[bookport] Re: speech
- From: "Richard Ring" <ring.richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 12:58:07 -0600
I used to like the hardware DECtalk, but the current software versions
that I have heard sound incredibly mushy, and they seem to make
pronunciation errors that the hardware versions did not make.
-----Original Message-----
From: bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Chris G
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 12:20 PM
To: bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bookport] Re: speech
How about decTalk?
i know speech is very subjective.
--
Chris G <chrisg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 11:51:46 -0600
"Richard Ring" <ring.richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Considering the time period which is historically known as the dark
> ages, I sincerely doubt if the Doubletalk chip was available then.
> I don't mind if improvements are made in speech, but please, don't use
> Keynote, and don't use AT&T natural voices.
> I am currently testing a piece of software that APH sells that
features
> the AT&T Natural voices, and that speech is extremely difficult for me
> to become accustomed to.
> Although the overall sound of many individual words is more human
than,
> say, Eloquence or the Doubletalk, the inflection/rhythm is quite
> strange. The speech sounds as if digitized words are being patched
> together so as to create the illusion of human sounding speech.
> It doesn't work.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rick and Pauline
> Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 11:34 PM
> To: bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bookport] Re: speech
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> Considering the improvements that have been made in synthesized speech
> in
> the last few years, it would be a shame for the American Printinghouse
> to
> saddle us with an antiquated system like Doubletalk. It simply
doesn't
> meet
> acceptable standards as a speech system any longer. People I have
> talked
> with have held back from buying a Bookport because they have little
> tolerance for Doubletalk. To package an up to date product like the
new
>
> Bookport with yesterday's technology makes no sense at all to me. For
> those
> who want to remain in the dark ages, you can keep what you have become
> accustomed to, but please don't try to hold back the rest of us who
hope
> for
> something better.
>
> Rick
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Arrigo" <n0oxy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 7:20 PM
> Subject: [bookport] Re: speech
>
>
> > The problem with eloquence is that it's software speech which means
> you
> > need
> > a few more things then you would by sticking with the doubletalk
> synth.
> > First a more powerful processor, and second, an operating system for
> the
> > speech to work with. Most likely that would result in a higher cost
> unit,
> > in
> > which case I'd say, by all means stick with doubletalk.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "David Bennett" <david382@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 9:31 PM
> > Subject: [bookport] Re: speech
> >
> >
> >> Just remember that the better the speech, the higher will be the
> cost.
> > I'd
> >> love to have eloquence, but it's one of the more costly ways to go.
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Sue" <sjfryer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 9:19 PM
> >> Subject: [bookport] Re: speech
> >>
> >>
> >> > Hi Mike,
> >> >
> >> > I'm with you, mate. I think Eloquence would be a great idea.
> >> >
> >> > Sue.
> >> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> > From: "Mike Arrigo" <n0oxy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> > To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> > Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 11:35 AM
> >> > Subject: [bookport] speech
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> Since we're talking about the new unit, speech might be worth
> > discussing.
> >> >> My
> >> >> vote would be for doubletalk or eloquence. Of course, everyone
has
> > their
> >> >> favorites, and there's no way you're going to please everyone,
but
> > that's
> >> >> my
> >> >> vote. Perhaps the new units could have 2 speech engines like the
> >> >> braillenotes do
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
2.21.03
Other related posts:
