| previous by date | index | next by date |
| previous in topic | topic list | next in topic |
A lot of the studios that have multitrack analog machines use them to dub analog masters
to digital for mixing and mastering. I was offered a deal a couple of years ago on a half dozen
3M 2” 24 Track machines /w locators for $3,500 US/each. I thought I was going to make a mint
but found that I couldn’t give those machines away. I sold my Neve console several years ago
and it seems now that people are more interested in the mic pre’s and Eq sections so the consoles
are being scrapped and the modules are being racked. I really miss the days of analog tape but the
DAC technology has become so good it is time to move on. I fought it for years…. some of the early
digital stuff was (expensive) crap but the technology is improving at an incredible rate while the
price continues to drop. The same thing is happening in pro video.
From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Thomas C. Doncourt
Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2011 7:01 PM
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
Funny that with so many of the studios getting back into analog tape we
are having this chat about mellotrons going digital.... a backwards lot
> 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
>> <mailto:newmellotrongroup%40yahoogroups.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.
>> >
>>
>>
>