The Mellotron Group

Martin,

If you have Chamberlin masters, does that mean you can supply frames with Chamberlin sounds?

Bernie

--- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, tronbros@... wrote:
>
> That's all very technical Mr Daily.  We have the Chamberlin masters  that 
> Streetly used and I can guarantee that they were not revisited for the M400  
> dicking around session.  I can understand the eq characteristics and the  
> lack of adjustment was probably deliberate to make the MKII Violins sound  
> different from Harry's and therefore not obviously a steal!  Naughty but  nice, 
> devious yet delicious.
>  
> Best,
>  
> M
>  
> Streetly Electronics - All Things Mellotronic 
> www.mellotronics.co.uk
> NEW for iPad!
> MELLOTRONICS M3000HD 
> US Sales  East: Jimmy Moore  (http://JMoore6397@.../) 
> US Sales  West: Paul Cox  (http://pjc56@.../) 
> myspace.com/chloesmithmusic 
>  
> 
>  
> In a message dated 23/08/2010 06:44:28 GMT Daylight Time,  
> pocotron@... writes:
> 
>  
>  
>  
> Hi all-
>   If the high F# was speeded up to A in production, one  explanation for 
> the shrill character might be the tape equalization  error due to the 
> increased speed.  More highs would be forced thru  the falling characteristic tape 
> filter slope.
>  
>   This leads me to the Mk2/M400 3-violins  comparisons.  One might also 
> want to listen to the 3-violins source  for comparison, since the Chamberlin 
> set was first.  What  was the reason for the difference between MK2 and the 
> Chamberlin  3-violins sound?  The Chamberlin violins were very clear and  
> full.  One thing I have suuspected is that Streetly recieved master  tapes from 
> Chamberlin that were recorded stateside using NAB-standard  tape 
> equalization.  If they were played back on a British machine,  having a different 
> standard (such as NARTB), the result may  have caused the "MK2 sound".  This is 
> just speculation, as most  recording engineers at the time would've noticed 
> (and dealt with) the EQ  difference, or the master tapes would've been 
> labeled with the  appropriate EQ standard.  Maybe Streetly couldn't compensate for 
>  NAB EQ, and ran the tapes with what they had, causing the EQ  error.  
> Therefore, the "MK2 3-violins" sound.
>   I think the M400 set sounds closer to the Chamberlin  set.  Maybe, in 
> 1971, the right tape EQ was available, and resulted  in the M400 set (with some 
> other aural "fooling around").
>  
>   Pure speculation on my part, from an electronics point-of  view.
>  
>    -Bruce Daily
>  
> 
> 
> --- On Sat, 8/21/10, tronfan66  <mellotron_head@...> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> From:  tronfan66 <mellotron_head@...>
> Subject:  [newmellotrongroup] Re: MK-II Violins vs M400 Violins
> To:  newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, August 21, 2010,  9:44 AM
> 
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks Clay, that would make a lot of sense (glad to hear  that someone 
> here has given it a listen too! :) ). In both cases I  just did a quick 
> recording straight from the outputs of my machine, so  you're getting 'the 
> unvarnished truth' so to speak. The fact that you  found a lot more going on with 
> the MKII ones pretty much confirms what  I've always thought about differences 
> in the overall 'feel' of certain  notes.
> 
> Interesting that the M400 violins were originally  intended to smooth out 
> some of the more strident notes from the MKII  versions though - just compare 
> the highest A between both versions and  the one on the M400 is *much* more 
> shrill! (It also happens to be the  F# closest to it, sped up to A, which 
> strikes me as a bit of a strange  choice, but there it is).
> 
> Gawd, I'm such an anorak with these  things.
> 
> Tony
> 
> --- In _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
> (http://us.mc636.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) ,  "ClayE" 
> <ecclesreinson@> wrote:
> >
> > The  comparison mp3 that you posted shows the difference well. I opened  
> your mp3 with Sony Sound Forge and used the spectrum analysis thingy.  The 
> MK-II notes have a lot more going on around 1.8 khz than the M400  notes. (8 
> db more !) The rest of the spectrum looks about the same. No  wonder M400 
> Violins sound a bit thin in the middle.
> > 
> >  --- In _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
> (http://us.mc636.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) ,  "tronfan66" 
> <mellotron_head@> wrote:
> > >
> > >  
> > > Same here, when I had the M400 violins I was always  trying to get them 
> to sound like the MKII ones. But of course with the  re-EQ, and some of the 
> actual notes/recordings not being the same  between versions, it was always 
> to no avail!
> > > 
> >  > I wonder if this is also part of what Mike Pinder meant when he  
> described the M400 as being "like a black and white photo of a  colourful 
> Mellotron". Circuitry and types of amplification between  models aside (though of 
> course they're major factors), maybe that's  another reason why he said this, 
> if he'd judged the M400 by the sound  of the M400 violins. 
> > > 
> > > Don't get me wrong, I  still like the M400 versions - just that to 
> these ears they'll always  pale by comparison to the MKII ones.
> > > 
> > > Hmm,  probably a case of OCD here too...
> > >
>