Mellotronists

Wow I am kind of floored by the cost of a MKII. Everything that you 
read in regaurds to Mellotrons always come back to saying that a MKII 
is a far supperiour machine over the M400? Also, from what I can hear 
the sounds of the MKII seem to have more of an eire nature about them 
ie. strings. I really love the strings used in the old king crimsion 
and this new group caled ours. With the M400 can you get that same 
sound as the MKII or is that just the nature of the beast? With MKII 
being as much as $12,000 I don't forsee that in the near furture. I 
guess M400 fit into the buget a little easier. As many of the other 
members may feel thier is just a growing obsecne everytime you hear 
one.

Cheers
Ron

At 03:16 AM 9/25/2002 +0000, Ron wrote:
>Wow I am kind of floored by the cost of a MKII. Everything that you
>read in regaurds to Mellotrons always come back to saying that a MKII
>is a far supperiour machine over the M400? Also, from what I can hear
>the sounds of the MKII seem to have more of an eire nature about them
>ie. strings. I really love the strings used in the old king crimsion
>and this new group caled ours. With the M400 can you get that same
>sound as the MKII or is that just the nature of the beast? With MKII
>being as much as $12,000 I don't forsee that in the near furture. I
>guess M400 fit into the buget a little easier. As many of the other
>members may feel thier is just a growing obsecne everytime you hear one.

 From reading Frank Samagaio's book, and my experience with having
owned a Mk.V, I have to agree with Mike Pinder'and others feeling
that the M400 simply doesn't come up sonically to the Mk.II or the
Mk.V.  Mike felt that the Mk.V finally incorporated all of the
improvements that the Mk.II and M400 should have had (or were made
during the life of it).  Having played an M400 recently, I would
have to agree - I feel that sonically it just doesn't have the "heft"
and dynamic range of the Mk.II or Mk.V.

Given the price levels of the Mk.II and Mk.V these days, the best
alternative is good samples of the Mk.II / Mk.V.

I know, heresy!  :)


---------------------------------------------------------
Mark S. Glinsky  -  Arlington, TX
Email -  glinskym@...
http://www.markglinsky.com/ManualManor.html
"Be Seeing You...." - No. 6
---------------------------------------------------------

Mark,
What is it about the MkV that makes it sound comparable to the 
MkII? I know it had a larger flywheel and an sms2 - But MP talked 
about electronic differences. What were these exactly and were 
they fitted to later M400s? If it sounded so good why isn't this 
available to us as an option now? Why isn't this incorporated into 
the new MKIV instead of the valve amp?
Confused!
John
M300 #005

> 
>  From reading Frank Samagaio's book, and my experience with having
> owned a Mk.V, I have to agree with Mike Pinder'and others feeling that
> the M400 simply doesn't come up sonically to the Mk.II or the Mk.V. 
> Mike felt that the Mk.V finally incorporated all of the improvements
> that the Mk.II and M400 should have had (or were made during the life
> of it).  Having played an M400 recently, I would have to agree - I
> feel that sonically it just doesn't have the "heft" and dynamic range
> of the Mk.II or Mk.V.
> 
> Given the price levels of the Mk.II and Mk.V these days, the best
> alternative is good samples of the Mk.II / Mk.V.
> 
> I know, heresy!  :)
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> Mark S. Glinsky  -  Arlington, TX
> Email -  glinskym@...
> http://www.markglinsky.com/ManualManor.html
> "Be Seeing You...." - No. 6
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ---------------------~--> Sell a Home for Top $
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/RrPZMC/jTmEAA/MVfIAA/iWZylB/TM
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------~
> ->
> 
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Mellotronists-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
>

--- In Mellotronists@y..., Mark Glinsky <glinskym@s...> wrote:
I have to agree with Mike Pinder'and others feeling that the M400 
simply doesn't come up sonically to the Mk.II or the Mk.V.  

I am sure this is true, but it is not a dramatic difference and it is 
not important to me.  The 400 has been used on a large number of 
great live and studio recordings over the years.  If you are looking 
for something that is sonically superior, get a sampler with samples 
recorded in 2002. 

I am completely convinced that the Chamberlin M1 is sonically 
superior to any Mellotron.  I have heard them side by side...
(Chamberlin 3 Violins vs MK11 3 Violins).  The Chamberlin is 
sonically superior, but I prefer the sound of the Mellotron.

I also prefer to hear Dianna Ross on a 1957 Jukebox.

Clay

-----Original Message-----

From: Mark Glinsky [mailto:glinskym@...]
Sent: 25 September 2002 04:46
To: Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Mellotronists] More on MKII


 From reading Frank Samagaio's book, and my experience with having
owned a Mk.V, I have to agree with Mike Pinder'and others feeling
that the M400 simply doesn't come up sonically to the Mk.II or the
Mk.V.


This is probably true, but, hang on a minute - it's still a Mellotron! Fault
the sound on any of the following, all recorded on an M400:

King Crimson: 'Starless'
Genesis: 'Blood on the Rooftops'
Strawbs: 'New World'
Rush: 'Tears'
Steve Hackett: 'Shadow of the Hierophant'
Hawkwind: 'Assault and Battery'

and many more... So much depends on how well the instrument's recorded, the
state of its tapes, etc. There are plenty of examples of *appallingly*
recorded M400 (hang your heads in shame, Lynyrd Skynyrd), but they tend to
be the exceptions to the rule, in my experience.


Given the price levels of the Mk.II and Mk.V these days, the best
alternative is good samples of the Mk.II / Mk.V.

I know, heresy!  :)


Sorry, I couldn't agree less. Think of the M400 more as the slightly lesser
of two peaks, as against the sampler's low foothills. My M400 still has the
power to send shivers down my spine...

Andy T.
M400 #1145

http://freespace.virgin.net/andy.thompson/

It's funny, isn't it?  I am desperate to acquire a Mk. II, a Mk. I or a Mk.
V, and can't agree more that the sound that those monsters produces is
different than that of the M400 series, but we're talking two totally
different creatures here.  I submit that owning one of the big ones is
great, just like owning a V-12 Ferrari F-50, but I'd still be thrilled to
drive a little V-8 Ferrari 360 Modena.  It's still way cooler than anything
else on the road, and the M400, despite its limitations, is still way cooler
than any other keyboard out there with the obvious exception of its big
brothers.  Let's face it, there's only 2400 of us in the world that have
this privilege (probably fewer still when you count the dead and missing
Mellotrons) and no matter what flavor it happens to be, it still has the
unmistakable taste of Mellotron.

Jon E Salley
MiloJohnson@...
M400 #886

You sum it up totally here, Jon!.. We're all very privileged to be
custodians and evangelists of these bizarre machines whilst we have the
chance. A 400 is STILL a little bit of magic even though it lives in the
shade of its more accomplished siblings. I saved hard for my 'Tron, and I'm
proud of it!!

CfN!!

C
----------

>From: "JS" <jonesalley@...>
>To: <Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com>
>Subject: Re: [Mellotronists] More on MKII
>Date: Wed, Sep 25, 2002, 11:18 pm
>

>It's funny, isn't it?  I am desperate to acquire a Mk. II, a Mk. I or a Mk.
>V, and can't agree more that the sound that those monsters produces is
>different than that of the M400 series, but we're talking two totally
>different creatures here.  I submit that owning one of the big ones is
>great, just like owning a V-12 Ferrari F-50, but I'd still be thrilled to
>drive a little V-8 Ferrari 360 Modena.  It's still way cooler than anything
>else on the road, and the M400, despite its limitations, is still way cooler
>than any other keyboard out there with the obvious exception of its big
>brothers.  Let's face it, there's only 2400 of us in the world that have
>this privilege (probably fewer still when you count the dead and missing
>Mellotrons) and no matter what flavor it happens to be, it still has the
>unmistakable taste of Mellotron.
>
>Jon E Salley
>MiloJohnson@...
>M400 #886
>
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>Mellotronists-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> 
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
>
>

At 09:08 PM 9/25/2002 +0100, Andy Thompson wrote:
>This is probably true, but, hang on a minute - it's still a Mellotron! Fault
>the sound on any of the following, all recorded on an M400:
>
>King Crimson: 'Starless'
>Genesis: 'Blood on the Rooftops'
>Strawbs: 'New World'
>Rush: 'Tears'
>Steve Hackett: 'Shadow of the Hierophant'
>Hawkwind: 'Assault and Battery'
>
>and many more... So much depends on how well the instrument's recorded, the
>state of its tapes, etc. There are plenty of examples of *appallingly*
>recorded M400 (hang your heads in shame, Lynyrd Skynyrd), but they tend to
>be the exceptions to the rule, in my experience.

Well, it could be the manner in which it's recorded.
Certainly there are a number of mediocre to poor recordings of the M400
out there.  But playing one live recently, I just wasn't very impressed.

I would make the analogy of the M400 to an upright piano, and
the Mk.II / Mk.V to a grand / concert grand piano.

So, personally, I would not pay $3000 for an M400 or an upright piano.
The money is better spent for an electronic equivalent.

I would pay $10-15,000 for a grand piano, or a Mk.II / Mk.V though.
I feel you're getting value for your money there.

Again, JMO.


---------------------------------------------------------
Mark S. Glinsky  -  Arlington, TX
Email -  glinskym@...
http://www.markglinsky.com/ManualManor.html
"Be Seeing You...." - No. 6
---------------------------------------------------------

chris.dale@... wrote:

> Ah yes, a nitpickers chance comes again!!!! Let's have some fun!! It's
> a good question since Mike Pinder discusses the improvements of the MK
> V which were already present in M400s. He states in Frank's book:
> ....."(Streetly) cottoned onto the transistor amplifier cards that I'd
> procured. They were new at the time. These cards were only 2" by 1",
> and 19 volt DC power supply, very clean, and were really good
> transistors. The EQ card followed the NAB curve very, very well. They
> sound just as good as the tubes do,without the microphonic effect."
> Aren't those our typical pre-amp cards under the M400 control panel?!
> Ian McDonald says this: "...But I just don't think they (the 400's)
> sounded the same. The transistorization thinned out the sound and I
> just never cared for them particularly".  Maybe the difference is
> using two keyboards. Obviously there is much more sound colour
> available when playing 2 keyboards as opposed to just one. Regardless,
> we really can't judge one model (the 400)  as inferior unless you've
> played each and every one of them to discern an inferior quality, and
> that's never going to happen at this point. Sound quality now depends
> more on the condition of the tapes/tape heads in each individual
> machine, especially after so many years. Playability/ease of use is
> also an influence. Historically another factor in sound (on albums) is
> the way the machine was recorded in studio (effects, amplification
> etc.). Opinions are also formed by what model one's first mellotron or
> chamberlin encounter was and how positive/negative the experience.
> It's condition/sound influences how other machines compare. Tony
> Banks/Rick Wakeman hated MK II's and preferred the 400's but Mike
> Pinder/Ian McDonald preferred the inverse. And Justin Hayward
> preferred the Chamberlin to the Mellotron during the recording of
> Seventh Sojourn. We can easily generalize about sound and quality of
> one model but when you think of all the variables today - overall
> physical condition, customization, age of original electronics,
> replacement electronics and parts, mechanical vs electronic switches,
> different tape masters, wear of tapes, tape head alignment, tubes,
> transistors, digital vs analog recording of tapes, temperature,
> reliability etc. it now all comes down to a matter of the individual
> instrument in question.  Chris Dale

I think Chris makes some very valid points, but there is one thing that
separates the MkIIs (and I's) from their younger siblings: the feel of
the keyboard. Not having the pressure pads mounted on each key makes a
HUGE difference in the touch of the instrument. I don't know how to
describe it except by using the word "elegant". Chamberlins may sound
wonderful, but (to my mind) their biggest drawback is the keyboard. Its
feel reminds me of those little toy pianos. Sad that Harry didn't take
the time to get that right.

Rick

-----Original Message-----
From: chris.dale@... [mailto:chris.dale@...]
Sent: 26 September 2002 04:27
To: Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com; ceccles_ca
Subject: Re: [Mellotronists] Re: More on MKII

Hi Chris

Can anyone recommend a concise list of recordings with a MK V or even a T550 where the sound is noticably different from the M400? (perhaps Andy Thompson can be goaded into this - where are you?!)

Well... Just been listening to some Klaus Schulze, who only ever used a MkV, mostly for choirs. Anekdoten (first 2 albums?), Pär Lindh (Anekdoten's old machine), Patrick Moraz/'80s Moodies, the Tangs, the Posies, mid-'70s Roxy Music, Neil Diamond, Paul McCartney, Pulsar... trouble is, in many of these cases it's hard to know just what machine they were recording with, especially if they owned more than one 'Tron (e.g.Tangs). I can't personally say I've noticed any difference between MkVs and M400s - after all, they both used the same tape library. Although most of you won't have heard it, I know for sure that the first Anekdoten album features a MkV.

Andy T.
M400 #1145

http://freespace.virgin.net/andy.thompson/

Dear All,

My slant on this is that most M400's sound different to each other!!!!!!!

My first (EMI) was certainly a more mellow beast than my current M400. This 
one is so bright that the tone control usually lives at about half way to 
tame the top end (otherwise it would sound like a Chamberlin :-))

Other things that may change things are the keyboard feel (MkII is better) 
and the heads are different on the early machines.  MkII uses different 
electronics (valve / tube) and there is the MkII's own amplification to add 
to the equation.

Conclusion: Any Mellotron is preferable to no Mellotron at all...

All the best,
Norm