen for.

Spot-on, Chris - not only is it, essentially, dishonest, but it makes my job a lot harder. :-)

A special kudos to Steve Hackett for being honest with us on his Darktown release (ie mellotron plundering) as he seems to understand this regardless of how trivial it might be.

Possibly due to his extensive past use?

I know some people who feel the same way and have returned to the store everything produced by Dave Friedmann despite the quality of the music.

Now, even *I* think that's extreme! :-) The recent Mercury Rev albums are still wonderful, even when you know every 'Mellotron' and 'Chamberlin' part is a fake.

Andy T.

http://www.planetmellotron.com

jonesalley wrote:
> I distinctly recall that MIDI was supposed to have constant improvements and 
> yet it seems to have painted itself into a corner so that companies could 
> offer backward compatibility.  Another short-sighted move.
>   

Hmmm. Why am I think about tape frames that fit new Mellotrons and old 
alike? Why didn't Dave Kean build the Mk VI with a tape frame eight 
inches longer than the old ones?

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

I must say - I like the idea of having the chance to have a midi link between a MIDI controller keyboard and a Chamberlin M1R. Vance ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ And

With all this sappy kissy-kissy - I may have to throw up... Vance And I really shouldn t come back from the pub and call a complete stranger names from behind