gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
680598 Posts in 27600 Topics by 4068 Members - Latest Member: Dae Lims March 28, 2024, 08:57:36 PM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Chamberlin sounds on BBs Records  (Read 8208 times)
c-man
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4941


View Profile WWW
« on: April 11, 2013, 08:40:00 AM »

Hey folks, there's been a few threads here over the years about the Boys' use of the Chamberlin, so I'm wondering if we can get some sort of definitive list of songs which include it and which of its tape library of sampled sounds were used, starting with the most obvious one:

COUNTRY AIR (muted trumpet)

plus one that Desper writes about in his book:

ADD SOME MUSIC TO YOUR DAY (3 violins)...although within 2 weeks of the reported tracking date of 10/28/69, Brian did hold a recording session at Bellagio with 3 violinists (and no other musicians), for an "untitled" song (listed on the AFM sheet as "Brian Wilson Productions" rather than "The Beach Boys")...on "ASM", it does sound more Chamberlin-like to me, but what's the general opinion?

and here's some more that I strongly suspect:

LITTLE BIRD (oboe)...particularly noticeable in the tag
DO IT AGAIN (oboe or maybe French horn or slur trombone)...in the bridge (listen to the early version from "Endless Harmony Soundtrack" or the track from "Stack O' Tracks", or the basic track from "Unsurpassed Masters")
SLIP ON THROUGH (3 violins)...heard in the fade
GOOD TIMIN' (French horn or oboe or maybe slur trombone)...the descending glissando heard in the verses on the '74 rough mix

On a related topic, even though it's been said they likely never used a Mellotron, there are a couple of track sheets I've seen with track assignments for the Mellotron...off the top of my head, "I Wanna Pick You Up" and Dennis' "School Girl".  
« Last Edit: April 11, 2013, 09:00:31 AM by c-man » Logged
adamghost
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2107



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: April 11, 2013, 10:30:12 AM »

C-man...good work as usual.  Your ears are way more attuned to this than mine, but for what it's worth, playing it back in my head, the string line on the bridge to ASM sounds exactly like a Chamberlin to me.  I haven't really thought about it before, but my instinct is I think you probably have this right.
Logged
c-man
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4941


View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: April 11, 2013, 10:40:49 AM »

Thanks Adam - and just listening to "Country Air" again, it sounds like a couple of keys are playing a regular trumpet sound, and one key is playing the muted trumpet.  Does anyone know if a Chamberlin allows you to play more than one sound at a time, on different keys?

I didn't mention "Aren't You Glad" in the list above, 'cause there is an AFM sheet for that song with eight string players (violin and viola) listed, but listening to the song just now, it kinda does sound like there's a Chamberlin in there as well (in addition to the Baldwin organ low buzzing note sound).
Logged
DonnyL
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1990



View Profile WWW
« Reply #3 on: April 11, 2013, 06:34:50 PM »

I may be able to contribute more to this topic in a bit ...

You can play more than one sound at once, but you can't change the pitch/octave of only one sound ... though some sounds are at a different pitch to begin with. Maybe part of the tape on that note was damaged or something.

I think this topic is going to be tough to figure out by just listening to final mixes ... Chamberlins can be very hi-fi sounding, and sometimes can fool even the best ears in a final mix!

There is a loose audio interview w/ Brian floating out there somewhere from around the time of the 'Stack O Tracks' release, and they talk briefly about the Chamberlin. I'll have to see if I can find it somewhere, but I remember getting the impression that although he thought the concept was fantastic, he wasn't totally impressed with the realism of the sounds themselves. Also worth noting is that he initially called it 'Mellotron', which makes me feel like maybe they wrote 'Mellotron' on a track sheet, even if it were a Chamberlin.

The only ones I'm confident about (from listening) are 'Country Air', 'Add Some Music' and 'Slip On Through'. 'Forever' comes to mind as well, though I would have to listen again. I don't doubt it's on countless others, but I think it'd be pretty tough to find out.

The RMI Rocksichord is another one that's all over songs from the '68-'71 era. The main two 'piano' parts on 'Add Some Music' sound exactly like a one. and it's pretty prominent on 'We're Together Again', among others.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2013, 08:00:46 PM by DonnyL » Logged

Amazing Larry
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 552


There's a new daddy in town...


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: April 11, 2013, 08:55:59 PM »

The Rocksichord is also on Busy Doin Nothin buried in the left channel.
Logged

A discipline daddy.
leggo of my ego
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1453


Beach Boys Stomp


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: April 11, 2013, 10:33:22 PM »

And Unions weren't crazy about these devices being used in the studio in those days either so very unlikely
to find written  documentation.

It is a fact however that Harry went to great lengths to obtain quality recordings
for his keyboard -- his tapes sound more realistic than a Mellotron and that would make it harder to discern
the "real thing" from a Chamberlin keyboard on a recording. 
Logged

Hey Little Tomboy is creepy. Banging women by the pool is fun and conjures up warm summer thoughts a Beach Boys song should.

Necessity knows no law
A bootlegger knows no law
Therefore: A bootlegger is a necessity
sparkydog1725
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 82



View Profile
« Reply #6 on: August 24, 2016, 09:12:26 AM »

Apologies if this is a repost.

Mellotron Albums
http://www.planetmellotron.com/revb4.htm#beach
Logged
Manfred
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 75


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: August 24, 2016, 10:12:34 PM »

What difference do you see between a Chamberlin and a Mellotron ? I´ve good a book about the Mellotron and it says they are the same, just that the Chamberlin was first and named after the inventor. The Mellotron (just a new name) had partly the same sounds and looked quite the same, just in white.

The nowadays version is digital and called "Memotron", wich has MIDI and the (original) sounds on CDs. It sounds just like the old ones (I´ve got one).
Logged
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #8 on: August 25, 2016, 08:13:38 AM »

The Chamberlin and Mellotron are not the same and actually have different sonic characteristics that are pretty audible once you hear them compared A/B, but they do share the same general operating system and design...i.e. "concept and execution".

The simplest difference is the Chamberlin was first and in the US, while the Mellotron copied that design later and was in the UK. That in itself is an interesting story which I'll condense here.

Harry Chamberlin had his instrument ready to go by the 1950's, having started the invention in the late 40's. It was designed as what we might call a very expensive toy for people to entertain with singalongs at home, or what we may even call an early Karaoke machine which could be installed in clubs and bars for patrons to sing along with. Neat footnote - Harry Chamberlin actually approached Lawrence Welk in the 50's about funding and providing some of the backing tracks which would be played by Welk's orchestra and loaded into the bank of tapes which could be played by the users of the instrument, but Welk's conditions included calling the Chamberlin the Welk machine, and Chamberlin wouldn't agree to that.

So Chamberlin instead found other bands and studios to record his "samples" (before that was even a musical term), and went about making and selling his invention. He had sales people who would go around to clubs, etc to try to sell them. The instruments themselves were very large, very un-portable, and difficult to move from place to place, especially the earlier ones. And - key point - they were filled with many specific electric parts and mechanical components which would only come from specialized manufacturers.

This is how the Mellotron came to be. One of Chamberlin's salesmen had taken a trip to the UK in the early 60's, armed with a shipment of two Chamberlin instruments, trying to find a deal with a manufacturer who could produce dozens of matched magnetic tape heads to outfit the instruments. On one of his fishing expeditions, the people who would build the Mellotron saw Harry Chamberlin's instrument up close and inside all the inner workings, and basically proceeded to copy it.

That was the genesis of the Mellotron. It was essentially Harry Chamberlin's idea, but done with a few twists and tweaks specific to the UK. It was a pretty serious issue, but in the mid 60's Harry and the makers of the Mellotron came to an agreement and money was paid to help make things right.


So to the question of what are the differences between the Chamberlin and Mellotron. Obviously they are the same basic design and operation, however the "bank" of tapes (or 'samples' in modern terms) contain different orchestras and musicians providing the sounds for each strip of tape that the keys engage. You can tell them apart, obviously different musicians and different studios created different tones and timbres of the same instruments. But some say the Chamberlin's sound overall is more deep or 'rich' sounding than the Mellotron.

There are specific examples of rock musicians using the Chamberlin versus the Mellotron, just check some web sources and listen to compare and contrast.

Another similarity is the fact that neither instrument handled moves and travel very well, and neither were designed to travel, although some bands who could afford to would buy several in the late 60's and 70's (Mellotron) to take on the road because they would regularly break down and were ubnreliable mechanically due to the number of mechanical parts needed to make it work.

Both also have issues with staying in tune and the stability of the pitches being played back on the tapes, but for many fans that warble and drifting pitch is the signature sound of a Mellotron. And the fact that pressing the same key and holding it as long as the tape would allow could produce a different and random wow/flutter/pitch change every time it was pressed is another thing which was both a hassle for the musicians yet a charming element of the sound that cannot be replicated quite the same way. The joy and the pain of mechanical parts and analog technology.

Sum up: Chamberlin was first and in the US, Mellotron was a later copy of the same design and idea, in the UK. Different versions of the same basic design and idea.
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
SMiLE Brian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8432



View Profile
« Reply #9 on: August 25, 2016, 08:21:34 AM »

Mike Pinder of the moody blues had the patience of a saint fixing his mellotron on the road in the late 1960s. The mellotron was shoddy knock off of the chamberlain in the early days before guys like Pinder improved it.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2016, 08:41:54 AM by SMiLE Brian » Logged

And production aside, I’d so much rather hear a 14 year old David Marks shred some guitar on Chug-a-lug than hear a 51 year old Mike Love sing about bangin some chick in a swimming pool.-rab2591
c-man
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4941


View Profile WWW
« Reply #10 on: August 25, 2016, 05:13:40 PM »

Guitarfool: fascinating stuff, and all the more peculiar that the BBs would have used a Mellotron versus a Chamberlin...at least that's seemingly how they remember it now, and how they thought of it at the time.
Logged
DonnyL
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1990



View Profile WWW
« Reply #11 on: August 26, 2016, 08:43:36 AM »

Guitarfool: fascinating stuff, and all the more peculiar that the BBs would have used a Mellotron versus a Chamberlin...at least that's seemingly how they remember it now, and how they thought of it at the time.

The Beach Boys definitely used a Chamberlin circa late '60s-early '70s. Not sure if they used a Mellotron at a later time, or continued to use the Chamberlin off and on (and someone wrote "Mellotron" on a track sheet). That 1968 interview I referenced a couple years back in this thread features Brian talking about the Chamberlin specifically.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2016, 08:45:17 AM by DonnyL » Logged

guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #12 on: August 26, 2016, 08:47:58 AM »

Guitarfool: fascinating stuff, and all the more peculiar that the BBs would have used a Mellotron versus a Chamberlin...at least that's seemingly how they remember it now, and how they thought of it at the time.

The Beach Boys definitely used a Chamberlin circa late '60s-early '70s. Not sure if they used a Mellotron at a later time, or continued to use the Chamberlin off and on. That 1968 interview I referenced a couple years back in this thread features Brian talking about the Chamberlin specifically. They may refer to it as a "Mellotron" these days.

Add to this the writings and posts of Stephen Desper, who in the past has given detailed descriptions of how he would load various sounds into a Chamberlin. If anyone would know, the engineer who worked the sessions and the equipment would know.

I might chalk it up to the instrument itself getting a generic name, like a catch-all - Similar to hearing 60's sessions and beyond where they refer to a "Fender bass", and where people still ask for a Kleenex instead of a tissue. I think the term "Mellotron" just got put into the lexicon as the keyboard that plays back tape loops, even though the actual Mellotron was more of a UK thing for quite some time.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2016, 08:48:45 AM by guitarfool2002 » Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
DonnyL
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1990



View Profile WWW
« Reply #13 on: August 26, 2016, 10:29:37 AM »

Guitarfool: fascinating stuff, and all the more peculiar that the BBs would have used a Mellotron versus a Chamberlin...at least that's seemingly how they remember it now, and how they thought of it at the time.

The Beach Boys definitely used a Chamberlin circa late '60s-early '70s. Not sure if they used a Mellotron at a later time, or continued to use the Chamberlin off and on. That 1968 interview I referenced a couple years back in this thread features Brian talking about the Chamberlin specifically. They may refer to it as a "Mellotron" these days.

Add to this the writings and posts of Stephen Desper, who in the past has given detailed descriptions of how he would load various sounds into a Chamberlin. If anyone would know, the engineer who worked the sessions and the equipment would know.

I might chalk it up to the instrument itself getting a generic name, like a catch-all - Similar to hearing 60's sessions and beyond where they refer to a "Fender bass", and where people still ask for a Kleenex instead of a tissue. I think the term "Mellotron" just got put into the lexicon as the keyboard that plays back tape loops, even though the actual Mellotron was more of a UK thing for quite some time.

Interesting to note re: the loading of custom-recorded sounds ... in that '68 interview, Brian seemed to imply that he may have been dissatisfied with the quality of sounds available in the Chamberlin, when he said something like, "it would be great if you could get your own man to record things for it" (paraphrasing). If he felt the Chamberlin was lacking in sound quality, then he surely would have been even less satisfied with a Mellotron. In some cases, the original Mellotron sounds were actually the same recordings that Harry Chamberlin made himself (often in his garage, I believe), but compressed and copied several generations down.
Logged

c-man
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4941


View Profile WWW
« Reply #14 on: August 26, 2016, 09:43:50 PM »

Have we ever determined if a Chamberlin or Mellotron, or something else, is making the woodwind sound in the bridge of "Do It Again"? One highly regarded source suspects it may be a synth (the Moog was around California just about a year at that point).
Logged
DonnyL
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1990



View Profile WWW
« Reply #15 on: August 26, 2016, 11:43:59 PM »

Have we ever determined if a Chamberlin or Mellotron, or something else, is making the woodwind sound in the bridge of "Do It Again"? One highly regarded source suspects it may be a synth (the Moog was around California just about a year at that point).

Doesn't sound like Chamberlin or Moog to me, just regular non-Leslie organ.
Logged

Manfred
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 75


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: August 26, 2016, 11:58:08 PM »

Thanks for the information.

I´ve got a DVD about the Mellotron and Brian is in, telling that he loved it and he plays a bit of California girls for the camera.

Also Stephen Desper said that Brian had water sounds on his Mellotron.
Logged
Stephen W. Desper
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1365


Maintain Dynamics - Keep Peaks below 100%


View Profile WWW
« Reply #17 on: August 27, 2016, 06:28:15 AM »


Also Stephen Desper said that Brian had water sounds on his Mellotron.

COMMENT to Manfred:  NOT ME!  I put the watersounds on the Chamberlin, of which Brian had two -- a small two-octave one and a larger five octave one.

Someone who has the time... go back into the archives here at smileysmile and find a post I made which was very detailed about how the Chamberlin works, what I did to customize the sounds, photos of the inside, and songs using the instrument.

I wish there was a way to search using a key word such as "Chamberlin," but so far only such a search only looks at one article at a time, not all entries. Maybe someone knows how to do that and can find the post. It could be several years back
.  ~swd 
Logged
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #18 on: August 27, 2016, 07:26:42 AM »

Stephen, I searched as well and it may have been an archived post that might need to be accessed with Google, I'll check it out. Or perhaps it was on another board?

That brings up another issue regarding archived posts: Around 10 years ago, there was a discussion about a group of studio photos that showed up, taken at what you said was a Do It Again mix session at Capitol, and you pointed out the delay unit as heard on the drum track in one of the shots. You also posted these photos using a photo host and links, but since then the links have expired as often happens. Any chance you might be able to upload and share those again? I'd love to see them, and whatever copies I had were lost in a drive crash years ago.

This is the earlier Chamberlin reference I found in the archives here, but not the one you're thinking of:

I was reading a discussion about Mellotrons recently, and had a complete mental block as to whether BW (or the BBs generally) had ever used one. Can't remember seeing a reference.

Given that the Beatles were using it on Strawberry Fields, November 1966, Brian's creative peak era, I'm surprised if not. Maybe it's a UK vs US thing?

The operative word here is "use."  I know that the BB are familiar with the Mellotron and played one while at Abby Road Studios in London.  Brian was back in the USA at the time. He could well have played one in the course of things.  So if you mean, did any of the Beach Boys ever play a Mellotron, the answer is yes.  But if you mean, did they ever record tracks using a Mellotron, to the best of my knowledge, no.

If my memory serves me, you could rent one in Hollywood from Studio Instrument Rentals, but the Mellotron was never very reliable and thus could not be counted on to be a source of sound for a session.  The US made Chamberlin used the same operating principle, but was better built and usually worked when you wanted it to.

As you may know, The Beach Boys bought two units and used a modified one for some preliminary sessions of Cool Cool Water.  However, the final sounds of water drops used in that recording were made on a MOOG synthesizer, played by Paul Beaver.
  ~swd
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #19 on: August 27, 2016, 07:34:31 AM »

And I also found - from yet another Chamberlin/Mellotron discussion 5 years ago - a post of mine which copied and pasted some of Stephen's comments from 2002-03, from another board:

I copied and saved this thread from somewhere some years ago, probably around 2002/2003 (my file is dated 2003). This is the version of events from the man himself, Stephen Desper, taken from a thread of similar questions written to him about Cool Cool Water. Funny thing is, someone posted how they hoped someone was archiving the thread (raises hand... Grin)

If this information or this re-post of information causes problems for anyone, please let me know and I'll take it down, simple enough.

I underlined and put in bold font one statement of note, otherwise the questions and answers are exactly as they appeared. And whether or not Vosse's water tapes appeared on Sunflower (they did not, I never suggested they did), there is no doubt he recorded tapes around Brian's "Water" concepts in 1966/67, and updated versions of those same concepts were used on the Sunflower recording a few years later.

Enjoy!  Smiley





I started recording --before-- the Sunflower CCW was recorded, but --after-- Brian had conceived of CCW[/u]. The creation of 2 1/2 octaves of drips by way of the ELTRON machine and subsequent transfer to the small CHAMBERLIN were in progress during the month or two it took to record CCW by the group. There were 30 different types of drips and blubbs recorded, each with 26 notes. That is a lot of work!!

I do not believe so. Earlier versions of CCW with Brian at the piano were recorded as guides to a final production of the song, if it were to come about. Brian wrote and recorded many songs on the piano with him signing (previews) just to keep them from slipping away in his memory. Kinda like you and I writing down ideas we may have so we don't forget them. Then going back and reading our notes to jog our memory.
Good Listening, ~Stephen W. Desper
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:


Mr Desper,

One final question. In your posts here you're indicating that you started work as a engineer on the road with the group first, and then in the studio with Stacks-O-Tracks. Now, there's this story of you beginning to tape the SFX in nature for Brian in January 1967. Even though you're saying that you're not good with dates, this story takes place almost a year before you say you started working for the group: could you confirm if this story of you working for Brian this early on is true or not? To put it simply, were the water sounds collected *before* or *after* work on Cool Cool Water had begun to be recorded by Brian/the group?

The earlier versions of CCW by Brian that you're talking of -are they by any chance the same as the first minute of the final Sunflower version of CCW, which was recorded in the fall of 1967?

(and now I won't bug you anymore!)

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:


You know... I'm not good with dates. Ask Brad Elliott via cabinessence.com board about dates. I know Brian had earlier versions of CCW, but they just sat on the tape vault shelf. Carl (and I) conceived the Sunflower version and resurrected the song (in concept) but Carl re-arranged it in its Sunflower form. More on this song in my book RECORDING THE BEACH BOYS. As to the date of the production meeting, I don't know. I do remember that it was rather long and involved, but Brian's involvement came later. That was a difficult time for him.

I was engineering for the BB starting with Stack-O-Tracks and before that engineering on the road.

Moogs could be rented by anyone in Hollywood since their invention. I don't think Brian was into the Moog much before I came along. Robert Moog designed the stage one for Good Vibs that Michael Love played. He designed it to be a playable unit unlike the Theriman unit used for the recording. He designed it, but it was built by someone else. The use of Robert Moog was not by Brian's request, rather by Steve Korthof, his cozen and road manager. The BB were the first RR group to use a Moog on any song, as Robert Moog recalls. The unit Robert designed was really a ribbon controlled oscillator - very easy to play. Some people thought it was a slide guitar as it looked kinda like that from off the stage in the audience. The boys had two units -- one a backup. In more recent concerts the use of a synthesizer in place of the Moog unit has come about. But to my ears, it's just not the same sound. Mike also used it for stage performances of "Stay Away When There's A Riot Goin' On."

Actually none of the BB knew how to program the Moog and looked to me for that function as their engineer. Dennis never liked the Moog beast and forsaw it being a replacement for live musicians years before that came about.

Hope that helps, ~Stephen W. Desper



--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:


Mr Desper,

to the best of your knowledge, would this production meeting concerning Cool Cool Water have taken place in late 1966, early 1967, or later? I'm trying to piece together some sort of timeline, and I believe it's been previously said that you began collecting the water sounds in January, 1967. According to Brian, Cool Cool Water was written three months later, right after he had moved into his new Bellagio house in April. Now, if one is to believe Brian's account, and it was in April 1967 or later that you collected the SFX for Cool Cool Water, what was the purpose of the water SFX recordings in January when you were first hired by Brian? If I have gotten everything wrong, please correct me. You have probably said all this before, but could you, in short, give us a more exact date of when you were first hired by Brian, and what he initially wanted you to do for him, and what his intents with the SFX you recorded for him were? I know that the making of Cool Cool Water is something that you're saving for your website, but could you just give us a litle idea?

Also, to your knowledge, do you know if Brian had had access to the moog before you became an engineer for the group?

Thanks for taking the time answering these detailed and geeky questions of mine!! 

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:
This so called "great stuff" is all archived by myself -- typical engineer. I have to date 63 pages of commentary on various subjects ask of me by fans that I have posted on this and other boards. These pages of commentary plus my book RECORDING THE BEACH BOYS (an in-depth examination of the recording of "Sunflower" and "Surf's Up") will soon be accessible on my website. The website is over 2 gigs large, rather much for a personal website, so it is taking a little time to get up and going. I'll post a link when we launch.
Good Listening, ~Stephen W. Desper

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:


I hope someone is archiving all this great stuff from Stephen...

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:


When we had our first production meeting concerning "Cool, Cool Water" I suggested the use of real water sounds recorded using an ELTRO machine (Eventide Harmonizer was not invented yet) to first shift the pitch making 2 1/2 octave half-note steps and to transfer all the notes to a small Chamberlin machine. Mangagement said to "go for it" and so I took off to northern California with my portable NAGRA profession tape recorder and a good microphone to capture running water sounds in the wild. Later I also recorded air making blubb-type sounds as blown air came up through flower mixed with water in large buckets. This too was put into 2 1/2 octave steps. It was not until this entire project was finished that Brian even became aware of what I was doing.

Brian started using Moogs when I came on as engineer. Theretofore he hired a Moog Player (Paul Beaver) to generate Moog sounds which were few. I bought a large Moog machine for the group (about eight feet wide and four feet high) and registered myself with the musicians union as a Moog player so I could get union scale for playing when called upon. Brian never learned about programming and would only play the keys to make the sounds I had programmed. It required an engineer's knowledge to run the early Moogs.
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

MELLOTRON -- CHAMBERLAIN. While in England on tour, The Beach Boys had a chance to "play" with the Beatles' Mellotron at Abby Roads Studios. Seeing it's advantage (the most early example of sampled sound) they also wanted one for Brian's house studio. The Mellotron was hard to find in the US, but I did locate two Chamberlain units (one full keyboard and one two-octave keyboard) which they bought and used. The small one I re-programmed for water sounds to be used for "Cool Cool Water." The larger one was used for making broad harmonic violin pads and such. Carl and Dennis used it more, but Brian used it little because each sound only lasted a few seconds. He became fed-up with that restriction and sold the unit after a few months.

Both units worked using the same design. A four foot long 1/4 tape "thread" was hung from a point high up in the inside of the case with a weight on the bottom of the tape-thread to pull it tight. Every key had a thread, so there were 52 tape-threads hanging the length of the case. Each thread passed over a horizontal spinning rod of steel, but the spinning rod did not influence or move the tape. Each key had a small rubber wheel attached to its mechanism. When the key was depressed, the wheel (back inside the case) came into contact with the tape-thread, pressing it onto the spinning steel rod (running the length of the case). This in turn caused the tape to rise up and pass by a playback head making a signal that lasted until the length of the thread reached the end, about four seconds. When the key was released the tape-thread fell back to the bottom and was again ready for engagement by another key pressing. In today's digital world this all sounds very primitive, but it did work rather well within the constrants of the design. It was certainly cheaper than hiring a full violin section.

see: http://www.e-prog.net/bands/mellotron.htm for more info on MELLOTRON and CHAMBERLAIN.

Happy Listening, even if sampled, ~Stephen W. Desper

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The large Chamberlin used tapes recorded by the factory.

The small Chamberlin, I modified so that I could use each of its internal playback heads for recording or re-recording each of the tape-threads in the instrument without needing to remove them from the unit. I assembled a variety of water sounds and bubble sounds tuned in one-half note steps for a 2˝ octave spread – to be used for “Cool, Cool Water” – and installed or recorded them one by one into the smaller Chamberlin.

Happy Listening, ~Stephen W. Desper
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
c-man
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4941


View Profile WWW
« Reply #20 on: August 27, 2016, 07:38:59 AM »

Have we ever determined if a Chamberlin or Mellotron, or something else, is making the woodwind sound in the bridge of "Do It Again"? One highly regarded source suspects it may be a synth (the Moog was around California just about a year at that point).

Doesn't sound like Chamberlin or Moog to me, just regular non-Leslie organ.

Interesting...it IS seemingly notated as "organ" on the original track sheet (there are only two references to keyboards inscribed on the sheet..."piano" and "organ"). Can a Hammond produce that woodwind-like sound with a natural-sounding glissando effect? Or would it more likely be the Baldwin?A few years back, we also discussed the "organ" on "Good Timin'" (again, notated as such on the track sheet), and how there is a glissando effect there which is similar to what you'd hear on a vintage Moog or ARP.
Logged
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #21 on: August 27, 2016, 07:46:13 AM »

Have we ever determined if a Chamberlin or Mellotron, or something else, is making the woodwind sound in the bridge of "Do It Again"? One highly regarded source suspects it may be a synth (the Moog was around California just about a year at that point).

Doesn't sound like Chamberlin or Moog to me, just regular non-Leslie organ.

Interesting...it IS seemingly notated as "organ" on the original track sheet (there are only two references to keyboards inscribed on the sheet..."piano" and "organ"). Can a Hammond produce that woodwind-like sound with a natural-sounding glissando effect? Or would it more likely be the Baldwin?A few years back, we also discussed the "organ" on "Good Timin'" (again, notated as such on the track sheet), and how there is a glissando effect there which is similar to what you'd hear on a vintage Moog or ARP.

I have to go by track times and points...my memory isn't as good anymore!

On this YouTube version of Do It Again, where is a good point to listen from for this woodwind sound?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fUyRp0NEzo

What I do pick out is one lower-register note heard at 59 seconds on this clip, just before the bridge. That to my ears is 100% the Baldwin, and it's one prominent note that could be the tip-off on the "organ" notation on that sheet.

Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
c-man
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4941


View Profile WWW
« Reply #22 on: August 27, 2016, 07:53:07 AM »

Yeah, that farty-souding low note immediately before the bridge is indicative of the Baldwin.
The woodwind-like sound I'm referring to commences at exactly 1:08 on this clip, behind Carl's line "makes you're nighttimes warm and outtasite".
Logged
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #23 on: August 27, 2016, 08:08:20 AM »

Yeah, that farty-souding low note immediately before the bridge is indicative of the Baldwin.
The woodwind-like sound I'm referring to commences at exactly 1:08 on this clip, behind Carl's line "makes you're nighttimes warm and outtasite".

I can't venture a guess on that one. I just assumed for years it was a "real" wind instrument or horn. It doesn't sound like one of the early Moogs to me.
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
c-man
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4941


View Profile WWW
« Reply #24 on: August 27, 2016, 08:47:35 AM »

Yeah, that farty-souding low note immediately before the bridge is indicative of the Baldwin.
The woodwind-like sound I'm referring to commences at exactly 1:08 on this clip, behind Carl's line "makes you're nighttimes warm and outtasite".

I can't venture a guess on that one. I just assumed for years it was a "real" wind instrument or horn. It doesn't sound like one of the early Moogs to me.

It's present on the "early version", too (as heard on Endless Harmony Soundtrack, which was a mix from the original 4-track recordings, prior to transfer to 8-track and adding additional parts, like the bass sax). I don't think a woodwind or brass player was present at those early sessions, so I'm inclined to believe it was a keyboard. As I'm not hearing the glissando effect to the extent I remembered, I'm venturing that it is indeed the Baldwin...Brian could have easily used one manual of the Baldwin for the farty sound heard on those intermittent low notes, and another for the French horn-type sound heard at 1:08 in the bridge.
Logged
gfx
Pages: [1] 2 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 1.386 seconds with 22 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!