Comments on: Speech Recognition You Can Count On–For Under $250

By: mary ann

mary ann — Sat, 03 Nov 2007 19:53:59 +0000

Can more than one person use the same voice recog. and is is compatible with programs like ShortHand?

By: Matthew Cornell

Matthew Cornell — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 13:29:53 +0000

Thanks for the article. I read a lot of books (part of a new profession) and I needed a way to rapidly convert to text. I bought an Olympus WS-300M Digital Recorder (which I love) and a copy of Dragon. I worked hard to use it, but ultimately gave up on it [1]. Now I use the best voice recognition system ever built [2]. I estimate I could get about 15-20 files done for $250. It would have been cheaper in the long run to do this via machine, but my conclusion is - at this time - humans do it better and easier (for me). My 2c! [1] Matt's Idea Blog: Notes on using a digital voice recorder for taking reading notes [2] Matt's Idea Blog: The 4-hour workweek applied: How I spent $100, saved hours, and boosted my reading workflow

By: Joel Goldstick

Joel Goldstick — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 19:31:28 +0000

My connection to speech recognitions started with Milton-Bradley — the old school game maker (chutes and ladders, battleship). In the late 70s and early 80s they got into electronic toys (Simon and some others). They were very interested for a short time in speech recognition — single words, not continuous — to make toys that you could give verbal commands.

I next went to Verbex which had just been purchased by Exxon where I met the Bakers. I don’t think Verbex lasted long, and I didn’t last long there either. I believe the Bakers — can’t remember first names — a very ‘geeky’ couple and very serious about voice recognition, left Verbex to start Dragon systems. Not having worked in that field since then, I noticed your post, and it brought back that little snippet of my personal work history.

Speech recognition is one of those fields that was always just around the corner from being great (bubble memory!). It sounds like its working pretty well now.

By: Dave

Dave — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 17:54:10 +0000

I really like dragon naturally speaking, but do know that ver. 9 requires a web connection to validate and use.

By: share.websitemagazine.com

share.websitemagazine.com — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 17:00:59 +0000

Speech Recognition You Can Count On

Speech recognition has been positioned as the holy grail of computing for decades, but many people have found the off-the-shelf software solutions too prone to inaccuracies.

By: Speech Recognition, Cheap and Easy « Post Process

Speech Recognition, Cheap and Easy « Post Process — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 03:22:05 +0000

[...] by rjbiii on October 3rd, 2007 Web Worker Daily gives us the scoop: Speech recognition has been positioned as the holy grail of computing for decades, but many people [...]

By: sfberglund

sfberglund — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 01:51:10 +0000

One day not too far away, speech recognition conversion of audio files will be faster than real time because we are talking about digital data here.

Within 12 months, Dr. Rob A. Rutenbar, professor of electrical and computer engineering at Carnegie Mellon University believes he will have a system that can recognise 5,000 to 10,000 words in five to 10 times faster than real time… cool!

We have an interesting and related product as well – the Acappella Conference Audio Recorder at http://www.acappella.com.au

By: Samuel Dean

Samuel Dean — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 01:28:11 +0000

No, you can’t actually speed up the voice-to-text transcription, and you woudn’t want to because you would introduce more inaccuracies. But yes you can send the audio directly to the computer for transcription.

Sam

By: Andrew Flusche

Andrew Flusche — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 23:54:17 +0000

as easy as hitting Record and then sending your audio directly to text in a word processor.

My big question is whether or not the audio goes from the recorder to text in real time. Can you speed it up?