From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from scanmail4.cableone.net ([24.116.0.124]) by speech.braille.uwo.ca with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18PBjY-0001X8-00 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 20:13:48 -0500 Received: from scanmail4.cableone.net ([10.116.0.124]) by scanmail4.cableone.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.687.68); Thu, 19 Dec 2002 18:12:51 -0700 Received: from scanmail4.cableone.net [24.116.0.124] by scanmail4.cableone.net (SMTPD32-7.04) id AE92EF68013E; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 18:12:50 -0700 Received: from default (89-89.norcpe.cableone.net [24.116.89.89]) by mail.cableone.net with SMTP (MailShield v2.04 - WIN32 Jul 17 2001 17:12:42); Thu, 19 Dec 2002 18:12:50 -0700 Message-ID: <003401c2a7c5$521810e0$be00a8c0@default> From: "Glenn Ervin" To: References: <20021219024936.GA697@romuald.net.eu.org> Subject: Re: a bit of trivia I found interesting Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 19:15:44 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 X-SMTP-HELO: default X-SMTP-MAIL-FROM: GlennErvin@cableone.net X-SMTP-PEER-INFO: 89-89.norcpe.cableone.net [24.116.89.89] Sender: speakup-admin@braille.uwo.ca Errors-To: speakup-admin@braille.uwo.ca X-BeenThere: speakup@braille.uwo.ca X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: speakup@braille.uwo.ca X-Reply-To: "Glenn Ervin" List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: I wish someone would create a Linux kernel for the BNS, as I do not like its OS too much, and there are no drivers for external devices other than what FS sells, like their over priced disk drives. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gregory Nowak" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 8:49 PM Subject: Re: a bit of trivia I found interesting Actually, I personally think that the accent sounds like crap, and the bns sounds wonderful. Whenever I listen to the accent, I can't help the notion that it is better suited for speaking French instead of English. I have known for a while that the bns used the si 263 chip. I had also suspected that the accent used the same speech chip as the bns because of how they both sounded on head phones, but wasn't absolutely sure. What I think makes the difference is how the chip is controlled by the software. Greg On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 07:55:53PM -0600, Adam Myrow wrote: > I was just looking through files on my computer and stumbled over a README > file from an old shareware DOS screen reader called TinyTalk. The part > that I found interesting is that it listed several synthesizers that > existed around 1994 and what chipset they used. It mentioned that the > Braille 'N Speak line as well as the Accent line both use a chip called > the SSI263. I found this interesting because the Braille 'N Speak sounds > like crap, has terrible pronunciation, and practically no inflection. > The Accent still sounds very mechanical, but has a lot more inflection, > and its pronunciation is 10 times better than the Braille 'N Speak line. > Apparently, this chipset wasn't the only piece required to produce speech. > So, anybody know what makes such a radical difference? I know this isn't > directly Linux related, but I figured a lot of the list members have been > using computers for a long time and might know what makes the difference > or where I may find such information. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Speakup mailing list > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup _______________________________________________ Speakup mailing list Speakup@braille.uwo.ca http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup