The quest to save Stephen Hawking's voice
sfchronicle.com
sfchronicle.com
The lesson is that software companies shouldn't be quick to kill an old product or let it die just because they have a newer one that they think is better.
Edit: Perhaps the next generation of blind techies will become attached to something open-source, like espeak-ng (which ships with the NVDA screen reader for Windows). Then, if they want it frozen in time at version X, that will be feasible.
OMG, so very much this!
The problem is that there was a very brief period of time in the early days of the development of the computer (by which I mean like 1975-1995 or so) when just about everything new was an improvement. That implanted the idea in people's heads that NEW==GOOD because it was (mostly) true for about 20 years. But nowadays technology has matured and it is no longer invariably true. I have a five-year-old MacBook pro running Mavericks that I much prefer to anything on the market today.
> The lesson is that software companies shouldn't be quick to kill an old product or let it die just because they have a newer one that they think is better.
I wish Microsoft had stopped trying to "improve" Windows after Windows 95, UI-wise. Maybe port it to the NT kernel and offer support for modern hardware like GPUs and USB, but that's it. Too many of their improvements to the experience aren't, really.
With that in mind, it was nice to read that the original CallText boards as well as the emulator are with the family. That should provide the security to ensure that nobody can impersonate him in the future.
You can copy normal voices, you can copy his voice and you can fully impersonate people and even create fake videos. If security was his intent, he should have used cryptographic signatures for his texts or voice recordings, but even that can be compromised.
I think he just liked his voice and wanted it to be unique. It's understandable and most people would do the same.
> He also explained that he was able to change the accent of his computer when the technology advanced, but he decided against it.
> Hawking added: “My old system worked well and I wrote five books with it, including A Brief History Of Time.
> “It has become my trademark and I wouldn’t change it for a more natural voice with a British accent.
> “I am told that children who need a computer voice want one like mine.”
Personally I modify my speech by context, just as I modify my writing. When I'm "home" (where I grew up, my parent's house) I emphasise my accent a little more, just as I use local slang.
Some people, subconsciously echo a speaking-partners accent - changing the tone, timbre, inflections, and such between conversations.
But yes, you're right that voice was strongly linked to his identity as is often the case for prolific public speakers.
One can definitely train to speak better with coaching, but your voice and most specifically your voice “ID” is unique to you. That can’t be changed.
By changing [style of] their speech I mean the frequency, timbre, intonations, accent, nasality, etc., and NOT words, or content (which obviously can also be changed).
There are often key elements that match based on morphology of the vocal apparatus, but if I speak like a toff with a cold vs. a barrel-chested Nor'n Irelander there's little ID left.
Good mimics, those who have radio/TV shows for example, can if they choose leave nothing for a normal listener to distinguish their speech from that of the subject of their mimicry. Impressionists tend to charicateur their subjects somewhat, however.
In UK it used to be relatively common to have a "telephone choice" that would sometimes confuse even close acquaintances in to thinking you were someone else.
Another common example is when taking different languages one has a different voice.
This is known as code-switching. It's different from modifying your "voice" (although I suspect code-switching to a different pitch may kinda count).
If using a different accent (different range of frequency, different speed, different tone) isn't changing one's voice then I'm not sure what really counts? At this point it sounds like you're trying to use a non-physics based concept for voice [the parameters of sound produced by vocalisation].
Speech is so nuanced; it really seems true that 80% of what you say has little to do with the words themselves.
In general, there's no security to be had in unique the sound of someone's voice. It is too easy to impersonate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DECtalk https://www.fastcompany.com/3050267/stephen-hawkings-voice-i...
Also, though it borders on surveillance, this text-to-speech technology offered the byproduct to record every spoken word that Professor Hawking said in lecture and made available as searchable text. He had authored every conversation he had. Does such a repository exist in his estate?
I knew they had gotten older, I knew their voices were different, but it never hit me until I saw them playing Han and Leia again.
I certainly wouldn't want people putting words in my [dead] mouth after I'm gone, and I doubt he would either.
I attempted to source his audio and recreate one as above.