So you want to know what I use for eyeshadow brushes? Well, I'm fixin to tell you guys Hi YouTube family and welcome into today's video where we are going to be doing a follow-up video to the video I did last week about face brushes. I showed you five of my favorites And when we talked about doing the eyeshadow ones several of you are really excited to see them This can be such a difficult topic with eyeshadow brushes because face brushes are easy. Okay, this one does blush This one does powder this one does highlighter. You got it nailed. It's not that big of a deal You can go through a couple you can figure out what are your favorites But when you get into these little teeny intricate brushes that or are for eyeshadow and other things Then what we're going? We're almost lost, right? So I have 11 eye brushes right here you guys I know that sounds like a lot I don't use them all every time and one of them is Actually an eyebrow brush that I use every single day But I did want to show it to you because I feel like it's a brush that really gets kind of overlooked My eyebrow game lately I feel like has kind of gone to a better place if you will and I've been able to do my eyebrows so much better And it's because of this tool right here. This is the one from benefit This was a gift from someone to me. So it wasn't one that I would have normally just gone. Oh, yeah I want that brush. It's $20. It's me. It's me. I I don't normally do that kind of thing So want to show you how good I think this is and the reason but I'm also gonna put in the description box I'll link to one that I think is just as good But the reason that it's so good I feel like is of course the spoolie on this and I use a spoolie through my entire eyebrow routine Several different times the reason that I love the other end of it is because I've been using gel instead of an eyebrow pencil I really enjoy using this. It's very angled But what's great about it is how stiff it is and it will do those little strokes that look like actual brow hairs Which I think is fantastic. So that's my first one not technically an eyeshadow brush, but basic your basic eyebrow brush Okay, the second one this one I have been using for I don't know long long time But this is the morphe M441 and you can get this now at Ulta. This is a fluffy blending brush This is what I do my transition color with every time It just has a really great way of being soft enough to blend out that Transition color and then you know kind of blend all your colors together at the very end Which I love and so that's the large one large fluffy brush is the first one that I start out with With my eye looks and then the second one that I use is a medium fluffy brush And this one is from Luxie. This is actually called a small tapered blending But it's from Luxie and I think this says it's the 231 if that's different you'll see it up on the screen But this is what I go in with my next color underneath the trend or you know kind of lower than the transition Position color and I'm starting to get some depth into the crease with this one the next one that I have is from Royal and Langnickel and This is their revolution one And I think this says bx80 and again you'll see it on the screen of it I am not quoting it right this shader brush is invaluable to me This is what I put on my darkest color right there in the outer part of my lid and then you know Blend it up just a little bit to give that a little bit of height right there. It's not just thin It has a little bit of thickness to it. It's perfect for its width, but I love how Stiff it is and it's not so fluffy that the color is gonna go everywhere because that's what you have your fluffy Blending brushes for this is for actually doing more precision work and getting those darker colors on the outer corner of your Lid and you can be able to work with that when you need that really big color payoff out there in the corner All right, so the next brush I've completely rubbed the letters name everything off of it But I will find one for you guys that is a reasonable price that is a good-looking one for this Okay, this is a small paddle brush or a very very thin like concealer brush You know how they do use the these shaped brushes for concealer the bigger ones for foundation to kind of lay it down So it's really little and what I really love this for is almost every single time on my lid I do use my fingers to put down my lid color because it's usually a shimmer But there are times when I want to just use a brush to kind of get a little bit of blending and a little bit of Evenness and also blending between my inner corner and the actual lid color right there and this one works so good for that Okay, speaking of that inner corner. I do use two different brushes for this for two different reasons One is an eyeliner and one is a angled eyeliner brush, but I'll tell you why I used two different ones So let's start with just the eyeliner one very finely tipped If all I'm wanting to do is just put down just a tiny bit of color in there and kind of like I have today Where it's just kind of sweeping around a little bit right there I go ahead and I use this liner now It is detailed enough that I could do a teeny tiny angle right there if I wanted to But I find that the other one that is an actual angled eyeliner brush from Sigma. This is so little I'm gonna make sure that I throw this up here on the screen that if I'm wanting to do a color which Occasionally I will do a like a brighter color right here in my inner corner Maybe a pink a light purple sometimes I do a little bit of blue, but I don't want that to get out of hand I don't want the full focus to go. Oh, she's got a lot of blue on her inner corner I want to just take as precision as I can and kind of line it just right there And it turns out to be such a pretty look after you're done because you've done just a little bit in there to bring the eye over just a little bit and Show off the color that you're using so that is just really fun to be able to use that one the next three that I have I Use for different purposes, so I don't use all three of these at the same time The first one is kind of a large kind of shader brush Smudger brush if you will it is from Zawaiva and I really enjoy having this one four times When I'm wanting to smudge this outer corner right here with the lower lash line right there So I can kind of go back and forth and get a little bit thicker line out there and get the two colors To go together, which I will do quite often But if I really want there to be Color specific color on the bottom lash line and I want to be bringing that all the way over I will use this color pop pencil brush, which I absolutely love you guys I wet this and then I will put a metallic on it and it will lay that color down so well And if you need a thinner line, it can lay a thinner line down if you need a thicker line It can do a thicker line now This isn't super precision because the tip of it is a little bit rounded But it's a really stiff one so that you're not going to be Smashing the eyeshadow and getting a bigger line So you can go as light as you want there and then you can get it as you know darkened up as you want as you layer It so this has been one of my very favorites I've actually mentioned that one in a lot of videos But this one right here this one is another more fee one and again I can't see that save my life. So I'll make sure I throw it up here for you guys This is the most little domed rounded smudger brush And if you're using regular eyeliner So you don't want to put eyeshadow underneath your eye But you want to use whatever pretty eyeliner that you have But you know that during the day if you just put eyeliner on one It's going to look just like a stark line and two It's probably going to smudge down there a little bit for you So if you just take your eyeliner you put it out there a little bit and then you go in with this right here And you just smudge and smudge and smudge and soften it This does the job so good As a matter of fact It is what I use today to smudge my lower lash line and put on just a tiny bit of eyeshadow on top of that in Order for the two to make it stay all day But then once I got the outer part done I could smudge it all the way over and just make it look soft and not so stark So this is one of my favorites as well. And then lastly what I have is this is from Morphe It's kind of a weird brush. It's hard to explain It does have a little pinch in its head But at the same time it is fairly round and this brush is Awesome for one reason only and that is to dip into some setting powder and go right Underneath your eyeliner right there not on top of it not on top of the color Right underneath there with the setting powder so that your eyeliner doesn't run down or doesn't travel down Even right out here in the corner if you have a lot of problems with your Eyeshadow or your eyeliner kind of getting a little bit of a mess right there by the middle of the day If you put a little bit of setting powder right there in the morning You're gonna have a lot less problems with that so this brush right here I highly recommend as well as all the other ten ones that I just showed you that's it for today's video You guys I hope that you did enjoy it. It was very enjoyable for me to bring you my brushes now I do want to hear from you guys and tell me what your favorite eye brushes are I don't care if you tell me one of them or if you tell me all of them I'd like to hear from you guys because I love testing out different products and all of these suggestions that you're giving me I am writing those down guys just so you know the other thing is I did have a request to Show you how I clean my brushes now if that's something that is interesting to you guys Please let me know in the comment section because I'd be happy to do that for you Love you guys also very much. Take care of yourselves. Hope you're in good health And I will see you in my very next video. Bye guys


All right, so guys, let's start. Let's talk about how to do the synthesis in non-stationary speech synthesis, right? So the presentation's outline is this.  We're going to focus then on vocoders for TTS. We're going to discuss about synthesis, about quality, and about our system. Then we're going to discuss a little bit about the speech signal, which was mostly covered by Janis. We're gonna give my perspective as well. And then we're going to go into the main part which is a volcano. Give an overview, present a model of speech, actually, because that's what it is. There's underline model of the speech waveform. So what is this? And then discuss about speech synchronous framing, spectral assembling, then deterministic stochastic model, and then some special sort of lines that I use to synthesize. Then how to synthesize sounds that are not exactly a periodic and not exactly periodic, like voice fricatives, using a coherent noise modulation model. And then we're going to talk about how to do fast synthesis in a solider. And yes. So I kind of found all these publications here where you can see that vocoders, actually, models of the speech signal, they have been very, they started up to from the 1791 to come from Wolfgang here. That was actually a kind of vocoder where the vocal track was made out of leather, was a tube made out of leather. You could put your head inside, squeeze it a little bit in several locations, when you may be able to fit exactly the location of an A and then you pass in the air and synthesize the A. Then going down to a phonia in 1846, mechanical talker in 1937. The electrical era found us with a vocoder from Bell Labs and then with a font, you all know him from 1950s in Sweden. Where he had a two-formant plot here, F1, F2, and he was able to move it around where he was synthesizing artificial resonances, the sum vowels. And then in the computer era we had, effectively, the main application was speech coding. For military purposes, where you have an ultra-low bit rate or a very low bit rate, that's how you see it, in 2.4 kilobits per second from the LPC10. Multipart excitation vocoder, which you all know, you all know the modern version of it, which is straight, and sinusoidal transfer code, which is a split-band sinusoidal multiband excitation vocoder. Then in the speech synthesis time, there was very new interest when unit selection was very hot in the 1990s where Giannis tried to use his harmonica noise model in Bell Labs to synthesize units effectively. His goal was to be able to do pitch modifications in very high quality and voice morthing. Then when statistical parametric speech synthesis came, most people started using straight because it was available and because of very high quality as well. And then later on in 2013, Aero also open sourced at his executable. He gave his implementation of harmonic plus noise model, which is also available for you guys when I try it out. So what is a vocoder from the DPS synthesis perspective, right? So it is analysis synthesis algorithm. Vocoders are tools we use to parametrize the speech signal in a way that is statistically amenable to code. It is amenable for coding and statistical manipulation. So we want to have an acoustic space of the speech signal that we can treat with any model. And that's why we use a vocoder for. We take the speech signal, we do the analysis and we assume some acoustic parameters. The typical pipeline that we use in statistical parametric speech synthesis is that we go from the text, we extract here, oops, we extract some linguistic features, some parameters of the text that describe the text itself. And then we use statistical mapping that map these features into some PDFs. And then from the PDFs, we extract one realization, one sequence, one trajectory of the acoustic parameters that later on we apply a post-filtering mechanism to enhance somehow and we do vocoding. In many cases you will see that these two steps have been done simultaneously using an LSTM. But conceptually that's a very good separation because it delineates the difference between capturing a conditional PDF of the acoustics. Given the linguistics, where here's the linguistics here of the acoustics and out of all possible realizations that follow this PDF, picking up one. So, you can use any method you like, the best methods are the LSTMs right now. And I guess a bunch of work on it is actually a thing, pioneer the field. So, what is a vocoder, what is the purpose of a vocoder in textual speech synthesis in the textual speech system? It is effectively we're trying to replace the mechanics of the speech synthesis. If you see the neural network here as capturing the relationship between text and acoustic parameters, the vocoder is the part that replaces here or the vocal system. So, conceptually it has a different job. When you wanna utter some speech then you have some sort of interrepresentation of knowledge, some sort of intention, some sort of content, some sort of context as well. And then you are sending the messages to your vocal system, and your vocal system with whatever is available tries to pass the message to convert it to speech. And this mechanism as Giannis noted at the beginning is being trained from very early age and because you hear yourself then you have mirroring, neural mirroring mechanism that go back and have a fit, there's a fit back mechanism that allows you to be able to use your vocal system to utter almost any possible sound that we find in speech. We evaluate it, we evaluate it as quality and vocoder quality using an MOS natural scale. There are many ways of evaluation. This is one we use because we mainly want to to capture the way that people feel that they talk to an actual human. So, naturalness is one of the criteria that is very important for us. And the scale goes from two to five with two being poor and five being excellent. And two means mostly an unnatural speech, three means equally natural and unnatural speech, mostly natural speech and completely natural speech. The quality below 2.9 is almost unmarketable here. You wouldn't like to hear to such a synthesizer, you wouldn't like to use it, no matter what you find another way of doing your job. The quality above 4.5, I call it imaginary quality because if the test is well constructed and it's well calibrated everything you should not be seeing these numbers. We get fluctuations around it for up to 4.6 and or 4.2, depending on how the human actually, human articulates speech as well. Whether it even correlates to how pleasant speech is. You ask a question about naturalness and also you get an opinion about the actual voice, the quality and the pleasantness of the voice, the recording. Here's quality here. The saturation effect has to do with the fact that we have a scale and with fixed points and people when they ask to vote between 4.5, the maximum they can give is 4.5. You see the same thing in the stars, in the restaurant when you do ratings. Many times you see 4.5 as a rating, especially when we have many, many samples and the guy doesn't tweak his ratings. So the same saturation that happens here as well, this is audio field quality, this is telephony quality. The one we're used when we were to communication with the mobiles. And before we came, that's where we were. We have statistical systems that were kind of entering the unmarketable quality, unmarketable quality era. Do you hear me back there? Now you hear me back there. Do you consistently hear me back there? I'll take that as a no. So the use selection system was rated on 3.7 and 3.8 and we clearly had to do something particularly for this domain. In terms of Google, we use the statistical synthesizers for embedded synthesis whenever the mobile is not capable of being connected to the internet with a high speed, sufficiently high speed. So it's a back fold. We also have to use it definitely for accessibility purposes because we have to utter very fast speeds, ultra fast. And people depend a lot on the latency as well. So the Android TDS quality was 3.2, the before, okay, and the embedded was about 3.5, a bespoke order that we could ship in a product. It was fast enough, it was 3.5. The best vocoder we had was 3.7. And then clearly we had to, and this was the upper bound of quality in the statistical synthesis, right? You can't get better value of a code where you are doing statistical synthesis if you're sufficiently high. So are you sure you don't need a better vocoder? Well, I guess we do. That's what we're showing right now. And when we started, there was a 0.5 MOS gap between the current and the state of the art. So this gap here, 0.5 MOS is really huge.  Let's talk about a little bit about the speech signal now. When we are doing waveform modeling, especially for the speech signal, we incorporate inside our models implicit or explicit assumptions. So we may pick up principles from essentially the speech production system from models that we know, like the source filter about how speech production occurs. Or we may pick up principles from the ear for auditory models. So there's an interplay there. These are the, that's what I call the two pillars. There's two sources of justification for picking up any design choice or any waveform model in algorithm. Once you have based on these two, you are going well. So one of the, for example, the principles we use is from the ear is the male scale. We model male septum, right? This principle originates from the fact that the ear responds in a scale that is more related to male. And also amplitude compression. Also it's related to how the ear listens. And phase coherence is also related to modulation detectors inside the ear. So mouth, we use a concept of vocal tract. We use a concept of nasal tract aspiration. We know about glottal excitation. You've seen this all over there. So when you construct a vocoder, you are picking up ideas from here and there and you're trying to put them in one set that has high quality. There's three ways of seeing the speech signal. I call them dichotomies in the sense that they guide our perception of what the speech signal is. The first is a source filter dichotomy where that originates from the vocal, from the speech production.  We sample the vocal tract at the harmonic frequencies. Already Janis talked about so I'm not gonna stick it any more. Then we have other dichotomies like deterministic and stochastic. We discussed about recovering synusoids but what about recovering which parts of the signal are noise like in a voice communicative, which parts of the signal are deterministic, are not noise. In straight terminology, we have the spectral envelope like this and we have an upper periodicity envelope and the difference between the two is like a signal to noise ratio for every band, for every frequency. So if you're familiar with straight, then you'll see that this difference here is the amount of noise you have effectively between your harmonic and where the noise level starts. This is the noise level, this is the harmonic at this location here. And why do we use this sort of per-band noise, a periodicity or a non-deterministic model? Because we have a lot of phenomena that happen there. Like aspiration, we have frecation, a hape son constrictions, we have voice frecatives as well. We have the fact that the vocal folds do not close completely in many cases. So you have incomplete closures of the vocal folds, which means that after like this air passes through. Another very famous dichotomy that people inherit their mind is from FFT, comes from FFT, which is the amplitude and phase. When you are talking in terms of amplitude and phase, you're effectively talking in terms of FFT, right? Amplitude and phase are constructs of FFT effectively, almost. So if we see from this perspective, then we can say that the speech signal is also an amplitude and a phase and the sum of modulated cosines. You've seen this model already, you've talked quite a lot. And there's a question there. How do you construct a good, if you have only the amplitude, what is a good model for the phase? And this is one of the questions that McCain answers to a certain extent. So the overview of McCain is this. The functional overview is that it has high spectral resolution. So you can, when you have some parameters and then you are synthesizing back the original signal, then the parameters you are getting are very close to what you already, what you expect, what you gave into the input signal. Because the process of synthesis, for example, overlap add itself, does not guarantee that you'd have exactly the amplitude, the Sadanius amplitude and the Sadanius frequency that you gave for synthesis. There's no complexity penalty for the high resolution. We have a decoupling between the spectral parameterization and the DSP implementation. Many of you guys that have already synthesized using, for example, a filter for male cap, right? Or LSP's or whatever spectral envelope or model that you may have used, you see that there's a restriction between the synthesis method, there's a correlation between the synthesis method and the actual parameterization of the spectral envelope. McCain breaks this.  So this decoupling allows you to explore parameterization, which we never really found some better parameterization, but allows you at least to explore which is the best parameterization for what you're trying to do. And then you have an asynchronous phase model. The asynchronous phase model is quite interesting because it allows you to blend vocoded speeds with recorded speeds. So if you want to do a statistical unit and you want to have actual chunk of audio and then in the middle put a chunk of audio that is synthesized artificially from a model, then you want to make sure that you don't have huge phase mismatches and this asynchronous phase model allows you to do this. Of course, it goes ultra wide band, whatever, up to 48 kilohertz and it's a universal decoder, effectively, because you can use whatever model, you can use YANCH, H&M, adaptive course, harmonic model, straight, multi-band excitation, whatever you want to synthesize, you can get it back. So think of it as a synthesis algorithm. High quality, comparison straight, can be the yes in a fair experiment, low computation complexity, yes, single structure, multiple data, friendly, I already did that, so yes. And it's very simple. So that's very good for maintenance, especially when you have engineers together with software engineers, software engineers together with researchers working, you want people to be able to navigate through your code. All right, so the speech model of a cane is effectively one equation. Describe the whole speech signal in one equation. You don't have different ways of synthesizing, let's say the noise and the deterministic part and then glue them together somehow and then dealing with how we have spilloff of noise from the harmonics, the non-harmonics, from the noise to the non-noise and so on. You don't have any of these problems because it is described in this equation here. This is the cosine, right? So you've seen this, this is the phase, we'll talk about it, how do we construct a nice phase? Because the whole trick is here, how to generate the noise? There's a trick that we do and the trick is exactly on these phases. Then this is a model for voice fricatives. We're going to talk about it and this is the instantaneous amplitude of the kth harmonic, so. And this is the first harmonic. So all the harmonics, except the first, they're described by this part here. And the first harmonic, if you notice, the phase of the first harmonic here, it is used to modulate the rest of the signal. So if you remember what Gianni showed you about the time envelope of the noise in speech, the time envelope of the noise speech exhibited a particular speech synchronous behavior. As the speech marks were like this, the glottaclosal distance, then there was noise, noise, noise, noise. Was fall and the time envelope was in this fall. Rokin does it explicitly by taking the first harmonic and just, it's a model of the aspirate, of the time behavior of the aspirated component, the aspirational components, the non-periodic components in speech. Let's talk about speech synchronous framing. So we've seen the equation, we know that there's a little bit of this bit here, this bit here, we don't know exactly, we haven't gone into depth into several components, but the most important part to understand at this stage is how we do the pitch synchronous framing, the asynchronous speech model as I called it. So in Rokin there's no difference between a voiced speech and unvoiced speech, right? They're all synthesized with exactly the same functions. And also what happens here is that, so there's a common concept of what I call reference synthesis in space, which in voiced speech, they are the glottaclosal distance, in unvoiced speech, they are the pitch marks, which are regularly placed every 10 milliseconds. Whenever we start at time zero, we start from here, and when I synthesize one pitch period, it might be voiced, it might be unvoiced, these are RSI, reference synthesis, they are not glottaclosal distance. We compute the pitch period or the synthesis period to be more exact, we compute the synthesis period and we say this is the frame where I'm expecting the parameters at the end. So I'm expecting the parameters here, I know the parameters of speech at the beginning, I know the parameters of speech at the end, and I'm interpolating between frames two and three. And I synthesize this pitch period completely independently of the previous one and the next one, as long as I keep here some continuity smoothness constraints. And then I do, once I synthesize this pitch period, I know this frame and where it goes in T1, I can add the next pitch period synthesis, or synthesis period if it's unvoiced, and then I go to frame seven. So bokeh tends to throw away all these frames and it does not impact quality except for the case of super fast speech. In this case, it uses them, but it makes the presentation much more complicated, so I will skip it. So now we can presume that we are talking about synthesis of one very, very particular case. We have the beginning of the pitch period, we have the end of the pitch period, and we want to, we have the parameters at the beginning of the pitch period, we have the parameters at the end of the pitch period, and we want to synthesize what is in the middle. What we have to do is to assemble our spectral parameterization, our spectral envelope on the location of the harmonics. So have a spectral envelope, which I showed you something like this, and then we have the harmonics here, here, here, here, here, and we want to assemble them. It is very easy and very cheap computationally, that's why we use it in the Melcap domain, and you can also do it in the LSP domain directly we're using this formula if you like. I have the references side of the paper, but in general, you don't have to tie up your spectral parameterization to the signal process that is used for synthesis, you could just give FFT, and in fact, Palavira is doing it. So you have FFT, log spectra, you just give it whatever you have, you can construct, you can assemble it. And then we have the phase. So we discussed about how to recover the amplitudes at the beginning and at the end of the synthesis period, which might be a pitch period, might be completely unvoiced. How do we construct the phase so that we construct simultaneously the deterministic behavior and the stochastic behavior of the phase, because you may be, for example, but eight kilohertz was completely noise. It may have a completely noisy harmonic, or you may want to synthesize as we said an unvoiced part of speech, that you have to put some phase there that generates noise. Traditionally what we do is that we put random phases, which is, so it's very clear what we do, but it is quite clear what we do in completely unperiodic speech, in noisy speech, but what we do in deterministic speech is also very clear. What is not clear is what we do in between cases where we have the signal to noise ratio to give here of, let's say, 10 dB. So at this location here, in particular, we want the periodic part of this harmonic, the periodic part of speech here of the signal to be 10 dB higher, let's say, that's actually more, it's like 30. Yeah, to be 30 dB higher than the noise level. And this has to be done by synthesizing one deterministic component. And that, I'm not gonna show you how I do it. So now we'll talk about the stochastic part, right? So we get the explicitly provided phases from a phase envelope. So you may have a phase envelope that is, you have trained externally somehow, you may have constructed your phase envelope using any way. Or you may give a fixed one. What can you use a fixed one? So that doesn't have to worry a lot about, mainly because of speed, but I have used minimum phase, maximum phase, mixed phase, you can use whatever. Another thing that matters here, and the unvoiced spectra here are, in the phase of the unvoiced spectra, are uniformly distributed between minus pi to pi, or zero to pi. So between these two points, what you wanna synthesize completely unvoiced speeds is very easy. The voiced peak spectra now is a sum of signs, excitation with some phase dispersion. When I say exactly how this happens. Now, let's assume that you want to synthesize a pulse, right? That is a sum of signs pulse with phase dispersion where you have the first harmonic is completely coherent with the reference interface, which means that if you have the reference interface at this location, the first harmonic will go like this. And so, and then the rest of the harmonics are offset it by two pi and a uniform distribution plus minus four. This means that the phase is, and this is the deterministic phase spectra. This is fixed. We compute it once at the beginning of the utterance and we keep it all the way. Once we want to synthesize speeds with a particular periodicity, we multiply the noise effectively, the level of the noise inside the phase. So, we add noise to the phase itself by the function of the periodicity. So, which means that if the speech is completely a periodic, yes. Yeah, yeah, let me see. You're right. Yes. This group. So, our phase, when the periodicity of zero, the function of the periodicity is zero, then this phase, fk becomes ck, becomes a deterministic. When a periodicity is one, which means totally a periodic, then this phase component is dominates over this one. So, we have, the more a periodic signal is, the more noisy the phase at the harmonic is. So, instead of adding noise, yes. I'm not the wise case that is. So, yes. So, the, the phi here, you mean, right? The phi. First of all, this one is the one that comes out of our phase model. We somehow have, it may be sampled from the signal itself. We may have the signal, the waveform, we may compute the phase envelope, somehow there's ways to do that. And then, you want to add to this phase as much noise as a periodic your component is. So, if your component here is completely a periodic, is completely deterministic, because termination is better than a periodic, then you would like to keep only this. You would like to be only that, right? If it is noisy, then as much, if you would like to make it as noisy as possible, so you add this component here, right? This gives you a way of introducing a periodicity, non-dependent, or without affecting the amplitude of the harmonic. So, you add noise without touching the amplitude of the harmonic. The instantaneous amplitude of the harmonic is what you intended. That's why I call it high resolution. How do I do that now? So, in the quadrat, and, so we see now the following things. We're seeing instantaneous amplitude at the beginning of the harmonic. Constantinous amplitude at the end of the harmonic. We've seen ways to compute the phase of the harmonic at the beginning. We saw ways to compute the harmonic, the phase of the harmonic at the end, and we're looking for a way to construct the signal. For the amplitude, we can do a simple linear interpolation, so that's easy. But for the phases, it's not as easy as it seems. And the cubic phase model that Janis described, the model from Poirieri, that's come to the previous slide, is not going to give us a structured way of breaking the harmonicity of the signal. So, that is the key point. The cubic phase model, which was something like, I don't know. Just don't know how to do that. With the, yes. It's all right. That's all about it, okay? The cubic phase model goes on this form. What it didn't do is that it didn't give you, you were given some amplitude at the beginning of the end, and then it could go any way that the side could do as long as it was cubic. But you didn't have no way of controlling how harmonic are the components within here. If you take it across many different harmonics. So, if you have many harmonics, the first, the second, the third harmonic, you may have taken all the difference, all the change in this bit, in this part, or you may have taken all the modification in this part. And this is something that introduces glitches from time to time. And so, I needed a different model in order to be able to synthesize noise with that. And that was the cubic model that I, the quadratic, sorry, the quadratic phase splines. So, in the quadratic phase splines, the synthesis period is split in two halves. The first half there, and the second half. First half that goes up to here, this bit, and the second half here. The, and corresponds to a piecewise linear frequency model. So, we have a piecewise linear frequency model that goes up to, omega zero is piecewise linear. And then, we have a mid-period, we have a continuity at the center of the pitch period, which is chosen to maximize smoothness. And it's very fast as well. So, effectively, what we do is that this phase, we have this model for the first half and this model for the second half. So, as you can see, this is phase. I saw the derivative of this is this spontaneous frequency. This is spontaneous phase at time n, and spontaneous frequency is omega k comma s plus gamma, two gamma k comma s multiplied by n. So, from the beginning to the middle of the pitch period, we have a linear function and then another linear function, one line and another line. And we have a phase unwrapping integer here, which tells us how many times we have done the pitch, we have how many multiples of p, how many times we have gone around the unit circle in the sinusoid. If we solve these now quadratic phase plines, in order to obtain the parameters, we have to solve this linear system with seven constraints. Remember, we have, it's a Daniel's sample, we have the phase at the beginning of the pitch period. We have the frequency at the beginning of the pitch period. Right? We have the phase at the end of the pitch period. We have the frequency at the end of the pitch period. We have one smoothness constraint that we have continuity at the middle of the pitch period at NC. We have continuity both in phase and in frequency. So, this phase continuity, this frequency continuity at the middle of the pitch period. And then we have a smoothness constraint that tells us that the curve we want to reconstruct is maximally smooth, which means it's the integral of the double derivative of phase squared of it is minimized. And by minimizing this term, we effectively get back the two pi multiple. So, we started from how many unknowns? One, two, three, four, five, six, seven unknowns. We made seven equations that we can solve for the phase, for the quadratic phase line. This is an example of it. We start, this is a pitch period or a actual synthesis period that goes from zero to 160 samples here. And the, you can see that, and we added several levels of noise. So, if we have no noise, you can see that it goes straight. This is the frequency, right? It is not phase, this frequency. And this is the phase of the same curves. So, it's linear phase here, which means fixed frequency. If we have noise, then the endpoint frequencies remain the same at 100, but the midpoint frequency goes to 125. So, effectively, the more noise we add at the phase, at the harmonic, the more the sender frequency, the frequency at the sender of the pitch period deviates from the frequencies of the, at the endpoints. So, you start with the frequency that is, you start from a value here, oops, doesn't work, or let's say 100 and then enter the value of 100 and this epsilon here, is delta, is related to your level of noise to a periodicity. This is omega k at the end. This is omega k at the beginning. And the omega k at the middle, right, is related to omega k at the end, a comma at the beginning, and to the periodicity. So, what do you do with that? You break harmonicity. The signal becomes more and more non-harmonic. So, that's how you generate noise by not having an effective noise model. You have a stationary set of sinusoid and then you can construct noise with it. And this is here how to, it's effectively, it gives you these advantages. The sinusoidal tracks are not harmonically related. This is another way to control a periodicity, right, in the sense because you don't have to, you can correlate it directly to the signal noise ratio. Sinusroids are guaranteed to be harmonic only at the pitch mark, at the end points of the synthesis. So, if you have, let's say, this continuity is, all these discontinuities will be located in particular location inside the pitch period. And harmonicity breaks according to the noise level. So, we discussed about, it's a Daniel's amplitudes, this and this, linear interpolation, standard phase quadratic phase model. And now we're going to discuss about this term here which is the coherent noise modulation term. This is nothing more than a way to shape the noise according to the aspiration pattern of the noise that James presented you in the previous slides. And it makes sense only for, it makes sense in voice frequencies and in the higher frequencies of the powers because you don't want it to be very buzzing. What does it do effectively this term? Check it out a little bit closer. It has a fixed term gamma zero here and then it has a periodicity multiplied by the first, the cosine that is actually of the first harmonic. So, if they have a periodicity equal to zero, then it's a fixed term, it doesn't do anything. If a periodicity is equal to one, then it becomes like this signal here where it has this behavior around one. So, if you modulate your signal like this, this is your harmonic, right? And as we saw, this is the sinusoid and the sinusoid can synthesize noise itself.  This is in time domain. In frequency domain, it takes energy from the center of the harmonic and just spread it around because that's what happens when you multiply cosine with the signal that takes it and puts it minus plus minus the center frequency. And the question is, well, does it work? The French language is particularly rich in voice fricatives. In French, for example, Vasivaza. So, we had a great improvement there as we're going to see from the results. Here are some references where, of course, Giannis, it's Gianu's work here. McCree, as well, who is one of the first guys that proposed this. Bastian Klein, of course, he did a listening test to show how time frequency masking happens on noise because that's what we're trying to do effectively. We're trying to mask the noise to incorporate into the speech signal with the time envelope, this one. And then I used it also in my LF plus noise forecoder. So this experiment is that with several parameters, I'm not going to go through the details because I only have five minutes. So what I want to say is this, that in terms of computational complexity, it is almost as fast, it's exactly as fast as the previous implementation of mixed band excitation, which was very, was quite optimized as well. Then, when we did a listening test for English, this is the MOS of the recorded speech. We're talking about clean database now, noise database could have a different. This is vocade synthesis with straight analysis and this is what vocane synthesis with our version of straight got because straight is patented, so we can't use it. We have our own implementation of something similar to straight. So we got this number, the actual implementation of straight got this number here when we're using vocade synthesis. This straight version produced this MOS here, 4.07. So you can see we matched the quality of straight while being very, very fast and able to go and to put our method into the small devices. But we also got something much better when we combine the merits of straight analysis with vocane. And this is where we are in the scale and all this is for English. When we go to France, then we see a great improvement. We see that straight goes on to 4.016 while the same type of analysis with straight synthesis goes to 4.265. Why? Because of the voiced pre-cutting model. Our previous analysis was, and Ben Nalsch was getting numbers like this one, 3.3 in French because it was not capable of dealing completely with voice pre-cuttings. And now we are in 4.3. That's the version you are using whenever you are using your mobile. The overall summary is that the original speech MOS gets about 4.5. Straight with vocane gets at 4.2. Straight alone gets 4.05. Coder, our own previous vocoder, our own vocoder analysis gets 4.05 if we're using with vocane. Coder with a previous two vocoders gets 3.7, 3.5. So effectively we got improvement of 0.5, 0.75 MOS in the server synthesizer in the embedded synthesizer 0.721. So those are quite huge improvements. Let's wait a little bit, I have five minutes. Now I did another experiment, that's quite interesting because it has in the same experiment, uniselection systems, parametric systems, and copy synthesis with vocoding, and recorded speech. So it's kind of puts in, if you put them all in the same list and test, you get an idea of how relative the distortions are, what is important, for example, what distortion is important when you have in-selection, what distortion is important when you have, how important is the degradation coming from vocoding related to the degradation coming from speech synthesis. So here you see that our in-selection systems, two of them, two different technologies, that's a fell generation, that's a second generation, it's a 3.788, right? So they all yield around the same 3.8, let's say MOS. Copy synthesis with state goes to 4.90, and copy zero with our own analysis and vocation goes to 4.176, and we put straight analysis goes to 4.337. But effectively this tells you that when you want to compare how much, where you are getting degradation from what you are doing in speech synthesis, the vocoding surface is not the primary source of degradation, there are much more significant things that you have to cater for. And all the parameters in the size are here, so you can see that this here, vocaine, plus next citation, and LSTM synthesizer, I can make the STM, was 3.738, right? So we pretty much went close to the in-selection, and the question was, the same thing happened from friends, we're gonna skip it, and I'm gonna go to, what happened if you then, okay, we show that we have a statistical system that goes very close to the in-selection, but how close can you get? Can you be the in-selection to what extent, right? And what we got is that for US English, right? The in-selection system is much better than three different versions of statistical systems that we have here in blue. So we have an embedded one and two non-embedding configurations, and this one got much better. Why? Because in English, American English, is a language that Google has really invested in and it wants to make it sound very good. At the same time, for Spanish, the difference is smaller because we have an investment of much time, and the same image, if we take all the European languages, you see that some of them, actually, you have a small difference improvement over here. You didn't say not that much time, you mean not that much data. What I'm saying, not much time is that there's both data and cleaning the data, and actually, how many people you put, how much effort you put to fix the in-selection system, because in-selection system effectively goes down to getting to every single way from fixing bugs, yes. What are the evaluations like from one speaker or one voice? All these values are made in one voice with one, with one, yes, a single speaker. Or with female or male. Always female, because people wanna hear female voices, and it's sad, but all the results are present are female only, and, yeah. It's kind of interesting to be introduced and how it runs. That's a good question, very good question, thank you. In this evaluation, we used 100 sentences, selected to reflect a kind of usage, so half of them, or a little bit less than half, were originating from DriveAbout, so they were kind of in-domain, semi-in-domain, I will call them, and the rest of them were web answers, and stuff that was coming from the logs. So they were, I would say, 50% in-domain, 30% out-of-domain, or stuff like this. Now we use 1,000, I think 900s utterances for valuations. So, still 100 utterances with seven samples per utterance, seven or eight is per utterance, is pretty much a very, very big test to run. It's much bigger than people do in other cases. The average duration? The average duration is between one, second, and three. It effectively corresponds to our usage, the way people use Google TDS. And you mentioned mixed accession on the bone border. Yes. It's using the straight information on an algorithm. It's using a straight like. Straight parameters, I've started now. Yes. Which, how many bands are there? Seven bands, for the 22 kilohertz signal. So it is a typical standard, the Melcap-based mixed band excitation with the filter that could have made for Melcap. Huh? It was a straight band, right? Yes, yes, yes. These bands actually not from straight, they come from the mixed band excitation for colder paper of Alamakri, exactly the same, yes. And you go to, okay, this is what happens in European languages, but if you go to Asian languages, we have a much better improvement, mainly because we don't understand the Asian languages. Now we have more people from China and more, we have much better representation. So we're doing better, but when this test was running, it was a clear benefit of the parameters and of the new selection. So what I would conclude out of this is that if you can spend a lot of money to make your new selections then sound good, that's great. If you cannot spend a lot of money to do this, then the LSTM may actually be better for a reduced slightly smaller amount of data as well. So, there's lots of discussion and here are the papers. I'm already five minutes late, so I will pick up questions for five or 10 minutes and then we can go. Yes, anyone? You started out in your description of the game, saying that it was universal in the sense that it was compatible with straight. Yes, it is, it did. And then in what followed, our kind of lost track of what you presented afterwards in terms of whether it corresponds to a different model or a different implementation that one plugged straight into. Okay, so straight here, you have to use the analysis and we use what came for synthesis. As of the beginning, what came is the part that does the generation of the waveform. It is not a part of the analysis. Think of it for example, in MP3 implementations of the algorithm, the MP3 standard tells you this is how I'm doing synthesis. You can do whatever you want in the analysis as long as your bit stream has these specifications. This is exactly what cocaine is in a way, is the thing that takes you from the parameters to the actual signal. So, it is both state compatible, it is H&M compatible, it is AQHM compatible. You can use whatever model you want. What about this part with the paramotor graphics lines? That part was about how to generate the signal once you have two end points and in these end points, you'll know the phases. So, that's a very simple question. I'm giving you the phases in this part of the signal, in that part of the signal, the amplitude in this part of the signal, in that part, we're talking about instantaneous phase damages because I've given it for a particular time instant and I want you to synthesize something. What you would say would be like to do an overlap add, right? That's not the best you can do. Assuming stationarity, an overlap add-in, yes. And so, cocaine is going to do this regardless of whether you get it straight or not. Exactly, yeah, yeah, yeah, it has already. Cool, there is no state. It's something that produces some sort of parameters that are straight like. There has a periodicity in bands and it has an amplitude, a spectral envelope. But as long as it gives you the parameters, then you can do whatever it is. So, to elaborate a bit more on how you get phase as many as you can get, I feel that the amount of time you just get to analyze it. So, that's a good question. So, a very good question. We'll have to write this down. I should be keeping this actually. I guess. So, we have two components there, right? Every phase it has a deterministic component plus another component that depends on a periodicity. Right? Let's put this as a function or something. It's a function of the periodicity. This is the deterministic part of the phase. This is a stochastic part of the phase. The deterministic part, I use many. I use minimum phase. You can extract it using minimum phase assumption from the log spectacle envelope. I use maximum phase, the complete reverse. I used a mixed phase, but I ended up using this very simple way. I fill up a vector with random values between minus pi, uniform distribution, minus pi, comma pi. And then, this is the phase that goes always to the first harmonic. This is the phase that goes always to the second harmonic. This is the phase that goes always to the, let's say, 200th harmonic if there is one ever. So, as you change harmonics, as you have different pitch periods, right, and different pitch, you will pick up a different phase. If your signal is stationary, this is completely fixed. If your signal changes, this phase changes almost randomly in a way. If you have a big change, you will get a big change as well. And this is like assuming that it's a fixed envelope per zero. But this is the cheapest way I could get ever to put in a phase, because as you remember, Vokain takes three, has to work in these devices here, right? And these devices have, and it also has to work, not only these, it's a high-end device, it has to work to a billion devices. So, it has to be extremely fast. So, I think I threw away every sort of minimum phase assumptions, any sort of phase assumptions, and put that, because that's much faster. And ultimately, if you hear it, you can tell a difference. And I have this sample, I don't represent it to any publication, but you can hear a difference between minimum phase and this one, but you can hear a difference only in maximum phase, only on the voice tone sets. Why? Because in maximum phase, let's say in a periodic speech, there's no difference at all between minimum phase and maximum phase, which is weird, because minimum phase goes like this, and maximum phase, that's the exact opposite, maximum phase goes like this. So, there's no audible difference, but in voice tone sets, it doesn't matter, because in voice tone sets, voice tones go something like this, okay? And then here, you have somehow the voice tone set. If I synthesize with maximum phase, then the energy goes here, goes before the voice tone set, so it changes the perception of, it is like pre-echo in a way, right? So you don't want that, so there's sometimes audible paths, but from this part on, it's okay, which brings a little bit of questions up above what quality do we need phase, and for what reason? I have very good examples about that effectively telling that phase is not, I'm the primary, let's say, problem, I'm not worried about this one, I'm not worried about phase. What about phase when I have to glue it together with the normal waveforms? Yes, there, I'm worried mostly about linear phase, but I'm not worried about phase when it has to do the waveform modeling itself. And I hope I answered the question, and you can open up your mobile, and I can play you something. I had a demo here, from time to time, you know, whenever you're trying to do without practicing it, it may not work, so you will excuse me in that case. I will put, hopefully, ah, sorry. Yes, yes, yes. I think this is where you are. I think this is where you are again. Okay, hello world. Ah, okay, I found it. Give me a second. Okay, it keeps failing. As demos happen, I had to prepare that, but your mobile actually uses it. If you have the latest Android, you can put any synthesis, put local only or disconnect, put it in airplane mode, and you will hear the LSTM, or the LSTM. For cop, eh? iPhone. Yes, I mean, Google Now and iPhone, well, we do the Google Now, but we don't do it for iPhone, because it's a different company. Okay, so Google Now uses the in-selection system when you're connected, so you put it in airplane mode, you will force it to use the embedded one. Yes? And researchers outside of the local use working? Of course not. You know how the pattern, the pattern law works. You can copy any pattern you want. Any at all, right? As long as you don't put it in a product. So you can implement it yourself.  But you cannot use it without violating the primary claims. I'm always pro open sourcing and I will open source a new vocoder, straight like yet another vocoder from that Hedekin may where he was in our lab and he was working with me and Hega and pretty soon. So this will happen in due time. So we'll open source, but we will not open source again because it is hard to implement. So it gives a kind of an edge there because it's very fast. That's the main thing I think you may be able to copy the quality maybe, but the speed of this quality is a hard thing to do. Yes. Other questions? Just to make sure my answer is correct. Yes. So earlier you put that phase equation so you expect the actual phase as the sum of the local track properties and noise properties. Ah, that's a very good question. The, it breaks down. It's not a source filter. I think it's not a source filter vocoder, right? I see. I just wanted to ask for the kind of noise part. So do you find, this is the case where you find the kind of correlation between the noise I mean that if you're obviously with obviously the phase theory it may not be a good point. No. Only if you're, yeah, but this will be applied if you remember the equation by a random number, right? So you will not have any correlation because you put an random number here. The answer, I'm sorry, going the wrong direction. You have a random number here. It's a uniform that goes for minus a function of a periodicity p4 to plus. So it's always random. So you will have no correlation because of that. It's actually, this bit here. Because I don't want to use overlap and add. I do not want to use overlap add as a way to have somehow to reconstruct away from between two parts, right? I don't want to use overlap add. If you use overlap add, you are having an implicit assumption about how overlap add or how the interpolation is made, right? And the, but the problem with overlap add what happens when you have two different quite different frequencies you have say 100 heads or have a 40 heads. We can deal with these differences with the, okay, there's no problem. You can have some, but then that and so that's the idea of interpolating or other than doing overlap add with specialty assumptions. The other thing that happens with overlap add and overlap add is that the higher frequencies in overlap add you make some assumptions, right? You make some assumptions that the pitch period represents your pitch. That's true if you're at zero is gives you an integer pitch period. But if it doesn't, if there's more deviations there, then the overlap add process destroys, has two main disadvantages. One is that it dumpens the higher frequencies because it produces random fluctuations of the, that have of the sort of components that have a destructive relationship in the higher frequencies. One sample or half a sample difference in one kilohertz is nothing. Half a sample difference in eight kilohertz is a really huge amount. And that introduces a dumping of the third format the fourth format that sounds like a less vivid speech. So that's one thing. And the other thing is that if you try to synthesize noise with overlap add the noise has the mean that you expect that the variance fluctuates with your window, your synthesis window. So the variance of the noise is reduced whenever you sample two noise samples, right? We have epsilon one plus epsilon two is has less variance than epsilon, right? Because if you did all these follow the same distribution because you reduce the variance here, some stuff which means an overlap add here in the middle you summed up a noise here and the noise there. And then, but your variance of the noise goes lower. So you have fluctuation of variance. And I don't want to have this. And in high quality, some high quality methods that they were actually trying in audio they were trying to minimize this with special windows as own ideal directly in the third or something. Yeah. What do you mean with a long page of your base information that is over the previous line of cubic interpolation? Oh, well, unless you're asking about the experiments, right? No, I've used the cubic interpolation method quite a lot. And then it had random glitches because sometimes it was not, for example, you can control, oops, the short answer is then there's no formal experience for this. You can control whether it goes like this. You can control whether the most of the change, I don't know what I was saying, the derivative, let's say, of the, of your curve here where the most of the amplitude, this, I said this is your criterion here, right? Second derivative of this. Then, and this is from, you can, that it's evenly distributed. If you would like to have a maximum difference because when you have a difference from here to there, you have to distribute it somehow within the global cycle. And when you would like to distribute your difference in order to do transition from this phase to that phase, you would like to have a couple of properties. The property I want to have was to break harmonicity as much as possible. This doesn't explicitly break harmonicity for me. So, if you try to synthesize noise with this, occasionally you may get glitches or you may not get a clean noise without a pitch and so on. And that's why, but this one, this guy here, allows you to do this because it goes and puts it straight in the middle. So it breaks harmonicity very efficiently. Also, this model has an extra parameter and when you are counting every computation in order to fit it to the specifications, then having a model for less complexity is a much desirable thing to do or to have. Yes. We're done. Thank you. I think we're already way past four. Thank you very much.


Aloha and welcome to Ehana Kako, we're here every week on the Think Tech Hawaii Broadcast Network. I'm Kili Ikeena, president of the Grassroot Institute. Well everyone knows it's political season, but there are some interesting things happening that are not so ordinary. The state of Hawaii, it's no secret, is ruled in many ways by a single party, whether that's Republican or Democrat, whatever that single party is, that's not always good for competition in the political world. But there is competition rising within the Democratic Party here in the state of Hawaii, and there are new voices emerging with new positions that haven't traditionally been held in the last several years by Democrats in power. Today we have with us a Democrat contender for the office of the United States Senate, Makani Christensen. He's a businessman who's very successful on the island of Maui, and he's also a graduate of Annapolis and served in the United States Marine Corps, discharged as, honorably discharged, that is, as a captain. We're delighted that he's with us today, and he's going to share his views on why he's running for office. Makani Aloha, great to see you today. Great to be here. Well you know, you graduated from Annapolis, and then you served in the U.S. Marine Corps. That was in what field of duty? I was in supply chain management, logistics, and I was with 3-3, their battanette. All right. So you were in Iraq and in Afghanistan as well. That's correct. I fought in Iraq and Afghanistan. And then you went into business? Yep. Shortly thereafter, in 2008, started a business called Keave Adventures, based on what I love to do. Which is have adventure, or help other people have adventures. And it wasn't easy though. It was started off in 2008 as a basic concept. I saw a niche, I went after it and made it happen. You've done very well. You've got 13 employees. What do you take from your military background and your business background that you bring to running for the United States Senate? So when it comes to running my business, it's about leadership, no matter where you are. Treating people right, treating people with compassion. And the basics of running a business, planning, organizing, communication, execution, and belief that it will work. And obviously hard work, a lot of hard work. Well you bring a lot of leadership skills to the task as well. Yeah. Yes. And it's having commitment to duty, to honor for my family, my country, courage to make those decisions and challenge yourself to go further than you ever thought you could personally go. Well, talking about challenges, you certainly have chosen a very big challenge. You are running against Senator Brian Schatz, someone who has been well-established in the Democratic Party, somebody who is poised, well, with the resources in order to defend his incumbency in the United States Senate. Have you ever been given feedback from people that this is a Herculean task, this is an amazing thing you're doing, that it's almost impossible? You know, I was told not to run.  You shouldn't run. And I was also asked to run. It wasn't a decision that was made easy, because this is a, it's like putting on the uniform again. Yes. You're representing Hawaii, the people of Hawaii, your country at a national level. And you know, anybody running for office, it shouldn't be a decision that's based on I want power, I want this, it should be always people first. So when you look at the resource situation, Senator Schatz has a long career in politics, he's well situated in the Democratic Party, he has union support, he's got large coffers in his campaign account and so forth, and his name recognition, well, everybody knows his name in Hawaii, when you looked at all of that and compared them just to your resource level, how is it that you decided to go ahead? So what, it wasn't about the money or bringing in money. It was more about the problems that Hawaii faces every day. Real problems that demand attention from our national delegates. It has to happen. Otherwise, the cost of living is not going to change. We can talk about it all day, but unless we actually make a decision, actually make moves to fix those things, for instance, small business, small business is very difficult here in Hawaii. In fact, I think we're ranked 48, 49. Yeah, on a good day. On a good day. And it's not easy starting a business, I know from a personal experience. You've got a lot of experience understanding how difficult it is with our regulatory climate as well as federal regulations, in fact, there's one in particular, now that you mentioned small business, that you talk about a lot differently than many of the leaders in the Democratic Party, and it happens to be a 1920 federal law called the Jones Act. Tell us what you think about that. So right now, the Jones Act actually increases cost of living by 30 percent, shipping. So that impacts not only small businesses, it impacts the consumer, it impacts everything in this state. Right, and when we talk about sustainability, for example, we're looking at farms, small farmers, the cost of running a farm and actually ordering supplies from mainland distribution points to Hawaii, it only adds to the overall cost. That's right. We don't necessarily know exactly what that cost is. It's up there, people feel it and so forth. So what's fundamentally wrong about this Jones Act? So it doesn't allow that free market competition. So it's a regulator price, U.S. ships, U.S. ports. Now if we can potentially modify it for Hawaii, then we actually have a chance to reduce the cost of living and gain supplies from other venues that will basically help the people of Hawaii. Well, you talk about free market competition here, but you're not saying what some people often talk about and that is repeal this nearly 100-year-old federal act. You said modify. You seem to take a more middle-of-the-road approach toward it. You know, whenever you deal with change, change is something that it's hard for people to accept, no matter what you do. And as far as this, the Jones Act, it's been in place for a very long time. To have the individuals, unions, the shipping industry to come to the table and say, you know what? I agree. Let's make it right for the people of Hawaii. Let's reduce the cost of shipping and this is how we propose we do it and want to do it together. Well, Makani, you know, you're taking a position that differs from the leadership of the Democratic Party, but there are a good number of younger Democrats in office who take your stand. But in another issue, there are some very senior members of the Democratic Party who seem to agree with you. And I'm talking about Governor Ariyoshi, Governor Kaitano, and even Senator Akaka. And that has to do with the vast body of water that surrounds the Hawaiian islands into the Pacific. We're looking at a very aggressive act now by our federal government to expand its jurisdiction over what we call a national monument. Tell us a little about that because you have some strong views on that. So basically what's happening right now is you have a national marine monument on Northwest Hawaiian Islands that circumference 50 miles around the Northwest Hawaiian Islands. And what's being proposed as part of a legacy project to a legacy project now. All right. It means that we're going to be paying for it forever. Right. Well, and it's a personal legacy project, you know, and it's under the Antiquities Act to expand the area from that 50 mile radius to a 200 mile radius around the islands. Now that's the size of Texas, California, Oregon, and Washington. Now in a lot of ways, this is something that if you're in favor of the expansion of federal power over a state, you'd be cheering on. Right. And if you in some way your contracts were dependent upon that, you'd be cheering that on and so forth. But you come from the point of view of a small businessman who doesn't see this kind of federal action as benefiting the locals. Right. And so one, there's no actual evidence that shows that anything that basically we collect 1.5% of the fish from the Pacific. The rest is caught from our counterparts in Asia. That's right. And they're actually coming into our U.S.S. water, the EZ. In other words, you don't accept the claim that our fishing around the White Islands is depleting the Pacific Ocean. Not even close. And you know, also the other aspect of it is we have a Hawaiian group that's saying it's a cultural area. That's right. If you've been 50 miles out, it's blue water. So I'm not sure what these individuals are talking about, but they're bringing up a case with unfounded documentation and it will affect the people of Hawaii. People will lose their jobs, the price of fish will go up, will end up buying gas fish from Asia for $25 a pound. And rather than having our long line fleet be sustainable, because you're not only affecting the long line fleet, you're affecting all the distributors, you're affecting hotels, you're affecting the overall dependence on the mainland for food. Well, two former Democrat governors and a former United States Senator, Senator Akaka, agree with you that they agree that we should not have this expansion of federal territory in federal waters. And in many ways, younger Democrats and the Democratic Party now have the power that seemed to be out of sync with that. It seems as though you might actually represent, would you think, some of the more classical Democratic values as opposed to some of the more recent ones? Yeah, you know, what I've seen from the Democratic Party is that there's a split, progressive versus conservatives and people that want to just tear the system apart.  And at the same time, you know, the leadership, just changed leadership. And, you know, I believe that it's going to take some time to smooth out all the wrinkles. Well, what's interesting here is you say you're a Democrat and proud to be a Democrat. I'm listening to you on the first two issues we talk about. Modify the Jones Act and restrict federal overreach within the state. You sound just like a Republican as well. It says if the positions you take aren't dependent upon party branding. They're not. It has to be dependent on the people, the people that we sign up to serve. Because it is. You sacrifice everything for the people. Well, Mccani, let's get back to the question of your relationship to the challenge, to your challenge to the incumbent now. Senator Schatz is completing his first term. So really, this election will be a test because generally, we tend to think here in Hawaii once somebody has been in Congress or Senate for a while, they're somewhat vested. So this would be a window of opportunity to challenge that. How do you compare yourself in this race to the positions that Senator Schatz takes? You know, so well, as, you know, well written in the Honolulu Star Advertiser that his main priority for Hawaii was climate change. All right. My main priority is the people of Hawaii. We're a climate change and when we talk about so a difference would be sustainability. Is it a fashionable sustainability or is it true sustainability for Hawaii? Well, there's some terms here that have almost become sacred buzzwords amongst many people. And I know that you like to look for the substance behind them. When you think of sustainability, what role do you think the government needs to play? We need to definitely make it cheaper for farmers. We encourage our fishermen to obviously fish sustainably. This expansion is definitely not part of that plan. We also encourage the access to our mountains for hunters. So on top of this, you know, I started the Hunting Farming Fishing Association. And the Hunting Farming Fishing Association basically gave the people of Hawaii a voice. The people that are down in a dirt digging. The people that are up in the mountains looking for food to feed their families. The fisherman that goes to the beach to bring back a couple fish for the rest of his Ohana. Those are the people we represent that didn't have time to look up and see what was changing around them. And when that happened, when I saw people losing more than they possibly ever dreamed that they would, their way of life disappeared in a second. We decided to formulate a cohesive unit of individuals from throughout the state, increasing communication, basically letting people know what's going on. So you've been a networker in many ways and I know that during your campaign you've been traveling the islands meeting with many of these people. We're going to come back right after a short break and I'm with Makani Christensen who is a candidate for United States Senate. Don't go away. Watching Think Tech Hawaii's Ehana Kako will be right back. Aloha. My name is Josh Green. I serve as Senator from the Big Island on the Kona side and I'm also an emergency room physician. My program here on Think Tech is called Healthcare in Hawaii. I'll have guests that should be interesting to you twice a month. We'll talk about issues that range from mental health care to drug addiction to our health care system and any challenges that we face here in Hawaii. We hope you'll join us. Again, thanks for supporting Think Tech. Thanks for watching Think Tech Hawaii, meeting people we may not have otherwise met, helping us understand and appreciate the good things about Hawaii. Great content for Hawaii from Think Tech. Aloha. My name is John Wahee and I actually had a small part to do with what's happening today. Served actually in public office. But if you don't already know that, here's a chance to learn more about what's happening in our state by joining me for a talk story with John Wahee every other Monday. Thank you and I look forward to your seeing us in the future. Welcome back to the concluding portion of Ehana Kako here every week on the Think Tech Hawaii Broadcast Network and again I'm Kaley Iakena with the Grassroot Institute. We call our program Ehana Kako after a very well-known saying here in Hawaii, a Pule Kako. A Pule Kako means let's pray together. The Kako is a way of saying we do it inclusively with all people. So at the Grassroot Institute we love to say Ehana Kako, let's work together. Let's work together for a better government, society and economy. Think of the terrible alternative of not working together. And so we're very proud of the fact that we work together with the Think Tech Hawaii Broadcast Network and my hat goes off to Jay Fiedel, the producer in general here as well as all of the great team who put this program on, 35 hours a week of original content coming out from Hawaii you can see it at ThinkTechHawaii.com. Now back to US Senate candidate Makani Christensen.  What are the challenges that business people, small business people in particular face here in the state that you think you could change in the US Senate? Well you know one of the biggest things is to encourage rather than discourage. And when I say that I'm talking about a couple instances that happened within the last six months. One was a blatant attack on VRBOs, the attack on by Senator Schatz. Well let's go back to that first one. You're talking about what has been emerging here as a shared economy and everything from people sharing an empty seat in their car through the ride share programs or sharing an empty bedroom going online and advertising that. And so what are your concerns about this? Well when it comes from the federal government this should be handled by the state. The state should be able to better manage the VRBO and better breakfast arena as well as Uber. When the federal government overreaches without being really in touch with what's going on and saying this is going to be the solution to our housing crisis and our cost of living then we should really re-examine who we're putting into office. Well I hear two strains of thought over here coming through both of them complimentary. The first one is you care about the economic impact upon the people. Absolutely. The individual's rights to conduct business, make it a little extra money, a few dollars and so forth and the availability of that. But the second thing I'm hearing you say, correct me if I'm wrong here, I'm hearing you say that you have a strong preference for the state having rights rather than the federal government coming in and taking those rights from the state. Are you a strong believer in putting power back into the hands of the states? Well in this case yes. The state would have a better know-how to challenge the issues that come up on a daily basis. You know if we're doing an overreach by the federal government here in Hawaii then I just got to stop you there for a second and then I'll let you continue overreach by the federal government. You sure aren't talking democratese. I thought the mantra had been for many years let's get as much federal funding as we can get but you're talking about the fact that there have to be limits. Let me let you continue to talk about what are your concerns about that federal overreach. So what's happening is it's hurting small business. So when federal overreach impacts our businesses here in Hawaii and impacts the way we do business then that's not a proper way to utilize the federal government. Now you've got concerns also of the federal government's policies toward agriculture for example all the rules about clean water sounds good but in many ways they regulate the state in a way that the federal government couldn't understand or the food safety act and so forth. So what are your concerns about farmers being able to survive with these federal regulations? Well as you know the cost to do business in Hawaii is already extreme. We don't have farmers. We need farmers here in Hawaii and that would be also a if we can at the national level encourage farming to I'm not going to just say throw money at it but come up with a well-executed plan on how can we make Hawaii more sustainable encourage those that produce food to come to Hawaii and let's make the land produce for all people in Hawaii. Then we actually talking about true sustainability. Also when it comes to agriculture you know there's a difference between everybody's fighting the GMO process and fighting the you know small farmers and you got the organic farmers. Right. It's going to be imperative that all farmers work together to come up with a solution to fix what we have right now. Well we've certainly seen a good deal of extremism in these battles between environmentalists and small farmers and I think you're absolutely right we have to find a middle ground to which we can can work work together and how would you bring about creating that opportunity to work together toward a common end as opposed to the divisiveness that it exists now. I believe that the best way to do this is to have a common theme and the common theme would be producing food for Hawaii and if you're producing food for Hawaii and everybody comes to the table you can actually come up with some great ideas from the farmers organic non-organic and the fighting is just dividing our community and the people of Hawaii where people have the opportunity I mean you look at Hawaii for example you have an area of 5,000 individuals in on the west side if the GMO crops and the seed companies left the economy on the west side would implode on itself without no recourse to the people there so when individuals fight the GMO issue come up with a solution on what is the best way for the state to go about and make it right rather than just say it's wrong all the time what would be the best solution instead of you know because if we allow Hawaii to implode on itself we allow Molokai to implode on itself and people don't have jobs you know you're looking at a thousand jobs on Kauai a thousand jobs on Molokai or less how does that benefit our economy and the people of Hawaii you were talking earlier about sustainability and sustainability would apply definitely to agriculture yeah agricultural practices and yet you're you're cautioning against the the extremism that would say no GMO or no no no practices that don't hit this certain mark we've got to find a way to work together yeah absolutely working together has also put Hawaii into a very successful place for many many years in providing health care we had one of the highest rates of coverage in the nation in our public-private partnership here that required businesses to actually pay for the health care their full-time employees right and then while we were held up as a model really across the country there were five other states studying our system thinking of using it we had a federal law called the Affordable Care Act often known affectionately as Obamacare which sent us into a downward spiral in terms of our own public health care system our health care system public-private partnership and left a lot of damage cost us a lot of money and we're in the aftermath of reconstructing our coverage here in Hawaii what are your thoughts about the Affordable Care Act so right now what we're looking at is it has to be ratified it has to absolutely be ratified there's people right now not receiving help because if you look at the Medicare Medicare funding went towards the general overall of health care and our kupuna suffer because of it the doctors no longer want to take the Medicare because it's not pain and you meant it has to be fixed it has to be that's right that's correct and you know the this is something a lot of people are afraid I think in the political season especially in races for for us senate and congress across the country and perhaps in Hawaii a lot of scare is interjected into the campaigning that if we tamper with this at all if we update it as you're talking about a fix it somehow the benefits of the seniors are going to be lost and then anyone who wants to bring about reform is often portrayed as somebody who is threatening the Medicare benefits of the seniors but what is your response to that when when that's leveled against you well you know whenever you bring a new idea into fruition if you will you have this idea you have this concept it's not going to be perfect but you work to make sure that it gets there I mean look at the Constitution yeah I mean we've amended it that's right we fixed it I mean there's been 11,538 attempts to amend the Constitution to make it great document imagine where we'd be if we didn't have those amendments right exactly we couldn't even talk about it without the first amendment so you look at you look at that concept is yeah we started it but we can make it better we can see where the flaws are and say you know what my constituents back home are not getting health care like they used to and we need to fix this Hawaii I mean I got 10 Kupuna's calling me up and what are we going to do well that's an important value to us in Hawaii glad to hear you'd be committed to working the very best solution for our Kupuna from Washington DC now let me throw you a tough question this one the little hairy politicians have to take a poll as to who they're talking to before they answer we're talking about amendments let's go to the second amendment okay nobody is blind to the violence that we've seen across the country and the battles over the second amendment the right to bear arms that have emerged you happen to be part of an association to the founder of one that is called hunting farming and fishing that's correct hunters of course need to have the appropriate weapons to the appropriate guns and so forth to use what are your thoughts on second amendment at Hawaii the second amendment should be preserved we have the toughest gun laws in Hawaii as we speak one of the rules that came out from the state recently affected a lot of people that for example our military you know I've been in contact with a lot of our veterans who shoot guns and also came back from Iraq and Afghanistan that suffered from post-traumatic stress because of the new law that says you know if you have a mental illness which is post-traumatic stress you have to turn in your eyes and this has ramifications in the next 10 15 years or and shorter where as an outlet they would you go and shoot guns now people wanting to go with help or need help will no longer go and get help because they like their weapons and also you know we have to preserve the fact that you know hunters and sports enthusiasts use these weapons to roll the hunters go out there and catch food and the sports enthusiasts use it for competition and you know they have a rifle team up at Kamehameha schools well just listening to you I'm somewhat marveling I'm thinking here's a Democrat who is pro-second amendment who is for changing the Jones Act who is pro-small business and so well as we close today let's talk about the party what kind of reaction are you getting from party members as to your stands you know I've gotten the mixed reviews if you will from Democrats Republicans and you know a lot of what Daniel E. Noy stood for I mean I've seen his decisions that he's made and a lot of the decisions he's made I would probably have made the same same decision well that's a good note to close on Daniel and oh yeah and I mean he's a warrior yes he's been there I've been there so Makani I wish you the best in your run thank you for being on the program today my guest today Makani Christensen candidate for United States Senate running against Ryan shots we'll be watching carefully and see what happens and also keeping an eye on Makani as his career goes forward until next time I'm Keeley Akina president of the grassroots Institute wishing you a Hanukkah go let's work together aloha thank you for watching


What is going on guys welcome back to the channel critical overload here? So I have some unfortunate, but exciting news at the same time screen 5's release date has been delayed We all know was supposed to come out in 2021 at some time from Paramount Pictures Now they're saying it's gonna come out according to an official tweet from the official Twitter account It'll come out on January 14th of 2022. So screen 5 has been delayed But they shared a very exciting teaser to kind of just make us not as disappointed now We haven't an official release date for it but before all we knew is it was coming sometime in 2021 now We know there's no longer the case. It's been delayed by at least a year now It's coming out sometime in 2022 not even some time. It's coming out January 14th of 2022 they shared a little teaser and Kevin Williamson Kevin Williamson retweeted this all of all the parties involved with this have retweeted It's just a little small nice clip that Reveals ghostface the ghostface mask emerges from it out of darkness and then we have a small Little date in the right far bottom right corner dating January 14th of 2022 now Am I disappointed about that? Not really and do I think this means the movie will be trash? That's still possible. It's possible. This could be trash no matter when it comes out Usually January is where the trash goes but in all honesty with everything going on in our society They're probably this is not something I would be too concerned with given the fact that the original screen came out around Christmas time the original screen came out it came out at a very odd point because I Don't really remember why it came out in December And I know I've made a mistake of saying why it came out in December So I'm not gonna do that again I don't really know why the original screen came out in December But all of them have these weird release dates so it coming out in January isn't necessarily anything to be worried about But yes, typically that's known from where the trash goes January, but getting on into things We also found out apparently that we have a a official title that hasn't yet to be Like publicly announced or confirmed but Paramount Pictures we know is gonna be distributing the project They honestly put out a tweet regarding upcoming projects on that list was of course details regarding screen 5 However, it was not called screen 5. It was detailing movies They have coming up like Param Activity 7, which I still don't know why that's happening I'm gonna go see it. Don't know why it's happening, but again, they had screened on the list as well for 2022 and That's all it was called. It was just called screen So I don't think they're gonna be calling it screen 5. It looks like our official title will be scream again Nothing publicly has been has been said by any any other Party just the Paramount Pictures who is gonna be distributing it They sent out a tweet saying that they have a movie coming out in 2022 called screams simply called scream Why are they doing that? Many people such as 3c films already made mention of this It appears that when you attach a number to entries in your franchise unless you're fast and furious When you attach numbers to your entries now that does seem to be turning off a lot of movie goers So if the casual movie gorgeous goes into a theater and they see I may mention of this on a previous But they see a movie coming out and it says oh screams out and then they're gonna say oh they remade scream And then they go and they sit down and they got a big surprise. It's not a remake buddy It's a sequel or reboot soft reboot But if they titled it scream 5 that same person might go into the theater and say oh They're still making these movies and then they won't even bother seeing it But they might be fooled into going into thinking they're going to see a remake because Who knows people just don't there's a lot of people out there who do that They don't research anything. They just go to the theater and they watch whatever's in theaters but Something I wanted to talk about was just briefly of the movie coming out in 2022 And it coming out in january the fact that it's coming out in january does make me a little bit more confident in what I was Saying previously that they probably had intentions to put it out in december of 2021 But because of this shuffling around with all these different movies being released And I don't think there's anything really coming out in december of 2021 So still not really understanding what was the ultimate reason we got january But it makes me a little bit more confident that that's probably what they were trying to do But they settled on january for some reason. So we're going to get screen 5 january 14th of 2022 and We found out also that The movie itself is still going to be still going to be shooting this fall In wilmington, north carolina filming at a few different locations according to all these production sites filming in raleigh Wilmington, and I think one other seat. I can't think of at the moment But we know that production is still slated to begin later this year in the few coming weeks We know that we have melissa berrera on board. We have jeno or tega on board We have david arcade on board. We have courtney cox on board A lot of you are still waiting to hear if nev camber will be on board Of course to reprise her role as sydney prescott who is considered the heart and soul of the franchise But not only ourselves the fans but by david arcade. Those are his words not mine And another thing is we're also waiting for a hating panthea to just miraculously show up and be in this movie Somehow as kirby a lot of people are just becoming convinced. She's dead.  They did put out a very interesting article They made a mention of the fact that this new screen movie is going to keep West west cravens films canon Now a lot of people are running with that as that being the official thing I don't know where they actually got that from again. I have not seen any other outlets Say that besides bloody disgusting where they got that from I wish they would share because It's kind of just like a it's it's in the middle of what they're announcing Somewhere in the middle of the article They just make it a make mention of the fact that these this new screen movie will keep the other ones canon Now, yes, that may be true. Yes, it may not be true I do not know because bloody disgusting again did not make it clear where exactly they got that information from They could have gotten it from Paramount they could have gotten it from of course radio silence spyglass media You guys can look up that article to see what I'm talking about I don't see anything in that article that's actually indicating where they got that got that from So keep in mind It's always a chance that we could get one of these movies ignored I don't think we will I think all the movies will remain canon But it's just the fact that they announced it as if it were coming from some type of official source But never really stated where they got that information from but All the west craven movies remaining canon, of course, that's what everyone wants That's what we all want to see we don't want anything to be ignored We don't want to see anything tampered with we want this to be remaining truth to the original We wanted to to keep what's craven's legacy intact Somehow and we just want to see honestly These filmmakers who because I know a lot of you guys are fans of ready or not if you're watching these videos And you're excited about screen five and you hear about radio silence and all of these other things And you know that they did ready or not Then that must mean you're a big fan of that movie that came out last year A lot of people are because that movie was surprisingly a lot better than what the trailer Actually showed based off of the trailer. I thought ready or not was just gonna be you know, like, okay I'll go see this but then when I actually went to see it Oh my gosh, that was just I can't wait to see what these guys do with screen five I honestly just hope they tone down on the comedy a bit But I'm looking forward to it and again We now know the movie will be coming out january 14th of 2022 And that brief glimpse of ghost face in the teaser that we got It does look like very reminiscent of the mass from the original movie Not the mass that we get during the kasey becker opening kill Like when he's chasing her briefly because the mass is like changing multiple times in the original movie I'm not mistaken But it looks like the main mass that you see for the most of the time in the first movie It looks like very reminiscent of that mass So I can't wait to see what happens. I hope nef camber returns I'm very excited about all of these things that keep coming out about the project A lot of people still think Selena Gomez is going to be involved. She hasn't yet signed on There hasn't been well. She might have signed on. We just haven't gotten an official announcement But I can't wait. I know you guys can't wait The whole idea behind it releasing in january 14th of 2022 There's a lot of things that are already coming out in 2021 So honestly, this isn't really that big much of a shocker If they want this movie to do well, this might be the best case scenario for now If they wanted to do well because 2021 is already crowded You have halloween kills coming out in october I mean imagine that You don't want to take the risk and the gamble Sure, that would be a nice thing to see Ghostface and Michael Myers at the box office battling over the weekend But screen four already didn't perform that well as they expected and as they hoped So you don't want to take that gamble again And probably going to want to release it just at on a random date When there's probably nothing else coming out If there is other things coming out then so be it But probably best to just release this movie based off of the reception from screen four Release this movie on its own individual weekend Where it doesn't have much competition Or if it has competition things that are much smaller in scale Not because releasing halloween and then screaming the same weekend That would be a massive fight at the box office But I just don't I wouldn't want to pick between those two In my opinion if I had to pick I would go see screen five But let me know what you guys think about all this down the comment section below Are you excited about screen five? Are you excited about the movie coming out in 2022? What do you think about the january release? And I know a lot of you said you live in wilmington. Yes, definitely tell me what's going on If you take pictures out in that area when they start filming But again, if you haven't already of course again, comment down below Leave a thumbs up and subscribe and turn on post notifications So you never miss a video in the description. I'll have links on my social media accounts I am on facebook twitter and instagram You can message me there to let me know if there is any movies news or reviews You would like me to cover in the future with all that in mind guys I will see you in the next video