Time Magazine profiles Thomas Edison

[OrthoFan]

A reference to this was posted today on Phonoland.

http://www.time.com/time/specials/packa ... 00,00.html

Nice to read something that doesn't trash Edison, for a change.

OF

[Edisonfan]

Read the article. Well done! Enjoyed it very much, and learned some more about the man.

Paul

[OrthoFan]

Hi John:

I thought so too.

As a bonus, I thought I'd pass along this early Edison talking film from 1913, which I recently spotted on youtube. I'd only seen snippets of it before in other documentaries:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbmn1R5KpKU[/youtube]


I was surprised at how advanced it looked, considering all of the disparaging things I've read about Edison's Kinetophone over the years.

[Edisone]

They showed an obvious movie viewer and called it the "first camera", but otherwise 'twas well done. I get an actual paper copy every week, too ! (How quaint of me)

[JohnM]

Hi John:

I thought so too.

As a bonus, I thought I'd pass along this early Edison talking film from 1913, which I recently spotted on youtube. I'd only seen snippets of it before in other documentaries:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbmn1R5KpKU[/youtube]


I was surprised at how advanced it looked, considering all of the disparaging things I've read about Edison's Kinetophone over the years.

Here's a link to the Library of Congress 'American Memory Project' website:
http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/index.html

Search on the site for 'Edison Films' and pages of Kinetoscope films will come up!

[OrthoFan]

Here's a link to the Library of Congress 'American Memory Project' website:
http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/index.html

Search on the site for 'Edison Films' and pages of Kinetoscope films will come up!

Hi John: Many thanks. I'd actually seen most of those. They were among the first videos I watched online after I finally got a high speed internet connection a few years back.

What puzzled me about the Edison sound film is how the sound effects -- dropping logs, etc. -- were recorded. I had read that the performers simply mimed their voices to a recording they made, with orchestra, prior to filming. This makes sense, given the limited range of the recording horn. But it doesn't explain how the sound effects were so well synchronized.

The only thing I can think of is that, after the film was made, the music/voice cylinder was re-recorded (using the horn to horn dubbing method) and the sound effects were simply added at the appropriate times. The final (dubbed recording) would then contain both the initial music and voices, as well as the sound effects.

OF

[Lenoirstreetguy]

I thought they were recorded on the spot, that is to say live. I seem to recall reading somewhere that they got the recorder sensitive enough so that the actors could be 15 feet from the horn. I don't THINK I'm making this up . The other sound systems at the time were lip synced although there is discussion that some of the Gaumont films were done live.
Too bad the cylinder player here has a flutter. And who is playing who?
Love this clip!

Jim

[OrthoFan]

I thought they were recorded on the spot, that is to say live. I seem to recall reading somewhere that they got the recorder sensitive enough so that the actors could be 15 feet from the horn. I don't THINK I'm making this up . The other sound systems at the time were lip synced although there is discussion that some of the Gaumont films were done live.
Too bad the cylinder player here has a flutter. And who is playing who?
Love this clip!

Jim

Hi Jim:

Many thanks. I think the most recent reference I read to the performers miming to prerecorded records came from this site -- http://eos.meccahosting.com/~a0003215/s ... 00-23.html -- but I know I've seen others.

Seems to be very little -- online -- about the technical aspects of making the films. But what you say makes sense. Looking at the movie again, everything seems too well synchronized for there to be dubbing involved.

OF

[Lenoirstreetguy]

I got digging in my stuff and found an article written in the Antique Phonograph Monthly by George Blacker in the early 80's when nobody new much about this system at all , other than the fact that it had been a high profile flop in 1913 for the Edison Company. His comments are interesting He was I think the first one to transfer the cylinders to tape...I'll attach the list later.... It is in fact much shorter than the material which we have access to today. Blacker states that the cylinders play at 120 rpm in order to get enough playing time and the cut is wider than that of the Blue Amberol. He was disappointed with the quality of the sound which doesn't match the crisp incisive sound of the commercial blue Amberols. One can hear what he means in the clip here. I suspect having a recording so distant was a factor in that.

Jim

[OrthoFan]

Hi Jim:

Many thanks. I look forward to reading it. Over the past few days, I've read a few online articles which I found by doing a search for:

"Edison talking film" OR "Edison Sound Film"

I found this one to be particularly interesting:

http://books.google.com/books?id=gABqNF ... 22&f=false

Seems that more than just technical problems led to the public's rejection of the Edison talking films: "The Edison films had no major stars and usually consisted of items that would have been considered of little entertainment (sic) even in the smaller vaudeville theaters."

Another reference I spotted was from a scholarly paper published in 1976 that stated that the films were "generally well received," based on the contemporary newspaper reviews. (Damned if I can find it now!)

OF