The voice isn't purely for emotion.
In the wake of AI voices, voice talent understandably point to the one thing their digital counterpart is completely devoid of: true feeling.
Yes, you can now insert emotional prompts line by line with some AI voice generators, which seems a faintly ludicrous, inorganic and labor-intensive way of getting a less-good end result, but it's still a valid point.
But another argument for the human voice is basic cognition.
If I understand the argument of a piece of copy, then I will naturally use the rhetoric within in to make my point for me. I won't just rely on throwing emotion at it.
Because emotion WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING is bad acting.
It's what acting teachers call 𝗜𝗡𝗗𝗜𝗖𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗡𝗚.
Rather than talking to your audience and carrying them with an argument, emotion for it's own sake talks AT an audience, telling them what they should be feeling.
And that's often how a lot of 'emotion' in AI voice comes across.
That doesn't mean it doesn't have it's place. For a one dimensional message, you can use a one dimensional tool. Some people just need the right sound or vibe for their content, and if they can find a (ethically sourced) tool that does the job, all power to them.
But for those that aspire to a greater, more meaningful connection with their audience?
You might want to employ someone who digs a little deeper.
Need a classically trained voice actor whos able to connect with your audience?
Contact me here or add me to your supplier list for future reference
By Christopher Tester, British Male Voice Actor
