Re: Echo II sound cards

[mjmahon@aol.com (Michael J. Mahon)]

Ben Yates replied:

>mjmahon@aol.com (Michael J. Mahon) wrote in message
>news:<20040329212800.15247.00000279@mb-m04.aol.com>...
>> Ben Yates replied:
>> 
>> >mjmahon@aol.com (Michael J. Mahon) wrote in message
>> >news:<20040329130730.15684.00000286@mb-m04.aol.com>...
>> >> Ben Yates wrote:
>> 
>> <snip>
>> 
>> >> >I wonder why no one has ever tried to interface a TI speech
>> >> >synthesizer to any other type of system. I have other systems and if I
>> >> >had time I'd love to try it.
>> >> >But still someone would have to write a good text-to-speech system to
>> >> >go beyond the built-in words.

<snip>

>> Echo II cards are also quite readily available and inexpensive, and
>> Apple software and large vocabularies are also readily available.
>
>Wasn't aware of that. But I do wonder if the vocabularies are
>interchangeable. Meaning LPC streams could be interchanged between the
>units?
>Always looking to increase my vocabulary, you understand...

If the same chips are used, the LPC coefficient streams would
be identical.

ISTR that there are hundreds of words available for the Echo.

>[snip]
>
>> BASIC compilers generally make some provision for "attached" machine
>> language programs, and Pascal provides excellent tools for incorporating
>> assembly language code.  I would be surprised if there were not a Pascal
>> "unit" to interface to an Echo card, but if not, it would not be hard to
make
>> for anyone motivated to do so.
>
>Not all BASIC compilers do. You are right about Pascal, but for some
>of us attempting a text-to-speech engine is above our heads.
>Especially when we do not desire unlimited speech in an application,
>but a set of speech words and phrases that are not built-in.
>
>> 
>> It would also be possible to "capture" the LPC streams for desired
>> utterances, if that were preferred, but this approach would also require
>> M/L interface code at run time to pump the streams to the chip.
>
>But that code is much easier than a text-to-speech engine, correct?
>I've done that myself, even in BASIC using POKEs directly to the chip.

Certainly it is easier, depending on the timing and handshake
requirements of the chip.  The code is basically a "paced" move
loop.
 
>> The situation is that speech was never a widely available option on
>> Apple II's--meaning more than 10% of the systems--so it did not
>> achieve "critical mass", and did not get the software support that
>> could have made it more useful.
>> 
>> At one time, TI hoped to have a self-sustaining business in creating
>> new custom "vocabularies" for its synthesizer chip, and so did not
>> promulgate software for allowing others to easily generate the LPC
>> streams.  In retrospect, this was probably a mistake.
>
>Yes. I remember trying to purchase a TI card for a PC around '89. It
>had come out only a couple of years before. It allowed one to create
>LPC speech on this PC card. I didn't even know if it created
>compatible LPC, but TI simply gave me a list of their non-affiliated
>support centers, none of which had a clue!

I'm a little surprised that there are not user-created PC software
packages for creating and managing "vocabularies" for the TI LPC
chips.  There were enough made, and interfaced to computers,
that I would expect nature to take its course, and software to
blossom.

-michael

Check out amazing quality sound for 8-bit Apples on my
Home page:  http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/