2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThis is totally off the wall - but listening to a clip of HRC on NPR this morning made me wonder:
has anyone ever done a study about the timbre and auditory frequency of the speaking voices of presidential campaign winners? What I mean is, is there a measurable range of vocal frequencies that electoral winners exhibit?
This would have nothing to do with the content of what any candidate has to say, this would be simply be about how the sound of their voices reaches the voters' ears.
I ask because I have never liked the sound of HRC's voice. I find it grating and unpleasant, and this has been the case throughout her tenure as Secretary of State - not just her present and former candidacies.
I will vote for her if she is the Democratic nominee, but not particularly because I like her - because I never have. And I think that one of reasons I've never liked her is because of the way her voice grates on my ears - never mind her policy positions.
How much does just the sound of a candidate's voice influence voters? When I read about polls giving Ben Carson high favorability among Republican voters it makes me wonder how much just the soothing, pleasant sound of his voice accounts for that favorability?
I think we know that how people vote often has nothing to do with rational thought but is instead predicated on all sorts of unconscious and irrational factors. Is the sound of someone's voice one of those unconscious and irrational factors?
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)I don't have an answer for you, but I'm just as curious. My hunch is that you're right.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)RKP5637
(67,112 posts)emotions. The correlation of voices to presidential campaign winners would be an interesting study.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)recordiings are available, and see if there's a particular frequency range within they all fall.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Hepburn
(21,054 posts)...I guess one could say "bedside manner."
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)What if just the sound of the voice is the main influence?
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)boston bean
(36,223 posts)We have never had a female president and to be quite frank with you, this type of criticism is firmly rooted in our sexist culture. sad to see this being posted here.
So, it is not totally off the wall, it's not something women who are climbing the ladder have heard throughout the ages.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)There are plenty of female voices that don't grate on my ears. Hillary's voice does, I can't help it. I'll still vote for her if she's the Democratic nominee.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)reformist2
(9,841 posts)Hillary's voice is a little grating.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)flor-de-jasmim
(2,125 posts)Ted Cruz, Huckabee, etc.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)tblue37
(65,487 posts)fingernails on a blackboard. Although I like comedian David Spade, I think his nasal, snarky voice would turn off people in any situation in which people wanted to hear maturity, responsibility, or power.
I never could stand the snickering, snarky sound of BabyBush's voice, but Jeb's voice actually has a fairly pleasant, calming sound. Of course, the John Birch Republicans don't *want* calm and rational sounding leaders, and the evangelicals who like Carson don't like Bush's position, his brother's contamination, and his wishy-washy words and demeanor, though Carson's soothing voice is married to words and ideas that *do* appeal to them.
The John Birch wing of the R Party probably responds to the bombastic sound of Trump's voice the same way Hitler's crowds responded to the tone and cadence of his demogoguery. They also like Fiorina's aggressive tone and demeanor.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)She is a perfect speaker and...if you want to talk presidential...she is both very strong and no-nonsense, and capable of expressing anger clearly, but also very personable, pleasant and humorous. And most important REAL.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)as most important is rather telling.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)boston bean
(36,223 posts)And I have given my opinion, based entirely on the OP's words and responses to me.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)The timbre and frequency of a speaking voice surely ought to be measurable - and the attractiveness or non-attractiveness of certain frequencies would therefore be measurable as well, whether the speaker is female or male.
Why does Siri have a female voice? The human ear seems to generally find female voices attractive and comforting.
Finding HRC's voice unpleasant to listen to has nothing to do with female voices in general, it has only to do with the one individual voice.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)What is the first woman president of the United States voice suppose to sound like?
thesquanderer
(11,991 posts)Possibly something like this...
Persondem
(1,936 posts)Armstead
(47,803 posts)The same measurement applies to men as well as women.....and vice versa.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)everything can be one, therefore nothing really is one, is not indicative of it not being a sexist trope.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)boston bean
(36,223 posts)Armstead
(47,803 posts)He alternates between sounding whiny and phony and sanctimonious. Even if I agreed with him on anything, that voice and inflection would drive me crazy. Last I heard, he is a male.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)That womens voices are whiny, angry, shrill etc. These things have been used against an entire group, not just one individual woman.
So pointing this out is not something I made up or that isn't true.
msrizzo
(796 posts)So what you say could have some bearing. My husband didn't like Hillary's voice until he heard Sander's speak and he dislikes his voice even more to the point where he has trouble listening to him. We have no silver throated candidates this time around, and our sitting president is one of the easiest people to listen to, so the bar is pretty high.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)I don't like what she says, but she seems to be talking down to her audience. Her tone is condescending and dismissive and her inflection is harsh. Even when she affects her bogus southern accent
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)That said, I like all three democratic candidates for various reasons. Of all of them, I think Bernie is the most down to earth.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)I find it difficult to listen to Bernie speak. He's got an abrupt style that reminds me of an angry and gravelly Regis Philbin. Perhaps such things are unfair criticisms, but I find it to be distracting and annoying. I think he'd be awkward and out of place on the world stage, and that would be a disadvantage.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)I can appreciate many of his positions, but I'm not convinced that he'd be an effective president.
sorechasm
(631 posts)Would be a great study. It would explain why grade school children are generally better at picking Presidential election winners than the rest of us. They like story teller's voices. May also explain the Ben Carson appeal.
Regarding HRC's voice and her delivery, my wife and I agree 100%. Her voice is about as inspirational as desert sand.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)Yes, the "story teller's" voice! That totally explains Reagan, for sure!
Thank you for getting what I'm saying - I'd love to see a study like that!
Response to scarletwoman (Original post)
guyton This message was self-deleted by its author.
LiberalArkie
(15,728 posts)says how to do it, not which voice type influence others. But that being said I did find this.
http://www.impactcommunicationsinc.com/telephone-communication-skills/your-tone-of-voice-affects-how-people-respond-to-you/
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)One thing I've been thinking about is how people train to be opera singers - where in their body their voice needs to come from.
When I hear Hillary speak, her voice sounds like it comes from no lower than her throat. A good singer's voice comes from their belly - Hillary's voice never gets that far down.
Rebkeh
(2,450 posts)Female voices tend to trigger or be processed in the emotional processing sections of the brain, especially for men. Likewise, male voices process more 'logically'. The claim was that female voices are filtered emotionally and this tends to not sit well with our culture's standards of authoritative speech.
If there's any truth to this claim, and I'm not convinced there is, it's got to be strictly cultural.
As for Hillary's voice, I'm hard of hearing so I hear it differently than most, and I too find it kind of unsettling and annoying. Especially her laugh, it sounds/feels insincere.
Bernie's voice has a grating quality but it's warm -like a grumpy but endearing grandfather.
MOM sounds like a salesman, which is off putting too.
Elizabeth Warren sounds like a beloved professor. So does Barack Obama, actually.
Interesting OP, giving me food for thought.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)This is interesting, if true:
I agree with you, that if it's true, it's "cultural".
Your post has also given me food for thought - thank you!
LiberalArkie
(15,728 posts)people always believe them. So there has to be something in the voice that makes people believe in someone just by listening to them. And I say voice because before TV was radio and outdoor speeches and sermons that caused people to fork over a lot of money.
For some reason Obama turns me off when he is speaking because I feel his is talking down to me, but only when I am watching him. I can just listen and not watch him and I am fine. He just seems to project an "air of superiority".
Bernie indeed presents the "grandfather" image.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Missing key to your vocal theory is that it is a two part process, the speaker and the listener, the physical bodies of each, the mental state of each. There are reasons that one person likes the sound of a voice while others do not. Those reasons tend to lie in the listener.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)that winners of presidential elections have in common. Is there a specific, measurable range of vocal timbre and tone that seems to be generally more attractive to the human ear?
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)would not be discerned by the casual listener nor predicted by the nature of the other voices. Voices that have those attractive qualities sound very different from one another, and no voice is perceived by all listeners in the same way.
I think what I am not saying clearly is that it is a physical process and a body experience, similar to taste or smell. Our likes and dislikes are simply the way our bodies and minds respond to say, broccoli. I can't stand the smell, I have friends who breath it in, yummmmmmm. We are both correct about the smell of broccoli. Our opinions are based on our bodies, not on the smell itself but on the smell in us.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)Like, picking up radio waves or something. Obviously the human ear is a completely subjective measurement. But surely there are machines that can measure tone and pitch, etc - just as decibels can be measured.
Anyway, that's what I'm trying to get at - not how people hear something, but how a machine of some sort might measure it.
Rebkeh
(2,450 posts)Studies have shown taller men have a distinct advantage to win, that's less about individual perception than most would think.
If voices follow a similar pattern is a legitimate question.
livetohike
(22,163 posts)thinks he needs to talk loudly to make his point, it is extremely annoying. He seems constantly on the edge of throwing a tantrum.
MBS
(9,688 posts)nebulous (and, yes, irrational) qualities -- add to the voice issue the emphatic, angry finger-pointing as well as the defensive tone that I also witnessed last night-- will play in the general election.
Fair or not, voters make judgment on these things.
I personally did not feel that HRC "won" the debate last night.
Nor (IMHO) did any other individual candidate, each of whom had both high and low moments.
The Democratic Party did come off well, though, in presenting -- and in stark contrast to the Republican circus - 3 candidates of substance and experience.
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)a successful politician,their voice is the least of it.
Rebkeh
(2,450 posts)In Barnie Frank's case, I'm told he sounds like someone talking without his dentures in. As a lip reader myself, I don't think I've ever seen any teeth so that would make sense.
Funny because Barnie Frank to me sounds abrasive but in a warm, endearing way.
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)for a long time.
Rebkeh
(2,450 posts)Armstead
(47,803 posts)Supposedly those who heard them of radio thought Nixon did better. Those who saw them on TV thought Kennedy did better.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)Actually, Nixon had a very good voice, just yesterday I heard a clip of him speaking. Kennedy's voice was sort of nasal and not as deeply pitched as Nixon's. I can see why radio listeners would favor Nixon, just going by the comparative sound quality of the voices.
shraby
(21,946 posts)to listen to. Their voice seems to go on and on and becomes extremely irritating, no matter what they are saying. Like Mr. Shraby says, "when are they going to shut up?"
I find in my case at least, the higher pitched female voices are the most abrasive. Probably why I don't find the male voices as irritating for the most part.
I agree, Cruz has a whiny voice and that one grates on the nerves. Don't like that kind of male voice.