| previous by date | index | next by date |
| previous in topic | topic list | next in topic |
I’ve got to give it to Streetly that they are interactive, available, and very helpful to the tape based community. This kind of customer service
means everything especially when dealing with such an expensive instrument. I don’t know Markus but I don’t hear from him like I do with the
Streetly people. I would think Markus would want to help create the “buzz” about his new product, answer questions, share more details, etc.
I would like to see Streetly be a bit more open about the Mark II that they are taking deposits on yet they have not responded to requests for
pictures of the new instrument. I guess Tony had to pay to see one….and once he did he changed his order. I am sure Streetly is trying to make
sure they can sell enough of them to make it worth their while, but why not show a picture or rendering if one does not exist at this time? It would
be a big help to those who might want to purchase one.
Gary
From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of lsf5275@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2011 8:14 AM
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
Clay,
How would Markus sample all of those Chamberlin sounds. It is my understanding that swapping tapes in any Chamberlin would be a pain in the ass. Even if you were to sample the sounds from an old Music Master, the tapes would likely be old and worn. Mattias has one now. so maybe he can tell us how his tapes are. But even if they're great, they're not all of the sounds. So if he wants to use the Chamberlin Masters, he would have to play them in a Mark VI or a 400. Doing that alters the dynamics of the intended sound. But then again, Markus makes no claim that I have seen, read or heard as to how the tapes were sampled. Maybe the Chamberlin sounds were all sampled from a Mellotron. Then they wouldn't be authentic, but who's gonna know?
My only real disappointment about Markus' machine is the name. I can certainly see its appeal and its purpose. I'm not sure I am aware of his marketing strategy, if any, but there certainly is interest. I am surprised that he isn't more involved with the Mellotron community.
The only reason to call what he is selling a Mellotron is because he can use that name and put it on anything he wants. As in the Harley Davidson analogy, anything they put their name on can be called a Harley Davidson "that thing." In this case, I think of it as a "Mellotron" M4000D digital sample playback machine (rompler). Where we are headed in the future is this... When someone asks whether you own a Mellotron or not, it's no longer a simple yes or no. You may have to define your answer. For me personally, a Mellotron will always be something that plays tapes.
Frank
In a message dated 1/23/2011 10:30:48 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, ecclesreinson@rogers.com writes:
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.
> >
>