[bookport] Re: speech
- From: "Mike Arrigo" <n0oxy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 20:08:00 -0600
Yep, speech is very subjective, in my opinion, dectalk would be the worst
choice.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris G" <chrisg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 12:19 PM
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:
