toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Yeah, it sounds like a Brit trying too hard and failing miserably
to speak with an American accent. And some of the other Espeak
languages are simply awful. Hawaiian is a distorted mess, and I
can't understand why. Very disappointing, was really looking
forward to that one. There are 3 others just as distorted:
Latgalian, Latvian, and Klingon. Oo I didn't know they had
Klingon... But it sucks! It's this nasal distorted thing. OK, some
of the variants aren't like that with them, but very few, and not
ones I like. Cherokee sounds like someone talking with a tube
stuck up their nose. I'm not impressed with Vietnamese either,
none of the 3, but for other reasons, indistinct consonants, some
consonants don't seem to sound like they should at all. I sort of
tried to learn it in 2012. I don't speak Arabic, but I've picked
up some words watching Youtube videos, I can't stand ESpeak's
Arabic voice for reading song titles and Youtube videos, so I use
Persian instead. The glottal stops and, I think it's the q, aren't
handled well at all IMHO. Aramaic doesn't seem to be very good
either, when I listen to the singer say the song title it sounds
nothing like what comes out of ESpeak. I use the different ESpeak
languages to help me figure out and remember how to pronounce
artists and song titles for my Internet radio show in a slew of
languages. Most of the voices are reasonable, for my purposes
anyway, but some of the voices are just useless.
On 7/22/2022 10:13 AM, Devin Prater
The slightly funny thing is that even today, the
American English version of ESpeak sounds a bit British still.
On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 10:00
AM Gene <gsasner@...
I should add that my comments refer to the American
English implementation. I can't comment on Eloquence for
I can say that I've heard the British English
implementation of Eloquence and it is significantly inferior
to the American implementation. It sounds as though it is
someone trying to imitate a British accent and I suspect
that it was developed by American English speakers, which
accounts for its imitation quality.
On 7/22/2022 9:53 AM, Gene wrote:
That may account for its initial
popularity but it doesn't account for its continued
popularity when so many other synthesizers are available.
It is popular because it does what the most people want it
to do the best. It is responsive, pronounces more words
than other synthesizers I've tried correctly out of the
box, allows for rapid listening while keeping speech more
intelligible than other synthesizers I've tried and it is
light on computer resources.
I used DeccTalk before there was an Eloquence and, though
it has a more pleasant voice, it is not as easy to listen
to speech rapidly and miss as few words as with Eloquence.
Some people may say that other less human and more
mechanical sounding synthesizers allow faster listening.
I can't say. But if that is true, it is also evidently
true, that one reason Eloquence is so popular is that it
allows a good compromise between the sound of the voice
and rapid speech intelligibility. I suspect a lot of
users don't want to use a mechanical sounding synthesizer
to get faster reading speed.
On 7/22/2022 9:43 AM, Josh Kennedy wrote:
I also find it interesting that
the eloquence voice many people like that is also now on
iPhone is now 27 or so years old already. and I think
the only reason it became so popular is that Jaws
started implementing it and encouraging its use back in
early to mid 1996. Jaws 3.2 was the first Jaws for
windows version to have eloquence. I got in on cd in the
mail in July of 1996 and I thought it was amazing that
you just needed a computer with a sound card and no
external speech box plugged into the computer. So then
eloquence took over, decTalk and Keynote gold software
went away because I think eloquence was free with jaws
while decTalk software and Keynote were paid products.
And eloquence I guess sounded better than both of