London PA Voice Fired for Slamming Tube
November 26, 2007 12:39 PM EST

LONDON - The woman behind the gentle, even voice which warns London's subway
commuters to "Mind the gap" was fired after telling a newspaper she thought
the transit network was dreadful.

Emma Clarke has been recording messages for London's sprawling subway
network, popularly known as the Tube, since 1999. In addition to warning
passengers to watch their step in walking between subway cars and the
platform, she also reads the trains' stops, tells Londoners how long they
have to wait until their next ride, and delivers service updates.

Transport for London, the body responsible for running the subway, said
Monday that Clarke, 36, was fired for telling The Mail on Sunday she avoided
using the subway whenever possible.

"The thought of being stuck in the Tube with strangers for minutes on end
and having to listen to endless repeated messages of my own voice fills me
with horror," she told the paper.

She said using the service every day had been "dreadful."

The paper also featured Clarke's Web site, which hosts a series of spoof
Tube announcements, including one warning a passenger not to stare at a
woman's chest and another telling American tourists, "You are almost
certainly talking too loud."

Transport for London noted that some of the spoof announcements were quite
funny, but spokesman Dan Hodges said Clarke's attack on the subway itself
had crossed the line.

"We wouldn't employ somebody to promote our services who simultaneously
criticizes those services," Hodges said.

Clarke's voice will continue to fill London's subway cars until a
replacement is needed, he said.


--
Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you
win, you're still retarded. -- Anon.

"Rev. CMOT TMPV" wrote in message
t
London PA Voice Fired for Slamming Tube
November 26, 2007 12:39 PM EST

LONDON - The woman behind the gentle, even voice which warns London's
subway commuters to "Mind the gap" was fired after telling a
newspaper she thought the transit network was dreadful.

Emma Clarke has been recording messages for London's sprawling subway
network, popularly known as the Tube, since 1999. In addition to
warning passengers to watch their step in walking between subway cars
and the platform, she also reads the trains' stops, tells Londoners
how long they have to wait until their next ride, and delivers
service updates.

Transport for London, the body responsible for running the subway,
said Monday that Clarke, 36, was fired for telling The Mail on Sunday
she avoided using the subway whenever possible.

"The thought of being stuck in the Tube with strangers for minutes on
end and having to listen to endless repeated messages of my own voice
fills me with horror," she told the paper.

She said using the service every day had been "dreadful."

The paper also featured Clarke's Web site, which hosts a series of
spoof Tube announcements, including one warning a passenger not to
stare at a woman's chest and another telling American tourists, "You
are almost certainly talking too loud."

Transport for London noted that some of the spoof announcements were
quite funny, but spokesman Dan Hodges said Clarke's attack on the
subway itself had crossed the line.

"We wouldn't employ somebody to promote our services who
simultaneously criticizes those services," Hodges said.

Clarke's voice will continue to fill London's subway cars until a
replacement is needed, he said.

It was interesting hearing her being interviewed last night on TV using
her real voice, which is quite different to the voice we all know.

On Nov 26, 11:21 pm, "Rev. CMOT TMPV"
wrote:
London PA Voice Fired for Slamming Tube
November 26, 2007 12:39 PM EST

LONDON - The woman behind the gentle, even voice which warns London's subway
commuters to "Mind the gap" was fired after telling a newspaper she thought
the transit network was dreadful.

Not many people could get away with publically slagging off the
company they do contract work for, even if in jest, and not get the
boot. She was rather naive IMO.

What I don't understand is why companies bother using recordings when
speech synthesizers cost buttons, are about the size of one and can
say anything you want - you don't have to pay some actor to record new
phrases if things change , you just type it in. Even in the 70s Texas
Instruments could do a 1 chip version and they sound a lot better
these days.

B2003

"Boltar" wrote in message
...
On Nov 26, 11:21 pm, "Rev. CMOT TMPV"
wrote:
London PA Voice Fired for Slamming Tube
November 26, 2007 12:39 PM EST

LONDON - The woman behind the gentle, even voice which warns London's
subway
commuters to "Mind the gap" was fired after telling a newspaper she
thought
the transit network was dreadful.

Not many people could get away with publically slagging off the
company they do contract work for, even if in jest, and not get the
boot. She was rather naive IMO.

What I don't understand is why companies bother using recordings when
speech synthesizers cost buttons, are about the size of one and can
say anything you want - you don't have to pay some actor to record new
phrases if things change , you just type it in. Even in the 70s Texas
Instruments could do a 1 chip version and they sound a lot better
these days.

because better is still crap

tim

On 27 Nov, 20:46, "tim \(not at home\)"
wrote:
"Boltar" wrote in message

...



On Nov 26, 11:21 pm, "Rev. CMOT TMPV"
wrote:
London PA Voice Fired for Slamming Tube
November 26, 2007 12:39 PM EST

LONDON - The woman behind the gentle, even voice which warns London's
subway
commuters to "Mind the gap" was fired after telling a newspaper she
thought
the transit network was dreadful.

Not many people could get away with publically slagging off the
company they do contract work for, even if in jest, and not get the
boot. She was rather naive IMO.

What I don't understand is why companies bother using recordings when
speech synthesizers cost buttons, are about the size of one and can
say anything you want - you don't have to pay some actor to record new
phrases if things change , you just type it in. Even in the 70s Texas
Instruments could do a 1 chip version and they sound a lot better
these days.

because better is still crap

tim

Blunt, to the point and spot on.

Mizter T wrote:
On 27 Nov, 20:46, "tim \(not at home\)"
wrote:
"Boltar" wrote in message

...



On Nov 26, 11:21 pm, "Rev. CMOT TMPV"
wrote:
London PA Voice Fired for Slamming Tube
November 26, 2007 12:39 PM EST

LONDON - The woman behind the gentle, even voice which warns
London's subway
commuters to "Mind the gap" was fired after telling a newspaper she
thought
the transit network was dreadful.

Not many people could get away with publically slagging off the
company they do contract work for, even if in jest, and not get the
boot. She was rather naive IMO.

What I don't understand is why companies bother using recordings
when speech synthesizers cost buttons, are about the size of one
and can say anything you want - you don't have to pay some actor to
record new phrases if things change , you just type it in. Even in
the 70s Texas Instruments could do a 1 chip version and they sound
a lot better these days.

because better is still crap

Blunt, to the point and spot on.

Crap at passing the Turing Test, but not crap at being understood, which is
its purpose. Since Emma can't say Highgate properly, and obviously belongs
to a certain class, I would think a synthesised voice would be superior, so
long as it's programmed with the correct phonemes (and isn't allowed to say
Green-witch or War-wick).

John Rowland wrote:
Mizter T wrote:
On 27 Nov, 20:46, "tim \(not at home\)"
wrote:
"Boltar" wrote in message

What I don't understand is why companies bother using recordings
when speech synthesizers cost buttons, are about the size of one
and can say anything you want - you don't have to pay some actor to
record new phrases if things change , you just type it in. Even in
the 70s Texas Instruments could do a 1 chip version and they sound
a lot better these days.

because better is still crap

Blunt, to the point and spot on.

Crap at passing the Turing Test, but not crap at being understood,
which is its purpose. Since Emma can't say Highgate properly, and
obviously belongs to a certain class, I would think a synthesised
voice would be superior, so long as it's programmed with the correct
phonemes (and isn't allowed to say Green-witch or War-wick).

What does "obviously belongs to a certain class" mean? Emma is a Mancunian
which you can tell from her natural voice, but as a good actress will adopt
whatever accent and pronunciation her client wants. On her website she used
to tell of the various ways of pronouncing Marylebone that she had to do,
with LU making the final choice.

Is it in fact Emma on the Northern Line? Her website says she's on "pretty
much everything except the Jubilee Line, the Northern Line and Docklands
Light Railway" (though the PA on the Piccadilly doesn't sound like her).
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

John Rowland wrote:

Since Emma can't say Highgate properly, and obviously belongs
to a certain class,

Snobbery is never attractive.

--

Stephen

I haven’t been this excited since Madonna just dropped by
Total Request Live.

Boltar wrote:

What I don't understand is why companies bother using recordings when
speech synthesizers cost buttons, are about the size of one and can
say anything you want - you don't have to pay some actor to record new
phrases if things change , you just type it in. Even in the 70s Texas
Instruments could do a 1 chip version and they sound a lot better
these days.

Because 99% of the time speech synthesisers are utter crap. Take the one
at King's Cross St. Pancras for example, which used to announce a Good
service on the Pick-addle-y Line when first installed. (Though that's
now been fixed).

The main problems being either mispronunciation or a complete lack of
inflection where you'd normally expect it. At least where there's a
(human) automated announcer it generally sounds more "natural"...Though
you can't beat a *properly trained* "live" announcer.

Cheers,

Barry

On Nov 28, 1:37 am, Barry Salter wrote:
Boltar wrote:
What I don't understand is why companies bother using recordings when
speech synthesizers cost buttons, are about the size of one and can
say anything you want - you don't have to pay some actor to record new
phrases if things change , you just type it in. Even in the 70s Texas
Instruments could do a 1 chip version and they sound a lot better
these days.

Because 99% of the time speech synthesisers are utter crap. Take the one
at King's Cross St. Pancras for example, which used to announce a Good
service on the Pick-addle-y Line when first installed. (Though that's
now been fixed).

The main problems being either mispronunciation or a complete lack of
inflection where you'd normally expect it. At least where there's a
(human) automated announcer it generally sounds more "natural"...Though
you can't beat a *properly trained* "live" announcer.


A bizarre thing I heard on Southern recently was an obviously
synthesised voice saying "London Underground have informed me ...".