[DECtalk] Intelligibility/Listenability criteria

[Damien Garwood]

Hi Josh,
Oh I'm well aware of that. I'm just referring to it as an example of a 
really good synth.
Cheers,
Damien.

On 21/07/2019 06:36 pm, Josh Kennedy wrote:
> Unfortunately, I think keynote gold is dead. Short of running it in an 
> old dos or windows95 emulator, in 15 minute demo mode, I don’t think 
> keynote gold will be returning any time soon.
> 
> Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for 
> Windows 10
> 
> *From: *Damien Garwood <mailto:damien at daygar.plus.com>
> *Sent: *Sunday, July 21, 2019 04:18
> *To: *dectalk at bluegrasspals.com <mailto:dectalk at bluegrasspals.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [DECtalk] Intelligibility/Listenability criteria
> 
> Hi Don,
> 
> Here are my criteria:
> 
> 1. Understandability
> 
> As a screen reader user who has to listen to speech synthesis on a
> 
> constant basis while using a computer, understandability is first and
> 
> foremost. If the synthesiser can't be understood, then you're not going
> 
> to get the feedback you need. In my opinion, ESpeak ticks every box,
> 
> except this, so I can't use it.
> 
> 2. Responsiveness. Again, because the speech is reading everything for
> 
> me, I don't want a synthesiser that acts sluggishly with any kind of
> 
> latency, whether that be a second, or 50 milliseconds, whether through
> 
> lack of performance optimisation or through audio silence. When I press
> 
> a key, I want instant feedback. This automatically rules out most
> 
> natural-sounding synthesisers.
> 
> 3. Accuracy: It needs to be able to read text accurately for the
> 
> language it is designed for. It's not enough simply to have a phonetics
> 
> dictionary, but it also needs to be able to distinguish between words
> 
> (Present noun versus present verb, for instance).
> 
> 4. Flexibility: The voice timbres should be available to the user, and
> 
> for the most part should adjust smoothly to the change. This is
> 
> important if a user has specialist needs and cannot use the synth in its
> 
> default state. Speed and pitch are definitely a must. Again, this rules
> 
> out natural synths, since due to the nature of recorded samples they
> 
> start to begin to sound unnatural if you attempt to adjust the speed and
> 
> pitch. The bigger the change, the more unnatural.
> 
> Like Jason, I also prefer formant synths. My favourite by far is
> 
> Keynote, which to me is the most understandable, but I do love DECTalk
> 
> for its flexibility. I also like Eloquence and the synthetic version of
> 
> Orpheus.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Damien.
> 
> On 21/07/2019 05:53 am, Don wrote:
> 
>  > Hi,
> 
>  >
> 
>  > Perhaps a bit off-topic for this list... if so, my apologies.
> 
>  >
> 
>  > I'm looking for opinions as to how one evaluates the "effectiveness"
> 
>  > of a particular synthesizer.  Said another way, how one decides that
> 
>  > synthesizer A is "better" than synthesizer B.  Ideally, criteria that
> 
>  > would allow you to rank a set of them!
> 
>  >
> 
>  > I've been auditioning various synthesis devices and techniques
> 
>  > to try to come to my own conclusions on this.  Then, hopefully,
> 
>  > work backwards to come up with some objective criteria by which
> 
>  > they could each be "scored" (even if that was done using bogus
> 
>  > rating units).
> 
>  >
> 
>  > "Intelligibility" is, of course, the prime issue.  "Listenability"
> 
>  > coming into play for any prolonged use.  Finally, "naturalness"
> 
>  > when it comes to extended use.
> 
>  >
> 
>  > For example, the old Votrax units were intelligible -- once you
> 
>  > learned their "accent".  But, listenability was rather poor... you
> 
>  > quickly developed ear fatigue.  And, the idea of naturalness was
> 
>  > never even considered!
> 
>  >
> 
>  > With gobs of resources (hardware, software, processing power), you
> 
>  > can achieve quite acceptable results.  This seems to be the approach
> 
>  > most "modern" synthesizers -- and techniques -- adopt.  The real problem
> 
>  > lies with limited resources attempting to handle unconstrained input.
> 
>  > (If you know what you're going to be asked to speak, it's really easy to
> 
>  > come up with a good presentation!)
> 
>  >
> 
>  > Limiting the user's exposure to the synthetic voice can reduce ear 
> fatigue.
> 
>  > So, dealing with it for 10 minutes might be tolerable while 2 hours
> 
>  > would be torture.
> 
>  >
> 
>  > But, having to face the prospect of completely unconstrained input can
> 
>  > tax even that brief usage.  "Dr. Jones' car -- bearing the license plate
> 
>  > FTDKTR -- has been parked in front of his house on Jones Dr. since 12:34A
> 
>  > this morning when his Polish butler finished polishing it."  Imagine you
> 
>  > have no other way of inspecting the input text...
> 
>  >
> 
>  > So, what makes a synthesizer "tolerable" or "intolerable"?  What is the
> 
>  > "threshold of pain" when it comes to tolerating an underperforming
> 
>  > synthesizer?
> 
>  > _______________________________________________
> 
>  > Dectalk mailing list
> 
>  > Dectalk at bluegrasspals.com
> 
>  > http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk
> 
>  >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> Dectalk mailing list
> 
> Dectalk at bluegrasspals.com
> 
> http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Dectalk mailing list
> Dectalk at bluegrasspals.com
> http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk
>