Auto Bleeping - does it exist? - Page 2

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: Auto Bleeping - does it exist?

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by wavo View Post
    Further research shows there is a device you can buy for your TV. It is also called "The TV Guardian" and is available through Amazon for about $80. Google that for more info.

    There are also more expensive units available.

    If I had an extra dollar or two I'd try one out of curiosity...
    No self respecting owner or engineer would trust something like that to determine what should be cut out of your audio.
    Manufacturers haven't been successful in making speech recognition software work reliably for closed captioning on TV yet. Doing it for audio only that would be reliable enough to keep you out trouble with the Commission? Not going to happen.

    The way it is now, should some bad language fly by, the first form of concession the lawyers make to the FCC is the Producer or Board Op gets fired once management found out. If the engineer or management was stupid enough to trust speech recognition software to protect themselves? They should be the ones fired.

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Kelly A View Post
    No self respecting owner or engineer would trust something like that to determine what should be cut out of your audio.
    Manufacturers haven't been successful in making speech recognition software work reliably for closed captioning on TV yet. Doing it for audio only that would be reliable enough to keep you out trouble with the Commission? Not going to happen.

    The way it is now, should some bad language fly by, the first form of concession the lawyers make to the FCC is the Producer or Board Op gets fired once management found out. If the engineer or management was stupid enough to trust speech recognition software to protect themselves? They should be the ones fired.
    You're preachin' to the choir, Kelly! I don't think many engineers asked to demo the Enco device...

    Our first priority is to protect the license.

    But the question was asked if anyone tried to develop such a critter and it turns out there's a couple of companies who have taken a shot at it. I would love to have one to experiment with but not on the public airwaves.

  3. #13
    Moderator/Co-Administrator
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    37,422
    Quote Originally Posted by Kelly A View Post
    No self respecting owner or engineer would trust something like that to determine what should be cut out of your audio.
    There are so many pitfalls here...

    First, recognition is bad with accented speech, ranging from American regional accents to those who are ESL speakers. Big risk.

    Second, there is a latency in interpreting speech, which can be longer than the time needed to perform the deletion. By the time a bad word is recognized, it may already have become RF.
    www.americanradiohistory.com
    Broadcasting Magazine and Yearbooks, Billboard, Cash Box, R&R, Record World, Music & Media, Audio, Television/Radio Age, R&R, Duncan's American Radio, Popular Electronics, Studio Sound, Broadcast Engineering, db, and more.

  4. #14
    "Television won't be able to hold on to any market it captures after the first six months. People will soon get tired of staring at a plywood box every night." -Darryl Zanuck, executive at 20th Century Fox, 1946

    Voice recognition synthesized speech are growing better exponentially:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5VN...ature=youtu.be

    If it's not good enough today it will be very soon.

  5. #15
    So invest in it. Put your own personal cash in it, and tell us how much you've made.

  6. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBigA View Post
    So invest in it. Put your own personal cash in it, and tell us how much you've made.
    Dude, all I said is that someone should patent it (with a smiley face, BTW) and apparently someone has. Chill out!

  7. #17
    Moderator/Co-Administrator
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    37,422
    Quote Originally Posted by wadio View Post
    "Television won't be able to hold on to any market it captures after the first six months. People will soon get tired of staring at a plywood box every night." -Darryl Zanuck, executive at 20th Century Fox, 1946

    Voice recognition synthesized speech are growing better exponentially:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5VN...ature=youtu.be

    If it's not good enough today it will be very soon.
    Given the inherent latency in interpreting "in context", it can't be fast enough for profanity control, even were the recognition to be better than it is today. As stated, no licensee will take that risk.

    And, in general, speech recognition puts those who do not speak pure Midwestern English at a disadvantage. In my family there are a range of accents as most are ESL speakers, and recognition goes from fair (tedious to use) to awful (useless) whether it is contacting someone by phone or using the voice to text feature on a smartphone.
    www.americanradiohistory.com
    Broadcasting Magazine and Yearbooks, Billboard, Cash Box, R&R, Record World, Music & Media, Audio, Television/Radio Age, R&R, Duncan's American Radio, Popular Electronics, Studio Sound, Broadcast Engineering, db, and more.

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidEduardo View Post

    Given the inherent latency in interpreting "in context", it can't be fast enough for profanity control,
    Because legally, if your auto-bleep misses a word, the station is still liable for a fine. You can't blame automation.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




     
Our Conferences
Useful Contacts
Community


Contact Us