Re: Networking and software speech with Speakup
Hi Kenny,
I'm snipping heavily as I've resolved the networking stuff. THX to everyone
taking part.
Kenny Hitt wrote:
software speech requires a working sound card and other programs to
work. During the initial install, a hardware synth is the only way
to go.
I see what you mean. That is software speech would require perfect
auto-detection of most sound cards as well as setting the channel gains
right, and so on.
A crazy idea, howabout using the PC speaker?
I've read you have to nastily hook into some timer and know from experience
that the sound quality is far from good. Stil, could this really work?
Playing audio through the beeper would theoretically work pretty much on all
PCs apart from certain kinds of laptops. I remember the 1.0 version of the
Finnish speech synth Mikropuhe used this method to speak through the beeper
before sound cards were common in DOS at all. Some games, like Pinball
Dreams, were even able to mix Amiga MOD files through the infernal speaker,
which was highly cool back then.
Speaking of modern sound cards, would all AC97 cards work with a universal
driver in Linux? HOwabout a generic driver for all Sound Blaster compatibles
and clones?
Flite is probably more responsive than festival, but festival has better
voices.
Umm, does Flight use LoFi Festival voices? I mean, the default Flight voice
sounds a lot like Festival to me at least, only its a bit shakier, almost
sad sounding, and a bit more LoFi, too.
I've never used any DOS screen readres as I said earlier, so I cannot really
comment on Vocalize vs ASAP.
Screader doesn't seem to be getting any development, so I
haven't tried it.
I tried compiling from sources in a RedHat system some time back. ANd it
looks as though it was written in ancient C, I mean K&R first edition
C-style, or something.
PS:
Should we change the subject line again?
--
With kind regards Veli-Pekka Tätilä (vtatila@mail.student.oulu.fi)
Accessibility, game music, synthesizers and more:
http://www.student.oulu.fi/~vtatila
Reply to: