• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Russell Brand accused of rape and sexual assault

AI voices don't have breathing, but not all recordings without audible breathing are AI voices. It's not difficult.

Have you listened to the recording in question? I have (via the All Four streaming service), through an extremely good USB DAC and HD580 headphones.
 
Have you listened to the recording in question? I have (via the All Four streaming service), through an extremely good USB DAC and HD580 headphones.

Your credentials to analyse audio are...?

I mean if you don't have any expertise, you're just some random person making a claim without evidence.
 
What? What am I full of?

Feel free to provide any material to support your bollocks claims regarding audio recording of the human voice, especially in the context of a professionally produced and edited documentary.
I'll venture to suggest you'd never given the subject of AI generated voices any thought whatsoever until about 20 minutes ago.
 
No, of course people will never notice an existential threat to their entire profession, it's inevitably a surprise!
 
My favorite CT are those who us 'evidence' in support that wouldn't even help the conspiracy if they were true.

'This voice has to be AI!'

First, no, not even close. Secondly, why would some conspiracy to, *checks notes* defame a flamed out dickhead who has already become irrelevant, need to use AI voiceover? How would it help? What benefit is there in doing that to make them use it over just someone reading a script?

Nothing. There is no benefit and only downsides.

So in addition to being simply untrue, it's also not something they'd have to do anyway.
 
I'm sure that professionally produced recordings use all sorts of fancy equipment and filters and maybe even post-editing software to remove extraneous noise such as breathing sounds so that they are not audible or barely audible. Because it sounds more professional that way. No reason to assume that lack of audible breathing noise means an AI-generated voice. But even if they did use one, it could be for no other reason than to make sure that a person who wants to remain anonymous cannot be identified by their voice. The alternative is to alter their voice, but that often sounds weird and kind of creepy.
 
Last edited:
Right? I've only seen him occasionally, on things like Big Fat Quiz of the Year, and he always struck me as creepy. Something about his eyes, they dart around and he seems to blink less frequently than most. I'm normally not judgmental of character based on appearances but if you're in a room with Jimmy Carr and you are the one who looks weirdly unnatural there is something going on.
Yeah, he's always kind of rubbed me the wrong way too. Now I know why.
 
I used to dislike Russell Brand as an entertainer and from what I perceived of him, as a person. In fact I'd go as far as saying I detested him, everything about him - his appearance, his crass 90's FHM/Loaded 'lad' humour (FFS - he just wasn't frikking funny except to mouth breathers) but .... had accusations like those currently being made by conveniently anonymous individuals, conveniently "verified" by journalists (whatever that word means to them nowadays, but take their word for it anyway, right?) my eyebrows would have gone up.

Now? I've watched more than few of his YT and Rumble videos (some hosted on the latter site because YT censorship would have nuked them) and it's crystal clear what's going on - a coordinated character-assassination campaign, nothing more or less.

I have to wonder if it hasn't blown up a little more than even its orchestrators intended, and that (as with the 'Depp V Heard thing') a lot of people who still give the corporate media the benefit of the doubt (if not treat it as gospel) will be scratching their heads.

That might be moot because the intention was to shut him up and in that they've most definitely succeeded, at least for the foreseeable future.
 
I read an opinion piece (FWIW) that said Brand basically cancelled himself years ago, when he went contrarian.
 
Yeah, if it were just a few people making the accusation it would be one thing. But now, basically everybody who has ever interacted with him is saying what a slimeball he is.

That's not character assassination, that's a pattern.
 
Well, plenty of people, including me, could not understand why he was fawned over and invited to serious debate shows for such a long time when his public persona was so disgusting and annoying.

It’s worth asking why only now have the BBC and others discovered there was something despicable about him.

They did briefly realize it when he was fired from BBC radio for calling up Andrew Sachs’s answering machine and telling him about how he’d ****** his grand daughter.

I seem to recall that some people on this forum were in support of Brand given that Sachs had portrayed Manuel in Fawlty Towers.
 
Well, plenty of people, including me, could not understand why he was fawned over and invited to serious debate shows for such a long time when his public persona was so disgusting and annoying.
Probably for the same reason he was able to get away with it for so long. He has charisma.
 
He always irritated me with his dodgyness and ability to use hundreds of words to say nothing of substance like an irritating ********, but it seems the media are already cancelling this and that and treating him as already guilty, which isn't good.

He shouldn't have gone around for the last fifteen years with a sign saying "I'm guilty" in ten foot flourescent neon lights, then.

Brand wasn't and isn't a man to keep quiet about his predelictions.
 
I've always thought he was an irritating twonk. Disappointed to learn I'm such a poor judge of character.
 

Back
Top Bottom