Subject: Re: Talking piano: Sparky debate on the auditory list From: "James W. Beauchamp" <jwbeauch@xxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 12:12:44 -0500 List-Archive:<http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>I have to say that Sparky's talking piano voice is a lot more intelligible than the other examples given. Sparky's piano evidentally used some kind of (analog) vocoder method. It's just an example of subtractive synthesis winning out over additive synthesis, especially when the atoms are not sine waves. Jim Beauchamp Univ. of Illinois Bob Carlyon wrote: >From: Bob Carlyon <bob.carlyon@xxxxxxxx> >Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 16:11:37 +0100 >Organization: Medical Research Council >To: AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx >Subject: [AUDITORY] Talking piano: Sparky debate on the auditory list >Comments: To: Markus Noisternig <Markus.Noisternig@xxxxxxxx> > >Is it just me who was reminded of Sparky's Magic Piano? > >Check out >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3etiNLAFi0 >and start the video after about 3 mins 15 seconds.... > >bob > >PS. Before anyone asks, no I was /not/ around in the 1940s when this >came out first.... PSS I was but I missed it somehow. These cuts are followed by: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYGmerbDs-w (part 2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OmTgHf0Z8o (part 3)