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

 

Hi all-   If the high F# was speeded up to A in production, one explanation for the shrill character might be the tape equalization error due to the increased speed.  More highs would be forced thru the falling characteristic tape filter slope.     This leads me to the Mk2/M400 3-violins comparisons.  One might also want to listen to the 3-violins source for comparison, since the Chamberlin set was first.  What was the reason for the difference between MK2 and the Chamberlin 3-violins sound?  The Chamberlin violins were very clear and full.  One thing I have suuspected is that Streetly recieved master tapes from Chamberlin that were recorded stateside using NAB-standard tape equalization.  If they were played back on a British machine, having a different standard (such as NARTB), the result may have caused the "MK2 sound".  This is just speculation, as most recording engineers at the time would've noticed (and dealt with) the EQ difference, or the master tapes would've been labeled with the appropriate EQ standard.  Maybe Streetly couldn't compensate for NAB EQ, and ran the tapes with what they had, causing the EQ error.  Therefore, the "MK2 3-violins" sound.   I think the M400 set sounds closer to the Chamberlin set.  Maybe, in 1971, the right tape EQ was available, and resulted in the M400 set (with some other aural "fooling around").     Pure speculation on my part, from an electronics point-of view.      -Bruce Daily   --- On Sat, 8/21/10, tronfan66 <mellotron_head@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: From: tronfan66 <mellotron_head@yahoo.co.uk> Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Re: MK-II Violins vs M400 Violins To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com Date: Saturday, August 21, 2010, 9:44 AM   Thanks Clay, that would make a lot of sense (glad to hear that someone here has given it a listen too! :) ). In both cases I just did a quick recording straight from the outputs of my machine, so you're getting 'the unvarnished truth' so to speak. The fact that you found a lot more going on with the MKII ones pretty much confirms what I've always thought about differences in the overall 'feel' of certain notes. Interesting that the M400 violins were originally intended to smooth out some of the more strident notes from the MKII versions though - just compare the highest A between both versions and the one on the M400 is ∗much∗ more shrill! (It also happens to be the F# closest to it, sped up to A, which strikes me as a bit of a strange choice, but there it is). Gawd, I'm such an anorak with these things. Tony --- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, "ClayE" <ecclesreinson@...> wrote: > > The comparison mp3 that you posted shows the difference well. I opened your mp3 with Sony Sound Forge and used the spectrum analysis thingy. The MK-II notes have a lot more going on around 1.8 khz than the M400 notes. (8 db more !) The rest of the spectrum looks about the same. No wonder M400 Violins sound a bit thin in the middle. > > --- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, "tronfan66" <mellotron_head@> wrote: > > > > > > Same here, when I had the M400 violins I was always trying to get them to sound like the MKII ones. But of course with the re-EQ, and some of the actual notes/recordings not being the same between versions, it was always to no avail! > > > > I wonder if this is also part of what Mike Pinder meant when he described the M400 as being "like a black and white photo of a colourful Mellotron". Circuitry and types of amplification between models aside (though of course they're major factors), maybe that's another reason why he said this, if he'd judged the M400 by the sound of the M400 violins. > > > > Don't get me wrong, I still like the M400 versions - just that to these ears they'll always pale by comparison to the MKII ones. > > > > Hmm, probably a case of OCD here too... > >