Mellotronists

Mike,

Nice review of the M-Tron. Probably too technical for Keyboard 
Magazine though :) Did you demo the combined set of sounds?

I purchased the original M-Tron and the 3 volumes that followed 
before GMedia combined them into one package. The original M-Tron 
and volume 1 of additional sounds were recorded from at least one 
M400 (one of which allegedly belonged to an East German spy), at 
least one Chamberlin (model unknown), a Birotron and a Roland VP330+.

The MkII sounds on volume 2 are miked recordings of Klaus Hoffmann-
Hoock's 1965 MkII. At least some of the other recordings on volume 3 
appear to be Klaus' samples "all of which had been lovingly 
denoised, scaled and tuned, yet still retained all of the necessary 
warmth and character", according to the CD jacket. Also from the 
same jacket, "Similarly, with instruments and tapes acquired from 
musicians such as Tangerine Dream and Frank Zappa, in addition to 
some ultra-rare recordings never previously released on any Tron 
library...".

Volume 3 "contains several layered Mellotron sounds which may upset 
a few purists out there", at least some of which apparently also 
come from Klaus' sample collection. There are also some SFX sound 
effects and new G-Media choirs.

There are multiple banks of the same sound. For instance, there are 
two versions of the M300A and M300B strings. There is also a big 
difference in the quality of the sound among versions. I agree that 
the MkII sounds are the best quality. Some sounds are atrocious, 
while others are pretty decent. Some sounds are not available on any 
other sample set, such as the SFX sound effects. Processed in a mix, 
I think several sounds could be useful; obviously not as good as the 
real thing though.

Bernie


--- In Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com, tron@... wrote:
>
> I've had the opportunity to play about with the GMedia M-Tron VST 
and
> have to say that I'm not very impressed. Forget about anything to 
do
> with 'purism' here; the real problem is just how *shit* some of it
> sounds.
> 
> Most of the voices are very poorly recorded indeed. I've no idea 
whence
> these recordings were sourced, but an awful lot of them are very 
noisy -
> far noisier than the real thing. In fact the only time I've heard
> noisier Mellotrons is when they are in Streetly prior to being 
fixed or
> serviced. Was this noise added for effect or was the machine or 
tapes
> from which these recordings were made defective in some way?
> 
> I'd single the solo flute out for special attention here. Given 
the fact
> that the publicise this VST as a way of playing *those classic 
sounds*
> without the need for *cumbersome machines and errant 1960s 
technology*,
> you'd think that they would get on of the most famous voices spot-
on.
> The trouble is that there is popping all over the middle range of 
the
> voice. I even went to the bother of dragging frame #1 out of the 
closet
> and doing an A/B test. No pops on the tapes, but popping all over 
the
> VST. The conclusion is therefore that either they added this or the
> tapes are buggered. Discuss.
> 
> On the subject of the flute, there is a good clue here that things 
are
> not all they seem anyway. As far as I know (I'm guessing to some 
extent
> here and working only on what I have heard) GMedia claim that this 
is a
> faithful recording of a real Mellotron, note-for-note, warts and 
all,
> etc. Hmmm. I disagree. Walking down from the top F, the most 
distinctive
> note on the solo flute is that 'Trio note' on the top D. You know -
 it
> sounds like a penny whistle giving a good shriek. It ain't there 
on the
> M-Tron. Neither is the second top F either - the one 
that 'warbles' a
> bit to itself. But if it's a verbatim account of the voice, why 
are they
> not there? Maybe they interpolate some of the samples. Maybe they 
didn't
> like the sound of those notes and tuned the ones below them up by a
> semitone. Whatever happened, it sure isn't a faithful recording of 
the
> whole sound.
> 
> And something else was odd about that sound too; chords sound a 
lot more
> 'musical' than on the real thing. Why is this? The obvious answer 
is
> that it has been tuned to some extent. Not all the way - not so 
much
> that Antares doesn't still laugh at it - but enough to make it 
obvious
> that the voices have been tampered with.
> 
> Hmmm again. I just checked with the Gmedia web site found at
> http://www.gmediamusic.com/gforce/m-tron/M-Tron.html and they 
say 'The
> M-Tron captures all of the character of the original instrument by
> sampling every note of every key and adhering to the eight second 
limit
> of each note. This way, not only do the resultant sounds ebb and 
flow,
> all the inherent and nostalgic magic of each sound is closely 
observed -
> minor imperfections and all'. I disagree. Still...at least they 
didn;t
> loop it.
> 
> Soldiering on I try out the Mk II violins. The shriller notes 
(*that*
> Bb, for example, but strangely enough not *that* F#) have been 
excluded
> here as well and are sonically almost identical (aside from pitch, 
of
> course) to their immediate neighbours. Where the blazes did they 
get
> this 'original instrument' from which they 'sampl[ed] every note'? 
I
> don't know how many Mellotrons I've played but *none of them* have 
ever
> sounded like this.
> 
> I did an A/B of the Mk II strings and got my frame bang in tune 
with the
> M-Tron, then did a run up of the notes. Sure enough, some samples 
are
> duller than the frame and some are definitely out of tune with it,
> particularly the bottom G and the first D and E. Methinks someone 
has
> been tuning some sounds here, and if they have done this then what 
else
> have they done? Added a few coughs and chair scrapes? :-) Of course
> tuned sets have existed for a good while now and it's possible 
that they
> took their samples from such a set...but who made them?
> 
> And on the subject of strings...the string section. If anything is
> designed to show them up, this is the one. I have the string 
section
> here on frame #2. You all know it. Big sound. Crunching sound. As 
we all
> know, it's a blend of cellos, violas and Mk II strings. 
Unfortunately,
> if you play it fast enough on the M-Tron you'd be forgiven for 
thinking
> it was nothing but cellos. The start times are *miles* off - the 
cellos
> start -way- before the other strings. Does anyone have a string 
section
> on their Trons that sounds like this? I sure don't. So how (again) 
is
> this a faithful sample...unless they put it together themselves, 
that
> is.
> 
> The choirs are hopeless. They are either muffled to the extent 
that you
> cannot tell the male and female voices apart (oh, and the shrill 
female
> voice on the top C has mysteriously vanished as well) or they are
> brightened up so much that there is no mid or bottom range left to 
speak
> of. They also feature a load of old Mk II voices and rhythms, none 
of
> which - heresy! heresy! they cry - I am mad keen on and frankly 
none of
> which I can see the average M-Tron user ever bothering with. The 
old
> french horns, trombones and organ (among others) sound like a 
bunch of
> sine waves subjected to slightly different filters.
> 
> And another thing that bothered me; key clicks. Some of the sounds 
have
> very faint key clicks at the start of them. Or something. That's 
not
> necessarily a *bad* thing (although it shows up a badly adjusted 
tape
> set) but the timbre of the click troubled me a little. It seemed 
to be
> strangely *the same* throughout. I recorded the sound into Sound 
Forge
> and cut out everything but the key click, then repeated it to try 
and
> make out what it is. It's hard to tell, but I am suspicious of it. 
It
> *sounds* like it's percussive white (or maybe pink) noise dumped 
at the
> start of the start of the sound to mimic a click. Like I say, I 
might be
> wrong here but it sounds very odd.
> 
> On the plus side the Mk II strings actually sound reasonably okay,
> missing, botched or alterted notes notwithstanding, and the brass 
is
> surprisingly punchy (although they have about four different brass
> voices, all of which sound very similar indeed) and the Chamberlin
> sounds are, though thin on the ground, very well-presented. It's 
also a
> lot better than the existing Mellotron VSTs such as the Nanotron 
(which
> has a flute that sounds *okay* but a string section and choir that 
sound
> horrendous) and the bizarre Mellow-Sounds which which is the only
> example I have ever seen or heard of a ten octave Mellotron with 
choirs
> ranging from Mysteron Bass up to something only dogs can make out. 
Faced
> with that level of competition the M-tron wins absolutely hands 
down. In
> fact, I find it very weird that no one has ever tried to really 
make a
> properly functioning Mellotron substitute until now, with the M-
Tron and
> the Memotron. If you go to a keyboard shop you'll find a myriad 
plastic
> boxes, all of which are fitted with drawbars and come with Leslie
> emulators - only because people still demand a real B3 sound. 
Maybe the
> Mellotron market is more limited than this.
> 
> I realise that not everyone has the requisite thousands to spend 
on a
> real Mellotron, and for that the M-Tron fills a yawning gap, but 
even
> for the relative inexpense it would be nice to get something that 
does
> exactly as it advertises and does not fall several yards short. 
It's not
> impossible to sample every voice on a properly functioning 
Mellotron and
> use that as is, without making artistic or auditory judgements on 
the
> product that warrant editorial meddling with the sound. Maybe 
someone
> will do this one day. GMedia certainly have not, and that's a pity.
> 
> Mike Dickson (tron@...) M400 #996
> The Official Cynic of Streetly Electronics
> Streetly Sample Library http://www.blackcat.demon.co.uk/tron/
>