THE TALKING PHONOGRAPH: 68S 



and these registered accurately in the manner described ; and second 

 that their reproduction should be accomplished in the same period of time 

 in which they were made, for evidently this element of time is an im- 

 j)ortant factor in the quality and nature of the tones. A sound which is 

 composed of a certain number of vibrations per second is an" octave above- 

 a sound which registers only half that number of vibrations in the same- 

 period. Consequently if the cylinder be rotated at a given speed while- 

 registering certain tones, it is necessary that it should be turned at precisely 

 that same speed while reproducing them, else the tones will be expressed in 

 entirely different notes of that scale, higher or lower than the normal note 

 as the cylinder is turned faster or slower. To attain this result there must 

 be a way of driving the cylinder, while delivering the sound or speakingy, 

 at exactly the same rate as it ran while the sounds were being recorded, and 

 this is perhaps best done by well regulated clockwork. It should be under- 

 stood that the machine illustrated is but an experimental form, and com- 

 bines in itself two separate devices — the phonograph or recording aparatus, 

 which produces the indented slip, and the receiving or talking contrivance 

 which reads it. Thus in use the first machine would produce a slip, and this 

 would for example be sent by mail elsewhere, together in all cases with in- 

 formation of the velocity of rotation of the cylinder. The recipient would 

 then set the cylinder of his reading aparatus to rotate at precisely the same 

 speed, and in this way he would hear the tones as they were uttered. Dif- 

 ference in velocity of rotation within moderate limits would by no means 

 render the machine's talking indistinguishable, but it would have the curi- 

 ous effect of possibly converting the high voice of a child into the deep- 

 bass voice of a man, or vice versa. 



No matter how familiar a person may be with machinery and its won- 

 derful performances, or how clear in his mind the principle underlying this 

 strange device may be, it is impossible to listen to the mechanical speech 

 without experiencing the idea that his senses are deceiving him. We have 

 heard other talking machines. The Faber apparatus for example, is a large 

 affair, as big as a parlor organ. It has a key board, rubber larynx and lips 

 and an immense amount of ingenious mechanism which combine to produce 

 something, like articulation in a single monotonous organ note. But here is 

 little affair of a few pieces of metal, set up roughly on an iron stand about a 

 foot square, that talks in such a way, that, even if in its present imperfect 

 form many words are not clearly distinguishable, there can be no doubt no- 

 that the inflections are those of nothing else than the human voice. 



We have already pointed out the startling possibility of the voices of the- 

 dead being reheard through this device, and there is no doubt but that its- 

 capabilities are fully equal to other results just as astonishing. When it 

 becomes possible, as it doubtles will, to magnify the sound, the voices of 

 such singers as Parepa and Titiens will not die with them, but will remain 

 as long as the metal in which they may be embodied will last. The witness 

 in court will find his own testimony repeated by the machine confronting 



