4 ms·

Where are you from if people think you don't have an accent, if you don't mind me asking?

nickjj 7y ago
Long Island, New York. I'm not trying to plug my channel but here's my latest public video from the other week: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kq_khHWovl4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kq_khHWovl4 I do believe audio quality plays a -huge- role in this. For comparison, here's the most recent Railscasts video from a few years ago by another screencast author: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urPi4qZJeOE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urPi4qZJeOE I can deal with him at 2x but it's mentally taxing because his audio has a metallic wispy sound at that speed and it makes his words sound blended together. I think he also talks slightly slower than me at 1.0x as well, so it's not just base talking speed. Does anyone else notice that metallic sound too? Here's another sample of Joe Rogan and Bill Burr on a podcast: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cS1KWv0das8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cS1KWv0das8 Listening to them talk at 2x feels like a joy. They are talking a little slower since it's a casual conversation but the audio is crystal clear and both of them have very good word annunciation (not surprising since they are on stage talking for a living).
- bscphil 7y ago
  I agree, you have a very neutral American accent, not much like a New Yorker at all. Other things I noticed include that you are indeed pronouncing each word very clearly, but also that you're speaking a bit more slowly than I would consider a typical speech rate (though not necessarily slower than the average Youtube video). In this video, you're also speaking at a bit higher pitch than a typical male voice, which I think further aids clarity because "sharper" syllables come out very clearly instead of being muddled like they are in very deep voices. That said, I couldn't comprehend you well at all at 2x speed (using the Youtube controls). This might have just been to distortion caused by the Youtube player on my computer, I'm not sure. At 1.75x you were still very clear, though I suspect at that rate I would find myself pausing the video now and then to think about what you were saying.
  - nickjj 7y ago
    Thanks for the listen. All of my tests are always using Youtube's playback controls btw. Were you able to listen to Joe Rogan's podcast at 2x? Skip somewhere in the middle and listen for 15 seconds maybe. You are right in that I speak slower in that video. Most of my more recent Youtube videos are unscripted so I'm just thinking about things with zero preparation, where as I script my courses word for word (which leads to faster speaking generally) but I don't have any course videos with the same audio equipment to compare side by side. I didn't read the paper but I wonder what they classify comprehension as. Personally I wouldn't listen to hardcore technical things at 2x because understanding the words isn't usually the goal of listening to it. It would be to fully absorb and understand what you're listening to so you can apply it on your own later. There's a big difference between a mechanical understanding of the words and really "getting" what you're listening to. I typically reserve 2x for listening to tech talks where my goal is to get a high level overview of something quickly.
    - bscphil 7y ago
      > Were you able to listen to Joe Rogan's podcast at 2x? Skip somewhere in the middle and listen for 15 seconds maybe. Hmm, I skipped around to a few different spots. About half the time it was intelligible at 2x, but as soon as they started speaking faster it became a garble. Occasionally they would speak fast enough that I couldn't catch it even at 1.75x. So I'd say they have a lot more variability in their pacing than you do.
- liability 7y ago
  I scoffed at the idea that somebody from Long Island would have no accent, but after listening for myself I have to agree. Interesting.

Long Island, New York. I'm not trying to plug my channel but here's my latest public video from the other week: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kq_khHWovl4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kq_khHWovl4 I do believe audio quality plays a -huge- role in this. For comparison, here's the most recent Railscasts video from a few years ago by another screencast author: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urPi4qZJeOE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urPi4qZJeOE I can deal with him at 2x but it's mentally taxing because his audio has a metallic wispy sound at that speed and it makes his words sound blended together. I think he also talks slightly slower than me at 1.0x as well, so it's not just base talking speed. Does anyone else notice that metallic sound too? Here's another sample of Joe Rogan and Bill Burr on a podcast: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cS1KWv0das8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cS1KWv0das8 Listening to them talk at 2x feels like a joy. They are talking a little slower since it's a casual conversation but the audio is crystal clear and both of them have very good word annunciation (not surprising since they are on stage talking for a living).

bscphil 7y ago
I agree, you have a very neutral American accent, not much like a New Yorker at all. Other things I noticed include that you are indeed pronouncing each word very clearly, but also that you're speaking a bit more slowly than I would consider a typical speech rate (though not necessarily slower than the average Youtube video). In this video, you're also speaking at a bit higher pitch than a typical male voice, which I think further aids clarity because "sharper" syllables come out very clearly instead of being muddled like they are in very deep voices. That said, I couldn't comprehend you well at all at 2x speed (using the Youtube controls). This might have just been to distortion caused by the Youtube player on my computer, I'm not sure. At 1.75x you were still very clear, though I suspect at that rate I would find myself pausing the video now and then to think about what you were saying.
- nickjj 7y ago
  Thanks for the listen. All of my tests are always using Youtube's playback controls btw. Were you able to listen to Joe Rogan's podcast at 2x? Skip somewhere in the middle and listen for 15 seconds maybe. You are right in that I speak slower in that video. Most of my more recent Youtube videos are unscripted so I'm just thinking about things with zero preparation, where as I script my courses word for word (which leads to faster speaking generally) but I don't have any course videos with the same audio equipment to compare side by side. I didn't read the paper but I wonder what they classify comprehension as. Personally I wouldn't listen to hardcore technical things at 2x because understanding the words isn't usually the goal of listening to it. It would be to fully absorb and understand what you're listening to so you can apply it on your own later. There's a big difference between a mechanical understanding of the words and really "getting" what you're listening to. I typically reserve 2x for listening to tech talks where my goal is to get a high level overview of something quickly.
  - bscphil 7y ago
    > Were you able to listen to Joe Rogan's podcast at 2x? Skip somewhere in the middle and listen for 15 seconds maybe. Hmm, I skipped around to a few different spots. About half the time it was intelligible at 2x, but as soon as they started speaking faster it became a garble. Occasionally they would speak fast enough that I couldn't catch it even at 1.75x. So I'd say they have a lot more variability in their pacing than you do.
liability 7y ago
I scoffed at the idea that somebody from Long Island would have no accent, but after listening for myself I have to agree. Interesting.