John Rowland wrote:
Mizter T wrote:
On 27 Nov, 20:46, "tim \(not at home\)"
wrote:
"Boltar" wrote in message

What I don't understand is why companies bother using recordings
when speech synthesizers cost buttons, are about the size of one
and can say anything you want - you don't have to pay some actor to
record new phrases if things change , you just type it in. Even in
the 70s Texas Instruments could do a 1 chip version and they sound
a lot better these days.

because better is still crap

Blunt, to the point and spot on.

Crap at passing the Turing Test, but not crap at being understood,
which is its purpose. Since Emma can't say Highgate properly, and
obviously belongs to a certain class, I would think a synthesised
voice would be superior, so long as it's programmed with the correct
phonemes (and isn't allowed to say Green-witch or War-wick).

What does "obviously belongs to a certain class" mean? Emma is a Mancunian
which you can tell from her natural voice, but as a good actress will adopt
whatever accent and pronunciation her client wants. On her website she used
to tell of the various ways of pronouncing Marylebone that she had to do,
with LU making the final choice.

Is it in fact Emma on the Northern Line? Her website says she's on "pretty
much everything except the Jubilee Line, the Northern Line and Docklands
Light Railway" (though the PA on the Piccadilly doesn't sound like her).
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)