Mark, the answer is still no. Synthesizers may be reasonable
alternatives for listening to textbooks and manuals where the goal is
information. They are not acceptable (to me) for pleasure reading for
the simple reason that they seriously limit the pleasure.
Tim Cranmer
On Fri, 19 Jan 1996, Mark J. Senk WB3CAI wrote:
> I think you might have missed the point. Of course a human who is a
> professional reader will "out perform" a speech synthesizer any day. I
> imagine that tailor made clothing would be more comfortable than off the
> shelf items as well.
> The question is could we use access to, say, ten times as many books, if
> the cost of a computer reading system was 10 per cent of the human
> reader?
>
> How many cities should have a newspaper like the one in Baltimore?
> Doesn't the use of speech synthesizers reduce dependence on human
> readers?
> -- Mark
>
>
> On Thu, 18 Jan 1996, Mike Freeman wrote:
>
> > David Andrews writes:
> > >
> > > I would be interested in digital data some day, but if I am going to
> > > listen to an audio medium, I would rather have a human voice. NLS has
> > > some excellent readers and some of the pleasure of reading is listening
> > > to these women and men. I hear enough of "Perfect Paul" and the like.
> > >
> > I most emphatically agree. Although I am perfectly willing to listen to
> > "perfect Paul" read documents available electronically, if I am going to
> > send for a library book, I do not wish to give up the wonderful reading
> > performances which we, the blind, are fortunate to have been blessed with
> > over the past sixty years.
> >
> > Mike Freeman
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 02 2012 - 01:30:03 PST