>
> 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...
> > >
>
