The Voder: 1939, the worlds first electronic voice synthesizer
Brian RoemmeleCited 3× on HN, 2017-2024
332K views · 9 years ago · demo · evergreen
A short look at the Voder, the first electronic voice synthesizer, demonstrated by Bell Labs at the 1939 World's Fair. It was operated by trained women using ten finger keys, foot pedals and a knee lever.
HN cites it as a historic demonstration of early speech synthesis, including discussions about whether the demo was genuine.
1:40:53The Mother of All Demos, presented by Douglas Engelbart (1968)
Marcel
1.2M views • 14 years ago
4:06DEC LAB-8/e (PDP-8/e) playing music
Philipp Hachtmann
50K views • 18 years ago
52:41Alto System Project: Larry Tesler demonstration of Gypsy
Computer History Museum
31K views • 7 years ago
3:39(1/4) Intro/History: Introducing a 100-year-old mechanical computer
engineerguy
476K views • 12 years ago
54:13:03Larynx Demo
synesthesiam
14K views • 5 years ago
52:56World's Second Best Speakers!
Tech Ingredients
2.5M views • 7 years ago
23:04The Computer-free Automation of a Jukebox (Electromechanics)
Technology Connections
1.3M views • 6 years ago
5:361968 “Mother of All Demos” by SRI’s Doug Engelbart and Team
SRI
302K views • 7 years ago
7:21#VoCo. Adobe Audio Manipulator Sneak Peak with Jordan Peele | Adobe Creative Cloud
Adobe Creative Cloud
1.9M views • 10 years ago
11:131979: Will WORD PROCESSORS start a HOME WORKING revolution? | Past Predictions | BBC Archive
BBC Archive
461K views • 4 years ago
8:07Seymour Papert 1983
Cynthia Solomon
28K views • 19 years ago
7:47This AI actually WORKS!!! - NVIDIA RTX Voice
ShortCircuit
1.8M views • 6 years ago
3:47Sketchpad, by Dr. Ivan Sutherland with comments by Alan Kay
David Carroll
54K views • 19 years ago
10:34Windows Vista Speech Recognition Tested - Perl Scripting
scrubadub1
913K views • 19 years ago
4:54LilithComdexDemo
Jos Dreesen
3K views • 14 years ago
2:47Ernst Dickmanns’ VaMoRs Mercedes Van, 1986-2003
Computer History Museum
38K views • 10 years ago
46:20The Eleventh HOPE (2016): Coding by Voice with Open Source Speech Recognition
Channel2600
13K views • 9 years ago
4:32The Visual Microphone: Passive Recovery of Sound from Video
Abe Davis's Research
1.9M views • 12 years ago
5:48Apple's 1987 Knowledge Navigator Video
rkarena
217K views • 19 years ago
20:13The Most Powerful Computers You've Never Heard Of
Veritasium
13.7M views • 4 years ago
3 comments from Hacker News
Vocoder more representative of the ADSR approach.[0] Although adding the orchestral music score single track equivalent of speech production looks about the same.[1] Space / technical complexity not withstanding, could generate a full choir & full orchestra with 1 vocoder per singer/ 1 vocoder per orchestra instrument. Suppose chatgpt could assist with reducing/minimizing amount of vocoders needed via waveform overlap reductions at the expense of being specific for given set of song(s). ---- [0] : ▶ this video [1] : link
I was skeptical that you could even type an intelligible phonetic "She saw me" with only two phonemes let alone give it the rise and fall demonstrated. I've played with the SP0256 speech synthesis IC and found constructing intelligible words challenging even with all the phonemes available on that silicon. This extended video has me thinking it probably was legit though: ▶ this video
This model is quite cool, but also quite a bit different than what lyrebird.ai is doing. NPSS has a lot of extra information in the control inputs about pronunciation and timing (the part-of-phoneme timer feature) - this means that most of the "hard parts" (in my opinion) for naturalness are control inputs to NPSS/WaveNet style models, rather than variables the model must generate globally and consistently as in lyrebird. At generation time NPSS appears to generate each component autoregressively as well, but I am not clear on whether the demo samples do this or if they use "true" values for f0 at least - what forces the model to sing the exact same melody, if many melodies are possible given the underlying audio information? Also note that NPSS has some amount of post-processing, at least reverb and perhaps other common musical mixing - we don't really know how these samples are generated, and I have a hard time decyphering exactly what inputs are required, and what are generated from the paper alone. However, I really, really, really like NPSS - I just don't think the comparison you are making is valid here. These features (f0, duration, pronunciation) are some of the most difficult things to learn to model from datasets of speech and text directly, and I am not sure how they got the subset used (I think only f0 and pronunciation/phoneme) for this NPSS model. Giving creators fine-grained control of the performance (as in NPSS) is quite cool, and if these systems can get fas