I find the crusade against 'um' to be annoyingly misplaced. It frustrates the shit out of me that iOS speech-to-text dictation refuses to write my 'um's and 'uh's with no way to change that behavior. If a person asks to remove them, fine, but don't fucking alter my speech patterns when I'm sending messages to people.
Removing 'um' from a recording is harder than it sounds
71–80 of 96 posts
Re: Removing 'um' from a recording is harder than it sounds
#72It takes about 30 seconds in Audacity and will give an infinitely better result. Also works on any other sound
I’ve don’t this in audacity many times, it doesn’t work as well. All the umm patterns don’t match exactly. I’ve had better overall results with erm. I haven’t used audacity in years for this, maybe they improved the feature.
Re: Removing 'um' from a recording is harder than it sounds
#73I would love to see support for videos and removal of custom filler words (I say 'basically' and 'like' a lot and have so far failed to improve myself on this).
It does take videos (like mp4) as input but will only output the stripped audio track.
I might add the custom filler word functionality and/or perhaps just make the filler word list configurable.
Re: Removing 'um' from a recording is harder than it sounds
#74The title of the article is wrong. It's not that removing 'um' from a recording is hard, it's that not removing everything else in the recording while doing so is.
You’re right. I may borrow that if I do a follow up at some point :-)
Re: Removing 'um' from a recording is harder than it sounds
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
The younger generation seems to love listening at 1.2x or faster. I think it’s a preference for a fast information dopamine hit. I may argue it’s even a shallow approach that prefers against pausing and time for careful reflection. Meanwhile, book reading is at an all time low seemingly because no one has a preference or patience for careful study and reflection.
I'm not in the younger generation, but I listen to most of youtube (apart from songs and comedy) at 2x speed, and wish it could be even faster most of the time (that's a feature of premium, but I'm not paying for that). The problem is that people are producing longer videos because that earns them more advertising revenue. Many creators now speak so mind-numbingly slowly, that even at 2x speed it feels like it's abou…
FYI NewPipe allows up to 4x playback; PipePipe up to 10x! And both block ads, while PipePipe also integrates Sponsorblock.
Re: Removing 'um' from a recording is harder than it sounds
#76I think the “What it won’t touch” section shows why the entire concept is unsound. Here it is with a different first sentence, and (other than the third sentence no longer matching erm’s reality) it’s perfectly coherent: > It leaves um , uh , er and elongated versions ( ummmm , uhhhhh ) alone. Those sound like fillers but they’re doing real work in the sentence, and cutting them automatically would change what someon…
>> It leaves um, uh, er and elongated versions ( ummmm, uhhhhh ) alone. Something's already gone wrong here. Uh and er refer to the same sound. Uh is the American spelling. Er is British; to them a following "r" like that is just a kind of vowel.
Regardless of American vs. British spellings, those are not the same sound. Some British people may pronounce them the same. Americans definitely pronounce them differently, though. For instance, the word “water” has a hard “r” sound at the end; Americans don’t pronounce it “watuh” like some British people do.
Re: Removing 'um' from a recording is harder than it sounds
#77It’s a nice engineering approach, but I’m interested in the motivation. Um and ah is distracting in a transcript, where you can naturally pause to take in information; in speech however it can serve as a focusing point to indicate the next part is important. See https://medium.com/better-humans/dont-worry-about-saying-um-... for example. The weirdly obsessive zeal that orgs like Toastmasters have about eliminating th…
The younger generation seems to love listening at 1.2x or faster. I think it’s a preference for a fast information dopamine hit. I may argue it’s even a shallow approach that prefers against pausing and time for careful reflection. Meanwhile, book reading is at an all time low seemingly because no one has a preference or patience for careful study and reflection.
> The younger generation seems to love listening at 1.2x or faster.
I do not belong to the younger generation. I refused to watch videos because it takes too long comparing with reading. But now I'm watching them at 2x. You can watch a 40 min video in 20 minutes. I'd like to compress it further to 10 min or so, but 3x is a paid option on youtube and I'm not sure I could digest English (which is a foreign language to me) at 3x.
> Meanwhile, book reading is at an all time low seemingly because no one has a preference or patience for careful study and reflection.
Oh, I read books too. But the content is different. You can't read some books at 2x. You can't listen to it on such a speed. In any book I think there are stretches of text you can consume at any speed, but sometimes you hit a dense packed information you need to think through. It happens with videos too. Like, try to watch Veritasium at 2x, you'll be forced to slow things down at least sometimes, because to get the message you need to learn how to think at 2x speed too, not just to listen.
In any case the most of videos dilute their message over tens of minutes and you can speed up things and have plenty of time to think things through while watching.
Re: Removing 'um' from a recording is harder than it sounds
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> It leaves um, uh, er and elongated versions ( ummmm, uhhhhh ) alone. Something's already gone wrong here. Uh and er refer to the same sound. Uh is the American spelling. Er is British; to them a following "r" like that is just a kind of vowel.
Regardless of American vs. British spellings, those are not the same sound. Some British people may pronounce them the same. Americans definitely pronounce them differently, though. For instance, the word “water” has a hard “r” sound at the end; Americans don’t pronounce it “watuh” like some British people do.
They are two names for the same sound. There is no particle "er" in American English. There could be one, theoretically, but there isn't.
Re: Removing 'um' from a recording is harder than it sounds
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
The younger generation seems to love listening at 1.2x or faster. I think it’s a preference for a fast information dopamine hit. I may argue it’s even a shallow approach that prefers against pausing and time for careful reflection. Meanwhile, book reading is at an all time low seemingly because no one has a preference or patience for careful study and reflection.
I'm not in the younger generation, but I listen to most of youtube (apart from songs and comedy) at 2x speed, and wish it could be even faster most of the time (that's a feature of premium, but I'm not paying for that). The problem is that people are producing longer videos because that earns them more advertising revenue. Many creators now speak so mind-numbingly slowly, that even at 2x speed it feels like it's abou…
It's medium used in wrong way. If you want getting information efficiently, read carefully writen text. If you want immersive story, watch feature film. If you want dialogue, use audio.
Instead we use audio for info, text for stories and video for dialogues.
Re: Removing 'um' from a recording is harder than it sounds
#80Does it work just for English?