Milestone-Proposal talk:First Karaoke Machine, 1967

Advocates’ Checklist

1. Is the proposal for an achievement rather than for a person? If the citation includes a person's name, have the proposers provided the required justification for inclusion of the person's name?
2. Was the proposed achievement a significant advance rather than an incremental improvement to an existing technology?
3. Were there prior or contemporary achievements of a similar nature? If so, have they been properly considered in the background information and in the citation?
4. Has the achievement truly led to a functioning, useful, or marketable technology?
5. Is the proposal adequately supported by significant references (minimum of five) such as patents, contemporary newspaper articles, journal articles, or citations to pages in scholarly books? At least one of the references should be from a peer-reviewed scholarly book or journal article. The full text of the material, not just the references, shall be present. If the supporting texts are copyright-encumbered and cannot be posted on the ETHW for intellectual property reasons, the proposers shall email a copy to the History Center so that it can be forwarded to the Advocate. If the Advocate does not consider the supporting references sufficient, the Advocate may ask the proposer(s) for additional ones.
6. Are the scholarly references sufficiently recent?
7. Does the proposed citation explain why the achievement was successful and impactful?
8. Does the proposed citation include important technical aspects of the achievement?
9. Is the proposed citation readable and understandable by the general public?
10. Will the citation be read correctly in the future by only using past tense? Does the citation wording avoid statements that read accurately only at the time that the proposal is written?
11. Does the proposed plaque site fulfill the requirements?
12. Is the proposal quality comparable to that of IEEE publications?
13. Are any scientific and technical units correct (e.g., km, mm, hertz, etc.)? Are acronyms correct and properly upper-cased or lower-cased? Are the letters in any acronym explained in the title or the citation?
14. Are date formats correct as specified in Section 6 of Milestones Program Guidelines? Helpful Hints on Citations, plaque locations
15. Do the year(s) appearing in the citation fall within the range of the year(s) included at the end of the title?
16. Note that it is the Advocate's responsibility to confirm that the independent reviewers have no conflict of interest (e.g., that they do not work for a company or a team involved in the achievement being proposed, that they have not published with the proposer(s), and have not worked on a project related to the funding of the achievement). An example of a way to check for this would be to search reviewers' publications on IEEE Xplore.

Independent Expert Reviewers’ Checklist

1. Is suggested wording of the Plaque Citation accurate?
2. Is evidence presented in the proposal of sufficient substance and accuracy to support the Plaque Citation?
3. Does proposed milestone represent a significant technical achievement?
4. Were there similar or competing achievements? If so, have the proposers adequately described these and their relationship to the achievement being proposed?
5. Have proposers shown a clear benefit to humanity?

In answering these questions, the History Committee asks that independent expert reviewers apply a similar level of rigor to that used to peer-review an article, or evaluate a research proposal. Some elaboration is desirable. Of course the Committee would welcome any additional observations that you may have regarding this proposal.

Submission and Approval Log

Submitted date: 29 October 2024
Advocate approval date: 18 November 2024
History Committee approval date: 4 December 2024
Board of Directors approval date:

Suggested New Wording for Citation -- Bberg (talk) 22:50, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Please consider this new wording for the citation, at 70 words:

In 1967, Shigeichi Negishi of Nichiden Kogyo created the first karaoke machine by mixing live vocals with pre-recorded music. His device included a mixer, a microphone, an 8-track cartridge magnetic tape player, and a payment system to charge the singer. Originally called a Sparko Box, his invention led to karaoke’s worldwide popularity. An original operational machine has been preserved by Negishi’s family at the original company site in Tokyo, Japan.

Brian Berg, Milestones Subcommittee Chair

Re: Suggested New Wording for Citation -- Kata (talk) 00:07, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Dear Brian Berg san

Thank you very much. I think your citation wording is great! I'd like to adopt yours.

Let me correct one point. Shigeichi Negishi launched the "Music Box" in 1967 and changed its name to "Sparko Box" in 1969. Therefore, could you please forgive me for changing it to "Music Box".

Best regards, Shiro Kataoka, one of proposers of the Milestone #2024-25

Re: Re: Suggested New Wording for Citation -- Bberg (talk) 00:49, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

I see that a new citation is now on the main page. I agree that the new one reads well, and it's good that it includes a bit more historical information.

Thank you. Brian Berg, Milestones Subcommittee Chair

Re: Re: Re: Suggested New Wording for Citation -- Zephyrus00jp (talk) 08:04, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I am Chiaki Ishikawa, one of the co-proposers.

I courted a clarificaton from Brian Berg, and considering the new wording of citation proposed in the review by Matt Alt (his main point was to refer to "Sparko Box", a later name which Shigeichi Negish was fond of using), I came up with the following after consultation with the advocate. We should mention that Karaoke's differentiating factor from the earlier Jukeboxes was it allows the singer/user to sing along with the pre-recorded accompaniment.

  In 1967, Shigeichi Negishi of Nichiden Kogyo created the first karaoke
  machine by mixing live vocals with pre-recorded accompaniment, which
  led to karaoke’s worldwide popularity. Originally called Music Box
  and later Sparko Box, it included a mixer, a microphone, an 8-track
  tape player, and a coin payment system to charge the singer. An
  early operational machine has been preserved by Negishi’s family
  at the original company site in Tokyo, Japan.

This is 70 words long according to MS-WORD. I would like to thank everybody for helping us polish the citation.

Chiaki Ishiakwa, one of the proposers

Message from Advocate to Proposers -- Tomohiro Hase (talk) 20:17, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Dear Proposers

I have been appointed by the History Committee as Advocate for your proposal. According to the Status Report, your proposal is currently in stage B1. Could you please send the proposal and the required documents listed in the table checkbox to the IEEE. This will allow your proposal to proceed to stage C1. I will review the content of the proposal at stage C1 and then continue with the Review Process.

Best regards, Dr. Tomohiro Hase, Advocate.

Expert Reviewer's Report_1_Matt uploaded by Advocate -- Tomohiro Hase (talk) 00:05, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Dr. Hase,

I have amended as requested, at bottom.

Here is my report.

(1) Is the suggested wording of the Plaque Citation accurate?

Yes. Please refer to my proposed edit, sent separately, as well:

In 1967, Shigeichi Negishi created the first karaoke machine from a microphone, an 8-track tape deck, an audio mixer, and a coin payment system. Originally called the Music Box, then the Sparko Box, his invention led to karaoke’s worldwide popularity. An original operational machine has been preserved by Negishi’s family at the former site of his company, Nichiden Kogyo, in Tokyo, Japan.

(2) Is the evidence presented in the proposal of sufficient substance and accuracy to support the Citation?

Yes, I believe so. I did not see any errors in the descriptions of the evidence. I can also confirm that the device is still operational as of November of 2023, when I filmed Negishi and his daughter singing a song on it.

(3) There is a personal name in Citation, Shigeichi Negishi. Proposer describes Karaoke machine in his own achievements in the name-in-citation section. Do you agree with this claim?

Yes, I do.

(4) Does the proposed milestone represent a significant technical achievement?

This depends on your definition of technical. Negishi's device utilized existing components created by others. But his combining these existing components in a novel way resulted in something new and transformative. I do believe this is a significant achievement.

(5) Were there similar or competing achievements? If so, have the proposers adequately described these and their relationship to the achievement being proposed?

There were numerous people working on similar devices in the years between 1967 and 1971, but in my research, and as outlined in your proposal, Negishi was the first to successfully bring such a device to market. In other words, the timeline as outlined in the proposal is correct.

As an aside, I think the term “online karaoke" might be better represented as "streaming karaoke" in the proposal's references. I say this because the earliest digital delivery systems for karaoke utilized modems connecting via dedicated phone lines to musical servers. This predates the public Internet and "world wide web," so "online" might invite confusion. (Modern streaming karaoke systems do use the Internet for their data delivery, but that was not the case in 1992, when the technology of "tsushin karaoke" (literally "communications karaoke," but colloquially "streaming karaoke," came to market.) In fact I believe that streaming karaoke may well represent the first streaming music service of any kind, so if one is linking Negishi to streaming karaoke, he could also be seen as a pioneer, or at least a precursor, of the streaming music industry today. The effects of karaoke are far-reaching and extend beyond the sing-along industry. As noted in the proposal, karaoke played a key role in promoting data storage and transmission systems, and Japan's consumer electronics industry as a whole. It also played a key role in transforming pop-musical tastes, particularly as streaming karaoke allowed for the use of "big data" analytics, leading producers to focus on songs that were easy for average customers to sing and would likely be chosen in karaoke establishments.

In conclusion, I think that Shigeichi Negishi's karaoke machine has historical value. And I highly recommend the invention of the karaoke machine for an IEEE Milestone.

Matt Alt

[Advocate’s remarks] Mr. Matt Alt is the author of the book “Pure Invention”.

Expert Reviewer's Report_2_Kamo uploaded by Advocate -- Tomohiro Hase (talk) 00:07, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Dear Dr. Tomohiro Hase.

We will respond to your questions as follows:

(1) Is the suggested wording of the Plaque Citation accurate?

Yes, the inscription is accurate.

(2) Is the evidence presented in the proposal of sufficient substance and accuracy to support the Plaque Citation?

Yes, I believe so. I read the section "Historical Significance" and reviewed the contents of references [3], [4a], [5b], [9], and [11].

(3) The Citation mentions Shigeichi Negishi as the inventor of the first Karaoke Machine. Do you agree with this Citation?

Yes. I read the section "Justification of name-in-citation" and agree with the inclusion of this name.

(4) Does the proposed milestone represent a significant technical achievement?

Yes, I believe so. Karaoke would not have been a successful form of entertainment if it only involved recorded accompaniment without singing. It became successful only when a mechanism for charging singers was established, forming the current karaoke business model. Mr. Negishi's karaoke system includes a billing system, which was crucial for the entertainment value of karaoke at the time. In an interview (reference [5b]), Mr. Negishi said, "The hardest part of developing the hardware was making the coin box." This highlights the importance of the billing system for karaoke.

(5) Were there similar or competing achievements? If so, have the proposers adequately described these and their relationship to the achievement being proposed?

Yes, Negishi's karaoke had a distinct advantage over the traditional competing LP record "MMO" (Music Minus One). According to the literature (reference [5a]), the late Isao Morimoto said, "Speaking of karaoke, it probably has its roots in the LP record 'MMO,' which was sold in the United States in the late '20s." However, as explained in the answer to question (4), it can be called "karaoke" only if it includes a mechanism for charging for singing. This makes the "concept of copyright royalties" for karaoke a reality.

In Conclusion; I believe that Shigeichi Negishi's karaoke holds significant value as a technical and historical asset. I strongly recommend its recognition as an IEEE Milestone.

Dr. Fumiyoshi Kamo, Associate Professor of Tamagawa University.

[Advocate's remarks] Dr. Fumiyoshi Kamo is not only an associate professor of Tamagawa University, but also a professional guitarist.

Expert Reviewer's Report_3_Sakuma uploaded by Advocate -- Tomohiro Hase (talk) 00:09, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Dr. Tomohiro Hase

I have carried out a review based on your request. And I will respond as follows.

First, I will explain the relationship between Mr. Shigeichi Negishi, as described in the Proposal, and the All-Japan Karaoke Industrialist Association to which I belong.

(a) As described in the Proposal, Mr. Shigeichi Negishi invented the karaoke machine in 1967. He withdrew from the karaoke business in 1975. On the other hand, our Association was established in 1994. In other words, our Association was born 19 years after he withdrew from the karaoke business. That is, there is no overlap in terms of the karaoke business.

(b) I heard that Mr. Shigeichi Negishi closed his company in 1993. On the other hand, as mentioned above, our Association was established in 1994. Our Association is basically made up of legally incorporated entities, i.e., companies, as members. His company no longer existed when our Association was established. We checked our internal documents, and his company was never a member of our Association.

(c) I have never met Mr. Shigeichi Negishi personally.

Based on the above three facts, I declare that I have “no conflict of interest” with Mr. Shigeichi Negishi.

That said, as an expert on karaoke, a major topic of the Proposal, I have reviewed it as follows.

(1) Is the suggested wording of the Plaque Citation accurate?

Yes. I think the citation is accurate.

(2) Is the evidence presented in the proposal of sufficient substance and accuracy to support the Plaque Citation?

Yes. The history of karaoke seems short, but it is long. Today, there are no people in the industry who know about the early days around 1970.

In that respect, it was good that in 1999 the history of karaoke in the 20th century was unraveled by people in the industry who knew about the time. In addition, the "History of Karaoke" compiled by the All-Japan Karaoke Industrialist Association, which conducted roundtable discussions by industry representatives and verified the results of the competition, was an initiative worthy of praise.

According to the history of karaoke, there is a description that before 1970, a trading company called the Kokusai Shohin released the "Music Box," an eight-tiger small jukebox manufactured by Mr. Shigeichi Negishi of the Nichiden Kogyo. And this is the oldest listed origin of karaoke. This point confirms the "Music Box" manufactured by Mr. Shigeichi Negishi of the Nichiden Kogyo in "3.3 Karaoke Innovator:" in the Proposal. I believe that the first karaoke machine that can be called the "Music Box" was manufactured in October 1967.

(3) The Citation mentions Mr. Shigeichi Negishi, as an inventor of the first Karaoke Machine. Do you agree with this Citation?

Yes. As described in the Proposal, Mr. Shigeichi Negishi manufactured the "Music Box" in 1967. It is only appropriate and natural that the name of "Shigeichi Negishi" is listed in Citation as the developer of the first karaoke machine.

(4) Does proposed milestone represent a significant technical achievement?

Yes. Today, karaoke has become a small number of people in the world who do not know about it. The development of the first karaoke machine, which is the root of karaoke, is of great significance from the history of karaoke breakthroughs since then. In the karaoke business, there are karaoke machines with functions that allow you to sing comfortably. There is also a need for karaoke software (music) that is easy for amateurs to sing. Furthermore, in order for karaoke to be viable as a business, the billing system is of utmost importance. Without any of these, the current flourishing of karaoke would not be possible.

Mr. Negishi's idea and the development of the "Music Box," which conceived the prototype of this trinity business, are the cornerstone of the current karaoke industry, which consists of singing spaces centered on karaoke machines.

(5) Were there similar or competing achievements? If so, have the proposers adequately described these and their relationship to the achievement being proposed?

Yes. Since 1970, four-and-a-half tatami mat manufacturers that manufacture and sell karaoke machines have emerged like bamboo shoots after rain. Unfortunately, however, there are very few records of products manufactured and sold before 1970 because of the passage of time. In the 1960s, there was a business in the tavern where instrumentalists called "Nagashi" for the act of singing. This Nagashi’s job also played the role of background music for instrumentalists to sing and listen to.

On the other hand, for tavern stores, small jukeboxes for background music were popular at the time. While a typical jukebox is a large device for playing records, this small jukebox uses an 8-track tape to save space so that it can be installed even in a tavern with a small store area.

In the late 1960s, Nagashi with microphone jacks appeared to use small jukeboxes instead of loudspeakers when singing with guitars and accordions. And it seems that there was also something that resembled Negishi's Music Box in appearance. In fact, the "Music Box" was also called the "Sparko Box", and it was used as a small jukebox for background music in the tavern.

However, there is a breakthrough that sets these small jukeboxes with microphone jacks and Negishi's "Music Box" apart. In other words, the "Music Box" had all six items in the "configuration of the early karaoke machine" indicated by Proposer. These six elements are at the root of the karaoke business, which continues to this day. The oldest and first device manufactured as a karaoke machine in this regard is his Music Box. It is an undeniable fact that karaoke machine was invented by Mr. Shigeichi Negishi.

In Conclusion, I believe that the karaoke machine invented by Mr. Shigeichi Negishi is valuable as a technological and historical asset. Therefore, I strongly recommend it as a suitable candidate for an IEEE Milestone

Hideki Sakuma, President of the All-Japan Karaoke Industrialist Association.

Expert Reviewer's Report_4_Hayashi uploaded by Advocate -- Tomohiro Hase (talk) 06:58, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Dear Dr. Hase

Here is my review report.

＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝

(1) Is the suggested wording of the Plaque Citation accurate?

Yes. After reading the statement, I determine that the inscription is accurate.

(2) Is evidence presented in the proposal of sufficient substance and accuracy to support the Plaque Citation?

Yes. I have read the “Historical Significance” section and determined that the evidence documents are presented correctly.

(3) The Citation mentions Shigeichi Negishi, as an inventor of the first Karaoke Machine. Do you agree with this Citation?

Yes. I have read the section on “Justification of name in citation” and agree with the name-in-citation.

(4) Does proposed milestone represent a significant technical achievement?

The first karaoke machine, created in 1967, was a composite technology, and its elemental technologies, magnetic tape playback, microphone mixing, and billing, were all known, but the innovative energy of its basic concept was enormous. As is comprehensively written in the section on “Social and industrial impact” in the text, technically, the transition from magnetic tape to laser discs and broadband had a major impact, and culturally and industrially, karaoke has evolved from open-space karaoke to karaoke boxes, and has become popular overseas. Given the size and diversity of its influence, karaoke is worthy of being called a great invention.

(5) Were there similar or competing achievements? If so, have the proposers adequately described these and their relationship to the achievement being proposed?

At the time the karaoke machine by Negishi was commercialized in 1967, there were no similar or competing ideas, and it was unique. All competing models that emerged in the subsequent development of karaoke were derived from the original karaoke machine invented in 1967, as adequately explained in the section "Features set this work apart from similar achievements" in the text.

In conclusion,

"Negishi Shigekazu's karaoke is valuable as a technical and historical asset, and is therefore worthy of being an IEEE Milestone, so I highly recommend it."

＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝

Masaki Hayashi.

[Advocate's remarks] Dr. Masaki Hayashi is former Associate Professor, Department of Game Design, Faculty of Arts, Uppsala University, Sweden.

Advocate’s Recommendation -- Tomohiro Hase (talk) 10:00, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Advocate's Recommendation for the IEEE Milestone #2024-25 “First Karaoke Machine, 1967”

November 18th, 2024.

Dear IEEE History Committee.

I’m honored to be an advocate to review for the Milestone Proposal, #2024-25 “First Karaoke Machine, 1967”.

(1) Expert Reviewers:

I asked four independent experts in the field of the proposal to conduct a detailed review from a technical point of view.

I asked expert reviewers following four questions.

(Q1) Is the suggested wording of the Plaque Citation accurate?

(Q2) Is the evidence presented in the proposal of sufficient substance and accuracy to support the Citation?

(Q3) There is a personal name in Citation, Shigeichi Negishi. Proposer describes karaoke machine in his own achievements in the name-in-citation section. Do you agree with this claim?

(Q4) Does the proposed milestone represent a significant technical achievement?

(Q5) Were there similar or competing achievements? If so, have the proposers adequately described these and their relationship to the achievement being proposed?

I've upload four Expert Reviewer’s Reports to ETHW website as following URL:

https://ieeemilestones.ethw.org/Milestone-Proposal_talk:First_Karaoke_Machine,_1967

As far as I can tell from reading the four Expert Reviewer Reports, I have received positive ratings from them all that are appropriate for Milestone.

(2) Advocates’ Checklist:

Following <Yes> is my check for lists.

1. Is the proposal for an achievement rather than for a person? If the citation includes a person's name, have the proposers provided the required justification for inclusion of the person's name? <Yes>

2. Was the proposed achievement a significant advance rather than an incremental improvement to an existing technology? <Yes>

3. Were there prior or contemporary achievements of a similar nature? If so, have they been properly considered in the background information and in the citation? <Yes>

4. Has the achievement truly led to a functioning, useful, or marketable technology? <Yes>

5. Is the proposal adequately supported by significant references (minimum of four) such as patents, contemporary newspaper articles, journal articles, or citations to pages in scholarly books? At least one of the references should be from a peer-reviewed scholarly book or journal article. The full text of the material, not just the references, shall be present. If the supporting texts are copyright-encumbered and cannot be posted on the ETHW for intellectual property reasons, the proposers shall email a copy to the History Center so that it can be forwarded to the Advocate. If the Advocate does not consider the supporting references sufficient, the Advocate may ask the proposer(s) for additional ones. <Yes>

6. Are the scholarly references sufficiently recent? <Yes>

7. Does the proposed citation explain why the achievement was successful and impactful? <Yes>

8. Does the proposed citation include important technical aspects of the achievement? <Yes>

9. Is the proposed citation readable and understandable by the general public? <Yes>

10. Will the citation be read correctly in the future by only using past tense? Does the citation wording avoid statements that read accurately only at the time that the proposal is written? <Yes>

11. Does the proposed plaque site fulfill the requirements? <Yes>

12. Is the proposal quality comparable to that of IEEE publications? <Yes>

13. Are any scientific and technical units correct (e.g., km, mm, hertz, etc.)? Are acronyms correct and properly upper-cased or lower-cased? Are the letters in any acronym explained in the title or the citation? <Yes>

14. Are date formats correct as specified in Section 6 of Milestones Program Guidelines? Helpful Hints on Citations, plaque locations. <Yes>

15. Do the year(s) appearing in the citation fall within the range of the year(s) included at the end of the title? <Yes>

16. Note that it is the Advocate's responsibility to confirm that the independent reviewers have no conflict of interest (e.g., that they do not work for a company or a team involved in the achievement being proposed, that they have not published with the proposer(s), and have not worked on a project related to the funding of the achievement). An example of a way to check for this would be to search reviewers' publications on IEEE Xplore. <Yes>

(3) Advocate’s Comment and Conclusion:

I received the satisfactory peer review results from four experts in the field of proposals. These expert reviewer’s reports and discussions were very useful for my decision as an advocate for Milestone #2024-25.

1. Citation:

Four expert reviewers responded that citation is accurate, judging by the answers to question Q1. They also reported that they confirmed that the contents of the citation are supported by evidences, judging by the answers to question Q2. As an advocate, I have the same judgments as reviewers, too.

2. Name-in-Citation:

The four reviewers decided that it was appropriate for Shigeichi Negishi's name to be included in the Citation. judging by the answers to question Q3. It is because they acknowledged that he alone had accomplished this feat. As an advocate, I have the same judgments as reviewers, too.

3. Technical significance and historical value:

Four expert reviewers gave me detailed reviews of the answers of Q4 and Q5. They acknowledged the historical significance of the Shigeichi Negishi’s karaoke machine and its great impact for historical value. As an advocate, I have the same judgments as reviewers, too.

4. Advocate’s Conclusion:

All four expert reviewers gave the proposal strong recognition and support that it deserves the IEEE Milestone certification. I have considered carefully both the proposal and the expert reviewer’s reports, and have the same thought as expert reviewers. In conclusion, I strongly recommend this proposal, #2024-25 “First Karaoke Machine, 1967”, to the IEEE Milestone as an advocate.

Best regards,

Dr. Tomohiro Hase, IEEE Fellow.

Advocate #2024-25, IEEE History Committee.

Approval of the Proposal -- Bberg (talk) 13:25, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Dear Tomohiro Hase-san and your Expert Reviewers,

Thank you for this detailed submission. I give this my approval.

Brian Berg, Milestones Subcommittee Chair

A modification using the term "streaming karaoke" on top of "online karaoke", and related changes. -- Zephyrus00jp (talk) 06:08, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Dear all,

This is Chiaki Ishikawa, one of the proposers.

We have taken a look at the reviews and found the following paragraph in the review of Alt Matt.

Quote from the review of Alt Matt.

As an aside, I think the term “online karaoke" might be better represented as "streaming karaoke" in the proposal's references. I say this because the earliest digital delivery systems for karaoke utilized modems connecting via dedicated phone lines to musical servers. This predates the public Internet and "world wide web," so "online" might invite confusion. (Modern streaming karaoke systems do use the Internet for their data delivery, but that was not the case in 1992, when the technology of "tsushin karaoke" (literally "communications karaoke," but colloquially "streaming karaoke," came to market.) In fact I believe that streaming karaoke may well represent the first streaming music service of any kind, so if one is linking Negishi to streaming karaoke, he could also be seen as a pioneer, or at least a precursor, of the streaming music industry today. The effects of karaoke are far-reaching and extend beyond the sing-along industry. As noted in the proposal, karaoke played a key role in promoting data storage and transmission systems, and Japan's consumer electronics industry as a whole. It also played a key role in transforming pop-musical tastes, particularly as streaming karaoke allowed for the use of "big data" analytics, leading producers to focus on songs that were easy for average customers to sing and would likely be chosen in karaoke establishments.

We carefully modified the submitted proposal to refer to the early distribution method that began in 1992 as "streaming karaoke" and used the phrase "online karaoke" to refer to the later broadband distribution. Also, I *THINK* many ordinary citizens would think of online karaoke as something that they can enjoy at homes and so mentioned that too.

I hope the modification reflects the spirits of Mr. Matt's review.

We changed the references to include the references about this 1992 introduction of "streaming karaoke" (or communication karaoke). Also, an oversight to update the reference [12] was also fixed.

Thank you all for the reviews and comments.

Chiaki Ishikawa
One of the proposers

PS: you can compare the changes using the following link.
https://ieeemilestones.ethw.org/w/index.php?title=Milestone-Proposal%3AFirst_Karaoke_Machine%2C_1967&type=revision&diff=20882&oldid=20819

Support of Milestone Proposal -- Jbart64 (talk) 18:39, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

I have reviewed the milestone proposal and support it, including the final revisions and explanations. Dave Bart

Support for Milestone Proposal -- Dmichelson (talk) 09:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

I have reviewed the proposal and support it, including the final edits and comments. In particular, the proposed citation is clearly written and well-crafted. Dave Michelson