Archive of the former Yahoo!Groups mailing list: The Mellotron Group

I basically agree with the idea that if Harry were alive he'd be interested in digital. And take a re-look at the original demo film for the Mellotron - Eric Robinson says "it makes the actual sounds of the orchestra". Of course when he said that, the only way you could (practically) do that was with tape.

There IS a difference between a 'pure' digital instrument and a electro-mechanical - there has to be  - in just the ways that have been noted.

BUT who cares? -- I love my Chamberlin for all that it is. And if you like something, then more power to you.

On the topic of a choice between the two - they are not competitors. The Streetly machine is a Mellotron (regardless of the name issue) - The Markus machine is a digital playback machine apparently called a "Resch" (look at the photos) that happens to be loaded with the Chamberlin/Bradley sounds and Markus has the right to use the Mellotron name/tm's from Dave Kean (I really don't know if Richard gave permission or if "Chamberlin" is in the public domain).
Vance

 

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, 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.
>