<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
My idea is to just do a last bit of tweakage on the voices as far as
formant parameters go, then do a initial release. It need not sound
like a particular version, just loads better than that Hlsyn stuff
from before The current version sounds like maybe a 4.5 or 4.6x
version, and that is totally fine to me. It's DECTalk and it's
sounding unique, crisp and clear. As Raymond pointed out, there's a
bit of word running together, such as "test of" but othr than that,
things are looking up for DECTalk. Any thoughts?<br>
<br>
Alex<br>
<br>
On 8/4/2011 1:31 PM, ebruckert Bruckert wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAMECcJ2jpe7s8n_wuja3OhtQv1+bTYdi2wd65HmxDN0kCtPtgA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Context-Type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<div>Here is my plan we need to now enter a release cycle where
Corine and I now carefully to the voices on the new synthesizer
bass and come out the first release. I'm unwilling to try to
make an exact match before we do a first release. There are many
reasons for this and the real issue is this is the way to really
start. After the initial release then we worry about other
details where we have to look for consensus on what people would
like a like. Also in many areas the rules are highly interactive
so a change may fix the exact problem you're trying to fix, but
have unintended side effects. Also there's issues like shutter
priority be to provide a way to better control the synthesizer
by getting around blocked commands by the screen reader
application. I will update the file system and get started
with corine hopefully tomorrow. Today I'm sick as a dog so I
don't want to do anything when I can barely think. And I am
willing to continue for free to try and please the users as long
as there is interest.</div>
<div>For myself I can say I've listened to DECtalk so much, that
I'm quite happy with the version we have right now.<br>
</div>
<div>As a point of interest what I think I have learned so far is
that the single biggest issue was spectral tilt, when we
incorporated change made by Dennis which from a speech
standpoint is more correct meaning more natural in a spectral
range. But from the overwhelming reaction we have anecdotal
proof that this spectral shape is better for users. This is
actually not terribly surprising because on the other side of
the coin we lack the higher formants because for compute and
other reasons it was impossible to add these to the synthesizer.
At this point theoretically we could add them in but it's is
fairly large effort because we'd have to go from integer
arithmetic to floating point for the vocal track as were
presently at the limit of what we can do with 16-bit integers. <br>
<br>
</div>
<div>On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 7:46 AM, FRIDO ORDEMANN <span><<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:enablerehab@verizon.net">enablerehab@verizon.net</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote>
<div>
<div>
<div>i can't tell the difference when listening as Ed
suggests - excellent!</div>
<div>thanks, Ed</div>
<div><br>
<div> <b><span>From:</span></b> Alex H. <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:linuxx64.bashsh@gmail.com">linuxx64.bashsh@gmail.com</a>><br>
<b><span>To:</span></b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:dectalk@bluegrasspals.com">dectalk@bluegrasspals.com</a><br>
<b><span>Sent:</span></b> Wed, August 3, 2011 4:34:48
PM
<div><br>
<b><span>Subject:</span></b> Re: [DECtalk] Some
DECtalk history and what I think we can and can't
reasonably do<br>
</div>
<div>
<div><br>
Agreed. This new sample rules. It's pretty darn
close to the original and has its own coolness..<br>
<br>
alex<br>
<br>
On 8/3/2011 4:09 PM, jake mcmahan wrote:
<blockquote type="cite">On 8/3/2011 3:42 PM,
ebruckert Bruckert wrote:
<blockquote type="cite">Okay as an update listen
to the to wave files separately not
back-and-forth listen to one we waited a few
minutes listen to the other. See if you agree
were getting closer, one of course is what you
sent me<br>
<br>
<div>On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 1:43 PM, ebruckert
Bruckert <span><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:edbruckert@gmail.com">edbruckert@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote>agreed
<div>
<div><br>
<br>
<div>On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 1:38 PM,
Alex H. <span><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:linuxx64.bashsh@gmail.com">linuxx64.bashsh@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote>
<div>I, too, hope that HLsyn
eventually will be a viable
option and we could use the old
method or HLsyn if we wanted,
maybe for reading long texts and
so on. It's a great idea and
theory but just isn't mature
enough at this point.<br>
<br>
Alex
<div>
<div><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 8/3/2011 1:13 PM,
ebruckert Bruckert wrote:
<blockquote type="cite">There's
always two sides to a
coin, if DECtalk hadn't
been purchased it would
have died. And since there
was no money from anyone
to work on handicapped
applications, we had to do
what our customers want it
or go home. I recognize
that the HLsyn work did
not yield the hoped-for
results and perhaps
someday it can with what
we learned in our
failures. But it was a
decision based on the best
knowledge we had at the
time and in fact also with
Dennis Klatt's work. The
problems that occurred
with the HL sin version
aren't of any interest to
me because the version put
out was in early one and
it's not the right time to
pursue trying to perfect
HLsyn. S<br>
<div>On all I can do is my
best. </div>
<div> As to the person
that mentioned the idea
of putting meaning into
the text. DECtalk
actually has the ability
to do some marketing and
adjustment to train
achieve that by hand.
Automating the system to
do that is deal beyond
our knowledge and
capability.
Understanding what is
being conveyed is
extremely extremely
difficult for a
computer. A simple
example;"You did that."
Depending on which word
you emphasize most there
are three different ways
of saying this very
simple sentence with
dramatically different
meanings. </div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div> Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at
12:07 PM, Alex H. <span><<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:linuxx64.bashsh@gmail.com">linuxx64.bashsh@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote>
<div>Well, to us,, we
never really heard
later versions of DT,
only the classics from
the 90's, so forgive
us if we compare the
new attempts to prior
versions - it's not
like we have a huge
library of source code
to just browse at will
and endless samples of
every version....
so... yeah.<br>
<br>
Wanna know what's been
wrong with the samples
and attempts posted to
this list a few months
ago for the sapi
dectalk? I'll tell
you.<br>
<br>
The voices were
clipping and
squawking, and all the
voices sounded like
they had a speech
problem. Perfect Paul
wasn't perfect as most
of us have heard
before. The voices
themselves sound not
like DECTalk at all,
they also drop out in
volume, just like a
human cuz it's using
HLsyn to make it sound
more natural. <br>
I've heard DT 4.2cd,
4.3, 4.4, 4.61, 4.62
and 4.64. But since
you've pointed out
before that version
numbers don't matter
to speak, is this even
important anyway or
are we just listening
to the same code with
minor tweaks to get
the various versions
we know?<br>
<br>
Disable HLsyn in the
new product, and it'll
suck less. I like
forment based synths,
not ones that try and
sound human, because I
and others are used to
classic forment
non-HLsyn versions of
DECTalk. True that
HLsyn is still formant
but it's trying to
sound real and have
human articulation,
and knowing that I can
understand why this
version sounds
different. It's just
not what we're used
to, that's all. Some
Joe Blow off the
street who has never
heard synthesized
speech can't
understand Eloquence
from DECTalk from
Espeak anyways, so
this point of
understanding speech
is a moot one. They'd
be better off using
Cepstral or some
human-sampled synths
and wasting their hard
drive space. This is
being targeted at a
relatively small group
of people who have
used DECTalk before
and like it, so i
think we're safe
there. I'd consider
giving HLsyn another
shot if it was
completed. But as
always, corporate
America screws
everyone over in the
end, and that was the
case with Dectalk. So
much so, that Fonix
wanted to make
FonixTalk and
specificly try and
make it sound human.
The result sucks.<br>
<br>
<br>
Alex<br>
On 8/3/2011 11:17 AM,
ebruckert Bruckert
wrote:
<blockquote
type="cite">
<div> First of all
let me make you
aware that I use
DragonDictate, as
I can't see very
well and
proofreading is
quite painful so
you'll have to
forgive and
interpret from
mistakes the
DragonDictate may
make. It</div>
<div> I was taught
about form and
speech synthesis
by Dennis Klatt,
and by reading but
before my
involvement with
him I knew next to
nothing. One of
the questions in
the early days was
could you achieve
higher
intelligibility by
super articulation
and do better than
natural speech.
What testing
revealed was
really two things.
At normal speaking
rates the answer
always seem to be
that the closer
you matched to
real speech the
better the
intelligibility at
higher speaking
rates above that
which humans could
normally achieve
things were little
different and I'm
not going to go
into the specifics
of what we did to
make things better
at high speed
other than to say
they were based on
knowledge of
speech perception.</div>
<div> The second
thing we learned
is that listening
to a synthesizer
has a very fast
but steep learning
curve. Somewhat
analogous to
learning to
understand a
person with a
strong dialect or
speech
impediment. One of
the problems we
encountered is
that people often
preferred the
version they were
used to over any
succeeding
version. But
actual tests did
not support the
preference.</div>
<div> One
example is the way
tilt was done
inside DECtalk.
The original
mechanism was a
crude
approximation of
spectral tilt.
Dennis before he
died developed a
much more
accurate (meaning
matching human
production) tilt
filter that was
not able to be
incorporated to a
later date. As a
point of interest
Dennis was so
dedicated that he
last modified the
DECtalk code 3
days before he
passed away. So
the spectral tilt
was changed and
this changed what
you might consider
the tone control
on an old radio or
record player.
That is just one
of many reasons
why DECtalk change
slightly over the
years.</div>
<div> The 5.0
DECtalk
Incorporated the
work of Prof. Ken
Stevens who was
Dennis is blessed
MIT and close
friend. The 5.0
code unfortunately
did not yield the
expected
results, but we
did learn a lot
from the attempt.
This</div>
<div> there
are even some
changes to DECtalk
that would change
the way it sounds
from any
particular
version, such
as Intonation that
I am unwilling to
revert because I
know for a fact
that they caused
loss of
information. So my
goal is very
simple I am
working to create
a very functional
intelligible
DECtalk to put
back out, I am
unwilling to try
and make it sound
exactly like any
given person wants
to. I have been
through this
before and the
year is very
sensitive and if
you directly
comparing two
versions
side-by-side you
not testing
anything but
whether did the
same and that is
an exercise in
futility. T </div>
<div> </div>
Any specific issues
I can address.
Secondly as a word
of warning to
listeners providing
feedback. The other
thing we've learned
is that listeners
are excellent at
deciding that
something is not
right, but are
absolutely terrible
at exactly
pinpointing the
problem. The reason
for this is quite
simple people judge
the output as speech
which it only kinda
is, by this I mean
that a synthesizer
can make mistakes
that humans cannot
possibly do and as a
consequence can't
possibly recognize.
An example of this
is that after so
many years of
working with it I
have learned to hear
a foreman that's
moving too rapidly,
but most people
cannot hear it. This
is because to make
life easy we try to
lead nor stuff
that's not important
in our language,
such as the nasal
lifestyles in French
or the retro flex
ours in American
English which is
Sheehan have a
heckuva time
hearing.
<div>
<pre>
_______________________________________________
DECtalk mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:DECtalk@bluegrasspals.com">DECtalk@bluegrasspals.com</a><span>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk">http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk</a>
</span></pre>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<div>-- <br>
Sent via
Thunderbird.</div>
</div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
DECtalk mailing list<br>
<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:DECtalk@bluegrasspals.com">DECtalk@bluegrasspals.com</a><br>
<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk">http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre>
_______________________________________________
DECtalk mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:DECtalk@bluegrasspals.com">DECtalk@bluegrasspals.com</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk">http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<div>-- <br>
Sent via Thunderbird.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
DECtalk mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:DECtalk@bluegrasspals.com">DECtalk@bluegrasspals.com</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk">http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
DECtalk mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:DECtalk@bluegrasspals.com">DECtalk@bluegrasspals.com</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk">http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
Ed, good mighty lord, you're doing exelent
dude. <br>
<pre>
_______________________________________________
DECtalk mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:DECtalk@bluegrasspals.com">DECtalk@bluegrasspals.com</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk">http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<div>-- <br>
Sent via Thunderbird.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
DECtalk mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:DECtalk@bluegrasspals.com">DECtalk@bluegrasspals.com</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk">http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<pre wrap="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
_______________________________________________
DECtalk mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:DECtalk@bluegrasspals.com">DECtalk@bluegrasspals.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk">http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
Sent via Thunderbird.</div>
</body>
</html>