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.
> >
>