Re: I take it there have been no improvements to the flawed espeak ng in 2017.4?


Ervin, Glenn
 

For me, it’s not that the eSpeak voices aren’t clear, or intelligible, it’s more that they sound too robotic, even with the settings set different.

To me, all variations of eSpeak have a mechanical tone to them, not smooth like Eloquence, which although does still sound synthetic, just is less, well, mechanical sounding.

However, I would select eSpeak over the more human-sounding voices if there was no Eloquence.

Glenn

 

From: nvda@nvda.groups.io [mailto:nvda@nvda.groups.io] On Behalf Of Rosemarie Chavarria
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2018 12:08 AM
To: nvda@nvda.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nvda] I take it there have been no improvements to the flawed espeak ng in 2017.4?

 

I'm using the American voice and it's great. I'm using the Max varient and I think he's the clearest of all the voices. The female 5 voice is pretty clear too.

 

 

 

From: nvda@nvda.groups.io [mailto:nvda@nvda.groups.io] On Behalf Of Sarah k Alawami
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2018 8:30 PM
To: nvda@nvda.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nvda] I take it there have been no improvements to the flawed espeak ng in 2017.4?

 

I use the  american variant for espeak. It is the best one out there, I think it is the klat one I use. That sounds like chocolate to my ear.

 

On Mar 26, 2018, at 4:03 PM, Sharni-Lee Ward <sharni-lee.ward@...> wrote:

 

I've tried other synths in the past, and know their issues from sometimes painful experience. Some of the Speech Platform voices cannot even pronounce the "n" in my name and mispronounce so many other things that it's honestly too frustrating to work with them at all. The Vocaliser voices I've tried are equally frustrating. If I somehow get them to say the word correctly, they don't stress the right syllables and I have no idea how to change that behaviour.

 

I may consider buying the legal Eloquence addon if it is as good as you say, but that will have to be at a time when my finances are not so tight.

 

On 27/03/2018 8:42 AM, Gene wrote:

You don’t know how the Eloquence synthesizer would work with the dictionary you already have.  Your generalization about other synthesizers is just that, a generalization.  You don't know if it applies to Eloquence.

 

Gene

----- Original Message -----

Sent: Monday, March 26, 2018 3:30 PM

Subject: Re: [nvda] I take it there have been no improvements to the flawed espeak ng in 2017.4?

 

I will add that one of my favourite features to work with in NVDA is the
Speech Dictionary. Espeak might have some issues out of the box, but it
is quite receptive to alternative pronunciations via the Speech
Dictionary, and I have made liberal use of it. Other synths are more
annoying to work with on that score.


On 27/03/2018 2:16 AM, Ervin, Glenn wrote:
> I would never use the "human sounding" voices for using the computer, however, for reading long articles, or a short book, I would not want to use something like Eloquence, or heaven's sake, not eSpeak.
> The human-sounding voices are good for strictly listening, where there is little or no keyboard input.
> Glenn
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nvda@nvda.groups.io [mailto:nvda@nvda.groups.io] On Behalf Of Rob Hudson
> Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2018 1:12 PM
> To: nvda@nvda.groups.io
> Subject: Re: [nvda] I take it there have been no improvements to the flawed espeak ng in 2017.4?
>
> Lino Morales <linomorales001@...> wrote:
>> This is what talking books are for. Regardless of what synth I use. You realize bla hearing a book ready by a speech synth would be? Boring. It would put me to sleep.
>
> But not all books are made into audio books. In fact, the vast majority are not. And if you're into online fiction, synth reading is the only game in town.
>
>
>
>
>
>


 

 

Join nvda@nvda.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.