Those "herky-jerky" TTS systems are considered "low-end". They really
do suck.
You can by "high end" TTS systems for a lot of money, and I think with
a little work there could be an open source "high end" engine as well.
I think somebody experimented in using neural networking to improve
TTS (to try to get it to mimic a speech sample of a human), and the
result was reasonably natural sounding.
Mark
On 25/04/05, Andrew Lih <andrew.lih(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/26/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
And I should add, why do we need a spoken
Wikipedia? Wouldn't it be
better to adapt a TTS engine to get articles from Wikipedia, and read
them? Remember, TTS engines can be made for any language, and it's
becoming increasingly easy to make them even if you're not an expert.
Mark, not sure if you're wondering about the whole idea of audible
aritcles, or just the human-centered approach to it.
If you find a TTS system that is acceptably good (Festival, MBROLA,
et al) then feel free to try it and post some samples at
[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia]]. But so far the TTS results
I've heard have been quite unsatisfactory, and the "ear fatigue"
experienced when listening to a herky jerky TTS system doesn't bode
well for long articles. Wikipedia might be a great testbed for a TTS
system. I'd like to see how it does on mixed language articles like
[[Dim sum]].
-User:Fuzheado
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE