The Mellotron Group

>
> Just wondering, now that NAMM 2011 is over, any list members attend?  Was the M4000D there and demonstrated?
> 
> Best,
> John
> #911
>

> > 
> > Just wondering, now that NAMM 2011 is over, any list members attend?  Was the M4000D there and demonstrated?
> >

> > 
> > Just wondering, now that NAMM 2011 is over, any list members attend? Was the M4000D there and demonstrated?
> >

>
>
> In a message dated 1/20/2011 2:10:25 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> pocotron@yahoo.com writes:
>
> Stupid youthful humor.  I bet his favorite sound is the moog  fart.
>
>

>
>
> In a message dated 1/20/2011 2:10:25 P.M.  Eastern Standard Time,
> _pocotron@yahoo.com_ (mailto:pocotron@yahoo.com)   writes:
>
> Stupid youthful humor. I bet his favorite sound is the  moog fart.
>
>

>
> Oh Goddd!!!!! hours of fun ahead.
>  
>  
> In a message dated 1/20/2011 2:55:45 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
> tomdcour@... writes:
> 
>  
>  
>  
> Here are all the fart sounds anyone could need
> 
> _http://umbla.com/free-games-play-online-flash-225.php_ 
> (http://umbla.com/free-games-play-online-flash-225.php) 
> 
> >
> 
> Ahhh  yes, the fart sound. Always an ice breaker at any  occassion.
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 1/20/2011 2:10:25 P.M.  Eastern Standard Time,
> > _pocotron@..._ (mailto:pocotron@...)   writes:
> >
> > Stupid youthful humor. I bet his favorite sound is the  moog fart.
> >
> >
>

	From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of tronbros
	Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 5:17 PM
	To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
	Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
	
	
	  

	Cock up on the abacus front. Now only 200US below the Memotron.
Justice for the arrogance of calling it the M4000D!
	
	M
	
	mellotronics.co.uk
	
	On 20 Jan 2011, at 20:52, "Charles" <charel196@yahoo.com
<mailto:charel196%40yahoo.com> > wrote:
	
	> so the M4000D has gone from $1995 to $2495....what can justify
this price jump in such a short time frame?

On 20 Jan 2011, at 22:37, lsf5275@aol.com wrote:

> With all respect, Martin, until you can put them side by side and compare them it would be hard to dispute that Markus' digital machine is better than the Memotron. I know people who have played both and that's what I'm told. I certainly understand your bitterness, but in it you lose objectivity. The facts seem to support the likelihood that it was under priced when compared to the Memotron, which I feel is ridiculously overpriced. But people are lining up to buy them. If they weren't, the price wouldn't have gone up. The buzz I am hearing is, "... here is a Mellotron that I can afford." I believe that Markus will sell a bunch of these machines, no matter what he named it. In 6 months he'll probably sell more of them than all the real Mellotrons Streetly could ever make. Sad but true if you're a purist. Regardless of whether or not he uses, "M400D Mellotron,' it just isn't a Mellotron. You make Mellotrons... and damn good ones.
>  
> Frank
>  
> The key for Markus is going to be to deliver them. You Tube will let us know. In my opinion they look far cooler and less cheesy than the Memotron.
>  
> In a message dated 1/20/2011 5:16:56 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, tronbros@aol.com writes:
> Cock up on the abacus front. Now only 200US below the Memotron. Justice for the arrogance of calling it the M4000D!
> 
>

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

From: lsf5275@aol.com

To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 5:37 PM

Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011

With all respect, Martin, until you can put them side by side and compare them it would be hard to dispute that Markus' digital machine is better than the Memotron. I know people who have played both and that's what I'm told. I certainly understand your bitterness, but in it you lose objectivity. The facts seem to support the likelihood that it was under priced when compared to the Memotron, which I feel is ridiculously overpriced. But people are lining up to buy them. If they weren't, the price wouldn't have gone up. The buzz I am hearing is, "... here is a Mellotron that I can afford." I believe that Markus will sell a bunch of these machines, no matter what he named it. In 6 months he'll probably sell more of them than all the real Mellotrons Streetly could ever make. Sad but true if you're a purist. Regardless of whether or not he uses, "M400D Mellotron,' it just isn't a Mellotron. You make Mellotrons... and damn good ones.

Frank

The key for Markus is going to be to deliver them. You Tube will let us know. In my opinion they look far cooler and less cheesy than the Memotron.

In a message dated 1/20/2011 5:16:56 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, tronbros@aol.com writes:

Cock up on the abacus front. Now only 200US below the Memotron. Justice for the arrogance of calling it the M4000D!

>
>
> In a message dated 1/20/2011 2:10:25 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> pocotron@yahoo.com writes:
>
> Stupid youthful humor. I bet his favorite sound is the moog fart.
>
>

>  
>  
>  
>    
> 
> I thought the US$500.00 increase was royalty payments to the UK for use of the
> name.
>  
> 8-)
> 
>>  
>>  
>> 
>>  From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
>> [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of  tronbros
>> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 5:17 PM
>> To:  newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
>> Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup]  Re: OT- NAMM 2011
>> 
>>  
>>    
>>  
>> 
>> Cock up on the abacus front. Now only 200US below the Memotron. Justice for
>> the arrogance of calling it the  M4000D!
>> 
>> M
>> 
>> mellotronics.co.uk
>> 
>> On 20 Jan 2011, at 20:52,  "Charles" <charel196@yahoo.com
>> <mailto:charel196%40yahoo.com> >  wrote:
>> 
>>> > so the M4000D has gone from $1995 to $2495....what can  justify this price
>>> jump in such a short time frame?
>>  
>>    
>> 
>>>>

>  
>  
>  
>    
> 
> I wouldn't own one.
> Digital control is fine, but for sound generation, count me out.
> Besides I'm a loyal Streetly fan!
>  
> Tony
> #510 and 2 more Black Beasts ordered :-)
>  
>>  
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>  
>> From:  lsf5275@aol.com
>>  
>> To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
>>  
>> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 5:37  PM
>>  
>> Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT-  NAMM 2011
>>  
>> 
>>    
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> With all respect, Martin, until you can put them side by side and compare
>> them it would be hard to dispute that Markus' digital machine is better than
>> the Memotron. I know people who have played both and that's what I'm told. I
>> certainly understand your bitterness, but in it you lose objectivity. The
>> facts seem to support the likelihood that it was under priced when compared
>> to  the Memotron, which I feel is ridiculously overpriced. But people are
>> lining  up to buy them. If they weren't, the price wouldn't have gone up. The
>> buzz I  am hearing is, "... here is a Mellotron that I can afford." I believe
>> that  Markus will sell a bunch of these machines, no matter what he named it.
>> In 6  months he'll probably sell more of them than all the real Mellotrons
>> Streetly  could ever make. Sad but true if you're a purist. Regardless of
>> whether or not  he uses, "M400D Mellotron,' it just isn't a Mellotron. You
>> make Mellotrons...  and damn good ones.
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> Frank
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> The key for Markus is going to be to deliver them. You Tube  will let us
>> know. In my opinion they look far cooler and less cheesy than the  Memotron.
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> In a message dated 1/20/2011 5:16:56 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
>> tronbros@aol.com writes:
>>  
>>> Cock  up on the abacus front. Now only 200US below the Memotron. Justice for
>>> the  arrogance of calling it the M4000D!
>>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>>    
>> 
>>>>

On 20 Jan 2011, at 23:28, mattias <Mattias.olsson5@comhem.se> wrote:

> Ha ha ! Great Comment !
> 
> Because Streetly owns the right to the name Mellotron right ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Den 2011-01-20 23.22, skrev "John Wright" <john.wright@consona.com>:
> 
> 
> 
>  
>  
>    
> 
> I thought the US$500.00 increase was royalty payments to the UK for use of the name.
> 
> 8-)
> 
> 
>  
> From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com  [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of  tronbros
> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 5:17 PM
> To:  newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup]  Re: OT- NAMM 2011
> 
>  
>    
>  
> 
> Cock up on the abacus front. Now only 200US below the Memotron. Justice for  the arrogance of calling it the  M4000D!
> 
> M
> 
> mellotronics.co.uk
> 
> On 20 Jan 2011, at 20:52,  "Charles" <charel196@yahoo.com <mailto:charel196%40yahoo.com> >  wrote:
> 
> > so the M4000D has gone from $1995 to $2495....what can  justify this price jump in such a short time frame?
> 
>    
> 
> 
>

On 20 Jan 2011, at 23:29, mattias <Mattias.olsson5@comhem.se> wrote:

> Digital control is fine, but for sound generation, count me out.
> 
> ...and for international touring ?
> 
> 
> Den 2011-01-21 00.12, skrev "Tony" <atm655@verizon.net>:
> 
> 
> 
>  
>  
>    
> 
> I wouldn't own one.
> Digital control is fine, but for sound generation, count me out.
> Besides I'm a loyal Streetly fan!
> 
> Tony
> #510 and 2 more Black Beasts ordered :-)
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
>  
> From:  lsf5275@aol.com  
>  
> To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com  
>  
> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 5:37  PM
>  
> Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT-  NAMM 2011
>  
> 
>    
>  
> 
> 
> With all respect, Martin, until you can put them side by side and compare  them it would be hard to dispute that Markus' digital machine is better than  the Memotron. I know people who have played both and that's what I'm told. I  certainly understand your bitterness, but in it you lose objectivity. The  facts seem to support the likelihood that it was under priced when compared to  the Memotron, which I feel is ridiculously overpriced. But people are lining  up to buy them. If they weren't, the price wouldn't have gone up. The buzz I  am hearing is, "... here is a Mellotron that I can afford." I believe that  Markus will sell a bunch of these machines, no matter what he named it. In 6  months he'll probably sell more of them than all the real Mellotrons Streetly  could ever make. Sad but true if you're a purist. Regardless of whether or not  he uses, "M400D Mellotron,' it just isn't a Mellotron. You make M ellotrons...  and damn good ones.
>  
>  
>  
> Frank
>  
>  
>  
> The key for Markus is going to be to deliver them. You Tube  will let us know. In my opinion they look far cooler and less cheesy than the  Memotron.
>  
>  
>  
>  
> In a message dated 1/20/2011 5:16:56 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  tronbros@aol.com writes:
>  
> Cock  up on the abacus front. Now only 200US below the Memotron. Justice for the  arrogance of calling it the M4000D!
> 
> 
> 
>  
>    
> 
> 
>

>  
>  
>  
>    
> 
> I agree, it's not a mellotron and I/we aren't bothered about the product just
> like Steinway don't care about an Alesis piano module.  Raising the price
> prior to liberating a product into the marketplace is clumsy and flawed.  It
> raises questions.
> 
> Best,
> 
> M     
> 
> mellotronics.co.uk <http://mellotronics.co.uk>
> 
> 
> 
> On 20 Jan 2011, at 22:37, lsf5275@aol.com wrote:
> 
>>   
>>    
>> 
>> With all respect, Martin, until you can put them side by side and compare
>> them it would be hard to dispute that Markus' digital machine is better than
>> the Memotron. I know people who have played both and that's what I'm told. I
>> certainly understand your bitterness, but in it you lose objectivity. The
>> facts seem to support the likelihood that it was under priced when compared
>> to the Memotron, which I feel is ridiculously overpriced. But people are
>> lining up to buy them. If they weren't, the price wouldn't have gone up. The
>> buzz I am hearing is, "... here is a Mellotron that I can afford." I believe
>> that Markus will sell a bunch of these machines, no matter what he named it.
>> In 6 months he'll probably sell more of them than all the real Mellotrons
>> Streetly could ever make. Sad but true if you're a purist. Regardless of
>> whether or not he uses, "M400D Mellotron,' it just isn't a Mellotron. You
>> make Mellotrons... and damn good ones.
>>  
>> Frank
>>  
>> The key for Markus is going to be to deliver them. You Tube will let us know.
>> In my opinion they look far cooler and less cheesy than the Memotron.
>>  
>> In a message dated 1/20/2011 5:16:56 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
>> tronbros@aol.com writes:
>>> Cock  up on the abacus front. Now only 200US below the Memotron. Justice for
>>> the  arrogance of calling it the M4000D!
>>> 
>> 
>>  
>>   
>  
>    
> 
>>>

>  
>  
>  
>    
> 
> Matthias, the ownership of the much celebrated, often emulated but never
> copied Mellotron trademark has never, ever had a bearing on anything.  Most
> people remember Streetly first.  And it cost nothing to get and costs nothing
> to uphold.  
> 
> M 
> 
> mellotronics.co.uk <http://mellotronics.co.uk>
> 
> 
> 
> On 20 Jan 2011, at 23:28, mattias <Mattias.olsson5@comhem.se> wrote:
> 
>>   
>>    
>> 
>> Ha ha ! Great Comment !
>> 
>> Because Streetly owns the right to the name Mellotron right ?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Den 2011-01-20 23.22, skrev "John Wright" <john.wright@consona.com>:
>> 
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>    
>>> 
>>> I thought the US$500.00 increase was royalty payments to the UK for use of
>>> the name.
>>>  
>>> 8-)
>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
>>>> [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of  tronbros
>>>> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 5:17 PM
>>>> To:  newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
>>>> <mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup]  Re: OT- NAMM 2011
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>    
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> Cock up on the abacus front. Now only 200US below the Memotron. Justice for
>>>> the arrogance of calling it the  M4000D!
>>>> 
>>>> M
>>>> 
>>>> mellotronics.co.uk <http://mellotronics.co.uk>  <http://mellotronics.co.uk>
>>>> 
>>>> On 20 Jan 2011, at 20:52,  "Charles" <charel196@yahoo.com
>>>> <mailto:charel196%40yahoo.com> >  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> > so the M4000D has gone from $1995 to $2495....what can  justify this
>>>>> price jump in such a short time frame?
>>>>  
>>>>    
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>   
>>>>  
>>>>    
>>>> 
>>>>

On 20 Jan 2011, at 23:41, mattias <Mattias.olsson5@comhem.se> wrote:

> But who owns the right to the name Mellotron ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Den 2011-01-21 00.33, skrev "tronbros" <tronbros@aol.com>:
> 
> 
> 
>  
>  
>    
> 
> Matthias, the ownership of the much celebrated, often emulated but never copied Mellotron trademark has never, ever had a bearing on anything.  Most people remember Streetly first.  And it cost nothing to get and costs nothing to uphold.  
> 
> M 
> 
> mellotronics.co.uk <http://mellotronics.co.uk> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 20 Jan 2011, at 23:28, mattias <Mattias.olsson5@comhem.se> wrote:
> 
>  
>    
> 
> Ha ha ! Great Comment !
> 
> Because Streetly owns the right to the name Mellotron right ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Den 2011-01-20 23.22, skrev "John Wright" <john.wright@consona.com>:
> 
> 
>  
>  
>    
> 
> I thought the US$500.00 increase was royalty payments to the UK for use of the name.
> 
> 8-)
> 
> 
>  
> From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com  [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of  tronbros
> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 5:17 PM
> To:  newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com <mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com> 
> Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup]  Re: OT- NAMM 2011
> 
>  
>    
>  
> 
> Cock up on the abacus front. Now only 200US below the Memotron. Justice for  the arrogance of calling it the  M4000D!
> 
> M
> 
> mellotronics.co.uk <http://mellotronics.co.uk>  <http://mellotronics.co.uk> 
> 
> On 20 Jan 2011, at 20:52,  "Charles" <charel196@yahoo.com <mailto:charel196%40yahoo.com> >  wrote:
> 
> > so the M4000D has gone from $1995 to $2495....what can  justify this price jump in such a short time frame?
>  
>    
> 
> 
> 
>  
>   
> 
>    
> 
> 
>

From: mattias

To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 6:29 PM

Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011

Digital control is fine, but for sound generation, count me out.

...and for international touring ?


Den 2011-01-21 00.12, skrev "Tony" <atm655@verizon.net>:

I wouldn't own one.
Digital control is fine, but for sound generation, count me out.
Besides I'm a loyal Streetly fan!

Tony
#510 and 2 more Black Beasts ordered :-)

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

From: lsf5275@aol.com

To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 5:37 PM

Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011






With all respect, Martin, until you can put them side by side and compare them it would be hard to dispute that Markus' digital machine is better than the Memotron. I know people who have played both and that's what I'm told. I certainly understand your bitterness, but in it you lose objectivity. The facts seem to support the likelihood that it was under priced when compared to the Memotron, which I feel is ridiculously overpriced. But people are lining up to buy them. If they weren't, the price wouldn't have gone up. The buzz I am hearing is, "... here is a Mellotron that I can afford." I believe that Markus will sell a bunch of these machines, no matter what he named it. In 6 months he'll probably sell more of them than all the real Mellotrons Streetly could ever make. Sad but true if you're a purist. Regardless of whether or not he uses, "M400D Mellotron,' it just isn't a Mellotron. You make Mellotrons.. and damn good ones.



Frank



The key for Markus is going to be to deliver them. You Tube will let us know. In my opinion they look far cooler and less cheesy than the Memotron.




In a message dated 1/20/2011 5:16:56 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, tronbros@aol.com writes:

Cock up on the abacus front. Now only 200US below the Memotron. Justice for the arrogance of calling it the M4000D!

>  
>  
>  
>    
> 
> Stop getting so emotional!  We aren't concerned about the name or the product.
> Truly.  We build mellotrons and have no intention of entering the digital
> keyboard market, iPad excluded.  We don't malign competition. Therin lies the
> difference.
> 
> M
> 
> mellotronics.co.uk <http://mellotronics.co.uk>
> 
> 
> 
> On 20 Jan 2011, at 23:41, mattias <Mattias.olsson5@comhem.se> wrote:
> 
>>   
>>    
>> 
>> But who owns the right to the name Mellotron ?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Den 2011-01-21 00.33, skrev "tronbros" <tronbros@aol.com>:
>> 
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>    
>>> 
>>> Matthias, the ownership of the much celebrated, often emulated but never
>>> copied Mellotron trademark has never, ever had a bearing on anything.  Most
>>> people remember Streetly first.  And it cost nothing to get and costs
>>> nothing to uphold.
>>> 
>>> M 
>>> 
>>> mellotronics.co.uk <http://mellotronics.co.uk>  <http://mellotronics.co.uk>
>>> <http://mellotronics.co.uk>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 20 Jan 2011, at 23:28, mattias <Mattias.olsson5@comhem.se> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>   
>>>>    
>>>> 
>>>> Ha ha ! Great Comment !
>>>> 
>>>> Because Streetly owns the right to the name Mellotron right ?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Den 2011-01-20 23.22, skrev "John Wright" <john.wright@consona.com>:
>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>    
>>>>> 
>>>>> I thought the US$500.00 increase was royalty payments to the UK for use of
>>>>> the name.
>>>>>  
>>>>> 8-)
>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
>>>>>> [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of  tronbros
>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 5:17 PM
>>>>>> To:  newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
>>>>>> <mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
>>>>>> <mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup]  Re: OT- NAMM 2011
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>    
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Cock up on the abacus front. Now only 200US below the Memotron. Justice
>>>>>> for  the arrogance of calling it the  M4000D!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> M
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> mellotronics.co.uk <http://mellotronics.co.uk>
>>>>>> <http://mellotronics.co.uk> <http://mellotronics.co.uk>
>>>>>> <http://mellotronics.co.uk> <http://mellotronics.co.uk>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 20 Jan 2011, at 20:52,  "Charles" <charel196@yahoo.com
>>>>>> <mailto:charel196%40yahoo.com> >  wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> > so the M4000D has gone from $1995 to $2495....what can  justify this
>>>>>>> price jump in such a short time frame?
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>    
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>   
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>    
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>   
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>    
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>

From:  _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
(mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com)   [_mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com]_ 
(mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com])   On Behalf Of  tronbros
Sent: Thursday, January  20, 2011 5:17 PM
To:  _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
(mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com)   _<mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
(mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) >  
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup]  Re: OT- NAMM  2011





Cock  up on the abacus front. Now only 200US below the Memotron. Justice  
for  the arrogance of calling it the  M4000D!

M

_mellotronics.co.uk_ (http://mellotronics.co.uk/)  
_<http://mellotronics.co.uk_ (http://mellotronics.co.uk/) >  _<http://mellotronics.co.uk_ 
(http://mellotronics.co.uk/) >  

On 20 Jan 2011, at 20:52,  "Charles" <_charel196@yahoo.com_ 
(mailto:charel196@yahoo.com)  _<mailto:charel196%40yahoo.com>_ (mailto:charel196@yahoo.com) 
  >  wrote:

> so the M4000D has gone from $1995 to  $2495....what can  justify this 
price jump in such a short time  frame?

But who owns the right to the name Mellotron ?





Den 2011-01-21 00.33, skrev "tronbros" <tronbros@aol.com>:

Matthias, the ownership of the much celebrated, often emulated but never copied Mellotron trademark has never, ever had a bearing on anything. Most people remember Streetly first. And it cost nothing to get and costs nothing to uphold.

M

mellotronics.co.uk



On 20 Jan 2011, at 23:28, mattias <Mattias.olsson5@comhem.se> wrote:

Ha ha ! Great Comment !

Because Streetly owns the right to the name Mellotron right ?




Den 2011-01-20 23.22, skrev "John Wright" <john.wright@consona.com>:

I thought the US$500.00 increase was royalty payments to the UK for use of the name.

8-)

From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of tronbros
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 5:17 PM
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011





Cock up on the abacus front. Now only 200US below the Memotron. Justice for the arrogance of calling it the M4000D!

M

mellotronics.co.uk ;

On 20 Jan 2011, at 20:52, "Charles" <charel196@yahoo.com > wrote:

> so the M4000D has gone from $1995 to $2495....what can justify this price jump in such a short time frame?

No, what you meant was, "Sorry about the H."

You know what annoys me? The extra T in Matthew. I mean, I know why it should be there, but it's very presence is so irritating. Anyone else?

In a message dated 1/20/2011 6:37:03 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, tronbros@aol.com writes:

Sorry about the extra H.

M

On 1/20/2011 7:52 PM, lsf5275@aol.com wrote:
>
> No, Vance or Vince is no bother. Lance is no bother either. Lince 
> would be a bother. That name would annoy the shit out of me.
> In a message dated 1/20/2011 9:33:50 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
> punchbowl4@earthlink.net writes:
>
>     Frank -
>     How about all those Lance's and Vince's.......sheesh!
>     Vance
>
>     On 1/20/2011 4:49 PM, lsf5275@aol.com wrote:
>
>>     No, what you meant was, "Sorry about the H."
>>     You know what annoys me? The extra T in Matthew. I mean, I know
>>     why it should be there, but it's very presence is so irritating.
>>     Anyone else?
>>     In a message dated 1/20/2011 6:37:03 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
>>     tronbros@aol.com writes:
>>
>>         Sorry about the extra H.
>>
>>         M
>>
>

-----Original Message-----
From: lsf5275 <lsf5275@aol.com>
To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thu, Jan 20, 2011 8:01 pm
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011


  
    
                  
Doesn't everyone love it when Dr. Tony talks in scientific terms? I love learning stuff.
 

In a message dated 1/20/2011 7:50:47 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, atm655@verizon.net writes:
  
Trust me as a Ph.D. in Computer   Science, your equipment will go "tits up" too.

-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Brumm <gabru@comsec.net>
To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thu, Jan 20, 2011 8:44 pm
Subject: RE: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011


  
    
                  

An Alesis piano module would never be mistaken for a Steinway where as this instrument would be difficult if not impossible to distinguish 
from a tape machine in a mix by most everyone.  You see terribly worried by this instrument being offered in the marketplace.  The more 
you try to find flaw with his marketing or product the more worried you sound.  I am sure his product will do well.  The tape machines are no 
longer (and never really were) in the mainstream of MI equipment.  Your customers are the few dedicated enthusiasts here on the list and 
a very small market beyond that.  IMHO You would probably do best to concentrate on that market as you really can’t compete with the 4000D 
products head to head in the larger MI market.  No offense meant to you or your products but the more you talk about the more you advertise 
for Markus (who I do not know).  ….just an observation YMMV J
 
Cheers,
 
Gary
 
 


From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of tronbros
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 3:05 PM
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011

 
  


I agree, it's not a mellotron and I/we aren't bothered about the product just like Steinway don't care about an Alesis piano module.  Raising the price prior to liberating a product into the marketplace is clumsy and flawed.  It raises questions.

 

Best,

 

M     

mellotronics.co.uk

 

 



On 20 Jan 2011, at 22:37, lsf5275@aol.com wrote:


  

With all respect, Martin, until you can put them side by side and compare them it would be hard to dispute that Markus' digital machine is better than the Memotron. I know people who have played both and that's what I'm told. I certainly understand your bitterness, but in it you lose objectivity. The facts seem to support the likelihood that it was under priced when compared to the Memotron, which I feel is ridiculously overpriced. But people are lining up to buy them. If they weren't, the price wouldn't have gone up. The buzz I am hearing is, "... here is a Mellotron that I can afford." I believe that Markus will sell a bunch of these machines, no matter what he named it. In 6 months he'll probably sell more of them than all the real Mellotrons Streetly could ever make. Sad but true if you're a purist. Regardless of whether or not he uses, "M400D Mellotron,' it just isn't a Mellotron. You make Mellotrons... and damn good ones.

 

Frank

 

The key for Markus is going to be to deliver them. You Tube will let us know. In my opinion they look far cooler and less cheesy than the Memotron.

 


In a message dated 1/20/2011 5:16:56 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, tronbros@aol.com writes:

Cock up on the abacus front. Now only 200US below the Memotron. Justice for the arrogance of calling it the M4000D!

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Dale <unobtainiumkeys@gmail.com>
To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Fri, Jan 21, 2011 3:19 am
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011


  
    
                  

 
 
Well I think it depends. 
 
I've been able to tell the real thing apart from samples, but deeper in the mix - yes it's pretty difficult.
 
Also - I imagine most Mellotron owners could recognize when it is real or not.
 
 


 
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Gary Brumm <gabru@comsec.net> wrote:

  



An Alesis piano module would never be mistaken for a Steinway where as this instrument would be difficult if not impossible to distinguish 
from a tape machine in a mix by most everyone.

> It's about your personal connection with the machine as much as the
> sound..the feel of it.  It's a very selfish feeling actually.  I can fool
> 99.9% of the public with samples, but I can't fool myself.  That's what
> counts!
>
> fd
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Dale <unobtainiumkeys@gmail.com>
> To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Fri, Jan 21, 2011 3:19 am
> Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Well I think it depends.
>
> I've been able to tell the real thing apart from samples, but deeper in
> the mix - yes it's pretty difficult.
>
> Also - I imagine most Mellotron owners could recognize when it is real or
> not.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Gary Brumm <gabru@comsec.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> An Alesis piano module would never be mistaken for a Steinway where as
> this instrument would be difficult if not impossible to distinguish
> from a tape machine in a mix by most everyone.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> That is well put! Playing a sampler is like a job, getting a real tron to
> sound just right and then recording it is a personal process I enjoy. Few
> things much better than that.
> 
> > It's about your personal connection with the machine as much as the
> > sound..the feel of it. It's a very selfish feeling actually. I can fool
> > 99.9% of the public with samples, but I can't fool myself. That's what
> > counts!
> >
> > fd
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chris Dale <unobtainiumkeys@gmail.com>
> > To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Fri, Jan 21, 2011 3:19 am
> > Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Well I think it depends.
> >
> > I've been able to tell the real thing apart from samples, but deeper in
> > the mix - yes it's pretty difficult.
> >
> > Also - I imagine most Mellotron owners could recognize when it is real or
> > not.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Gary Brumm <gabru@comsec.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > An Alesis piano module would never be mistaken for a Steinway where as
> > this instrument would be difficult if not impossible to distinguish
> > from a tape machine in a mix by most everyone.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
>

>
> Completely agree Tom
> 
> Which makes me wonder,aren't the samples in the 
> M4000D taken directly from the mastertapes, instead of 
> a real Mellotron?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Op 21 jan. 2011 om 16:41 heeft "Thomas C. Doncourt" <tomdcour@...> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> > That is well put! Playing a sampler is like a job, getting a real tron to
> > sound just right and then recording it is a personal process I enjoy. Few
> > things much better than that.
> > 
> > > It's about your personal connection with the machine as much as the
> > > sound..the feel of it. It's a very selfish feeling actually. I can fool
> > > 99.9% of the public with samples, but I can't fool myself. That's what
> > > counts!
> > >
> > > fd
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Chris Dale <unobtainiumkeys@...>
> > > To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
> > > Sent: Fri, Jan 21, 2011 3:19 am
> > > Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Well I think it depends.
> > >
> > > I've been able to tell the real thing apart from samples, but deeper in
> > > the mix - yes it's pretty difficult.
> > >
> > > Also - I imagine most Mellotron owners could recognize when it is real or
> > > not.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Gary Brumm <gabru@...> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > An Alesis piano module would never be mistaken for a Steinway where as
> > > this instrument would be difficult if not impossible to distinguish
> > > from a tape machine in a mix by most everyone.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > 
> >
>

From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of lsf5275@aol.com
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 12:49 PM
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011


I will happily take that bet.

Frank

In a message dated 1/21/2011 1:20:03 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, gabru@comsec.net<mailto:gabru@comsec.net> writes:
I would
be willing to bet Marcus makes more money selling those in the next couple of years than all of the Mellotron and Streetly tape machines
sold in the last ten.

> If so, that would seem to explain some of the EQ differenced noted by
> Berington.
>
>
>
> In a message dated 1/21/2011 3:57:23 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> hessel@soundscape.nl writes:
>
> Completely agree Tom
>
>
> Which makes me wonder,aren't the samples in the
> M4000D taken directly from the mastertapes, instead of
> a  real Mellotron?
>
>

From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com  
[mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of  lsf5275@aol.com
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 12:49  PM
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re:  [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011

 
 
 
 
I will happily  take that bet.
 

 
Frank
 

 
 
In a message  dated 1/21/2011 1:20:03 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
_gabru@comsec.net_ (mailto:gabru@comsec.net)   writes:

I would   
be willing  to bet Marcus makes more money selling those in the next couple 
of years  than all of the Mellotron and Streetly tape machines  
sold in the  last ten.

> If so, that would seem to explain some  of the EQ differenced noted by
>  Berington.
>
>
>
> In a message dated 1/21/2011  3:57:23 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> _hessel@soundscape.nl_ (mailto:hessel@soundscape.nl)   writes:
>
> Completely agree Tom
>
>
> Which  makes me wonder,aren't the samples in the
> M4000D taken directly from  the mastertapes, instead of
> a real  Mellotron?
>
>

> Because Markus can't put every sound in a Mark VI and can't make realistic  Chamberlin sounds that way.
>  
> In a message dated 1/21/2011 4:23:29 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, tomdcour@amnh.org writes:
>  
> I wonder why he would do that, the samples he provided for Nord were
> made using a Mk VI
> 
> > If so, that would seem to explain some of the EQ differenced noted by
> > Berington.
> >
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 1/21/2011 3:57:23 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> > hessel@soundscape.nl writes:
> >
> > Completely agree Tom
> >
> >
> > Which makes me wonder,aren't the samples in the
> > M4000D taken directly from the mastertapes, instead of
> > a real Mellotron?
> >
> >
> 
> 
>

From: lsf5275@aol.com <lsf5275@aol.com>
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, January 21, 2011, 4:46 PM







 



  


    
      
      
      


Because Markus can't put every sound in a Mark VI and can't make realistic 
Chamberlin sounds that way.
 

In a message dated 1/21/2011 4:23:29 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
tomdcour@amnh.org writes:
  
  
  I wonder why he would do that, the samples he provided for Nord 
  were
made using a Mk VI

> If so, that would seem to explain some 
  of the EQ differenced noted by
> 
  Berington.
  


    
     


        
      

                Messages in this topic
          (60)
           






      Recent Activity:

    
                                                    
    
  
    Visit Your Group
  


              
      MARKETPLACE
      
                  
            Get great advice about dogs and cats.  Visit the Dog & Cat Answers Center.          
                                  
                          
                        Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.           
              
    
  

  
  Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use




   

  
  
  



     




     

  .

From:  lsf5275@aol.com <lsf5275@aol.com>
Subject: Re:  [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
To:  newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, January 21, 2011,  4:46 PM


 
Because Markus can't put every sound in a Mark VI and can't make  realistic 
Chamberlin sounds that way.
 
 
In a message dated 1/21/2011 4:23:29 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
tomdcour@amnh.org writes:

 
I wonder why he would do that, the samples he provided for Nord  were
made using a Mk VI

> If so, that would seem to  explain some of the EQ differenced noted by
>  Berington.

On 21 Jan 2011, at 23:00, Gary Brumm <gabru@comsec.net> wrote:

> There is no doubt that a digital machine is much easier and cheaper to build.  That is and the low volume of sales is reflected in the tape machines high price. 
> 
> I think you know as well as Streetly or Marcus what it takes to build one of those mechanical beasts.  I also think you are right that even though it may sell well
> 
> at first it will likely dwindle off due to its limited use as “a one trick pony” sampler.  Although there are some analogue and electromechanical  (Mellotron, Hammond)
> 
> I don’t know that many digital keyboards will achieve that “Hall of Fame” status.  To me they seem to be not an unique in character but who knows….I didn’t appreciate
> 
> the longevity all of the “classic” analogs I have owned over the years.  J
> 
>  
> 
> Cheers!
> 
>  
> 
> From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of lsf5275@aol.com
> Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 1:46 PM
> To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Making the M4000D is less costly in every regard than a real tron. Chips are cheap. The profit margins have to be far better with the digital machine and you can assemble a couple in a few hours. Take it from me. I've built a number of Mellotrons from the frame up, but I don't build cabinets (yet) and I don't have to machine the parts. I think the labor cost on the digital machine is very low. In short, he can crank them out. But if he builds 200 of them, that's going to be more than Streetly is ever going to make (in my opinion).
> 
>  
> 
> I think Markus will sell a bunch of them. But eventually the buzz will die down, and once all the sounds are out there, there won't be anything to sell to the customer base. He'll bury the Memotron, but Streetly will sell all of the hand crafted, lovingly assembled M4000s they care to make. There just won't be as many of them as there are digital machines.
> 
>  
> 
> I imagine many tron owners will also have the digital machine, but by keeping his price low, he could bury the Memotron.
> 
>  
> 
> Here is a graph of the Dollar against the Krona. There is no justification for a 30% increase in the price of Markus' digital machine. Perhaps the price increase may prove to be a mistake in the long run.
> 
>  
> 
> http://www.x-rates.com/d/USD/SEK/graph120.html
> 
>  
> 
> In a message dated 1/21/2011 4:17:32 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, gabru@comsec.net writes:
> 
>  
> 
> Drinks are all I can afford to bet in this economy…if you throw in the dinner and airfare….with a night’s hotel stay to recover
> 
> that’s a few grand at least….but win or lose it would be fun….oh that’s right Frank I forgot you quit drinking….I just saved
> 
> at least $50+….it would have been more but I haven’t quit (yet…in 2 years who knows :)  I’ll leave you with your own words: 
> 
> “The buzz I am hearing is, "... here is a Mellotron that I can afford ." I believe that Markus will sell a bunch of these machines,
> 
> no matter what he named it. In 6 months he'll probably sell more of them than all the real Mellotrons Streetly could ever make.”
> 
> Frank (#1)
> 
> January 20, 2011
> 
> Best to you! J
> 
> Gary
> 
> From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of lsf5275@aol.com
> Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 12:49 PM
> To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
> 
>  
> 
> I will happily take that bet.
> 
> Frank
> 
> In a message dated 1/21/2011 1:20:03 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, gabru@comsec.net writes:
> 
> I would
> 
> be willing to bet Marcus makes more money selling those in the next couple of years than all of the Mellotron and Streetly tape machines
> 
> sold in the last ten. 
> 
> 
>

From: _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
(mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com)   [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of 
_lsf5275@aol.com_ (mailto:lsf5275@aol.com) 
Sent: Friday,  January 21, 2011 1:46 PM
To:  newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup]  Re: OT- NAMM 2011

 
 
 
 
Making the  M4000D is less costly in every regard than a real tron. Chips 
are cheap. The  profit margins have to be far better with the digital machine 
and you can  assemble a couple in a few hours. Take it from me. I've built 
a number of  Mellotrons from the frame up, but I don't build cabinets (yet) 
and I don't  have to machine the parts. I think the labor cost on the 
digital machine is  very low. In short, he can crank them out. But if he builds 
200 of them,  that's going to be more than Streetly is ever going to make (in 
my  opinion).
 

 
I think  Markus will sell a bunch of them. But eventually the buzz will die 
down, and  once all the sounds are out there, there won't be anything to 
sell to the  customer base. He'll bury the Memotron, but Streetly will sell 
all of the  hand crafted, lovingly assembled M4000s they care to make. There 
just won't  be as many of them as there are digital machines.
 

 
I imagine  many tron owners will also have the digital machine, but by 
keeping his  price low, he could bury the Memotron.
 

 
Here is a  graph of the Dollar against the Krona. There is no justification 
for a 30%  increase in the price of Markus' digital machine. Perhaps the 
price increase  may prove to be a mistake in the long run.
 

 
_http://www.x-rates.com/d/USD/SEK/graph120.html_ 
(http://www.x-rates.com/d/USD/SEK/graph120.html) 
 

 
 
In a message  dated 1/21/2011 4:17:32 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
_gabru@comsec.net_ (mailto:gabru@comsec.net)   writes:

 
 
Drinks  are all I can afford to bet in this economy…if you throw in the 
dinner and  airfare….with a night’s hotel stay to recover  
that’s a  few grand at least….but win or lose it would be fun….oh that’s 
right Frank  I forgot you quit drinking….I just saved  
at least  $50+….it would have been more but I haven’t quit (yet…in 2 years 
who knows  :)  I’ll leave you with your own words:   
“The buzz I  am hearing is, "... here is a Mellotron that I can afford ." I 
believe  that Markus will sell a bunch of these machines,  
no matter  what he named it. In 6 months he'll probably sell more of them 
than all  the real Mellotrons Streetly could ever make.” 
Frank  (#1) 
January  20, 2011 
Best to  you! J 
Gary 
 
 
 
From: _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
(mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com)   [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of 
_lsf5275@aol.com_ (mailto:lsf5275@aol.com) 
Sent: Friday,  January 21, 2011 12:49 PM
To:  newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re:  [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011

 
 
 
 
I will  happily take that bet.
 
Frank
 
 
In a  message dated 1/21/2011 1:20:03 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
_gabru@comsec.net_ (mailto:gabru@comsec.net)   writes:

I would   
be  willing to bet Marcus makes more money selling those in the next couple 
 of years than all of the Mellotron and Streetly tape machines   
sold in the last  ten.

From: _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
(mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com)   [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of 
_lsf5275@aol.com_ (mailto:lsf5275@aol.com) 
Sent: Friday,  January 21, 2011 1:46 PM
To:  newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup]  Re: OT- NAMM 2011

 
 
 
 
Making the  M4000D is less costly in every regard than a real tron. Chips 
are cheap. The  profit margins have to be far better with the digital machine 
and you can  assemble a couple in a few hours. Take it from me. I've built 
a number of  Mellotrons from the frame up, but I don't build cabinets (yet) 
and I don't  have to machine the parts. I think the labor cost on the 
digital machine is  very low. In short, he can crank them out. But if he builds 
200 of them,  that's going to be more than Streetly is ever going to make (in 
my  opinion).
 

 
I think  Markus will sell a bunch of them. But eventually the buzz will die 
down, and  once all the sounds are out there, there won't be anything to 
sell to the  customer base. He'll bury the Memotron, but Streetly will sell 
all of the  hand crafted, lovingly assembled M4000s they care to make. There 
just won't  be as many of them as there are digital machines.
 

 
I imagine  many tron owners will also have the digital machine, but by 
keeping his  price low, he could bury the Memotron.
 

 
Here is a  graph of the Dollar against the Krona. There is no justification 
for a 30%  increase in the price of Markus' digital machine. Perhaps the 
price increase  may prove to be a mistake in the long run.
 

 
_http://www.x-rates.com/d/USD/SEK/graph120.html_ 
(http://www.x-rates.com/d/USD/SEK/graph120.html) 
 

 
 
In a message  dated 1/21/2011 4:17:32 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
_gabru@comsec.net_ (mailto:gabru@comsec.net)   writes:

 
 
Drinks  are all I can afford to bet in this economy…if you throw in the 
dinner and  airfare….with a night’s hotel stay to recover  
that’s a  few grand at least….but win or lose it would be fun….oh that’s 
right Frank  I forgot you quit drinking….I just saved  
at least  $50+….it would have been more but I haven’t quit (yet…in 2 years 
who knows  :)  I’ll leave you with your own words:   
“The buzz I  am hearing is, "... here is a Mellotron that I can afford ." I 
believe  that Markus will sell a bunch of these machines,  
no matter  what he named it. In 6 months he'll probably sell more of them 
than all  the real Mellotrons Streetly could ever make.” 
Frank  (#1) 
January  20, 2011 
Best to  you! J 
Gary 
 
 
 
From: _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
(mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com)   [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of 
_lsf5275@aol.com_ (mailto:lsf5275@aol.com) 
Sent: Friday,  January 21, 2011 12:49 PM
To:  newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re:  [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011

 
 
 
 
I will  happily take that bet.
 
Frank
 
 
In a  message dated 1/21/2011 1:20:03 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
_gabru@comsec.net_ (mailto:gabru@comsec.net)   writes:

I would   
be  willing to bet Marcus makes more money selling those in the next couple 
 of years than all of the Mellotron and Streetly tape machines   
sold in the last  ten.

On 1/21/2011 3:44 PM, djacques@csulb.edu wrote:
>
> Love the reference to Marvin from Hitchhiker's Guide. You guys crack 
> me up.
>
> I am in London in march. Can I come and meet you guys and maybe do 
> some business?
>
> David
>
> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: * tronbros <tronbros@aol.com>
> *Sender: * newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
> *Date: *Fri, 21 Jan 2011 23:27:39 +0000
> *To: *newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com<newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
> *ReplyTo: * newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
> *Subject: *Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011ee
>
> It'us funny how a few comments gets everyone so fired up.  We really 
> don't have an issue with any digital emulation of the mellotron and 
> our iPad app will soon be revolutionised at such a low price that if 
> thats what you want, save your pennies and have fun for the cost of a 
> beer!  Not quite the real thing but bloody good for the price.
>
> The name ownership issue is for others and NOT for us.  We have never 
> suffered from not owning the Mellotron name.  We have an equally, 
> almost more important name and the one musicians remember.
>
> We are not bitter people and what prompts my personal annoyance is the 
> negative selling techniques of Mr Swede.  I have ample evidence of a 
> paranoid android maligning everyone in his path to gain sales.  Our 
> quotes NEVER EVER malign anyone.  I am tempted to reveal all but 
> won't.  So when you think we are paranoid about the M unit, it's just 
> frustration at the pathetic put downs and negativity.
>
> We build mellotrons and will continue to do so.  Markus has abdicated.
>
> Best,
>
> Martin
>
> mellotronics.co.uk <http://mellotronics.co.uk>
>
>
>
> On 21 Jan 2011, at 23:00, Gary Brumm <gabru@comsec.net 
> <mailto:gabru@comsec.net>> wrote:
>
>> There is no doubt that a digital machine is much easier and cheaper 
>> to build.  That is and the low volume of sales is reflected in the 
>> tape machines high price.
>>
>> I think you know as well as Streetly or Marcus what it takes to build 
>> one of those mechanical beasts.  I also think you are right that even 
>> though it may sell well
>>
>> at first it will likely dwindle off due to its limited use as \u201ca one 
>> trick pony\u201d sampler.  Although there are some analogue and 
>> electromechanical  (Mellotron, Hammond)
>>
>> I don\u2019t know that many digital keyboards will achieve that \u201cHall of 
>> Fame\u201d status.  To me they seem to be not an unique in character but 
>> who knows\u2026.I didn\u2019t appreciate
>>
>> the longevity all of the \u201cclassic\u201d analogs I have owned over the years. J
>>
>> Cheers!
>>
>> *From:*newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com 
>> <mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com> 
>> [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of 
>> *lsf5275@aol.com <mailto:lsf5275@aol.com>
>> *Sent:* Friday, January 21, 2011 1:46 PM
>> *To:* newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
>>
>> Making the M4000D is less costly in every regard than a real tron. 
>> Chips are cheap. The profit margins have to be far better with the 
>> digital machine and you can assemble a couple in a few hours. Take it 
>> from me. I've built a number of Mellotrons from the frame up, but I 
>> don't build cabinets (yet) and I don't have to machine the parts. I 
>> think the labor cost on the digital machine is very low. In short, he 
>> can crank them out. But if he builds 200 of them, that's going to be 
>> more than Streetly is ever going to make (in my opinion).
>>
>> I think Markus will sell a bunch of them. But eventually the buzz 
>> will die down, and once all the sounds are out there, there won't be 
>> anything to sell to the customer base. He'll bury the Memotron, but 
>> Streetly will sell all of the hand crafted, lovingly assembled M4000s 
>> they care to make. There just won't be as many of them as there are 
>> digital machines.
>>
>> I imagine many tron owners will also have the digital machine, but by 
>> keeping his price low, he could bury the Memotron.
>>
>> Here is a graph of the Dollar against the Krona. There is no 
>> justification for a 30% increase in the price of Markus' digital 
>> machine. Perhaps the price increase may prove to be a mistake in the 
>> long run.
>>
>> http://www.x-rates.com/d/USD/SEK/graph120.html
>>
>> In a message dated 1/21/2011 4:17:32 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
>> gabru@comsec.net <mailto:gabru@comsec.net> writes:
>>
>>     Drinks are all I can afford to bet in this economy\u2026if you throw
>>     in the dinner and airfare\u2026.with a night\u2019s hotel stay to recover
>>
>>     that\u2019s a few grand at least\u2026.but win or lose it would be fun\u2026.oh
>>     that\u2019s right Frank I forgot you quit drinking\u2026.I just saved
>>
>>     at least $50+\u2026.it would have been more but I haven\u2019t quit (yet\u2026in
>>     2 years who knows :)  I\u2019ll leave you with your own words:
>>
>>     \u201cThe buzz I am hearing is, "... here is a Mellotron that I can
>>     afford ." I believe that Markus will sell a bunch of these machines,
>>
>>     no matter what he named it. In 6 months he'll probably sell more
>>     of them than all the real Mellotrons Streetly could ever make.\u201d
>>
>>     Frank (#1)
>>
>>     January 20, 2011
>>
>>     Best to you! J
>>
>>     Gary
>>
>>     *From:*newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
>>     <mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
>>     [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of
>>     *lsf5275@aol.com <mailto:lsf5275@aol.com>
>>     *Sent:* Friday, January 21, 2011 12:49 PM
>>     *To:* newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
>>     *Subject:* Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
>>
>>     I will happily take that bet.
>>
>>     Frank
>>
>>     In a message dated 1/21/2011 1:20:03 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
>>     gabru@comsec.net <mailto:gabru@comsec.net> writes:
>>
>>         I would
>>
>>         be willing to bet Marcus makes more money selling those in
>>         the next couple of years than all of the Mellotron and
>>         Streetly tape machines
>>
>>         sold in the last ten.
>>
>

>  
>  
>  
>    
> 
> In a message dated 1/21/2011 3:31:03 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
> lsf5275@aol.com writes:
>>  
>> Well alright then!
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> But I must admit that I haven't heard a peep from the mouth of Mr.  Resch...
>> at least not on this or the other group list.
> It's just as well.  Do we really want another major flame war?
>  
>    
> 
>

----- 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.

> 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.
>
>
>
>

>
> 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.
>

> 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, 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.
> >
> 
>

>
> 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, 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.
> >
>

>  
>  
>  
>    
> 
> 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@yahoo.com> 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> , 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.
>>> >
>> 
>>  
>>   
>>  
>>    
>> 
>>

>
> 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, 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.
> >
>

> I record my Mellotron digitally and it sounds pretty accurate.
> 
> // Mattias
> 
> 
> Den 2011-01-22 19.45, skrev "Hessel Herder" <hessel@soundscape.nl>:
> 
> 
> 
>  
>  
>    
> 
> 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@yahoo.com> 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> , 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.
> >
> 
>  
>   
>  
>   
> 
> 
>

>  
>  
>  
>    
> 
> I'm talking about the instrument, and it's characteristics
> 
> 
> 
> Op 22 jan. 2011 om 20:09 heeft mattias <Mattias.olsson5@comhem.se> het
> volgende geschreven:
> 
>>   
>>    
>> 
>> I record my Mellotron digitally and it sounds pretty accurate.
>> 
>> // Mattias
>> 
>> 
>> Den 2011-01-22 19.45, skrev "Hessel Herder" <hessel@soundscape.nl>:
>> 
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>    
>>> 
>>> 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@yahoo.com> 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>  , 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.
>>>>> >
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>   
>>>>  
>>>>    
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>   
>>>>  
>>>>    
>>>> 
>>>>

> new and different model in the family tree....made  by the people who own 
> the name and  masters.
>

>
> I hear Harley Davidson is going to make a bicycle with speakers on it that  
> play back the sounds of the big V-Twin when you pedal it around. It will 
> have  the Harley Davidson Logo on it and since it still sounds just like the 
> big bike  it must be a motorcycle.
>  
>  
> In a message dated 1/22/2011 1:44:51 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
> hessel@... writes:
> 
>  
>  
>  
> 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@..._ 
> (mailto: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) ,  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.
> >
>

> 
> 
> I have Harley Davidson eyeglass frames. They're really loud!
> 
> Bernie
> 
> --- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, lsf5275@... wrote:
> >
> > I hear Harley Davidson is going to make a bicycle with speakers on it that  
> > play back the sounds of the big V-Twin when you pedal it around. It will 
> > have the Harley Davidson Logo on it and since it still sounds just like the 
> > big bike it must be a motorcycle.
> > 
> > 
> > In a message dated 1/22/2011 1:44:51 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
> > hessel@... writes:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 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@..._ 
> > (mailto: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) , 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.
> > >
> >
> 
>

> 
> 
> I have Harley Davidson eyeglass frames. They're really loud!
> 
> Bernie
> 
> --- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, lsf5275@... wrote:
> >
> > I hear Harley Davidson is going to make a bicycle with speakers on it that  
> > play back the sounds of the big V-Twin when you pedal it around. It will 
> > have the Harley Davidson Logo on it and since it still sounds just like the 
> > big bike it must be a motorcycle.
> > 
> > 
> > In a message dated 1/22/2011 1:44:51 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
> > hessel@... writes:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 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@..._ 
> > (mailto: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) , 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.
> > >
> >
> 
>

>
> Bad Ass! Have you ever sat on them?
>  
>  
> In a message dated 1/22/2011 3:22:23 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
> tron400@... writes:
> 
>  
>  
>  
> 
> 
> I have Harley Davidson eyeglass frames. They're really  loud! Why? Are they 
> Orange?
> 
> Bernie
> 
> --- In _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
> (mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) ,  lsf5275@ wrote:
> >
> > I hear Harley Davidson is going to make a  bicycle with speakers on it 
> that 
> > play back the sounds of the big  V-Twin when you pedal it around. It will 
> > have the Harley Davidson  Logo on it and since it still sounds just like 
> the 
> > big bike it must  be a motorcycle.
> > 
> > 
> > In a message dated 1/22/2011  1:44:51 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
> > hessel@ writes:
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 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@_  
> > (mailto: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) )  , 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.
> > >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 0.0.0
>

>
> If you make a digital "violin" that plays back violin samples is it a  
> violin? The very nature of what makes a Mellotron a Mellotron is that it plays  
> tapes. Markus' machine has the name Mellotron on it because he has the right 
> to  put that name on anything he so chooses. He could build a guitar and 
> put  Mellotron on the head stock and we would know it as a "Mellotron" Guitar. 
> In  this case, he has put the name "Mellotron" on a DIGITAL sample playback 
> machine  that shares nothing else in common with a real Mellotron except 
> wooden keys that  are dimensionally similar and a shape that is reminiscent of 
> the top of a M400.  I am not degrading Markus' machine, I would love to 
> have one. I am merely  pointing out that it is no more a Mellotron than the 
> Memotron is.
>  
> If Harry Chamberlin were alive today and made a digital sample playback  
> machine that played his samples or any other samples and put his name on it we 
>  would call it a Chamberlin "..." but it would not be the same thing. 
> "Mellotron"  is not just a name owned by David Kean, it is a kind of thing. The 
> fact that  Streetly makes such a machine that doesn't use the name but is one 
> none the less  supports this position. People look at it and buy it and 
> play it and if you ask  them what it is they'll tell you it's a Mellotron
>  
> If I want to play any other sound than those Markus sells for his digital  
> machine I can't unless I hack the software or find some other way of 
> sneaking  different sounds into it. The nature of a Mellotron is such that there is 
> no  limit to what sounds I can put into it. If they can be put on tape, I 
> can play  them.
>  
> If I make a frame from scratch that substantially duplicates the original,  
> duplicate the original keyboard, make a preamp, line amp and controls like  
> a Mellotron and get a Mellotron tape frame, then I put the whole mess in a  
> white cabinet shaped like an M400, everyone who looks at it and hears it 
> will  say, "that's a Mellotron."
>  
> We could go on and on Charles, and while I respect your opinion, we'll have 
>  to disagree. I'm right and you're wrong. Nyah! 
>  
>  
> In a message dated 1/22/2011 12:18:52 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
> charel196@... writes:
> 
> The  M4000D is a DIGITAL MELLOTRON
>

> to disagree. I'm right and you're  wrong. Nyah! 
> 
> 
> In a message dated 1/22/2011 12:18:52  P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
> charel196@... writes:
> 
>  The M4000D is a DIGITAL MELLOTRON
>

>
> On what stone tablets is it written that a Mellotron or Chamberlin HAVE to be tape replay instruments? The whole idea was to be able to playback instruments on a keyboard. Who can dictate with absolute authority that this has to be done exclusively on recording tape?
>  A bit like saying a car with a computer can no longer be called a car because old cars didn't have computers.
> 
> 
> 
> --- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, lsf5275@ wrote:
> >
> > If you make a digital "violin" that plays back violin samples is it a  
> > violin? The very nature of what makes a Mellotron a Mellotron is that it plays  
> > tapes. Markus' machine has the name Mellotron on it because he has the right 
> > to  put that name on anything he so chooses. He could build a guitar and 
> > put  Mellotron on the head stock and we would know it as a "Mellotron" Guitar. 
> > In  this case, he has put the name "Mellotron" on a DIGITAL sample playback 
> > machine  that shares nothing else in common with a real Mellotron except 
> > wooden keys that  are dimensionally similar and a shape that is reminiscent of 
> > the top of a M400.  I am not degrading Markus' machine, I would love to 
> > have one. I am merely  pointing out that it is no more a Mellotron than the 
> > Memotron is.
> >  
> > If Harry Chamberlin were alive today and made a digital sample playback  
> > machine that played his samples or any other samples and put his name on it we 
> >  would call it a Chamberlin "..." but it would not be the same thing. 
> > "Mellotron"  is not just a name owned by David Kean, it is a kind of thing. The 
> > fact that  Streetly makes such a machine that doesn't use the name but is one 
> > none the less  supports this position. People look at it and buy it and 
> > play it and if you ask  them what it is they'll tell you it's a Mellotron
> >  
> > If I want to play any other sound than those Markus sells for his digital  
> > machine I can't unless I hack the software or find some other way of 
> > sneaking  different sounds into it. The nature of a Mellotron is such that there is 
> > no  limit to what sounds I can put into it. If they can be put on tape, I 
> > can play  them.
> >  
> > If I make a frame from scratch that substantially duplicates the original,  
> > duplicate the original keyboard, make a preamp, line amp and controls like  
> > a Mellotron and get a Mellotron tape frame, then I put the whole mess in a  
> > white cabinet shaped like an M400, everyone who looks at it and hears it 
> > will  say, "that's a Mellotron."
> >  
> > We could go on and on Charles, and while I respect your opinion, we'll have 
> >  to disagree. I'm right and you're wrong. Nyah! 
> >  
> >  
> > In a message dated 1/22/2011 12:18:52 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
> > charel196@ writes:
> > 
> > The  M4000D is a DIGITAL MELLOTRON
> >
>

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, 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.
>

> I basically agree with the idea that if Harry were alive he'd be
> interested in digital. And take a re-look at the original demo film for
> the Mellotron - Eric Robinson says "it makes the actual sounds of the
> orchestra". Of course when he said that, the only way you could
> (practically) do that was with tape.
>
> There IS a difference between a 'pure' digital instrument and a
> electro-mechanical - there has to be  - in just the ways that have been
> noted.
>
> BUT who cares? -- I love my Chamberlin for all that it is. And if you
> like something, then more power to you.
>
> On the topic of a choice between the two - they are not competitors. The
> Streetly machine _is_ a Mellotron (regardless of the name issue) - The
> Markus machine is a digital playback machine apparently called a "Resch"
> (look at the photos) that happens to be loaded with the
> Chamberlin/Bradley sounds and Markus has the right to use the Mellotron
> name/tm's from Dave Kean (I really don't know if Richard gave permission
> or if "Chamberlin" is in the public domain).
> Vance
>
>> 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%40yahoogroups.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.
>> >
>>
>>
>

> I basically agree with the idea that if Harry were alive he'd be
> interested in digital. And take a re-look at the original demo film for
> the Mellotron - Eric Robinson says "it makes the actual sounds of the
> orchestra". Of course when he said that, the only way you could
> (practically) do that was with tape.
>
> There IS a difference between a 'pure' digital instrument and a
> electro-mechanical - there has to be - in just the ways that have been
> noted.
>
> BUT who cares? -- I love my Chamberlin for all that it is. And if you
> like something, then more power to you.
>
> On the topic of a choice between the two - they are not competitors. The
> Streetly machine _is_ a Mellotron (regardless of the name issue) - The
> Markus machine is a digital playback machine apparently called a "Resch"
> (look at the photos) that happens to be loaded with the
> Chamberlin/Bradley sounds and Markus has the right to use the Mellotron
> name/tm's from Dave Kean (I really don't know if Richard gave permission
> or if "Chamberlin" is in the public domain).
> Vance
>
>> 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%40yahoogroups.com>
>> <mailto:newmellotrongroup%40yahoogroups.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.
>> >
>>
>>
>

> new and different model in the family tree....made by the  people who own 
> the name and masters.
>

>
> Obviously not
> 
>  
> 
> Hessel-DEF2
> 
>  
> 
> Van: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] Namens mattias
> Verzonden: zaterdag 22 januari 2011 20:59
> Aan: 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>  , 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.
> >
>

> > the name  and masters.
> >
>

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, "Hessel Herder" wrote:
>
> Obviously not
>
>
>
> Hessel-DEF2
>
>
>
> Van: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] Namens mattias
> Verzonden: zaterdag 22 januari 2011 20:59
> Aan: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
> Onderwerp: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
>
>
> ;
>
>
> I know.
>
>
> Den 2011-01-22 20.43, skrev "Hessel Herder" :
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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" :
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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" 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
> newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
> newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
> newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
> 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.
> >
>

>
> Charles, you have it backwards... It's a Mellotron Digital, not a  
> Mellotron.
>  
> I agree that there is a place for it if you have to have a white box that  
> looks vaguely familiar. But the box makes little difference. If it was 
> orange  and had shorter keys and a different cabinet and control placement would 
> you  feel the same?
>  
> I like it... I hate the name. I would have called it a Mellotron Digital. I 
>  think it's a better name. Mellotrons (generically) play tape. Samplers 
> play  samples.
>  
>  
>  
> In a message dated 1/23/2011 12:25:51 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
> charel196@... writes:
> 
> As I  said...it's a DIGITAL Mellotron, not a Mellotron.
>

On 23 Jan 2011, at 17:45, Gary Brumm <gabru@comsec.net> wrote:

> I would like to see Streetly be a bit more open about the Mark II that they are taking deposits on yet they have not responded to requests for
> 
> pictures of the new instrument.  I guess Tony had to pay to see one….and once he did he changed his order.  I am sure Streetly is trying to make
> 
> sure they can sell enough of them to make it worth their while, but why not show a picture or rendering if one does not exist at this time?  It would
> 
> be a big help to those who might want to purchase one.
>

On 1/23/2011 10:00 AM, tronbros wrote:
> This is purely because we have fragmented components.  The cabinet is 
> unpainted, the mainframe is hung on the wall, the pushbutton switches 
> are in a box and the electronics are under finalisation at Norm's. 
>  Not at all photogenic or impressive in the component parts so please 
> be patient a little longer.  We have always delivered and will do again.
>
> Best,
>
> Martin
>
> mellotronics.co.uk <http://mellotronics.co.uk>
>
>
>
> On 23 Jan 2011, at 17:45, Gary Brumm <gabru@comsec.net 
> <mailto:gabru@comsec.net>> wrote:
>
>> I would like to see Streetly be a bit more open about the Mark II 
>> that they are taking deposits on yet they have not responded to 
>> requests for
>>
>> pictures of the new instrument.  I guess Tony had to pay to see 
>> one\u2026.and once he did he changed his order.  I am sure Streetly is 
>> trying to make
>>
>> sure they can sell enough of them to make it worth their while, but 
>> why not show a picture or rendering if one does not exist at this 
>> time?  It would
>>
>> be a big help to those who might want to purchase one.
>>
>

>
> BTW, none of my remarks should construed as defending Markus or demeaning Streetly.  I'm just commenting on what I have actually heard with my own ears firsthand.  Markus is a big boy and can defend himself, if needed.
> 
> Frank 1
> 
> 
> 
> In a message dated 01/23/11 14:53:51 Pacific Standard Time, mainpsych writes:
>   
> In a message dated 01/23/11 08:14:35 Pacific Standard Time, lsf5275 writes:
> 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?
> 
> We really need to move from the philosophical/speculative realm to the real world, i.e., sonority (what sounds good).  50 people, 50 opinions, no consensus, no progress.  After all, strict music theory would dictate that the dissonance of playing a B and a C together is a major no-no (or parallel fifths), but listening to Wakeman's brass intro to "Siberian Khatru" says it's perfect for that musical phrase, both starting and ending on such an interval.  I don't know Markus' sound source, but I can tell you firsthand that, say, the Mellotron Cello and Chamberlin Cello can be played together or solo on an M400D and you can move back and forth between the two by the twist of a knob for an instant A/B comparison.  While both are good, objectively, the Chamby Cello is much more authentic sounding.   The point being that Markus could not have achieved that other than sampling a source oth er than direct from tape.
> 
> 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.
> 
> I had intended to ask Markus about this very issue; unfortunately, he was not present at NAMM this year.
> 
> Frank 1
>

>
> It's a machine. It exists. It's poorly named. It does what it is supposed  
> to. Knowing Markus, it's probably well made. It's poorly named. It will  
> sell.
>  
>  
> In a message dated 1/23/2011 6:00:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
> MAinPsych@... writes:
> 
>  
>  
>  
> BTW, none of my  remarks should construed as defending Markus or demeaning 
> Streetly.  I'm  just commenting on what I have actually heard with my own 
> ears  firsthand.  Markus is a big boy and can defend himself, if  needed.
> 
> Frank  1
>  
>  
>  
> In a message dated 01/23/11 14:53:51 Pacific Standard Time, mainpsych  
> writes:
> 
>    
>  
> In a message dated 01/23/11 08:14:35 Pacific Standard Time, lsf5275  writes:
> 
> 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?
> 
>  
> We really need  to move from the philosophical/speculative realm to the 
> real world, i.e.,  sonority (what sounds good).  50 people, 50 opinions, no 
> consensus, no  progress.  After all, strict music theory would dictate that the 
>  dissonance of playing a B and a C together is a major no-no (or parallel  
> fifths), but listening to Wakeman's brass intro to "Siberian Khatru" says  
> it's perfect for that musical phrase, both starting and ending on such an  
> interval.  I don't know Markus' sound source, but I can tell you  firsthand 
> that, say, the Mellotron Cello and Chamberlin Cello can be played  together or 
> solo on an M400D and you can move back and forth between the two  by the 
> twist of a knob for an instant A/B comparison.  While both are  good, 
> objectively, the Chamby Cello is much more authentic  sounding.   The point being 
> that Markus could not have achieved  that other than sampling a source oth er 
> than direct from  tape.
> 
>  
> 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.
> 
>  
> I had intended  to ask Markus about this very issue; unfortunately, he was 
> not present at  NAMM this year.
> 
> Frank  1
>

>
> I agree about the name...is there any documentation proving who named their instrument first? Not taking sides....just asking.
>  What would YOU have named Markus' unit? I'd probably say something like MK8 (since it was next from the MK7) or M8000.
> And yes...I want one.....wish now I had ordered one before the price jump:(
> 
> --- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, lsf5275@ wrote:
> >
> > It's a machine. It exists. It's poorly named. It does what it is supposed  
> > to. Knowing Markus, it's probably well made. It's poorly named. It will  
> > sell.
> >  
> >  
> > In a message dated 1/23/2011 6:00:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
> > MAinPsych@ writes:
> > 
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > BTW, none of my  remarks should construed as defending Markus or demeaning 
> > Streetly.  I'm  just commenting on what I have actually heard with my own 
> > ears  firsthand.  Markus is a big boy and can defend himself, if  needed.
> > 
> > Frank  1
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > In a message dated 01/23/11 14:53:51 Pacific Standard Time, mainpsych  
> > writes:
> > 
> >    
> >  
> > In a message dated 01/23/11 08:14:35 Pacific Standard Time, lsf5275  writes:
> > 
> > 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?
> > 
> >  
> > We really need  to move from the philosophical/speculative realm to the 
> > real world, i.e.,  sonority (what sounds good).  50 people, 50 opinions, no 
> > consensus, no  progress.  After all, strict music theory would dictate that the 
> >  dissonance of playing a B and a C together is a major no-no (or parallel  
> > fifths), but listening to Wakeman's brass intro to "Siberian Khatru" says  
> > it's perfect for that musical phrase, both starting and ending on such an  
> > interval.  I don't know Markus' sound source, but I can tell you  firsthand 
> > that, say, the Mellotron Cello and Chamberlin Cello can be played  together or 
> > solo on an M400D and you can move back and forth between the two  by the 
> > twist of a knob for an instant A/B comparison.  While both are  good, 
> > objectively, the Chamby Cello is much more authentic  sounding.   The point being 
> > that Markus could not have achieved  that other than sampling a source oth er 
> > than direct from  tape.
> > 
> >  
> > 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.
> > 
> >  
> > I had intended  to ask Markus about this very issue; unfortunately, he was 
> > not present at  NAMM this year.
> > 
> > Frank  1
> >
>

On 24 Jan 2011, at 14:09, "Charles" <charel196@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I agree about the name...is there any documentation proving who named their instrument first? Not taking sides....just asking.
> What would YOU have named Markus' unit? I'd probably say something like MK8 (since it was next from the MK7) or M8000.
> And yes...I want one.....wish now I had ordered one before the price jump:(
> 
> --- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, lsf5275@... wrote:
> >
> > It's a machine. It exists. It's poorly named. It does what it is supposed 
> > to. Knowing Markus, it's probably well made. It's poorly named. It will 
> > sell.
> > 
> > 
> > In a message dated 1/23/2011 6:00:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
> > MAinPsych@... writes:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > BTW, none of my remarks should construed as defending Markus or demeaning 
> > Streetly. I'm just commenting on what I have actually heard with my own 
> > ears firsthand. Markus is a big boy and can defend himself, if needed.
> > 
> > Frank 1
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > In a message dated 01/23/11 14:53:51 Pacific Standard Time, mainpsych 
> > writes:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > In a message dated 01/23/11 08:14:35 Pacific Standard Time, lsf5275 writes:
> > 
> > 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?
> > 
> > 
> > We really need to move from the philosophical/speculative realm to the 
> > real world, i.e., sonority (what sounds good). 50 people, 50 opinions, no 
> > consensus, no progress. After all, strict music theory would dictate that the 
> > dissonance of playing a B and a C together is a major no-no (or parallel 
> > fifths), but listening to Wakeman's brass intro to "Siberian Khatru" says 
> > it's perfect for that musical phrase, both starting and ending on such an 
> > interval. I don't know Markus' sound source, but I can tell you firsthand 
> > that, say, the Mellotron Cello and Chamberlin Cello can be played together or 
> > solo on an M400D and you can move back and forth between the two by the 
> > twist of a knob for an instant A/B comparison. While both are good, 
> > objectively, the Chamby Cello is much more authentic sounding. The point being 
> > that Markus could not have achieved that other than sampling a source oth er 
> > than direct from tape.
> > 
> > 
> > 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.
> > 
> > 
> > I had intended to ask Markus about this very issue; unfortunately, he was 
> > not present at NAMM this year.
> > 
> > Frank 1
> >
> 
>

>
> I agree about the name...is there any documentation proving who named their instrument first? Not taking sides....just asking.
>  What would YOU have named Markus' unit? I'd probably say something like MK8 (since it was next from the MK7) or M8000.
> And yes...I want one.....wish now I had ordered one before the price jump:(
> 
> --- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, lsf5275@ wrote:
> >
> > It's a machine. It exists. It's poorly named. It does what it is supposed  
> > to. Knowing Markus, it's probably well made. It's poorly named. It will  
> > sell.
> >  
> >  
> > In a message dated 1/23/2011 6:00:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
> > MAinPsych@ writes:
> > 
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > BTW, none of my  remarks should construed as defending Markus or demeaning 
> > Streetly.  I'm  just commenting on what I have actually heard with my own 
> > ears  firsthand.  Markus is a big boy and can defend himself, if  needed.
> > 
> > Frank  1
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > In a message dated 01/23/11 14:53:51 Pacific Standard Time, mainpsych  
> > writes:
> > 
> >    
> >  
> > In a message dated 01/23/11 08:14:35 Pacific Standard Time, lsf5275  writes:
> > 
> > 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?
> > 
> >  
> > We really need  to move from the philosophical/speculative realm to the 
> > real world, i.e.,  sonority (what sounds good).  50 people, 50 opinions, no 
> > consensus, no  progress.  After all, strict music theory would dictate that the 
> >  dissonance of playing a B and a C together is a major no-no (or parallel  
> > fifths), but listening to Wakeman's brass intro to "Siberian Khatru" says  
> > it's perfect for that musical phrase, both starting and ending on such an  
> > interval.  I don't know Markus' sound source, but I can tell you  firsthand 
> > that, say, the Mellotron Cello and Chamberlin Cello can be played  together or 
> > solo on an M400D and you can move back and forth between the two  by the 
> > twist of a knob for an instant A/B comparison.  While both are  good, 
> > objectively, the Chamby Cello is much more authentic  sounding.   The point being 
> > that Markus could not have achieved  that other than sampling a source oth er 
> > than direct from  tape.
> > 
> >  
> > 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.
> > 
> >  
> > I had intended  to ask Markus about this very issue; unfortunately, he was 
> > not present at  NAMM this year.
> > 
> > Frank  1
> >
>

>
> I agree about the name...is there any documentation proving who named their instrument first? Not taking sides....just asking.
>  What would YOU have named Markus' unit? I'd probably say something like MK8 (since it was next from the MK7) or M8000.
> And yes...I want one.....wish now I had ordered one before the price jump:(
> 
> --- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, lsf5275@ wrote:
> >
> > It's a machine. It exists. It's poorly named. It does what it is supposed  
> > to. Knowing Markus, it's probably well made. It's poorly named. It will  
> > sell.
> >  
> >  
> > In a message dated 1/23/2011 6:00:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
> > MAinPsych@ writes:
> > 
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > BTW, none of my  remarks should construed as defending Markus or demeaning 
> > Streetly.  I'm  just commenting on what I have actually heard with my own 
> > ears  firsthand.  Markus is a big boy and can defend himself, if  needed.
> > 
> > Frank  1
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > In a message dated 01/23/11 14:53:51 Pacific Standard Time, mainpsych  
> > writes:
> > 
> >    
> >  
> > In a message dated 01/23/11 08:14:35 Pacific Standard Time, lsf5275  writes:
> > 
> > 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?
> > 
> >  
> > We really need  to move from the philosophical/speculative realm to the 
> > real world, i.e.,  sonority (what sounds good).  50 people, 50 opinions, no 
> > consensus, no  progress.  After all, strict music theory would dictate that the 
> >  dissonance of playing a B and a C together is a major no-no (or parallel  
> > fifths), but listening to Wakeman's brass intro to "Siberian Khatru" says  
> > it's perfect for that musical phrase, both starting and ending on such an  
> > interval.  I don't know Markus' sound source, but I can tell you  firsthand 
> > that, say, the Mellotron Cello and Chamberlin Cello can be played  together or 
> > solo on an M400D and you can move back and forth between the two  by the 
> > twist of a knob for an instant A/B comparison.  While both are  good, 
> > objectively, the Chamby Cello is much more authentic  sounding.   The point being 
> > that Markus could not have achieved  that other than sampling a source oth er 
> > than direct from  tape.
> > 
> >  
> > 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.
> > 
> >  
> > I had intended  to ask Markus about this very issue; unfortunately, he was 
> > not present at  NAMM this year.
> > 
> > Frank  1
> >
>

> > not present at NAMM this  year.
> > 
> > Frank 1
>  >
>

>
> What do you call the next one? 
>  
> Personally, after giving it considerable thought, I think the new  machine 
> should be called the MA Digital XL Mark 1 Chambertron, because, as  you can 
> see from the You Tube videos, it's a highly crafted, state of the art,  
> scientifically designed, human engineered, software updateable, user  friendly, 
> feature-full, sample loaded, flexible, light weight, easily  transportable, 
> fun to play machine, with the look of real wood, in the color of  your 
> choice.
>  
> Ralph... I'll take one.
>  
>  
> In a message dated 1/24/2011 1:19:31 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
> fdoddy@... writes:
> 
>  
>  
>  
> I would have named the unit  "Brian"
> 
> 
> fritz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original  Message-----
> From: Bill Rudloff <doctorwho8@...>
> To:  newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Mon, Jan  24, 2011 1:05 pm
> Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
> 
> 
>  
>  
>  
> The MD M100.
> Bill "the Doctor"  Rudloff
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original  Message-----
> From: tron400 <_tron400@..._ (mailto:tron400@...) >
> To: _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
> (mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) 
> Sent:  Mon, Jan 24, 2011 8:41 am
> Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM  2011
> 
> 
>  
>  
>  
> 
> 
> I would have named it something completely unrelated to the Mk or  M 
> series. Maybe Digitron?
> 
> Bernie
> 
> --- In _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
> (mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) ,  "Charles" <charel196@> wrote:
> >
> > I agree about the  name...is there any documentation proving who named 
> their instrument first?  Not taking sides....just asking.
> > What would YOU have named Markus'  unit? I'd probably say something like 
> MK8 (since it was next from the MK7) or  M8000.
> > And yes...I want one.....wish now I had ordered one before the  price 
> jump:(
> > 
> > --- In _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
> (mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) ,  lsf5275@ wrote:
> > >
> > > It's a machine. It exists. It's  poorly named. It does what it is 
> supposed 
> > > to. Knowing Markus,  it's probably well made. It's poorly named. It 
> will 
> > >  sell.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > In a message dated 1/23/2011  6:00:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
> > > MAinPsych@ writes:
> >  > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > BTW, none of my  remarks should construed as defending Markus or 
> demeaning 
> > >  Streetly. I'm just commenting on what I have actually heard with my 
> own  
> > > ears firsthand. Markus is a big boy and can defend himself, if  needed.
> > > 
> > > Frank 1
> > > 
> > > 
> >  > 
> > > In a message dated 01/23/11 14:53:51 Pacific Standard Time,  mainpsych 
> > > writes:
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  
> > > In a message dated 01/23/11 08:14:35 Pacific Standard Time,  lsf5275 
> writes:
> > > 
> > > 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?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > We  really need to move from the philosophical/speculative realm to the 
> >  > real world, i.e., sonority (what sounds good). 50 people, 50 opinions, 
> no  
> > > consensus, no progress. After all, strict music theory would  dictate 
> that the 
> > > dissonance of playing a B and a C together is a  major no-no (or 
> parallel 
> > > fifths), but listening to Wakeman's  brass intro to "Siberian Khatru" 
> says 
> > > it's perfect for that  musical phrase, both starting and ending on such 
> an 
> > > interval. I  don't know Markus' sound source, but I can tell you 
> firsthand 
> > >  that, say, the Mellotron Cello and Chamberlin Cello can be played 
> together or  
> > > solo on an M400D and you can move back and forth between the two  by 
> the 
> > > twist of a knob for an instant A/B comparison. While both  are good, 
> > > objectively, the Chamby Cello is much more authentic  sounding. The 
> point being 
> > > that Markus could not have achieved  that other than sampling a source 
> oth er 
> > > than direct from  tape.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 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.
> >  > 
> > > 
> > > I had intended to ask Markus about this very  issue; unfortunately, he 
> was 
> > > not present at NAMM this  year.
> > > 
> > > Frank 1
> >  >
> >
>

	From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of lsf5275@aol.com
	Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 1:48 PM
	To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
	Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
	
	
	  

	
	What do you call the next one? 
	 
	Personally, after giving it considerable thought, I think the
new machine should be called the MA Digital XL Mark 1 Chambertron,
because, as you can see from the You Tube videos, it's a highly crafted,
state of the art, scientifically designed, human engineered, software
updateable, user friendly, feature-full, sample loaded, flexible, light
weight, easily transportable, fun to play machine, with the look of real
wood, in the color of your choice.
	 
	Ralph... I'll take one.

 From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com  
[mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of  lsf5275@aol.com
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 1:48  PM
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re:  [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011




What do you call the next one? 
 
Personally, after giving it considerable thought, I think the new  machine 
should be called the MA Digital XL Mark 1 Chambertron, because,  as you can 
see from the You Tube videos, it's a highly crafted, state of the  art, 
scientifically designed, human engineered, software  updateable, user friendly, 
feature-full, sample loaded, flexible, light  weight, easily transportable, 
fun to play machine, with the look of real  wood, in the color of your 
choice.
 
Ralph... I'll take one.

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

From: tronbros

To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 9:49 AM

Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011

The M4000 has benn the M4000 for 4 years at least. Markus is just being a confrontational twat.

M

mellotronics.co.uk

On 24 Jan 2011, at 14:09, "Charles" <charel196@yahoo.com> wrote:

I agree about the name...is there any documentation proving who named their instrument first? Not taking sides....just asking.
What would YOU have named Markus' unit? I'd probably say something like MK8 (since it was next from the MK7) or M8000.
And yes...I want one.....wish now I had ordered one before the price jump:(

--- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, lsf5275@... wrote:
>
> It's a machine. It exists. It's poorly named. It does what it is supposed
> to. Knowing Markus, it's probably well made. It's poorly named. It will
> sell.
>
>
> In a message dated 1/23/2011 6:00:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> MAinPsych@... writes:
>
>
>
>
> BTW, none of my remarks should construed as defending Markus or demeaning
> Streetly. I'm just commenting on what I have actually heard with my own
> ears firsthand. Markus is a big boy and can defend himself, if needed.
>
> Frank 1
>
>
>
> In a message dated 01/23/11 14:53:51 Pacific Standard Time, mainpsych
> writes:
>
>
>
> In a message dated 01/23/11 08:14:35 Pacific Standard Time, lsf5275 writes:
>
> 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?
>
>
> We really need to move from the philosophical/speculative realm to the
> real world, i.e., sonority (what sounds good). 50 people, 50 opinions, no
> consensus, no progress. After all, strict music theory would dictate that the
> dissonance of playing a B and a C together is a major no-no (or parallel
> fifths), but listening to Wakeman's brass intro to "Siberian Khatru" says
> it's perfect for that musical phrase, both starting and ending on such an
> interval. I don't know Markus' sound source, but I can tell you firsthand
> that, say, the Mellotron Cello and Chamberlin Cello can be played together or
> solo on an M400D and you can move back and forth between the two by the
>; twist of a knob for an instant A/B comparison. While both are good,
> objectively, the Chamby Cello is much more authentic sounding. The point being
> that Markus could not have achieved that other than sampling a source oth er
> than direct from tape.
>
>
> 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.
>
>
> I had intended to ask Markus about this very issue; unfortunately, he was
> not present at NAMM this year.
>
> Frank 1
>

> Where's the bathroom?
>
>
> --- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, lsf5275@... wrote:
>>
>> What do you call the next one?
>>
>> Personally, after giving it considerable thought, I think the new
>> machine
>> should be called the MA Digital XL Mark 1 Chambertron, because, as  you
>> can
>> see from the You Tube videos, it's a highly crafted, state of the art,
>> scientifically designed, human engineered, software updateable, user
>> friendly,
>> feature-full, sample loaded, flexible, light weight, easily
>> transportable,
>> fun to play machine, with the look of real wood, in the color of  your
>> choice.
>>
>> Ralph... I'll take one.
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 1/24/2011 1:19:31 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
>> fdoddy@... writes:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I would have named the unit  "Brian"
>>
>>
>> fritz
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original  Message-----
>> From: Bill Rudloff <doctorwho8@...>
>> To:  newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Mon, Jan  24, 2011 1:05 pm
>> Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The MD M100.
>> Bill "the Doctor"  Rudloff
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original  Message-----
>> From: tron400 <_tron400@..._ (mailto:tron400@...) >
>> To: _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_
>> (mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com)
>> Sent:  Mon, Jan 24, 2011 8:41 am
>> Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM  2011
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I would have named it something completely unrelated to the Mk or  M
>> series. Maybe Digitron?
>>
>> Bernie
>>
>> --- In _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_
>> (mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) ,  "Charles" <charel196@>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > I agree about the  name...is there any documentation proving who named
>> their instrument first?  Not taking sides....just asking.
>> > What would YOU have named Markus'  unit? I'd probably say something
>> like
>> MK8 (since it was next from the MK7) or  M8000.
>> > And yes...I want one.....wish now I had ordered one before the  price
>> jump:(
>> >
>> > --- In _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_
>> (mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) ,  lsf5275@ wrote:
>> > >
>> > > It's a machine. It exists. It's  poorly named. It does what it is
>> supposed
>> > > to. Knowing Markus,  it's probably well made. It's poorly named. It
>> will
>> > >  sell.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > In a message dated 1/23/2011  6:00:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
>> > > MAinPsych@ writes:
>> >  >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > BTW, none of my  remarks should construed as defending Markus or
>> demeaning
>> > >  Streetly. I'm just commenting on what I have actually heard with my
>> own
>> > > ears firsthand. Markus is a big boy and can defend himself, if
>> needed.
>> > >
>> > > Frank 1
>> > >
>> > >
>> >  >
>> > > In a message dated 01/23/11 14:53:51 Pacific Standard Time,
>> mainpsych
>> > > writes:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > In a message dated 01/23/11 08:14:35 Pacific Standard Time,  lsf5275
>> writes:
>> > >
>> > > 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?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > We  really need to move from the philosophical/speculative realm to
>> the
>> >  > real world, i.e., sonority (what sounds good). 50 people, 50
>> opinions,
>> no
>> > > consensus, no progress. After all, strict music theory would
>> dictate
>> that the
>> > > dissonance of playing a B and a C together is a  major no-no (or
>> parallel
>> > > fifths), but listening to Wakeman's  brass intro to "Siberian
>> Khatru"
>> says
>> > > it's perfect for that  musical phrase, both starting and ending on
>> such
>> an
>> > > interval. I  don't know Markus' sound source, but I can tell you
>> firsthand
>> > >  that, say, the Mellotron Cello and Chamberlin Cello can be played
>> together or
>> > > solo on an M400D and you can move back and forth between the two  by
>> the
>> > > twist of a knob for an instant A/B comparison. While both  are good,
>> > > objectively, the Chamby Cello is much more authentic  sounding. The
>> point being
>> > > that Markus could not have achieved  that other than sampling a
>> source
>> oth er
>> > > than direct from  tape.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > 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.
>> >  >
>> > >
>> > > I had intended to ask Markus about this very  issue; unfortunately,
>> he
>> was
>> > > not present at NAMM this  year.
>> > >
>> > > Frank 1
>> >  >
>> >
>>
>
>
>

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

From: Thomas C. Doncourt

To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 4:06 PM

Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011

The Markustron

> Where's the bathroom?
>
>;
> --- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, lsf5275@... wrote:
>>
>> What do you call the next one?
>>
>> Personally, after giving it considerable thought, I think the new
>> machine
>> should be called the MA Digital XL Mark 1 Chambertron, because, as you
>> can
>> see from the You Tube videos, it's a highly crafted, state of the art,
>> scientifically designed, human engineered, software updateable, user
>> friendly,
>> feature-full, sample loaded, flexible, light weight, easily
>> transportable,
>> fun to play machine, with the look of real wood, in the color of your
>> choice.
>>;
>> Ralph... I'll take one.
>>
>>
>>; In a message dated 1/24/2011 1:19:31 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
>> fdoddy@... writes:
>>
>>
>>
>>;
>> I would have named the unit "Brian"
>>
>>;
>> fritz
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Bill Rudloff
>> To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Mon, Jan 24, 2011 1:05 pm
>> Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The MD M100.
>> Bill "the Doctor" Rudloff
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: tron400 <_tron400@..._ (mailto:tron400@...) >
>> To: _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_
>> (mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com)
>> Sent: Mon, Jan 24, 2011 8:41 am
>> Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I would have named it something completely unrelated to the Mk or M
>> series. Maybe Digitron?
>>
>> Bernie
>>
>> --- In _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_
>> (mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) , "Charles"
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > I agree about the name...is there any documentation proving who named
>> their instrument first? Not taking sides....just asking.
>> > What would YOU have named Markus' unit? I'd probably say something
>> like
>>; MK8 (since it was next from the MK7) or M8000.
>> > And yes...I want one.....wish now I had ordered one before the price
>> jump:(
>> >
>> > --- In _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_
>> (mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) , lsf5275@ wrote:
>;> > >
>> > > It's a machine. It exists. It's poorly named. It does what it is
>> supposed
>> > >; to. Knowing Markus, it's probably well made. It's poorly named. It
>> will
>> > > sell.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > In a message dated 1/23/2011 6:00:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
>> > > MAinPsych@ writes:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > BTW, none of my remarks should construed as defending Markus or
>> demeaning
>> > > Streetly. I'm just commenting on what I have actually heard with my
>> own
>> > > ears firsthand. Markus is a big boy and can defend himself, if
>> needed.
>> > >
>> > > Frank 1
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > In a message dated 01/23/11 14:53:51 Pacific Standard Time,
>> mainpsych
>> > > writes:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > In a message dated 01/23/11 08:14:35 Pacific Standard Time, lsf5275
>> writes:
>> > >
>> > > 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?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > We really need to move from the philosophical/speculative realm to
>;> the
>> > > real world, i.e., sonority (what sounds good). 50 people, 50
>> opinions,
>> no
>> > > consensus, no progress. After all, strict music theory would
>> dictate
>> that the
>> > > dissonance of playing a B and a C together is a major no-no (or
>> parallel
>> > > fifths), but listening to Wakeman's brass intro to "Siberian
>> Khatru"
>> says
>> > > it's perfect for that musical phrase, both starting and ending on
>> such
>> an
>> > > interval. I don't know Markus' sound source, but I can tell you
>> firsthand
>> > > that, say, the Mellotron Cello and Chamberlin Cello can be played
>> together or
>> > > solo on an M400D and you can move back and forth between the two by
>> the
>> > > twist of a knob for an instant A/B comparison. While both are good,
>> > > objectively, the Chamby Cello is much more authentic sounding. The
>> point being
>> > > that Markus could not have achieved that other than sampling a
>> source
>> oth er
>> > > than direct from tape.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > 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.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > I had intended to ask Markus about this very issue; unfortunately,
>> he
>> was
>> > > not present at NAMM this year.
>> > >
>> > > Frank 1
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>;
>

>
> What do you call the next one? 
> 
> Personally, after giving it considerable thought, I think the new machine 
> should be called the MA Digital XL Mark 1 Chambertron, because, as you can 
> see from the You Tube videos, it's a highly crafted, state of the art, 
> scientifically designed, human engineered, software updateable, user friendly, 
> feature-full, sample loaded, flexible, light weight, easily transportable, 
> fun to play machine, with the look of real wood, in the color of your 
> choice.
> 
> Ralph... I'll take one.
> 
> 
> In a message dated 1/24/2011 1:19:31 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
> fdoddy@... writes:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would have named the unit "Brian"
> 
> 
> fritz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Rudloff <doctorwho8@...>
> To: newmellotrongroup <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Mon, Jan 24, 2011 1:05 pm
> Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The MD M100.
> Bill "the Doctor" Rudloff
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tron400 <_tron400@..._ (mailto:tron400@...) >
> To: _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
> (mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) 
> Sent: Mon, Jan 24, 2011 8:41 am
> Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Re: OT- NAMM 2011
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would have named it something completely unrelated to the Mk or M 
> series. Maybe Digitron?
> 
> Bernie
> 
> --- In _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
> (mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) , "Charles" <charel196@> wrote:
> >
> > I agree about the name...is there any documentation proving who named 
> their instrument first? Not taking sides....just asking.
> > What would YOU have named Markus' unit? I'd probably say something like 
> MK8 (since it was next from the MK7) or M8000.
> > And yes...I want one.....wish now I had ordered one before the price 
> jump:(
> > 
> > --- In _newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com_ 
> (mailto:newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com) , lsf5275@ wrote:
> > >
> > > It's a machine. It exists. It's poorly named. It does what it is 
> supposed 
> > > to. Knowing Markus, it's probably well made. It's poorly named. It 
> will 
> > > sell.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > In a message dated 1/23/2011 6:00:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
> > > MAinPsych@ writes:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > BTW, none of my remarks should construed as defending Markus or 
> demeaning 
> > > Streetly. I'm just commenting on what I have actually heard with my 
> own 
> > > ears firsthand. Markus is a big boy and can defend himself, if needed.
> > > 
> > > Frank 1
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > In a message dated 01/23/11 14:53:51 Pacific Standard Time, mainpsych 
> > > writes:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > In a message dated 01/23/11 08:14:35 Pacific Standard Time, lsf5275 
> writes:
> > > 
> > > 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?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > We really need to move from the philosophical/speculative realm to the 
> > > real world, i.e., sonority (what sounds good). 50 people, 50 opinions, 
> no 
> > > consensus, no progress. After all, strict music theory would dictate 
> that the 
> > > dissonance of playing a B and a C together is a major no-no (or 
> parallel 
> > > fifths), but listening to Wakeman's brass intro to "Siberian Khatru" 
> says 
> > > it's perfect for that musical phrase, both starting and ending on such 
> an 
> > > interval. I don't know Markus' sound source, but I can tell you 
> firsthand 
> > > that, say, the Mellotron Cello and Chamberlin Cello can be played 
> together or 
> > > solo on an M400D and you can move back and forth between the two by 
> the 
> > > twist of a knob for an instant A/B comparison. While both are good, 
> > > objectively, the Chamby Cello is much more authentic sounding. The 
> point being 
> > > that Markus could not have achieved that other than sampling a source 
> oth er 
> > > than direct from tape.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 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.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I had intended to ask Markus about this very issue; unfortunately, he 
> was 
> > > not present at NAMM this year.
> > > 
> > > Frank 1
> > >
> >
>

>
> You mean, of course, "the imitation Masonite wild west gunrack.."
>  
>  
> In a message dated 1/24/2011 7:22:14 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
> pocotron@... writes:
> 
> Next to the gunrack.
> Designed with your mind in mind.  Complete with Climate  Control!!
>

>
> You mean, of course, "the imitation  Masonite wild west gunrack.."
> 
> 
> In a message dated  1/24/2011 7:22:14 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
> pocotron@...  writes:
> 
> Next to the gunrack.
> Designed with your mind  in mind. Complete with Climate Control!!
>

On 1/24/2011 5:20 PM, lsf5275@aol.com wrote:
>
> In the color of your choice.
> In a message dated 1/24/2011 8:12:11 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
> tron400@yahoo.com writes:
>
>     With the look of real wood?
>
>     --- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
>     <mailto:newmellotrongroup%40yahoogroups.com>, lsf5275@... wrote:
>     >
>     > You mean, of course, "the imitation Masonite wild west gunrack.."
>     >
>     >
>     > In a message dated 1/24/2011 7:22:14 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
>     > pocotron@... writes:
>     >
>     > Next to the gunrack.
>     > Designed with your mind in mind. Complete with Climate Control!!
>     >
>
>

> new and  different model in the family tree....made by the people who own 
>  the name and masters.
>

On 25 Jan 2011, at 20:25, Chris Dale <unobtainiumkeys@gmail.com> wrote:

> Well - I don't know about 'meticulously cared-for Chamberlins'.
>  
> I think Dave and Markus were doing the "caring" - fixing them up and getting them to sound right after years of misadjustment. Mellotrons are generally easier to fix than Chamberlins and that includes all models.
>  
> Markus did have access to an M1 so there's a few sounds from that model in there, and  I agree that the other sounds would have come from both older material they sampled from other instruments, or the master tapes.
> But there are some sounds from late 1979 - 1980 Chamberlins that were never sold in earlier machines.
> Harry relented in the last year of the business and did custom sounds for people and finally allowed his personal sounds to be shared. So not all the Chamberlin sounds would be coming from actual Chamberlin keyboards because not all the sounds made it into the units. And nobody has ALL the master tapes. They are shared privately amongst a few people.
>  
>  
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 10:57 AM, ClayE <ecclesreinson@rogers.com> wrote:
>  
> Chris Dale wrote:
> 
> > I believe Markus must have either taken the tapes from the Chamberlin masters, with the exception of sampling whatever was in the M1 he had in for repair at the time.
> 
> I believe that they are excellent digital samples taken from Mellotron and Chamberlin outputs. On the Pinder CD it says "each key sampled directly from the most meticulously cared-for Mellotrons and Chamberlins". They (DK and MR) have had access to a variety of Chamberlins and Chamberlin sounds over the years. Whenever they could sample a particular Chamberlin sound, they would.
> 
> Don't forget that 99 sounds would be 33 tape frames. Maybe there is something not quite right about this keyboard other than its crappy name. Right now, I don't know of anything.
> 
> Clay
> 
> 
>

>
> On 25/01/2011 20:34, tronbros wrote:
> > We have a virgin set of MusicMaster masters that Bill Fransen 
> > borrowed.  There are actually two sets but one was used by Les to 
> > generate the MKII violins.  We can offer the other sounds but have 
> > never pushed them as they are largely unknown to most people.
> 
> What are these sounds?
> 
> Mike
>