[DECtalk] DECtalk TTS licensing

Karen Lewellen klewellen at shellworld.net
Mon Aug 30 14:30:44 EDT 2021


Some interesting history behind that to be sure.
Still, I used Hawking as an example.
When i went to work for Xerox in the early 90's one explanation for the 
variety and quality of dectalk for communication was the number of men 
women  and children who used the tools  after losing their ability to 
speak.
The importance to those I encountered of being heard clearly was hard to 
articulate.
those behind Hawking's voice, updated over the years, reference dectalk as 
part of their programming.
In the end, what is more individually significant, getting the job done as 
you define that experience with dignity, or the code under the hood?
I respect your personal choices.  still, I have countless experiences of 
people  who have say only heard standard speech in Linux,  being 
absolutely blown away when they here my  Dectalk setup.

  Karen



On Mon, 30 Aug 2021, Jayson Smith wrote:

> Hi,
> Slight correction. Stephen Hawking's voice sounded very much like DECtalk but 
> it wasn't, although I don't know how much of the code was based on it. His 
> speech synthesizer was a device called the CallText 5010 by a company called 
> Speech Plus, manufactured if I recall correctly in 1986.
>
> Jayson
>
> On 8/30/2021 12:32 PM, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>>  speaking personally?
>>  Yes I do believe a set of voices, clear easy to understand voices should
>>  apply to everything I do with my computer...after all one does not get a
>>  different set of ears or a brain to read email, research the net, shop,
>>  read a book.
>>  Nor does one get a different set of eyes for a different task.
>>  the *major* problem with  your method for the end user is that quality
>>  and consistency  across activity, having to configure things over and
>>  over again leads to poor performance.
>>  with my  dectalk talk, I can choose from 9 voices, one for the main stuff
>>  and one for alerts, and just. get. to. work.
>>  My hands stay on the  keyboard, and i know that the voices will provide
>>  consistent information no matter what I am doing, like the human body
>>  actually  works.
>>  I say please give this gift back to end users who are not programmers, and
>>  who   just want to  have  base line quality and consistency.
>>  ..and communication.  after all there is a reason why dectalk remained
>>  the synthesis for Stephen Hawking.
>>  Being understood as well as flawless understanding.
>> 
>>
>>  On Mon, 30 Aug 2021, Don wrote:
>> 
>> >  On 8/30/2021 6:06 AM, Devin Prater wrote:
>> > >   I mean, there is ESpeak.
>> > 
>> >  There are *lots* of (FOSS/exposed) synthesizers out there,
>> >  if you are looking to incorporate one into a product (and
>> >  likely need to work with sources)!
>> > 
>> >  It's an ancient technology that has been replicated by many
>> >  people in many different ways over the past 4 decades (longer
>> >  if you want to look at cruder synthesis technologies).  You
>> >  just have to decide what features you want *in* the synthesizer
>> >  and what resources you have to devote to it.
>> > 
>> >  ["Making noises" that sound like bits of speech is relatively easy]
>> > 
>> >  DECtalk made sense in the 80's -- when resources were scarce
>> >  and the synthesizer had to be a "bag" that was bolted onto
>> >  an existing product/system.  It was a "one-size-fits-all",
>> >  standalone solution to "converting text into speech".  But,
>> >  *it* had no idea what purpose it was serving in any particular
>> >  application.  So, it could never adjust its approach to
>> >  synthesis to match the expectations made of it.
>> > 
>> >  Nowadays, one would *integrate* the synthesizer into the
>> >  product/system to improve performance, intelligibility, etc.
>> > 
>> >  Do you really think ONE set of synthesis rules should apply to:
>> >  - reading your email
>> >  - reading a URL
>> >  - reading a password
>> >  - reading a web page
>> >  - reading a novel
>> >  - reading a child's book
>> >  - reading stock tickers/quotes
>> >  - reading picture captions
>> > 
>> >  A synthesizer should understand context; HOW it is being used
>> >  AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME.  If you push that responsibility into
>> >  the application that is driving the synthesizer, then much
>> >  of the value of the "TTS as black box" disappears -- you're
>> >  doing the work *for* it!
>> > 
>> >  Why not just implement a "LETTER-to-speech" synthesizer?  And,
>> >  *spell* everything, out loud (Ans:  because, while it could
>> >  TRULY be "one-size-fits-all" -- because it pushes all of the
>> >  real work into the listener's brain -- it would be incredibly
>> >  unuseful)
>> >  _______________________________________________
>> >  Dectalk mailing list
>> >  Dectalk at bluegrasspals.com
>> >  https://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk
>> > 
>> > 
>> >
>>  _______________________________________________
>>  Dectalk mailing list
>>  Dectalk at bluegrasspals.com
>>  https://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk
>> 
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dectalk mailing list
> Dectalk at bluegrasspals.com
> https://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk
>
>


More information about the Dectalk mailing list