Jesus christ, just post the audio on piratebay or whatever! Don't play this weird "Youtube, but I'm gonna private this in a day" shit.
This is why I think it is a talented troll. It's baiting us. "yeah we have this but for a limited time only!!!"
As I said before,if this is a fake, it is the best fake made in recent times. This isn't like the supposed complete tape that was uploaded some time before, there must be something else here.
This is why I think it is a talented troll. It's baiting us. "yeah we have this but for a limited time only!!!"
Yeah I’m thinking it’s just someone with too much free time. I’ll gladly admit I’m wrong, but I find it fishy that this thread is filled with new people with only one of two posts. I also find it suspect that someone just made an account to post the audio. I will give them points for the effort. They deserve it.
If this is fake, it's the best fake I've ever heard.
My God, to me they sound identical. If there's any way somebody can fake this, please tell me. I want to think that this is real and we have not been fooled all this time. If the audio is made up, could it be deepfake or something?
Last Edit: Apr 10, 2021 22:22:18 GMT by Don Rodrigo
If this is fake, it's the best fake I've ever heard.
My God, to me they sound identical. If there's any way somebody can fake this, please tell me. I want to think that this is real and we have not been fooled all this time. If the audio is made up, could it be deepfake or something?
There is of course the possibility of it being a deepfake, but, though I am not sure how things like that work, I feel like that would be hard to do. The moment I heard this audio (this was when the abridged video was uploaded a few months ago) I instantly could tell it was her. I don't know what about it; I just knew it.
So did I. I definitely knew once I pulled up that footage from ‘Kate Plays Christine’. She has a Midwest accent (she grew up in Ohio), coupled with a deep voice and that kind of ‘news anchor’ polish thrown in.
Though I noticed her accent came through a little more in the audio (Nerves, probably).
This is why I think it is a talented troll. It's baiting us. "yeah we have this but for a limited time only!!!"
As I said before,if this is a fake, it is the best fake made in recent times. This isn't like the supposed complete tape that was uploaded some time before, there must be something else here.
It isn't like the transcript is a secret, I could easily see this being a film student being bored. This audio isn't exactly hard to fake if you have the right equipment.
What bothers me is why they would come HERE to this small, esoteric corner of the internet when there are much bigger fish out there. Take it to a movie studio or some shit. Take it to a bigger facebook group. LMW is small, we have (at best) a few hundred active users. Coming here with a holy grail is going to lead to questions of authenticity, and OP just isn't being open about anything. This isn't the first high effort troll of this material either, recall squid made a pretty convincing fake. It's a lot of day 1 accounts raiding...
It's a high effort troll. A $300 fake rolex. It's a nice rolex, but it is still fake.
As someone who has been in somewhat regular contact with Ataliste, I am 99.9% sure this is real. I just can't see someone being able to make a fake this convincing - compare it to Christine's voice in Kate Plays Christine - it's identical. You can't just fake that with software. And the information is all accurate, just compare what she is saying to the Sarasota Herald-Tribune from that day... This is either real, or someone has done impeccable research AND happened to have found a Christine Chubbuck sound-alike.
He has his reasons for releasing it and then privating it, which I won't be divulging here because I don't particularly want to see this situation take any drastic turns, for the betterment of everyone involved.
As I said before,if this is a fake, it is the best fake made in recent times. This isn't like the supposed complete tape that was uploaded some time before, there must be something else here.
It isn't like the transcript is a secret, I could easily see this being a film student being bored. This audio isn't exactly hard to fake if you have the right equipment.
What bothers me is why they would come HERE to this small, esoteric corner of the internet when there are much bigger fish out there. Take it to a movie studio or some shit. Take it to a bigger facebook group. LMW is small, we have (at best) a few hundred active users. Coming here with a holy grail is going to lead to questions of authenticity, and OP just isn't being open about anything. This isn't the first high effort troll of this material either, recall squid made a pretty convincing fake. It's a lot of day 1 accounts raiding...
It's a high effort troll. A $300 fake rolex. It's a nice rolex, but it is still fake.
I was originally not going to reply to this because I don't want to stir the pot, but, reading it back again... There are just too many things wrong with it to not say something.
>It isn't like the transcript is a secret
Interestingly enough, what she says in this audio is actually not 1:1 with the released transcript. If you were going to fake this, why would you *change* what she is saying? That would only open you up to more scrutiny.
>This audio isn't exactly hard to fake if you have the right equipment.
Yes, yes it is. It might be relatively easy to deepfake video footage these days, but audio is an entirely different kettle of fish.
>LMW is small, we have (at best) a few hundred active users.
Actually, we average 150k unique viewers a month; of those, we have 7000+ Discord users, as well as 5000+ users here on the forums... But I guess this could come down to just having a different personal interpretation of the word "active".
>OP just isn't being open about anything.
Not publicly, no. Because it would go against his best interests (this is coming from someone who has spoken to him in-depth about the situation).
>recall squid made a pretty convincing fake
Actually, that was quickly proven to be a fake through analysing the film reel distortion effects used, alone (which NationSquid had used in a prior video). Faking a video using an out-of-focus actress, After Effects and a picture of the newsdesk is childsplay compared to faking audio *this* convincing. It's not something you can just "do". A fake this believable would require a Hollywood production team.
It isn't like the transcript is a secret, I could easily see this being a film student being bored. This audio isn't exactly hard to fake if you have the right equipment.
What bothers me is why they would come HERE to this small, esoteric corner of the internet when there are much bigger fish out there. Take it to a movie studio or some shit. Take it to a bigger facebook group. LMW is small, we have (at best) a few hundred active users. Coming here with a holy grail is going to lead to questions of authenticity, and OP just isn't being open about anything. This isn't the first high effort troll of this material either, recall squid made a pretty convincing fake. It's a lot of day 1 accounts raiding...
It's a high effort troll. A $300 fake rolex. It's a nice rolex, but it is still fake.
I was originally not going to reply to this because I don't want to stir the pot, but, reading it back again... There are just too many things wrong with it to not say something.
>It isn't like the transcript is a secret
Interestingly enough, what she says in this audio is actually not 1:1 with the released transcript. If you were going to fake this, why would you *change* what she is saying? That would only open you up to more scrutiny.
>This audio isn't exactly hard to fake if you have the right equipment.
Yes, yes it is. It might be relatively easy to deepfake video footage these days, but audio is an entirely different kettle of fish.
>LMW is small, we have (at best) a few hundred active users.
Actually, we average 150k unique viewers a month; of those, we have 7000+ Discord users, as well as 5000+ users here on the forums... But I guess this could come down to just having a different personal interpretation of the word "active".
>OP just isn't being open about anything.
Not publicly, no. Because it would go against his best interests (this is coming from someone who has spoken to him in-depth about the situation).
>recall squid made a pretty convincing fake
Actually, that was quickly proven to be a fake through analysing the film reel distortion effects used, alone (which NationSquid had used in a prior video). Faking a video using an out-of-focus actress, After Effects and a picture of the newsdesk is childsplay compared to faking audio *this* convincing. It's not something you can just "do". A fake this believable would require a Hollywood production team.
I can understand why one can be so wary of this material, and while I still think this is real, the part of the OP being so secretive of it raises some doubts. May I ask why being more open about it would go "against his best interests"?
Post by theCarbonFreeze on Apr 11, 2021 12:40:54 GMT
I hope me adding my two cents doesnt inflame tensions or come off as though I'm kicking someone when they're down but I do feel the need to say this.
If the "squid video" being referred to is what I think it is: the creepy distorted black and white footage, that was not a convincing fake at all. It was way too over the top, trying too hard to amp up the "scare" factor. The lighting was much too dark to be a mundane news set, obviously in an attempt to ratchet up the chills at the expense of believability. (Tape decay can make a scene appear darker than it was, but not to that extent.) The "tape static" was clearly a digital enhancement rather than genuine analog artifacts. (Anyone who watches tons of old tapes would know the real thing.) The audio was much too distorted to be believable. Anyone who knows even a little about film and audio editing could tell right away it was an over-produced, try hard fake. I'm hardly an expert but even in my limited experience making adjustments to music and film on my computer I noticed the telltale signs. The only people who were fooled by that release are those who wanted desperately for it to be real and let their hopes run away with them.
This new audio clip is much more believable because of its understatedness. The sound is muffled because its an old tape and apparently recorded via microphone over a person's TV speakers. But its not an exaggeratedly garbled mess (in order to both frighten and hide that the voice isnt Chubbuck's) like Squid's. The cadence, timbre and accent of the voice match Christine's other surviving footage. And again as someone who dabbles a bit in audio editing (Im hardly an expert) you cant just "fake" a person's voice wholesale like that. Try to pitch shift music in even the best audio equipment and beyond a limited threshold there will be telltale digital artifacts and the sound no longer passes the "smell test." You also cant just "fake" an accent via computer trickery yet. Digital editing is a miracle technology but it's only come just so far.
I encourage a healthy skepticism of unverified leaks but I think in this case you're vastly overestimating the tools available to end users and letting cynicism run amok. As you yourself stated, we are a niche corner of the internet. The amount of time it would take to even try to do a fake this good is just not worth the effort to troll us for one single day. It doesnt make sense as a call for attention either considering the uploader has retreated from our discussion and nobody is begging them for more. (We either understand they dont have video or we dont think it should come out until her family dies/gives the okay.)
Reading between the lines in Dycaite's post it seems like the uploader is in hot water legally and/or the Chubbuck family is pissed. This also lends credibility to the upload. Did they go after "squid" ? Not to my knowledge.
It isn't like the transcript is a secret, I could easily see this being a film student being bored. This audio isn't exactly hard to fake if you have the right equipment.
What bothers me is why they would come HERE to this small, esoteric corner of the internet when there are much bigger fish out there. Take it to a movie studio or some shit. Take it to a bigger facebook group. LMW is small, we have (at best) a few hundred active users. Coming here with a holy grail is going to lead to questions of authenticity, and OP just isn't being open about anything. This isn't the first high effort troll of this material either, recall squid made a pretty convincing fake. It's a lot of day 1 accounts raiding...
It's a high effort troll. A $300 fake rolex. It's a nice rolex, but it is still fake.
I was originally not going to reply to this because I don't want to stir the pot, but, reading it back again... There are just too many things wrong with it to not say something.
>It isn't like the transcript is a secret
Interestingly enough, what she says in this audio is actually not 1:1 with the released transcript. If you were going to fake this, why would you *change* what she is saying? That would only open you up to more scrutiny.
>This audio isn't exactly hard to fake if you have the right equipment.
Yes, yes it is. It might be relatively easy to deepfake video footage these days, but audio is an entirely different kettle of fish.
>LMW is small, we have (at best) a few hundred active users.
Actually, we average 150k unique viewers a month; of those, we have 7000+ Discord users, as well as 5000+ users here on the forums... But I guess this could come down to just having a different personal interpretation of the word "active".
>OP just isn't being open about anything.
Not publicly, no. Because it would go against his best interests (this is coming from someone who has spoken to him in-depth about the situation).
>recall squid made a pretty convincing fake
Actually, that was quickly proven to be a fake through analysing the film reel distortion effects used, alone (which NationSquid had used in a prior video). Faking a video using an out-of-focus actress, After Effects and a picture of the newsdesk is childsplay compared to faking audio *this* convincing. It's not something you can just "do". A fake this believable would require a Hollywood production team.
You don't need to worry about stirring the pot, it's cool. You are a legend on this forum and I respect the hell out of you and your opinions. You won't see me getting mad because you have a different opinion. You are awesome man!
With that out of the way, I feel like I can fire back a bit. My hypothesis remains that (unless you know something I don't) it appears to be a high effort troll, likely someone in film school.
The fact that it varies off of the transcript isn't evidence that it is real, it is further evidence that it isn't. I'll concede that transcripts are not perfect or at least are unlikely to be 100% accurate, but that is not proof of authenticity.
As for audio, I understand that this is going to take more than apple garageband and a low quality text to speech software, but her voice isn't exactly unique. This isn't an insult to her, but her voice is pretty similar to about half the women in the upper midwest and carolinas. It wouldn't be too hard for a film student to have a friend with that voice or be the person with that voice. nor would it be impossible to fake audio distortion with the correct software. Like the kind of software that any university with a film/audio program would have. My old community college had professional grade stuff for the film/audio department, it's not hard to come by.
I'm glad to see that we are growing as a community, I'm very happy to see those stats! But we aren't exactly Facebook. We are a small corner of the internet and it is just weird that someone would drop a holy grail with no reasoning behind it and expect us to take it on face value. There are much larger forums than ours, especially after the two movies. Why not post it to the christine movie facebook page? Why not post it to a larger lost media forum? If you can't post it publicly why take the risk or going to this small/midsized website at all? It just seems to me like if they can't post it because of legal issues, they wouldn't have. If they could have posted it without legal issues they would have gone bigger, Like news media bigger. Not our corner of the internet. We just fall into the midsized range of the internet. Think about it, let's say you find the lost 8 hour cut of greed, do you dump it here or do you take it to a film archiving society? I love this place but I bet the archiving society would digitize it for free.
As for his lack of public speaking, I'm sure you know something that I don't since you have been in communication with him but I can only go off of the information that I have seen. From what I have seen, it has been dodgy, troll-like answers with bursts of anger and paper thin reasonings about trust. Anon1974's behavior has been rather odd to say the least with some of his style being unpleasant and confrontational and other times he styles himself as polite and a leaker of a holy grail. At the end of the day he is a new user with no clout and a bunch of day 1 accounts come to confirm everything? That's suspicious to me. While I trust you and your judgement, it is difficult for me to trust a new account waltzing into the forum with a holy grail and no explanation.
I think that it's much more possible to fake audio and we should not doubt that some people have access to high quality software. A film student or audio student at a small university would have access to the software and talent needed to fake this if they put enough time into it. I could easily see this being someone's project for a film class or an audio class and then deciding "hey this is pretty good maybe I should have some fun with this!"
A lot of my questions really come down to why here? This is a great forum but we aren't even the largest lost media forum on the internet. Sure we are the largest database of lost media articles, but there are discord groups, facebook groups and other websites that have a bigger following. Why the secrecy and if it is so secret, why leak it at all? If you are opening pandora's box and you want it to get out, why HERE? It would take effort to transfer an audio recording to digital then upload it. If the audio is so secret why do it? Why pay to have it digitized? Why upload it if you aren't supposed to, if you aren't supposed to either go big or go home, don't leave it on a midsized website. Take it to cnn or something. There is just no plausible reason to take it here, where we have been fooled in the past and are obsessed with this bit of lost media.
Anyway, I respect your opinions and your experience, but I just don't believe we are going to see eye to eye on this. I don't think you need to be randy newman's audio technician to do this. This is more advanced than most but it wouldn't be impossible for a university student to fake.
Post by theCarbonFreeze on Apr 11, 2021 17:56:12 GMT
Some of the questions raised by schlomo are totally valid too. I stand by this clip being legitimate, and even if it were not, I say again it must be extremely accurate to what the original probably sounds like. But ultimately if someone isnt convinced I cant force them to be. Believe the audio or not.
That said, I personally think this entire search effort is in bad taste and I hope the people who are trying to find the tape can at least be satisfied enough with the clip to leave the participants alone going forward. This is as good as its going to get unless one of the guardians of the master copy breaks the law for some internet fame. (Very unlikely.) So its in the best interests of everyones mental health to be thankful we got this much--even if it is just a well done fake to satiate our morbid curiousity.
Post by Terry the Cat on Apr 11, 2021 21:27:29 GMT
If this leaked audio recording is indeed fake, this had better be as close as we can get to the real thing, because let's be honest: the real thing shouldn't ever be found.
As for the audio itself, the only part that seems fake to me is "the moment" itself. Everything else seems authentic enough, even if what she's saying doesn't 100% match the transcripts (which, as far as I can recall aren't even 100% consistent with each other).