The Mellotron Group

That's the bottom line alright! If you like the way it sounds, the way it
is setup, the way it feels or even the way it looks.....

> Bottom line to me is if you like the way something sounds, then buy it.
> I certainly have preffered companies past and present, but I must say the
> newer gear just doen't appeal to me.
> You like it, you buy it, simple as that.
> I don't care if you like my collection, and vice versa, with the exception
> of rare items.
> It's not worth serious, boderline nasty jabs between people with similiar
> interests.
>
> Tony
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Charles
>   To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2011 8:48 AM
>   Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
>
>
>
>   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.
>
>
>
>