• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

training your own replacement

E

ex radio pimp

Guest
I found this interesting. I can't name names but, a friend of mine works for one of the big radio corps. The air staff were recently air checked and everyone got the same "feedback". That's not usually how air checks work. They usually speak to each person's strengths and weaknesses.

The air talent couldn't understand how everyone had the same directive. "Speak more clearly, at a quick pace with no add libs and fewer individual characteristics as we try to achieve a uniformity based style guide so as to not confuse the listener"

Then one of the announcers saw an email they weren't supposed to see that implied that they are going to have the air talent (unknowingly) train A.I.

Here we are.
 
They have already taken the voice of Randy Travis, who has been unable to sing since a stroke, and recreated it with AI. It sounds just like him. But it's not him. If they can do that, they can do anything. Having said that, someone still has to program the AI. But reading a weather report or anything like that can already by done by AI.
 
TheBigA said:
They have already taken the voice of Randy Travis, who has been unable to sing since a stroke, and recreated it with AI. It sounds just like him. But it's not him. If they can do that, they can do anything. Having said that, someone still has to program the AI. But reading a weather report or anything like that can already by done by AI.
Click to expand...
The training is the programming. You want the AI voice to know the nuance of doing a weather report in Boston. Have you ever heard AI on A Youtube video? It always mispronounces something. In Boston you have to know how to pronounce Peabody, Worcester and Billerica.
 
To the guy doing 3 shifts in 3 different “local” markets—AI could do a much better job in at least 2 of them. AI could have a far better understanding of the happenings, vibe, and everything about those markets in real time and historically.
We’re still a ways to go before this happens in practice. But it’s coming imo.
 
AI will never truly "better understand" anything than humans. AI isn't capable of "understanding." It has no humanity and no lived experience. You're making this junk sound omnipotent, and surrendering human communication to it and entrusting it with that responsibility that we broadcasters have to our audience is truly scary.
 
ex radio pimp said:
I found this interesting. I can't name names but, a friend of mine works for one of the big radio corps. The air staff were recently air checked and everyone got the same "feedback". That's not usually how air checks work. They usually speak to each person's strengths and weaknesses.

The air talent couldn't understand how everyone had the same directive. "Speak more clearly, at a quick pace with no add libs and fewer individual characteristics as we try to achieve a uniformity based style guide so as to not confuse the listener"

Then one of the announcers saw an email they weren't supposed to see that implied that they are going to have the air talent (unknowingly) train A.I.

Here we are.
Click to expand...
Welcome to jobs in darn near every industry. Good, bad or otherwise, this is reality.
 
Andy Travis said:
And so many cheered the destruction of unions. If there's a path to sue these people for this, I sincerely hope it's taken.
Click to expand...
Sue them for what? Every business owner has a right to do what they feel is best for their business. Perhaps the better approach would be to point out the flaws every time the robot hiccups and try to get listeners, hence advertisers to flock to the live and local station.
 
Andy Travis said:
They don't have the right to use my voice to train AI without disclosure or my consent.
Click to expand...
They have no right to use your likeness(voice) in their future automation. They have every right to teach the A1 style and pace from the work you are currently accepting a salary to perform
 
Hyrum said:
They have no right to use your likeness(voice) in their future automation.
Click to expand...

There are exceptions. Two of my voice talents record generic song tags for me, they are paid a negotiated amount per tag, and I have the right to use those as much as I want.
 
K.M. Richards said:
There are exceptions. Two of my voice talents record generic song tags for me, they are paid a negotiated amount per tag, and I have the right to use those as much as I want.
Click to expand...
If that's your deal, that's your deal. They could have done the vo with a limit that you had use until a specific date. If they chose not to put that in the contract that's on them when they hear themselves on your station in 2029
 
Hyrum said:
If that's your deal, that's your deal. They could have done the vo with a limit that you had use until a specific date. If they chose not to put that in the contract that's on them when they hear themselves on your station in 2029
Click to expand...

It also helps that these are old friends, I give them ongoing liner work, and as a result they are getting a few hundred bucks every month that they wouldn't get otherwise.

Realistically, I'm not a big time player, but the long-term value to their tracks is pretty much predicated on my continuing to do what I do.

I only offered my situation, albeit unique, as an exception to your blanket statement. That's what I do when people insist on a "one size fits all" argument.
 
K.M. Richards said:
It also helps that these are old friends, I give them ongoing liner work, and as a result they are getting a few hundred bucks every month that they wouldn't get otherwise.

Realistically, I'm not a big time player, but the long-term value to their tracks is pretty much predicated on my continuing to do what I do.

I only offered my situation, albeit unique, as an exception to your blanket statement. That's what I do when people insist on a "one size fits all" argument.
Click to expand...
Once again. It is a deal between the two of you and is not really relevant outside of you two.
 
Hyrum said:
Once again. It is a deal between the two of you and is not really relevant outside of you two.
Click to expand...

Thank you for clarifying. Your original statement was phrased in such a way as to presume a "blanket" condition applicable to all such matters.
 


Back
Top Bottom