The Mellotron Group

Clay,
 
How would Markus sample all of those Chamberlin sounds. It is my  
understanding that swapping tapes in any Chamberlin would be a pain in the ass.  Even 
if you were to sample the sounds from an old Music Master, the tapes would  
likely be old and worn. Mattias has one now. so maybe he can tell us how 
his  tapes are. But even if they're great, they're not all of the sounds. So 
if he  wants to use the Chamberlin Masters, he would have to play them in a 
Mark VI or  a 400. Doing that alters the dynamics of the intended sound. But 
then again,  Markus makes no claim that I have seen, read or heard as to how 
the tapes were  sampled. Maybe the Chamberlin sounds were all sampled from 
a Mellotron. Then  they wouldn't be authentic, but who's gonna know?
 
My only real disappointment about Markus' machine is the name. I can  
certainly see its appeal and its purpose. I'm not sure I am aware of his  
marketing strategy, if any, but there certainly is interest. I am surprised that  
he isn't more involved with the Mellotron community.
 
The only reason to call what he is selling a Mellotron is because he can  
use that name and put it on anything he wants. As in the Harley Davidson  
analogy, anything they put their name on can be called a Harley Davidson "that  
thing." In this case, I think of it as a "Mellotron" M4000D digital sample  
playback machine (rompler). Where we are headed in the future is this... 
When  someone asks whether you own a Mellotron or not, it's no longer a simple 
yes or  no. You may have to define your answer. For me personally, a 
Mellotron will  always be something that plays tapes.
 
Frank
 
 
In a message dated 1/23/2011 10:30:48 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
ecclesreinson@rogers.com writes:

 
 
 
Let me try to explain this thread. Mr. Herder thinks that the samples in  
the M4000D were taken directly from the mastertapes, instead of 
a real  Mellotron. I cannot imagine why they would do that. Did MR or DK 
say that they  did this? Maybe they were misinterpreted. It makes no sense.

P.S.  Charles - The plexiglass mellotron has a more transparent sound. 
(some twit  had to say it)

Clay

--- In _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
(mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) ,  "Hessel Herder" <hessel@...> wrote:
>
> Obviously  not
> 
> 
> 
> Hessel-DEF2
> 
> 
>  
> Van: _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
(mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) 
>  [mailto:_newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
(mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) ]  Namens mattias
> Verzonden: zaterdag 22 januari 2011 20:59
> Aan:  _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
(mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) 
>  Onderwerp: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> I know.
> 
> 
> Den 2011-01-22  20.43, skrev "Hessel Herder" <hessel@...>:
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> I'm talking about the instrument, and it's  characteristics 
> 
> 
> 
> Op 22 jan. 2011 om 20:09  heeft mattias <Mattias.olsson5@...> het
> volgende  geschreven:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I record my Mellotron  digitally and it sounds pretty accurate.
> 
> // Mattias
>  
> 
> Den 2011-01-22 19.45, skrev "Hessel Herder"  <hessel@...>:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> It seems to me that, for any device claiming to have authentic  MELLOTRON
> sounds onboard, capturing the MELLOTRON medium (tape! ) and  capturing the
> characteristic replay mechanism is very important and  indeed what many
> buyers would expect to hear from this device
>  
> 
> 
> 
> Op 22 jan. 2011 om 18:18 heeft "Charles"  <charel196@...> het volgende
> geschreven:
> 
>  
> 
> 
> not a valid comparison...a guitar relies on the  wood and strings for 
sound.
> The Mellotron doesn't rely on it's  cabinet. Does the plexiglass tron 
sound
> different from the wooden  ones?
> The M4000D is a DIGITAL MELLOTRON....not a tape playback  Mellotron...but 
is
> entitled to the name nonetheless IMO since it is an  offspring of the 
line of
> instruments. As far as tuning & denoising  etc. ruining or changing the
> sound....aren't these the very things  people have bitched about for 
decades.
> Now someone fixes them and you  bitch about that! (shakes head....walking
> away....smiling)
>  Markus could offer non tuned/non-denoised versions of the sounds as an
>  option.And if you can detect the missing bits of analog tape sound in  
the
> digital version you must have super hearing.
> Yeah...the  Classic Keys sounds aren't good. The E4K/Pinder CD sounds as
> accurate  as I need. I even have samples from my old 400 in it (hissy & 
out
>  of tune) every note sampled full length, non looped.
> 
> --- In  _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
(mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) 
>  <mailto:_newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
(mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) >
>  <mailto:_newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
(mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) >
>  <mailto:_newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
(mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) >
>  <mailto:_newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
(mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) >  , lsf5275@ wrote:
> >
> > Charles,
> > 
>  > Suppose you make a wooden thing with a neck and buttons on it instead 
of  
> > strings. All of the sounds are digitized and you press buttons  to get 
the
> 
> > sounds. Is it a Guitar? It looks like a  guitar, but is it a guitar? 
No. A
> 
> > Mellotron or  Chamberlin were TAPE playback machines. Just because you 
make
> 
>  > something that kinda looks like one and plays digital representations  
of
> the 
> > original tape samples doesn't make them  one.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > In a  message dated 1/22/2011 8:48:18 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
> >  charel196@ writes:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 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.
> >
>