
The quest to save Stephen Hawking's voice - wallflower
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/The-Silicon-Valley-quest-to-preserve-Stephen-12759775.php
======
mwcampbell
People get strongly attached to speech synthesizers, even (especially?) the
old robotic-sounding ones, whether they're using it to speak for them (as with
Hawking) or read to them (e.g. blind people). I know a blind guy who was so
attached to the ETI-Eloquence synthesizer (developed in the 90s) that, to use
it on his Mac, he did a hack involving the WINE Win32 compatibility layer.
Some blind people favor the more robotic-sounding synths in general because
those tend to be better at high speeds than the more natural-sounding voices
based on real recordings.

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.

~~~
bitwize
Interesting. Hawking appears to have preferred his old CallText for similar
reasons to why I prefer chunky old bitmap fonts in my terminal windows rather
than something like Consolas: One part nostalgia, and one part noise-
robustness.

> 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.

~~~
qubex
I‘d be delighted with a Windows 10 kernel and technology stack sporting a
Windows 2000 GUI. That represents the nostalgic apex for me. XP’s default
”Fisher Price” skin was when things turned sour.

------
james_pm
I wonder if one of the reasons Hawking was so tied to that specific voice and
hardware was so that there could be a way to verify that a recording was
actually him. If nobody else had that hardware and software combo, it wouldn't
be possible for anyone else to put words into his mouth.

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.

~~~
overcast
He was so tied to that specific voice, because that was his voice. If someone
told you that today, you get a completely new voice, would you? It just so
happens that this particular synthetic voice was attached to an extremely
popular person, and it was his identifying trait.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
Lots of people do. Politicians are well known for changing their speech later
in life in order to convey a different feeling, usually "confident and
statesman-like".

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.

~~~
AckSyn
Speech != voice.

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.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
English word choice is confusing here because voice can be "the style of
speech/writing".

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.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
s/"telephone choice"/"telephone voice"

------
classichasclass
The CallText 5010 is a descendent of DECtalk, so the voice he used has been
around. Hawking's voice was based on Perfect Paul, which the DECtalk Express I
have here is set to, and sounds very much like him. You can still buy these
devices and a software version is available.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DECtalk](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DECtalk)
[https://www.fastcompany.com/3050267/stephen-hawkings-
voice-i...](https://www.fastcompany.com/3050267/stephen-hawkings-voice-is-now-
open-source-and-free-to-download)

~~~
mwcampbell
Just curious, do you still use a DECtalk Express day to day, or do you just
have one for the sake of nostalgia? What do you use a speech synthesizer for
(e.g. screen reader)?

~~~
classichasclass
It's just for fun. I got it _because_ it sounds like Hawking. It came DOA from
a music shop and it just turned out the battery pack needed to be serviced.
Anything with a serial port can use it to speak.

------
blorenz
I understand that his voice was his identity but our voices naturally and
distinctly change as we mature and age. I am left to wonder why it was so
important that his voice remain frozen in time?

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?

~~~
larkeith
I would imagine part of it is that our voices change _gradually_. Even in
extreme cases, like when we go hoarse or get sick, there's an essential
progression to link our new voice to the old, and there's an identifiable
common thread. Meanwhile, for Hawking, it would have been a sudden, disjoint
change - and with the exception of the mentioned upgraded CallText voice, any
replacement would have been completely new, utterly unrelated to his prior
voice; Imagine how disconcerting it would be to awake with a stranger's voice,
with no expectation of getting your own back.

~~~
mwcampbell
Exactly. And whereas biological human voices deteriorate with time, the
proposed replacements for Hawking's voice were supposedly improvements (though
not necessarily improvements _to him_ ).

------
mewse-hn
Great story, would be nice if the voice emulator became open source

~~~
Jaruzel
I think in this case, that's not something that should happen. It's his voice,
and it should die with him.

I certainly wouldn't want people putting words in my [dead] mouth after I'm
gone, and I doubt he would either.

------
oasisbob
Some previous discussion, four months ago:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16637162](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16637162)

------
BackwardSpy
I really enjoyed reading that, thank you for posting.

------
voicemynah
shameless plug: [https://www.voicemynah.com](https://www.voicemynah.com)

I attempted to source his audio and recreate one as above.

