Mellotronists

>Here is my Mellotron credo:
>
>A good Mellotron is a sampled Mellotron.
>
>A good Mellotron sample is looped.
>
>A good Mellotron loop is Autotuned.

I'll bite.  What does Tony get by doing this?

- Personal 'tron samples which are from an original machine, as close as 
you're going to get (although not from the Wharfedales, but he also 
explained why)

- Portability, reliability

- Something that's in tune and doesn't wobble

- Something that won't burn studio time trying to "get it right" or while 
trying to fix some malfunction

And that's what Tony wants, and who am I to argue?  I think he kinda knows 
what he's doing, and he's also not blinded by some kind of dedication to a 
strange piece of kit.

On the other hand...Would Michael Oliver's tune 
(http://www.kleonard.com/gear/805/pop.htm) have been more perfect sonically 
if #805 wasn't in a sauna the day he came over to record it?  Of 
course.  But would the *song* have been as good if the wobbly, out-of-tune 
flutes weren't used when one considers the melody and the lyrics?  No 
way.  Would Pinder's work have been so stellar if he didn't have to take 
the time to get it right?  Maybe, maybe not.  Let's just say that compared 
to their heyday, the Moodys leave a little to be desired (but there are a 
lot of reasons for that, not just a Mark II).  Tangerine Dream, too, as 
they moved away from the analog gear.  And Genesis.  No, it ain't the 
gear--entirely--but it's at least part of it---make something easy to do, 
and you'll get stuff that sounds easy to do.  Make something hard to do so 
you have to dedicate yourself to it, and it shows.

As Fritz once posted, everyone should go through a fully analog recording 
session, including splicing tapes and all that, to develop better 
recording/engineering skills and get a full appreciation of the digital 
domain.  Clearly Tony Visconti has been there, done that, and he's decided 
what works better for him---digital.  And that's probably as far as this 
issue should be discussed:  Tony's opinion, he goes with what works for 
him, and that's fine by me.  It's easier/convenient, and, yeah, the output 
kinda shows that (sorry, Tony--not exactly his fault, though), but I can't 
argue with the guy who's been doing this for decades.

*Our* opinions are driven by the gear itself and what we may or may not 
hear in the recorded tracks as being the difference between the real and 
sampled thing.  So we will use the real deal, like someone using a beat-up 
B-3 instead of samples or whatever.  And that's what works for *us*, and 
that's fine.

If I were in Tony's position, I'd probably do exactly the same thing for 
the live shows, but I'd use the real thing on the albums "just 
because."  But that's me.  :-)

...kl...M400 #805 - not sampled

* Ken Leonard - Web Table of Contents:  http://www.kleonard.com
* Get Outdoors New England:  http://www.GONewEngland.org

> From: Ken Leonard <ken@...>
   > Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 11:18:46 -0500
   > 

   > *Our* opinions are driven by the gear itself and what we may or
   > may not hear in the recorded tracks as being the difference
   > between the real and sampled thing.  So we will use the real
   > deal, like someone using a beat-up B-3 instead of samples or
   > whatever.  And that's what works for *us*, and that's fine.

It used to be that a Musical Instrument was a noise-making process
that the musician interacted with in an enjoyable and inspirational
way.  

Today there's a cult that wants to replace all musical instruments
with computers playing samples, so there's absolutely no interaction
with the noise-making process.

That's surreal.  

Am I the only one thinking "Stepford Wives" here? 

  -- Don

-- 
Don Tillman
Palo Alto, California, USA
don@...
http://www.till.com

I remember a discussion with Tony in a use-group on AOL, years ago, I think
it was for the Moodies. A thread about Mellotrons, and he was giving them a
good bashing (in a light-hearted way). Mellotron jokes etc. Q - what do you
call a Mellotron at the bottom of a dumpster? A. A Good Start! stuff like
that. And there was some dissent in defense of the Mellotron, and Tony
pointed out the "wheep!" noise that sometimes happen when the tape rewinds,
and he wanted to know of what redeeming value *that* could possibly have.
The response was "of what redeeming value is finger noise on round-wound
strings - it is part of the nature of the Instrument and the process of
playing it with your hands!"

Maybe it's that he is a "record producer", which means he produces records,
so his end result is the sound that comes out of car speakers, and any box
that helps to expidite this process is a good thing?


- Gene

M400S #1023
M400S #1213
M400S #1289

-----Original Message-----
From: Don Tillman [mailto:don@...]
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 2:32 PM
To: mellotronists@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Mellotronists] Tony Visconti


   > From: Ken Leonard <ken@...>
   > Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 11:18:46 -0500
   > 

   > *Our* opinions are driven by the gear itself and what we may or
   > may not hear in the recorded tracks as being the difference
   > between the real and sampled thing.  So we will use the real
   > deal, like someone using a beat-up B-3 instead of samples or
   > whatever.  And that's what works for *us*, and that's fine.

It used to be that a Musical Instrument was a noise-making process
that the musician interacted with in an enjoyable and inspirational
way.  

Today there's a cult that wants to replace all musical instruments
with computers playing samples, so there's absolutely no interaction
with the noise-making process.

That's surreal.  

Am I the only one thinking "Stepford Wives" here? 

  -- Don

<<Today there's a cult that wants to replace all musical instruments
with computers playing samples, so there's absolutely no interaction
with the noise-making process.

That's surreal.  

Am I the only one thinking "Stepford Wives" here?>>


no, don. but the blame isn't entirely with the technology; that so often 
these days the bland-out approach is taken is a natural consequence of the 
commoditisation of art. cars used to be hand-built once too; I'd venture that 
witnesses of the arrival of the model-t mourned the passing of quality wooden 
coachwork. big business always damages the things that people like, by trying 
to overtake the demand with sheer quantity and variety, and erasing the vital 
personal touches from the product.
one can only hope that the damn things (samplers) are so cheap that 
eventually one of them's bound to fall into the hands of a genuine musical 
subversive who doesn't then sell out. but who cares? we've already got julian 
cope.

duncan/400nr1098 and several dormant samplers.

Dear all
\ufffd
Tony Visconti on Mellotrons, from:
\ufffd
http://mixonline.com/ar/audio_capturing_keyboards/
\ufffd

Here is my Mellotron credo:

A good Mellotron is a sampled Mellotron.

A good Mellotron sample is looped.

A good Mellotron loop is Autotuned.

\ufffd


Sheep.


love,
Fritz

A typical orchestra will contain instruments that are either slightly out of tune or played slightly out of tune. 

Usually due to poor musicianship.  With orchestras, the old credo goes, "Safety in numbers"



      :>)
fritz

Don wrote,
    "Today there's a cult that wants to replace all musical instruments
with computers playing samples, so there's absolutely no interaction
with the noise-making process."

Does this cult have a name , because I've never heard of that one. A website perhaps? It's all about balance and freedom.

Fritz m400#1697...cohabitating with multiple computers

It's hard to believe that Tony V was involved with this article.
Anyone who knows Antares "Autotune" would know that it would just NOT 
WORK with most 'tron sounds.  There are several Mellotron CDrom 
sample sets available.  None of them were processed with Autotune.
Most are not looped.

....and what about the Harry C nonsense!!

Antares "AutoTune" would NOT WORK with most 'tron sounds.  AutoTune 
requires a clean, periodic waveform for input.  (Solo voice or solo 
flute for example).  Multiple instrument sounds are non-periodic 
waveforms.  AutoTune can't process them and was never intended to.

AutoTune works well with 'Tron flute.  Just one note at a time.  
(Chords would be non-periodic right?)

(noise filter, EQ and compression first, then AutoTune).