3 ms·
> I feel like this is a huge unnecessary roadblock holding back this kind of technology. There are speech synthesis markup languages, like SSML. And targeting
by riceart 4y ago
> I feel like this is a huge unnecessary roadblock holding back this kind of technology.
There are speech synthesis markup languages, like SSML.
And targeting even lower level has always been possible with commercial speech engines.
Think about how tedious and time consuming it is to mark up a large amount of copy? Unless we’re talking about little hints here and there (which is also doable) it rapidly becomes more cost effective to just pay for voice talent. For this stuff to be appealing it really must be close to fire and forget.
- feoren 4y agoI think there are two "sweet spots" here. The first is being able to correct a few things that sound off, as another poster pointed out. "Hey, that's not actually how you pronounce 'synecdoche', it should be 'sɪˈnɛk.doʊ.k'." Or "Less emphasis on the first word, more on the second". Little corrections like that. I imagine a two-stage process where the first generates 'best guess' SSML (or whatever markup) based on the text. Then the content creator can modify it as necessary before it goes into the second step of actual voice synthesis. The second sweet spot is when your text is dynamically generated. Marking up the entire copy might be a lot of work for pre-written text, but it's a great option for dynamically generated text.