| I see that, Clay. Perspective is everything. As a recordist, perhaps you want a mellotron sound that's exactly like a 10 bit sample from the eighties, and perhaps even completely sequenced and processed until it no longer sounds like the original signal. Does it work in a way that nothing else could accomplish? Is it "the" sound you were looking for? Then more power to you.
I have a friend who is the complete opposite from me in his methods for production. I being the lush, dreamy analog guy, he being the icy-cold, aloof digital guy. I have no issue with his work or his methods because his approach works for his production "reality". He's committed to his sound, therefore his recordings have conviction. Of course he's an extremely talented person who backs his conviction with true expertise.
It is possible (not to talk in circles) to have an artificial-sounding recording that also sounds "real". I'm saying that when your method fails to do it's job in the way it's intended, you've failed. Again it's artistic in nature so the mistake could sometimes be your success, but the idea is purity in vision can equal purity in sound.
I have neglected to discuss instrumentalists, which make up a huge portion of this group. My feeling on a player's choice of instrument (be it an M4000, M4000D, synth, guitar or what have you) is a question of what voice would you want to represent yourself as a player? A guitarist will buy a guitar for a million personal reasons. The lengths they will go to to obtain that special guitar are boundless in many cases. Sometimes it's petty, just-to-have-it reasons, but I'm talking about that instrument that just feels right in your hands and responds the way you want. I've used mellotron samples in my recording in lieu of the real thing many times, hidden it well, and gotten the desired effect. But the real one requires nothing to sound the way I want it to but to plug it in. Done. Satisfaction. It also required me to part with some serious dough. But it's important to me to get "the" sound. So I guess another question would be, "Is a mellotron something to have in your arsenal of sounds, or something you are committed to as an instrument?"
Now, I guess my point is that there are a bazillion people taking shortcuts and making devices to make recording/playing easier. Recording and making music is and always should be hard work that requires passion and commitment. The listener nowadays is getting short-changed far too often, not by technology, but by simple laziness and amateurism. The tragedy is that they are barely aware of it. --- On Sun, 1/23/11, ClayE <ecclesreinson@rogers.com> wrote:
From: ClayE <ecclesreinson@rogers.com>
Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Re: "Telling the difference"....
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, January 23, 2011, 9:45 AM
"Because your recordings sound real, like they actually happened."
Definitely a compliment Jack. I think that some types of music benefit from "high integrity recording" much more than others. Frank Zappa always had a knack for making recordings that sounded real.
The BIG issue we haven't discussed re: real vs contrived mellotron sounds and recordings is midi capture / sequence playback. With a digital mellotron like the M4000D there will be temptation for keyboardists and/or studio engineers to tweek the mellotron tracks with midi to some extent. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but can be. Too much heavy handed midi "fixing" can make a track sound artificial and lifeless.
For a band like Kraftwork, artificial is a good thing, for a blues band... Not so much.
Clay
--- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, Jack Younger <e4103s@...> wrote:
>
> OK, I had to chime in about the idea of whether regular folks can distinguish between the digital mellotron sounds and the real McCoy. This again can be boiled down to the long-time argument between analog and digital and the foibles therein. I can tell the difference, you can tell the difference, but the public at large cannot and don't care. Period. Thank goodness for that.
>
> In the recording realm we make impossible things happen every day and if the public knew the specifics of all the tricks, effects and shortcuts we use every day, the lot of us would be labelled charlatans. Now although they can't hear the specific differences, they can, unbeknown to themselves, FEEL the difference. Someplace inside they know that something within a recording lifts them or pushes them down....pulls at them emotionally. Good songwriting can take you part way, but the choices made of how to frame that song within a recording can make or break the communicated sentiment.
>
> There's something I like to call "high integrity recording." This involves the use of certain formats and instruments that make a recording thicker, fuller and more impactive to the listener. Magnetic tape, transformered consoles, valves, very good tube and ribbon mics can be considered high integrity formats. Piano, strings, horns, tympani, real mellotrons, choirs and the like are high integrity instruments....essentially any instrument that would be difficult to attain to the average listener short of an orchestra, which would be very high integrity indeed. It's not really about the specific usage of one instrument over another, but the whole of the recording that denotes this.
>
> The question can be asked..."Are we providing the listener with as full, impactive and emotional an experience as we can given a decent song and a talented artist?" Right down to the smallest shaker or tambourine, are we committed to providing a sense of reality or quality? I recently was interviewing a new recording client about why he chose me to produce his album and the answer was perhaps the highest compliment I've ever received in 20 years in the biz....."Because your recordings sound real, like they actually happened." I was elated at this simple observation. Yes, a touch dismayed that this is what the industry has boiled down to, but proud to be one who makes the distinction.
>
> Digital tron or real one, how does the whole of the recording sound? If the digital one is such that the emotion is conveyed thoroughly, OK. We also have to balance the this idea with what's available. Don't have a choir? Overdub vocals until you do? Use a sample? Don't have a mellotron? Use a 4000D or Memotron? Don't have a tape machine? Use Pro Tools or Nuendo? Fine, but take responsibility for your choice and be sure it works as the idea intended and above all, know the difference. It's OUR job to know what's real and what's not so the listener doesn't have to....so the listener can be given a true experience and be transported to a place where the song moves them. That's my feeling on it.
> -Jack YoungerM400 #376
>
>
>
|