The Mellotron Group

Let me try to explain this thread.  Mr. Herder thinks that the samples in the M4000D were taken directly from the mastertapes, instead of 
a real Mellotron.  I cannot imagine why they would do that.  Did MR or DK say that they did this?  Maybe they were misinterpreted.  It makes no sense.

P.S.  Charles - The plexiglass mellotron has a more transparent sound.  (some twit had to say it)

Clay


--- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, "Hessel Herder" <hessel@...> wrote:
>
> 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@...>:
> 
> 
>  
>  
>    
> 
> I'm talking about the instrument, and it's characteristics 
> 
> 
> 
> Op 22 jan. 2011 om 20:09 heeft mattias <Mattias.olsson5@...> het
> volgende geschreven:
> 
>  
>    
> 
> I record my Mellotron digitally and it sounds pretty accurate.
> 
> // Mattias
> 
> 
> Den 2011-01-22 19.45, skrev "Hessel Herder" <hessel@...>:
> 
> 
>  
>  
>    
> 
> 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@...> 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.
> >
>