The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

Can this be true? All we have ever heard was that Edison recorded the human voice for the first time. But this artical seems to differ? It could not play back the sound?
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7Gi6j4w3DY[/youtube]

Leon Scott's Phonautograph could record a tracing of sound waves - but it could not play them back. It was a useful scientific tool and Edison himself used it for analytical purposes early in his career.

This was major news when it was announced in early 2008. It even drew front page attention in the NY Times. The transcription of Léon Scott de Martinville's phonautograms was the work of the group First Sounds. You can read all about it on their website: http://firstsounds.org/.

Leon Scott designed the Phonautograph to visibly trace the pattern of sound waves. So far as we know, no one ever conceived of reproducing sound waves until Thomas Edison did it, and Charles Cros in France also conceived the idea but never made any attempt. I think Bell's telephone probably caused Edison to even consider that such as thing was possible.

In fact, Bell himself made a similar apparatus, using actual human ear bones, which traced sound vibrations on a smoked glass slide. He was rather taken aback when Edison's Phonograph was announced.

Bill

I think the answer is they didn't set out to reproduce sound as Edison did. If they would have we would have a different history. I just do not like Edison as a person. He was a baby and a mean selfish person.

Amberola wrote:I think the answer is they didn't set out to reproduce sound as Edison did. If they would have we would have a different history. I just do not like Edison as a person. He was a baby and a mean selfish person.

He did make a fine machine though.

Amberola wrote:I think the answer is they didn't set out to reproduce sound as Edison did. If they would have we would have a different history. I just do not like Edison as a person. He was a baby and a mean selfish person.

Yes, he was imperfect.

JerryVan wrote:

Amberola wrote:I think the answer is they didn't set out to reproduce sound as Edison did. If they would have we would have a different history. I just do not like Edison as a person. He was a baby and a mean selfish person.

Yes, he was imperfect.

None of them were saints - kind and gentle men did not last long as captains of industry, and those who did generally employed others to do their dirty work.

estott wrote:

JerryVan wrote:

Amberola wrote:I think the answer is they didn't set out to reproduce sound as Edison did. If they would have we would have a different history. I just do not like Edison as a person. He was a baby and a mean selfish person.

Yes, he was imperfect.

None of them were saints - kind and gentle men did not last long as captains of industry, and those who did generally employed others to do their dirty work.

My point exactly. Edison was no different than any of us today, or anyone back then. Not completely good, nor completely bad. Modern historians, with nothing of value to contribute, seem to make a name for themselves by highlighting the shortcomings of people who made this a great nation and an industrial giant. All they really prove is that they were human beings, with the same faults and weaknesses as any other of our species. Not defending Edison's personality per se, just sayin'....