Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Voice recognition, dictation into computers

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Voice recognition, dictation into computers

    In the early 1990s, I dabbled with voice recognition with the IBM ViaVoice. I bought this because I am not the world's best typist and I was producing numbers of long reports for various organisations, as well as technical papers. At the time, ViaVoice and a couple of other programs that were available used the discrete technique. This means that each word had to be dictated separately with a pause of about 1/5 of a second between each one. ViaVoice was quite a remarkable program.

    About 1995, I switched to IBM Simply Speaking Golden which allowed one to use continuous speech, without pausing between words. The accuracy was slightly poorer than with ViaVoice because the algorithms could not always separate the words correctly. However, its speed and ease of use were a lot better.
    A few years later, IBM dropped many of its software products to concentrate on its core business and voice recognition disappeared from its product list (although I believe that they still give product support on it). I therefore switched to Dragon for PC, produced by Dragon Systems. I can't remember which version I started with, possibly 5 or 6. It was not as accurate as the IBM system but still quite good.

    Disaster struck me in 2002, in that I had a couple of small strokes which left my right hand considerably less mobile (and it still is less mobile). This made the use of keyboards very difficult and I relied on Dragon NaturallySpeaking, as it had become, for much of my general computer use, including on this forum.Upgrades in the software were rather sporadic in quality at this time, because they initially sold the company to a Belgian outfit who in turn sold it to another company who sold it to a subsidiary of Nuance. I went through the various upgrades, each with improved results as far as voice recognition was concerned, but Nuance made installation rather user unfriendly and their support was very poor (and still is). The problem started with version 11 which was quite unstable. Version 11.5 was not much better but version 12 was a very considerable improvement in stability and accuracy.

    Nuance have just brought out Dragon NaturallySpeaking 13 which I now have installed. The typical Nuance problems of installation and setting up remain but once it has been set up, this version is really fantastic. It can keep up with me speaking rapidly and the accuracy is very close to 100% (of course, if I stumble in my speech, it can produce bizarre results). I would say this software is now fully mature and I can now recommend it. This post has been entirely dictated with DNS 13 and I have made no corrections except in two places where my original dictation was unclear. The makers claim that it will work straight from the box; I cannot confirm this because I upgraded my personal profile from DNS 12.5 to DNS 13.

    I have no vested interest in Dragon NaturallySpeaking or Nuance and am a very satisfied user of DNS, but I detest Nuance!
    Brian (the devil incarnate)

  • #2
    Do they still insist on using it with their own microphones? I recently had to look at the compatibility of our web apps with voice control, screen readers etc, and couldn't get trial version of the speech recognition software because of that.

    Glad to hear the technology has finally matured, after only 20+ years !
    FT.

    Comment


    • #3
      I have no problem with Google for basic text entry and voice commands in Android <shrug>

      Otherwise, keyboards are still it.
      Dr. Mordrid
      ----------------------------
      An elephant is a mouse built to government specifications.

      I carry a gun because I can't throw a rock 1,250 fps

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Fat Tone View Post
        Do they still insist on using it with their own microphones? I recently had to look at the compatibility of our web apps with voice control, screen readers etc, and couldn't get trial version of the speech recognition software because of that.

        Glad to hear the technology has finally matured, after only 20+ years !
        They never insisted on using their own microphones, although they recommended them. In actual fact the Andrea microphones that were supplied in the box were rubbish! In the past, any decent microphone with a good sound card worked fine. Today, any good USB microphone or headset works fine, provided that it is noise cancelling. I use a Logitech off-the-shelf USB microphone without any problems.
        Brian (the devil incarnate)

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Dr Mordrid View Post

          Otherwise, keyboards are still it.
          Philistine and Luddite! :-)
          Brian (the devil incarnate)

          Comment


          • #6
            the voice recognition built into win7 (and earlier/later ones) was quite good as far as I remember - ever gave that a try?
            W
            "Perhaps they communicate by changing colour? Like those sea creatures .."
            "Lobsters?"
            "Really? I didn't know they did that."
            "Oh yes, red means help!"

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Wulfman View Post
              the voice recognition built into win7 (and earlier/later ones) was quite good as far as I remember - ever gave that a try?
              W
              As for the Windows voice recognition, I found this comparison on another forum, written by a very experienced user:

              WSR (Windows speech recognition) is faster than Dragon 13 but it can’t compete with
              Dragon’s features, flexibility, Vocabulary Builder, Vocabulary Editor, transcription
              capabilities, and most importantly, DNS Ver. 13’s accuracy. Anyone who is serious
              about speech recognition should consider using Dragon 13, because comparing WSR to
              Dragon 13 would be equivalent to comparing WordPad to Microsoft Word.
              My guess is that this user has the Dragon speed versus accuracy slider set to maximum accuracy. I have mine set to 75% accuracy and it will follow my gabbling a read text as fast as I can with virtually 100% accuracy. The default position of the slider is 50-50. I haven't tried it at less than that because I have no need of extra speed. It is some time since I tried WSR which left me underwhelmed as far as accuracy is concerned.
              Brian (the devil incarnate)

              Comment

              Working...
              X