One of the really nice aspects of trolling around the web is that
occasionally one hooks something truly out of the ordinary.

I thought that I'd been reasonably knowledgeable about the history of
early music synthesizers, but the details of the RCA synthesizer were
indeed a surprise to me!  The web site is at:

    http://www.hyperreal.org/music/machines/manufacturers/RCA

It includes a few photos of this behemoth, and (best of all, I think)
includes a diagram showing how the rolls were encoded.  Unfortunately,
the source of the information is not disclosed, and from the tantalizing
"Fig. 65" on the encoding diagram, the original document could have been
formidable in size.

Even more unfortunate is the news, disclosed at the end of the following
"readme" file found at the web site disclosed above, that the apparatus
may already have been consigned to the scrap yard.  Ouch!  Additionally,
there is a nice colour photo of the perforator portion, given at:

    http://www/synthfool.com/rca1.jpg

Anyone with more information on this synthesizer, or just interested
in on-line yakking about obsolete electronic music in general, is
hereby invited to get in touch with me.

Colin Hinz

>
> THE RCA ELECTRONIC MUSIC SYNTHESIZER
> (The mother of all synths)
> By Batz J Goodfortune <batzman@dove.mtx.net.au>
>
> The RCA electronic music synthesizer was first used in 1955.

 [ snip -- Sarnoff's "blah blah blah!"  (See the web site!)  -- Robbie

> In effect, the RCA electronic music synthesizer is basically a
> two channel harmonic additive synth.  It takes sine waves at
> various harmonic intervals and adds them together to form
> complex harmonic structures.  It has all the usual things found
> on modern synths today like envelope generators, portamento etc.,
> however the terminology they used was a little different.
> Instead of calling the EG and ADSR generator, they called it a
> "GD&D control." Growth, decay and duration control.  The synth
> has filters but they are manually adjusted and something called
> a resonator chain which isn't explained.
>
> The whole thing is made from Vacuum tube and mechanical
> technology of the day.  It fills a sizable room and consumes a
> hell of a lot of power.  Exactly how big and how much isn't
> stated.  It's not like they produced a spec sheet and colour
> glossy brochure for prospective buyers.  :) It's input device is
> a pair of piano rolls.  Literally piano rolls.  They took apart
> two pianola mechanisms and put them to service as input devices.
> The parts are played in on a pianola recorder and further
> encoded with data to control the synth as it plays.  These are in
> turn synchronized to it's output device.  A single disk cutting
> lathe.  Since the synth is only two channels I can only assume
> that the disks where then taken elsewhere and synchronized
> together like a multitrack recorder to produce finished works.
> Indeed the recorder points to this as being the way it's done as
> they explain how a song (Blue Skys by Irving Berlin.  Uploaded to
> hyperreal as an MPEG) is put together.
>
> Circa 1958 there was a Mark II version of the RCA electronic
> music synthesizer.  It was modified from the original.  It then
> contained 2 built in paper piano-roll punchers to record the
> settings and control of the synth as well as 2 cutting lathes.
> In addition a tape recorder was added.
>
> It was originally located at Collumbia-Princeton university's
> Electronic music centre.  However in 1996 I believe it is being
> pulled down and it's fate is unknown at the time of writing.  It
> would be nice to think that it would be given a good home in the
> future and kept in working order.  This synth produced some
> unique sounds.  even though the relatively modern voltage
> controlled, transistorized Moog synthesizers also produced
> unique tones, there is no comparison to the sound of the RCA
> beast.  Listening to it is like listening to a radio broadcast
> that has been travelling in space for 40 years.  Twisted and
> warped by time like a message in a bottle.  The terminology used
> on the recording is the rudiments of the synthesis language we
> use today.  Like listening to ancient English.  You can understand
> what they're on about but the language has evolved since.
> Interestingly they refer to the player of a synthesizer as being
> a "synthesist".  Even though they make a distinction between the
> engineer programming the machine and the musician playing it.
> The hopes and aspirations mentioned in Brig. General David
> Sarnoff's speech above, seem to have been fulfilled in modern
> synth technology but I'm sure he would have never expected
> things to have progressed in the manner they have today.
>