-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 When I first used Espeak, I really wondered what I might be getting into. It sounded awkward but now I'm so used to it that I think little of the slight British accent applied to some words and all that. I now run it about as fast as it will go:). On Thu, Sep 07, 2006 at 09:21:09AM -0500, John Heim wrote: > > I'd be interested to hear how it compares with a modern commercial > > synth for someone with hearing difficulties, for the purpose of > > intelligibility. Its speech isn't as natural as the commercial synths > > of course, but that's not necessarily the same as intelligibility. > > > That's a good point. In fact, I was thinking about that on the bus on the > way home last night. Somebody told me that they'd heard the new voice for > Voiceover for the Mac and it sounded very human. It blew him away, he said. > But that guy isn't blind. > > That's what got me thinking. 80% of the time I use JAWS and Windows. The > other 20 is speakup and a hardware synth. The default JAWS voice is quite > nasally. You can select voices that sound more natural but they're not as > clear. > > In fact, when people want to make sure they're understood, they usually > speak in an unnatural tone. So I take it that you wrote espeak with > intelligibility in mind rather than trying to make it sound "real". If so, > you've done a good job. > > > _______________________________________________ > Speakup mailing list > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > > - -- HolmesGrown Solutions The best solutions for the best price! http://holmesgrown.ld.net/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFAC7eWSjv55S0LfERA1vZAJ9e5fdEramxayt+Lrp6EOHaYedBNQCgrR7S kkjUljpQEs8sOfujxC0x3do= =lVuk -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
