The Mellotron Group

Obviously not

 

Hessel-DEF2

 

Van: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] Namens mattias
Verzonden: zaterdag 22 januari 2011 20:59
Aan: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Onderwerp: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011

 

  

I know.


Den 2011-01-22 20.43, skrev "Hessel Herder" <hessel@soundscape.nl>:


 
 
   

I'm talking about the instrument, and it's characteristics 



Op 22 jan. 2011 om 20:09 heeft mattias <Mattias.olsson5@comhem.se> het
volgende geschreven:

 
   

I record my Mellotron digitally and it sounds pretty accurate.

// Mattias


Den 2011-01-22 19.45, skrev "Hessel Herder" <hessel@soundscape.nl>:


 
 
   

It seems to me that, for any device claiming to have authentic MELLOTRON
sounds onboard, capturing the MELLOTRON medium (tape! ) and capturing the
characteristic replay mechanism is very important and indeed  what many
buyers would expect to hear from this device




Op 22 jan. 2011 om 18:18 heeft "Charles" <charel196@yahoo.com> het volgende
geschreven:

 
   

not a valid comparison...a guitar relies on the wood and strings for sound.
The Mellotron doesn't rely on it's cabinet. Does the plexiglass tron sound
different from the wooden ones?
 The M4000D is a DIGITAL MELLOTRON....not a tape playback Mellotron...but is
entitled to the name nonetheless IMO since it is an offspring of the line of
instruments. As far as tuning & denoising etc. ruining or changing the
sound....aren't these the very things people have bitched about for decades.
Now someone fixes them and you bitch about that! (shakes head....walking
away....smiling)
 Markus could offer non tuned/non-denoised versions of the sounds as an
option.And if you can detect the missing bits of analog tape sound in the
digital version you must have super hearing.
Yeah...the Classic Keys sounds aren't good. The E4K/Pinder CD sounds as
accurate as I need. I even have samples from my old 400 in it (hissy & out
of tune) every note sampled full length, non looped.

--- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>  , lsf5275@... wrote:
>
> Charles,
>  
> Suppose you make a wooden thing with a neck and buttons on it instead of  
> strings. All of the sounds are digitized and you press buttons to get the

> sounds. Is it a Guitar? It looks like a guitar, but is it a guitar? No. A

> Mellotron or Chamberlin were TAPE playback machines. Just because you make

> something that kinda looks like one and plays digital representations of
the  
> original tape samples doesn't make them one.
>  
>  
>  
>  
> In a message dated 1/22/2011 8:48:18 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
> charel196@... writes:
> 
>  
>  
>  
> I just don't get all this "it's not a Mellotron" talk....the digital unit

> is a logical progression from tape replay and Ill bet Harry Chamberlin
would 
>  have moved into this area if he were alive now. The whole point was 
> playing  instrument sounds on a keyboard, not the tape technology (which
was the 
> only  method available) 
> If all sounds are from original tapes and only last 8  seconds and are the

> best digital representations that can be done, personally  to me it's a
new 
> Mellotron.It's the offspring of the tape machine. So what  that it doesn't

> use Chamberlin heads etc. With EQ'ing and processing I imagine  you can
get 
> near 1000% close.
> Heck I have used samples on my albums (from  my EMU E4K, EMAX 1, and 
> CLASSIC KEYS) sometimes on the same songs I used my  real M400 (when I had
it) and 
> I defy anyone to tell me which is which. And the  E4K was using the Pinder

> CD. The M4000D samples are said to be way beyond the  Pinder CD in
quality. 
> I think it's totally anal to hang on to tape playback  technology as the 
> only thing that can be called "Mellotron" or "Chamberlin".  The 4000D is
just a 
> new and different model in the family tree....made by the  people who own 
> the name and masters.
>