The Mellotron Group

On 6 Nov 2010, at 16:46, Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com> wrote:

> In what may be a futile attempt, I will attempt to introduce some discussion into this group.
> 
> Do you think there is any merit in recording and selling new sounds for the Mellotron?
> 
> Pro this, I'd say that it expands the palette of sounds available for the instrument, keeps it 'alive' and generates revenue for those who want to sell it as a product.
> Contra this, you could argue that it transforms the Mellotron into just another sampler and that there are probably better digital products out there for the job, plus the fact that usually the Mellotron is sold to sound like a Melotron and not like just any other instrument.
> 
> Discuss?
> -- 
> Mike Dickson, Edinburgh
>

Can't be bothered. This is the apathy forum is't it?

M

mellotronics.co.uk

On 6 Nov 2010, at 16:46, Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com> wrote:

In what may be a futile attempt, I will attempt to introduce some discussion into this group.

Do you think there is any merit in recording and selling new sounds for the Mellotron?

• Pro this, I'd say that it expands the palette of sounds available for the instrument, keeps it 'alive' and generates revenue for those who want to sell it as a product.
• Contra this, you could argue that it transforms the Mellotron into just another sampler and that there are probably better digital products out there for the job, plus the fact that usually the Mellotron is sold to sound like a Melotron and not like just any other instrument.

Discuss?

-- 
Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Blechta <rick@rickblechta.com>
To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sat, Nov 6, 2010 2:14 pm
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] New Sounds In General


  
    
                  



On Nov 6, 2010, at 1:09 PM, tronbros wrote:


Can't be bothered.  This is the apathy forum is't it?


M



You're a big pooh head! I bet it will generate a lot of discussion.

From: Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com>
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, November 7, 2010 5:46:47 AM
Subject: [newmellotrongroup] New Sounds In General

   
In what may be a futile attempt, I will attempt to introduce some     discussion 
into this group.

Do you think there is any merit in recording and selling new       sounds for 
the Mellotron?


	* Pro this, I'd say that it expands the palette of sounds         available for 
the instrument, keeps it 'alive' and generates         revenue for those who 
want to sell it as a product.
	* Contra this, you could argue that it transforms the Mellotron         into 
just another sampler and that there are probably         better digital products 
out there for the job, plus the fact         that usually the Mellotron is sold 
to sound like a Melotron and         not like just any other instrument.
Discuss?

--  Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark <epdowd54@yahoo.com>
To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sat, Nov 6, 2010 5:31 pm
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] New Sounds In General


  
    
                  

Sorry this is going to be a bit of rant, so don't read any further!

I am not sure what the new sounds are trying to achieve. I have just listened to the new organ demo which sounds fantastic but doesn't sound like a mellotron to my ears, which admittedly aren't the greatest. To me that sounds exactly like a church organ I would not have picked that it was a mellotron. If the new samples are aiming for fidelity they are certainly succeeding but in that case why not use samples or the real thing?

Certainly if new samples sell and make money for Streetly they can only be a good thing for those of us that own trons and will be looking for replacement parts, but there really aren't that many sounds that are characteristic of the mellotron or aren't easily mistaken for anything else.

In my opinion there are  2.

The Mark II 3 violins
The 8 Choir

I would have added combined brass except there is at least one track where I mistook it for the real thing and some of the people on the list have long memories.

I suppose the Mark II flute is useful if you want to play "Strawberry Fields" but I can't think of any other use for it.

Essentially the mellotron has been mainly used as a "string, brass and choir machine" which explains why they fell out of production when there were reasonably reliable polyphonic  synthesizers available. The current resurgence in use is mainly due to the complete lack of anything new in popular music so that producers are looking for some 70's vintage sound to bring some sort of nostalgic feel to their music.

But anything that keeps Streetly going has to be good!

Mark




From: Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com>
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, November 7, 2010 5:46:47 AM
Subject: [newmellotrongroup] New Sounds In General

     
                  
        In what may be a futile attempt, I will attempt to introduce some    discussion into this group.
    
    Do you think there is any merit in recording and selling new      sounds for the Mellotron?
    
    
      
Pro this, I'd say that it expands the palette of sounds        available for the instrument, keeps it 'alive' and generates        revenue for those who want to sell it as a product.
      
Contra this, you could argue that it transforms the Mellotron        into just another sampler and that there are probably        better digital products out there for the job, plus the fact        that usually the Mellotron is sold to sound like a Melotron and        not like just any other instrument.
    
    
    Discuss?
    
-- 

Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

From: "fdoddy@aol.com" <fdoddy@aol.com>
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, November 7, 2010 12:27:21 PM
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] New Sounds In General

   
you're kidding 'bout all this right?  


fritz





-----Original Message-----
From: Mark <epdowd54@yahoo.com>
To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sat, Nov 6, 2010 5:31 pm
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] New Sounds In General


  
Sorry this is going to be a bit of rant, so don't read any further!

I am not sure what the new sounds are trying to achieve. I have just listened to 
the new organ demo which sounds fantastic but doesn't sound like a mellotron to 
my ears, which admittedly aren't the greatest. To me that sounds exactly like a 
church organ I would not have picked that it was a mellotron. If the new samples 
are aiming for fidelity they are certainly succeeding but in that case why not 
use samples or the real thing?

Certainly if new samples sell and make money for Streetly they can only be a 
good thing for those of us that own trons and will be looking for replacement 
parts, but there really aren't that many sounds that are characteristic of the 
mellotron or aren't easily mistaken for anything  else.

In my opinion there are  2.

The Mark II 3 violins
The 8 Choir

I would have added combined brass except there is at least one track where I 
mistook it for the real thing and some of the people on the list have long 
memories.

I suppose the Mark II flute is useful if you want to play "Strawberry Fields" 
but I can't think of any other use for it.

Essentially the mellotron has been mainly used as a "string, brass and choir 
machine" which explains why they fell out of production when there were 
reasonably reliable polyphonic  synthesizers available. The current resurgence 
in use is mainly due to the complete lack of anything new in popular music so 
that producers are looking for some 70's vintage sound to bring some sort of 
nostalgic feel to their music.

But anything that keeps Streetly going has to be good!

Mark




________________________________
From: Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com>
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, November 7, 2010 5:46:47 AM
Subject: [newmellotrongroup] New Sounds In General

  
In what may be a futile attempt, I will attempt to introduce some     discussion 
into this group.

Do you think there is any merit in recording and selling new       sounds for 
the Mellotron?


	* Pro this, I'd say that it expands the palette of sounds         available for 
the instrument, keeps it 'alive' and generates         revenue for those who 
want to sell it as a product.
	* Contra this, you could argue that it transforms the Mellotron         into 
just another sampler and that there are probably         better digital products 
out there for the job, plus the fact         that usually the Mellotron is sold 
to sound like a Melotron and         not like just any other instrument.
Discuss?

-- 
  Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

On 6 Nov 2010, at 23:27, fdoddy@aol.com wrote:

> you're kidding 'bout all this right?  
> 
> 
> fritz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark <epdowd54@yahoo.com>
> To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sat, Nov 6, 2010 5:31 pm
> Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] New Sounds In General
> 
>  
> Sorry this is going to be a bit of rant, so don't read any further!
> 
> I am not sure what the new sounds are trying to achieve. I have just listened to the new organ demo which sounds fantastic but doesn't sound like a mellotron to my ears, which admittedly aren't the greatest. To me that sounds exactly like a church organ I would not have picked that it was a mellotron. If the new samples are aiming for fidelity they are certainly succeeding but in that case why not use samples or the real thing?
> 
> Certainly if new samples sell and make money for Streetly they can only be a good thing for those of us that own trons and will be looking for replacement parts, but there really aren't that many sounds that are characteristic of the mellotron or aren't easily mistaken for anything else.
> 
> In my opinion there are  2.
> 
> The Mark II 3 violins
> The 8 Choir
> 
> I would have added combined brass except there is at least one track where I mistook it for the real thing and some of the people on the list have long memories.
> 
> I suppose the Mark II flute is useful if you want to play "Strawberry Fields" but I can't think of any other use for it.
> 
> Essentially the mellotron has been mainly used as a "string, brass and choir machine" which explains why they fell out of production when there were reasonably reliable polyphonic  synthesizers available. The current resurgence in use is mainly due to the complete lack of anything new in popular music so that producers are looking for some 70's vintage sound to bring some sort of nostalgic feel to their music.
> 
> But anything that keeps Streetly going has to be good!
> 
> Mark
> 
> From: Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com>
> To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sun, November 7, 2010 5:46:47 AM
> Subject: [newmellotrongroup] New Sounds In General
> 
>  
> In what may be a futile attempt, I will attempt to introduce some discussion into this group.
> 
> Do you think there is any merit in recording and selling new sounds for the Mellotron?
> 
> Pro this, I'd say that it expands the palette of sounds available for the instrument, keeps it 'alive' and generates revenue for those who want to sell it as a product.
> Contra this, you could argue that it transforms the Mellotron into just another sampler and that there are probably better digital products out there for the job, plus the fact that usually the Mellotron is sold to sound like a Melotron and not like just any other instrument.
> 
> Discuss?
> -- 
> 
> 
> Mike Dickson, Edinburgh
> 
> 
> 
>

From: Mark <_epdowd54@yahoo.com_ (mailto:epdowd54@yahoo.com) >
To:  newmellotrongroup <_newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
(mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) >
Sent:  Sat, Nov 6, 2010 5:31 pm
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] New Sounds In  General


 
 
 

 
Sorry this is going to be a bit of rant, so don't read any  further!

I am not sure what the new sounds are trying to achieve. I  have just 
listened to the new organ demo which sounds fantastic but doesn't  sound like a 
mellotron to my ears, which admittedly aren't the greatest. To  me that 
sounds exactly like a church organ I would not have picked that it  was a 
mellotron. If the new samples are aiming for fidelity they are  certainly 
succeeding but in that case why not use samples or the real  thing?

Certainly if new samples sell and make money for Streetly they  can only be 
a good thing for those of us that own trons and will be looking  for 
replacement parts, but there really aren't that many sounds that are  
characteristic of the mellotron or aren't easily mistaken for anything  else.

In my opinion there are  2.

The Mark II 3  violins
The 8 Choir

I would have added combined brass except there  is at least one track where 
I mistook it for the real thing and some of the  people on the list have 
long memories.

I suppose the Mark II flute is  useful if you want to play "Strawberry 
Fields" but I can't think of any  other use for it.

Essentially the mellotron has been mainly used as a  "string, brass and 
choir machine" which explains why they fell out of  production when there were 
reasonably reliable polyphonic  synthesizers  available. The current 
resurgence in use is mainly due to the complete lack  of anything new in popular 
music so that producers are looking for some 70's  vintage sound to bring some 
sort of nostalgic feel to their  music.

But anything that keeps Streetly going has to be  good!

Mark


 
____________________________________
 From: Mike Dickson <_mike.dickson@gmail.com_ 
(mailto:mike.dickson@gmail.com) >
To: _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
(mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) 
Sent: Sun, November 7, 2010 5:46:47  AM
Subject:  [newmellotrongroup] New Sounds In General


In what may be a futile attempt, I will attempt to introduce some  
discussion into this group.

Do you think there is any merit in  recording and selling new sounds for 
the Mellotron?


    *   Pro this, I'd say that it expands the palette of sounds available 
for  the instrument, keeps it 'alive' and generates revenue for those who 
want  to sell it as a product.  
    *   Contra this, you could argue that it transforms the Mellotron into  
just another sampler and that there are probably better digital  products 
out there for the job, plus the fact that usually the Mellotron  is sold to 
sound like a Melotron and not like just any other instrument.  

Discuss?
-- 




Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

From: Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com>
>To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Sun, November 7, 2010 5:46:47 AM
>Subject: [newmellotrongroup] New Sounds In General
>
>  
>In what may be a futile attempt, I will attempt to introduce some     discussion 
>into this group.
>
>Do you think there is any merit in recording and selling new       sounds for 
>the Mellotron?
>
>
>	* Pro this, I'd say that it expands the palette of sounds         available for 
>the instrument, keeps it 'alive' and generates         revenue for those who 
>want to sell it as a product.
>	* Contra this, you could argue that it transforms the Mellotron         into 
>just another sampler and that there are probably         better digital products 
>out there for the job, plus the fact         that usually the Mellotron is sold 
>to sound like a Melotron and         not like just any other instrument.
>Discuss?
>
>-- 
>  Mike Dickson, Edinburgh
>
>

From: Chris Dale <unobtainiumkeys@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] New Sounds In General
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, November 6, 2010, 11:09 PM


  




I concur with Rick and Martin about this. Rick's stories about that gig are not an exaggeration.
 
 
The Mellotron offers all kinds of characteristics unobtainable anywhere else because the sound is coming from a tape, and the tape has physical movement and each mechanism under the key responds differently when playing a chord or a single note. The playing pressure you have can add subtleties as well. The electronics are a whole other part of it. Let's not forget about the different generations of tape. All of this is the reason why the 3 violins in the Mellotron and Chamberlin sound different from each other. 
 
If you play just one single note from the Mellotron strings, especially a high note,  you might mistake it for real strings.
But when you play chords and other things, a whole universe opens up. The new sounds will all sound "Mellotronic" the more you play them, because the mechanics start influencing how the tape moves, and then your playing style adapts and starts to enhance or inhibit certain characteristics of how you want it to sound. You will notice that the sound tends to evolve after a few hours of playing. It's absolutely wonderful.     
 
 
I think if all the sounds we have now were available back then, you would have heard Pinder, Banks, Wakeman etc. using them. The idea or perhaps 'stigma' of the Mellotron as a 'string machine' really came from bands using just strings and orchestral instruments from the machine. 
But anything could have been used. 
 
I don't know about you guys, but I think there's still lots of innovation and creation awaiting us. The people who recorded  Mattias "tuned bees" sound was a step in the right direction. It was a creative move forward, whoever they were. 
So is the Tony Levin Cello, and many of the other new ones. 
 
You might laugh, but some sounds I imagine would be really interesting and wonderful in the Mellotron are:
 
 
Harmonium
 
Orchestron String Ensemble
 
Hammond Novachord sounds
 
Danelectro/Coral Electric Sitar
 
Backwards Piano
 
Gizmotron
 
Orchestra section (spanning all 3 tracks in various registers)
 
Birotron sounds
 
Steel Guitar
 
Saloon Music Piano
 
Water Pot (the sound of water moving in a pot as it's struck!) 
 
Theremin
 
Stylophone 350S sounds
 
 
Why?  Because each of these would sound different from their original source. They would become "Mellotronized" versions, and thus new musical tools. Some would be more experimental, some are certainly crazy choices, but some could be very useful.
No one expected those Lawrence Welk Chamberlin violins to ubiquitously wind up on prog rock albums. 
 
The work involved in getting these properly done onto Mellotron tape would be arduous, but there's always hope.
 
Then again - I got "Sweet Gingerbread Man" across the keyboard so what do I know?
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 9:10 PM, tronbros <tronbros@aol.com> wrote:


  




Ok, we record new sounds because we want to offer a contrast to what has gone before.  The website samples are excellent but exist to whet the whistle.  If you were to listen closely to the new recording, it is full of air, odd intonation and quirks of nature.  It is mellotronic.  Do you want us to call a halt or expand the library? I really do wonder why some even bother having a tron when the parameters are known and the technique is unique.  Mike has produced excellent recordings with an instrument the needs a service and Andy Thompson's website is testament to how prolific the awkward bastard has been.  Mike, Woolly, Pinder, Banks and a host of others make it sound good.  The problem lies with the player and NOT the instrumen


Bastard Smith   

mellotronics.co.uk 








On 6 Nov 2010, at 23:27, fdoddy@aol.com wrote:




  

you're kidding 'bout all this right?  


fritz










-----Original Message-----
From: Mark <epdowd54@yahoo.com>
To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sat, Nov 6, 2010 5:31 pm
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] New Sounds In General


  





Sorry this is going to be a bit of rant, so don't read any further!

I am not sure what the new sounds are trying to achieve. I have just listened to the new organ demo which sounds fantastic but doesn't sound like a mellotron to my ears, which admittedly aren't the greatest. To me that sounds exactly like a church organ I would not have picked that it was a mellotron. If the new samples are aiming for fidelity they are certainly succeeding but in that case why not use samples or the real thing?

Certainly if new samples sell and make money for Streetly they can only be a good thing for those of us that own trons and will be looking for replacement parts, but there really aren't that many sounds that are characteristic of the mellotron or aren't easily mistaken for anything else.

In my opinion there are  2.

The Mark II 3 violins
The 8 Choir

I would have added combined brass except there is at least one track where I mistook it for the real thing and some of the people on the list have long memories.

I suppose the Mark II flute is useful if you want to play "Strawberry Fields" but I can't think of any other use for it.

Essentially the mellotron has been mainly used as a "string, brass and choir machine" which explains why they fell out of production when there were reasonably reliable polyphonic  synthesizers available. The current resurgence in use is mainly due to the complete lack of anything new in popular music so that producers are looking for some 70's vintage sound to bring some sort of nostalgic feel to their music.

But anything that keeps Streetly going has to be good!

Mark





From: Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com>
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, November 7, 2010 5:46:47 AM
Subject: [newmellotrongroup] New Sounds In General

  

In what may be a futile attempt, I will attempt to introduce some discussion into this group.

Do you think there is any merit in recording and selling new sounds for the Mellotron?



Pro this, I'd say that it expands the palette of sounds available for the instrument, keeps it 'alive' and generates revenue for those who want to sell it as a product.
Contra this, you could argue that it transforms the Mellotron into just another sampler and that there are probably better digital products out there for the job, plus the fact that usually the Mellotron is sold to sound like a Melotron and not like just any other instrument.
Discuss?
-- 


Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

>
> On 07/11/2010 05:09, Chris Dale wrote:
> > The Mellotron offers all kinds of characteristics unobtainable 
> > anywhere else because the sound is coming from a tape, and the tape 
> > has physical movement and each mechanism under the key responds 
> > differently when playing a chord or a single note.
> 
> /Kind of. /That sounds is obtainable elsewhere because it is possible to 
> sample it and replay it. What you /won't /get is any variance from that 
> particular event.
> 
> > If you play just one single note from the Mellotron strings, 
> > especially a high note,  you might mistake it for real strings.
> 
> I don't think I have /ever/ thought they were real strings. To me it 
> sounds like a Mellotron. This sort of cuts to the heart of what I'm 
> trying to say. The old sounds /sound like a Mellotron/ whereas the newer 
> ones don't, just because no one associates  them with the instrument. 
> Hence, is it a waste of time Streetly making new sounds?
> 
> > I think if all the sounds we have now were available back then, you 
> > would have heard Pinder, Banks, Wakeman etc. using them.
> 
> Undoubtedly. The choir was new once, and everyone seemed to leap onto 
> that straight away.
> 
> Mike
>

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Dale <unobtainiumkeys@gmail.com>
To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sun, Nov 7, 2010 1:10 am
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] New Sounds In General


  
    
                  

I concur with Rick and Martin about this. Rick's stories about that gig are not an exaggeration.
 
 
The Mellotron offers all kinds of characteristics unobtainable anywhere else because the sound is coming from a tape, and the tape has physical movement and each mechanism under the key responds differently when playing a chord or a single note. The playing pressure you have can add subtleties as well. The electronics are a whole other part of it. Let's not forget about the different generations of tape. All of this is the reason why the 3 violins in the Mellotron and Chamberlin sound different from each other. 
 
If you play just one single note from the Mellotron strings, especially a high note,  you might mistake it for real strings.
But when you play chords and other things, a whole universe opens up. The new sounds will all sound "Mellotronic" the more you play them, because the mechanics start influencing how the tape moves, and then your playing style adapts and starts to enhance or inhibit certain characteristics of how you want it to sound. You will notice that the sound tends to evolve after a few hours of playing. It's absolutely wonderful.     
 
 
I think if all the sounds we have now were available back then, you would have heard Pinder, Banks, Wakeman etc. using them. The idea or perhaps 'stigma' of the Mellotron as a 'string machine' really came from bands using just strings and orchestral instruments from the machine. 
But anything could have been used. 
 
I don't know about you guys, but I think there's still lots of innovation and creation awaiting us. The people who recorded  Mattias "tuned bees" sound was a step in the right direction. It was a creative move forward, whoever they were. 
So is the Tony Levin Cello, and many of the other new ones. 
 
You might laugh, but some sounds I imagine would be really interesting and wonderful in the Mellotron are:
 
 
Harmonium
 
Orchestron String Ensemble
 
Hammond Novachord sounds
 
Danelectro/Coral Electric Sitar
 
Backwards Piano
 
Gizmotron
 
Orchestra section (spanning all 3 tracks in various registers)
 
Birotron sounds
 
Steel Guitar
 
Saloon Music Piano
 
Water Pot (the sound of water moving in a pot as it's struck!) 
 
Theremin
 
Stylophone 350S sounds
 
 
Why?  Because each of these would sound different from their original source. They would become "Mellotronized" versions, and thus new musical tools. Some would be more experimental, some are certainly crazy choices, but some could be very useful.
No one expected those Lawrence Welk Chamberlin violins to ubiquitously wind up on prog rock albums. 
 
The work involved in getting these properly done onto Mellotron tape would be arduous, but there's always hope.
 
Then again - I got "Sweet Gingerbread Man" across the keyboard so what do I know?
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 9:10 PM, tronbros <tronbros@aol.com> wrote:

  


Ok, we record new sounds because we want to offer a contrast to what has gone before.  The website samples are excellent but exist to whet the whistle.  If you were to listen closely to the new recording, it is full of air, odd intonation and quirks of nature.  It is mellotronic.  Do you want us to call a halt or expand the library? I really do wonder why some even bother having a tron when the parameters are known and the technique is unique.  Mike has produced excellent recordings with an instrument the needs a service and Andy Thompson's website is testament to how prolific the awkward bastard has been.  Mike, Woolly, Pinder, Banks and a host of others make it sound good.  The problem lies with the player and NOT the instrumen


Bastard Smith   

mellotronics.co.uk 








On 6 Nov 2010, at 23:27, fdoddy@aol.com wrote:




  
you're kidding 'bout all this right?  


fritz










-----Original Message-----
From: Mark <epdowd54@yahoo.com>
To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sat, Nov 6, 2010 5:31 pm
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] New Sounds In General


  



Sorry this is going to be a bit of rant, so don't read any further!

I am not sure what the new sounds are trying to achieve. I have just listened to the new organ demo which sounds fantastic but doesn't sound like a mellotron to my ears, which admittedly aren't the greatest. To me that sounds exactly like a church organ I would not have picked that it was a mellotron. If the new samples are aiming for fidelity they are certainly succeeding but in that case why not use samples or the real thing?

Certainly if new samples sell and make money for Streetly they can only be a good thing for those of us that own trons and will be looking for replacement parts, but there really aren't that many sounds that are characteristic of the mellotron or aren't easily mistaken for anything else.

In my opinion there are  2.

The Mark II 3 violins
The 8 Choir

I would have added combined brass except there is at least one track where I mistook it for the real thing and some of the people on the list have long memories.

I suppose the Mark II flute is useful if you want to play "Strawberry Fields" but I can't think of any other use for it.

Essentially the mellotron has been mainly used as a "string, brass and choir machine" which explains why they fell out of production when there were reasonably reliable polyphonic  synthesizers available. The current resurgence in use is mainly due to the complete lack of anything new in popular music so that producers are looking for some 70's vintage sound to bring some sort of nostalgic feel to their music.

But anything that keeps Streetly going has to be good!

Mark




From: Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com>
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, November 7, 2010 5:46:47 AM
Subject: [newmellotrongroup] New Sounds In General

  
In what may be a futile attempt, I will attempt to introduce some discussion into this group.

Do you think there is any merit in recording and selling new sounds for the Mellotron?



Pro this, I'd say that it expands the palette of sounds available for the instrument, keeps it 'alive' and generates revenue for those who want to sell it as a product.
Contra this, you could argue that it transforms the Mellotron into just another sampler and that there are probably better digital products out there for the job, plus the fact that usually the Mellotron is sold to sound like a Melotron and not like just any other instrument.

Discuss?

-- 





Mike Dickson, Edinburgh

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com>
To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sun, Nov 7, 2010 4:48 am
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] New Sounds In General


  
    
                  
        On 06/11/2010 23:03, Rick Blechta wrote:
    
    
      
        
          
                          Case in point: the Ian            McDonald flute. It is an incredibly flexible, utterly            delightful voice. Why? Because the person who created it            understands what a mellotron is. 
        
      
    
    
    Good point, that. However, played through a sampler would it make it    any different? I still maintain a lot of what makes samplers and    Mellotron's 'different' is that in the former case people with no    sense of musicality or timbre make all kinds of business decisions    about the tunings, the attacks, noise reduction, gain etc so that it    totally ruins the effect. I have sampled #996's first frame    (strings/choir/flute) and made absolutely no attempt to do anything    to the sounds other than chop them up and apply them to a sampler.    In all candour, you'd never know the difference other than the fact    that the sounds are very consistent. I still think the M-Tron is one    of the biggest abortions I've heard in ages. Not only can I tell a    real Mellotron a mile off, I can also tell when someone has been    using that particular library. 
    
    Another example is Steve Hackett's guitar. I'd never have believed    it possible that a sustained guitar would be so much fun to play. 
    
    Ian's flute has something in common with the Wilden Pipe Organ, the    new oboe/cor anglais and (to some extent) the new cello and viola    sounds too. They are all recorded with attention paid to the attack.    Most sampler libraries do not have that kind of attention to detail    and expect the sound to be full on the second the key is depressed.    Sadly, that was also a 'mistake' made with some of the old sounds    too. The Mk II brass has to be one of the worst, with no real    attention paid to balance, to attack and none to the blend used.    (Sax? Why not French Horn?!) But it sounds like a Mellotron.    So people will buy it. It's a pity we don't have enough new sounds    to put together a new brass section. I'll bet it will sound good. I    also bet hardly anyone would buy it. 
    
    
      
        
          
            
It seems to me that you're living in the past. You're              trying to turn this instrument into a museum. 
          
        
      
    
    
    Good point also. I see the whole sound library as an organic entity,    which grows according to need. Or I did, anyway. But now I am    wondering just how many of these sounds are finding their way    anywhere beyond my web site. Or are people wanting the Mellotron for    the strings/choir/flute/brass/cello axis alone?
    
    
      
        
          
            
Case in point: when my old band from the '70s got              together in 2001 to just "do a gig for the hell of it", I              was equipped with a full 36-voice FX console. They'd been              used to the same instrument, but with 400 tapes in it (6              sounds). At our first rehearsal, we were farting around              with some of the cover songs we'd decided to play for our              first set. One was "In the Court of the Crimson King". I              used the MkII violins until the end of the song, then              cycled to Les Bradley's "Orchestra" mix. The band stopped              dead in their tracks. The singer looked at me and asked,              "Holy shit! Have you been feeding that thing, steroids?" 
          
        
      
    
    
    Kind of. The orchestra is (if I am not mistaken) Mk II brass, string    section and woodwind, which are all old sounds. It will still sound    'like a Mellotron' because the sounds are all still based on things    you'd have heard from the past. 
    
    
      
        
          
            
Maybe Mike did too good a job with his recording of the              new pipe organ voice. It does sound incredibly real, but              that's probably what he was going for. 
          
        
      
    
    
    Sure. The sounds are doubled (to make it sound more like a pipe    organ) and the bottom end borrows a bass pedal from elsewhere. It    sounds very real.
    
    
      
        
          
            
For some reason, throw a bunch of magnetic tape on one              of these ridiculous machines and something magical              happens. That's what I love about them -- and I'm sure I'm              not alone.
          
        
      
    
    
    You're not. I find magnetic tape to be continually fascinating    stuff. It does things to sounds that nothing else can. 
    
    Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com>
To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sun, Nov 7, 2010 5:07 am
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] New Sounds In General


  
    
                  
        On 07/11/2010 08:33, Bruce Daily wrote:
    
    
                       
            
              
                
                  
                    
                      
Funny thing about a classic Hammond organ, it                        is also ELECTO-MECHANICAL.  Maybe there is                        something to that.
                    
                  
                
              
            
          
                  
    
    It also generates more white noise than a Mellotron. It's maybe the    noisiest circuitry I've ever heard.
    
    
      
        
          
            
              
                
                  
                    
                      
New recordings are great.  It sounds like you                        had fun with the Wilden Church Organ set, Mike.                         Someone else will, too.
                    
                  
                
              
            
          
        
      
    
    
    I hope so.
    
    Mike

On 07/11/2010 15:20, fdoddy@aol.com wrote:
>
> I love that noise!!!
>
> fd
>
>> Funny thing about a classic Hammond organ, it is also 
>> ELECTO-MECHANICAL.  Maybe there is something to that.
>>
>
> It also generates more white noise than a Mellotron. It's maybe the 
> noisiest circuitry I've ever heard.
>

On 7 Nov 2010, at 17:28, Rick Blechta <rick@rickblechta.com> wrote:

> I think a lot of this discussion is based around the current list's owners' nostalgia for their youth. "I want to relive the glory years of prog rock when I couldn't afford one of these things!" Now we have the money to indulge ourselves in the same way that a 50-year-old goes out and buys an old Jaguar. I personally would be bored musically with 3-violins, brass, choir and cello (which were the most popular sounds way back when. To say that the "Orchestra" sound is made up of old components, and then blow it off for that reason is completely missing the point. Les did something wonderful when he put it together. To be fair, I love playing "Watcher of the Skies" as much as the next old fart.
> 
> 
> The reason the old library of sounds is so dodgy is that they were recorded badly by people who weren't adept musicians (the people recording, not the people playing, necessarily). That brass sound is ridiculous if you break it down into its 3 discreet com ponents -- which is how it was recorded. That's its downfall (but also its charm). Lots of horn bands use trumpet, trombone and tenor sax. Do they sound like the MkII brass? Of course not. If Les and the guys had recorded these three instruments playing together at the same time, the results would have been far different (and probably a lot more in tune!).
> 
> My reasons for recording new sounds was primarily to make some new ones available (bass clarinet, bari sax, bass flute, etc) but also to fix up some of the bad ones that I really wanted to use but couldn't (French horn, oboe, clarinet). The reason many of these new ones don't "sound like a mellotron" is because of our list members' expectations still being mired in the past.
> 
> What's the median age of the members of the list? I'll bet it's mid-50s. Of course there's a natural urge to hang onto our youth. I'd like to give a few M4000s to some good, creative young bands and see what they could come up with since they're (hopefully) not mired in the '70s. I think we'd all be surprised with what they'd come up with. Would we think it sounds like a mellotron? Perhaps yes, perhaps no -- but they would. Actually, that's what Streetly is doing and there have been some excellent results.
> 
> Is anyone here aware of the fact that the precursor to the mellotron was the pipe organ? Take a look at what many of the ranks on them are called: oboe, clarinet, flute, trumpet, etc. In trying to make an instrument that could imitate these instruments, organ makers came up with a wholly new instrument that sort of sounded like them. I've heard mellotrons described as tape transport organs, and that is what they are. I still maintain that any instrument recording put on an 8-second piece of tape and mounted on a mellotron will sort of sound like that instrument, but in going through the instrument, it will become so mething different. Vive la difference! Those who say the new voices don't sound like a mellotron haven't played them.
> 
> Rick
> 
>

>
> In what may be a futile attempt, I will attempt to introduce some 
> discussion into this group.
> 
> /Do you think there is any merit in recording and selling new sounds for 
> the Mellotron?/
> 
>     * Pro this, I'd say that it expands the palette of sounds available
>       for the instrument, keeps it 'alive' and generates revenue for
>       those who want to sell it as a product.
>     * Contra this, you could argue that it transforms the Mellotron into
>       *just another sampler* and that there are probably better digital
>       products out there for the job, plus the fact that usually the
>       Mellotron is sold to sound like a Melotron and not like just any
>       other instrument.
> 
> 
> Discuss?
> 
> -- 
> Mike Dickson, Edinburgh
>

 From:  newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com 
[newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On  Behalf Of Mike Dickson [mike.dickson@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday,  November 07, 2010 2:06 AM
To:  newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup]  New Sounds In General




 
 
 
On 07/11/2010 08:33, Bruce Daily wrote:



Funny thing about a classic Hammond organ, it is also  ELECTO-MECHANICAL.  
Maybe there is something to  that.



It also  generates more white noise than a Mellotron. It's maybe the 
noisiest circuitry  I've ever heard.



 
 
New recordings are great.  It sounds like you had fun with  the Wilden 
Church Organ set, Mike.  Someone else will,  too.





I  hope so.

Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: lsf5275 <lsf5275@aol.com>
To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sun, Nov 7, 2010 4:51 pm
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: New Sounds In General


  
    
                  

I think the gist of all this is simple. The new sounds don't sound like the old sounds. Because they aren't. They still get "Mellotronized," each in their own way, and distinct from machine to machine.
There. That sums it all up and nothing more needs to be said. That is the definitive summary that will satisfy everyone so we're done with it. 
 
Frank
 
 
 

In a message dated 11/7/2010 12:31:11 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, rick@rickblechta.com writes:
    
  
I think a lot of this discussion is based around the current list's owners'   nostalgia for their youth. "I want to relive the glory years of prog rock when   I couldn't afford one of these things!" Now we have the money to indulge   ourselves in the same way that a 50-year-old goes out and buys an old Jaguar.   I personally would be bored musically with 3-violins, brass, choir and cello   (which were the most popular sounds way back when. To say that the "Orchestra"   sound is made up of old components, and then blow it off for that reason is   completely missing the point. Les did something wonderful when he put it   together. To be fair, I love playing "Watcher of the Skies" as much as the   next old fart.   
  


  
The reason the old library of sounds is so dodgy is that they were   recorded badly by people who weren't adept musicians (the people recording,   not the people playing, necessarily). That brass sound is ridiculous if you   break it down into its 3 discreet com ponents -- which is how it was recorded.   That's its downfall (but also its charm). Lots of horn bands use trumpet,   trombone and tenor sax. Do they sound like the MkII brass? Of course not. If   Les and the guys had recorded these three instruments playing together at the   same time, the results would have been far different (and probably a lot more   in tune!).
  


  
My reasons for recording new sounds was primarily to make some new ones   available (bass clarinet, bari sax, bass flute, etc) but also to fix up some   of the bad ones that I really wanted to use but couldn't (French horn, oboe,   clarinet). The reason many of these new ones don't "sound like a mellotron" is   because of our list members' expectations still being mired in the past.
  


  
What's the median age of the members of the list? I'll bet it's mid-50s.   Of course there's a natural urge to hang onto our youth. I'd like to give a   few M4000s to some good, creative young bands and see what they could come up   with since they're (hopefully) not mired in the '70s. I think we'd all be   surprised with what they'd come up with. Would we think it sounds like a   mellotron? Perhaps yes, perhaps no -- but they would. Actually,   that's what Streetly is doing and there have been some excellent results.
  


  
Is anyone here aware of the fact that the precursor to the mellotron was   the pipe organ? Take a look at what many of the ranks on them are called:   oboe, clarinet, flute, trumpet, etc. In trying to make an instrument that   could imitate these instruments, organ makers came up with a wholly new   instrument that sort of sounded like them. I've heard mellotrons   described as tape transport organs, and that is what they are. I still   maintain that any instrument recording put on an 8-second piece of tape and   mounted on a mellotron will sort of sound like that instrument, but in   going through the instrument, it will become so mething different. Vive la   difference! Those who say the new voices don't sound like a mellotron haven't   played them.
  


  
Rick

From: lsf5275@aol.com <lsf5275@aol.com>
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: New Sounds In General
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, November 7, 2010, 2:50 PM


  




I think the gist of all this is simple. The new sounds don't sound like the old sounds. Because they aren't. They still get "Mellotronized," each in their own way, and distinct from machine to machine.
There. That sums it all up and nothing more needs to be said. That is the definitive summary that will satisfy everyone so we're done with it. 
 
Frank
 
 
 

In a message dated 11/7/2010 12:31:11 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, rick@rickblechta.com writes:
  

I think a lot of this discussion is based around the current list's owners' nostalgia for their youth. "I want to relive the glory years of prog rock when I couldn't afford one of these things!" Now we have the money to indulge ourselves in the same way that a 50-year-old goes out and buys an old Jaguar. I personally would be bored musically with 3-violins, brass, choir and cello (which were the most popular sounds way back when. To say that the "Orchestra" sound is made up of old components, and then blow it off for that reason is completely missing the point. Les did something wonderful when he put it together. To be fair, I love playing "Watcher of the Skies" as much as the next old fart. 



The reason the old library of sounds is so dodgy is that they were recorded badly by people who weren't adept musicians (the people recording, not the people playing, necessarily). That brass sound is ridiculous if you break it down into its 3 discreet com ponents -- which is how it was recorded. That's its downfall (but also its charm). Lots of horn bands use trumpet, trombone and tenor sax. Do they sound like the MkII brass? Of course not. If Les and the guys had recorded these three instruments playing together at the same time, the results would have been far different (and probably a lot more in tune!).


My reasons for recording new sounds was primarily to make some new ones available (bass clarinet, bari sax, bass flute, etc) but also to fix up some of the bad ones that I really wanted to use but couldn't (French horn, oboe, clarinet). The reason many of these new ones don't "sound like a mellotron" is because of our list members' expectations still being mired in the past.


What's the median age of the members of the list? I'll bet it's mid-50s. Of course there's a natural urge to hang onto our youth. I'd like to give a few M4000s to some good, creative young bands and see what they could come up with since they're (hopefully) not mired in the '70s. I think we'd all be surprised with what they'd come up with. Would we think it sounds like a mellotron? Perhaps yes, perhaps no -- but they would. Actually, that's what Streetly is doing and there have been some excellent results.


Is anyone here aware of the fact that the precursor to the mellotron was the pipe organ? Take a look at what many of the ranks on them are called: oboe, clarinet, flute, trumpet, etc. In trying to make an instrument that could imitate these instruments, organ makers came up with a wholly new instrument that sort of sounded like them. I've heard mellotrons described as tape transport organs, and that is what they are. I still maintain that any instrument recording put on an 8-second piece of tape and mounted on a mellotron will sort of sound like that instrument, but in going through the instrument, it will become so mething different. Vive la difference! Those who say the new voices don't sound like a mellotron haven't played them.


Rick

On 8 Nov 2010, at 05:44, Bruce Daily <pocotron@yahoo.com> wrote:

>    Master tape of sound recorded.
>       Safety copy(s) made, and used for further production
>       Copy of safety copy made for editing down to proper sequence (maybe timed, possible splicing done)
>       Copied to production master, producing 3 different sounds side-by side
>       Safety production master made
>       Your copy from the safety production master.