100 speakers of Punjabi Telephony Speech

Speech captured over a real telephony path — a genuine call through the network, not studio audio downsampled afterwards to imitate one.

Scenario-driven calls between a caller and an agent or IVR flow, each leg recorded separately, across a deliberate spread of handsets and network conditions.

Yield at this style: 50–60% of recorded time is accepted. Dropped calls, network artefacts beyond tolerance and unusable legs are discarded. Real network conditions are the point of the style and also its main cost.

• Call scenarios drawn from real contact-centre intents: balance enquiry, complaint, booking change, escalation
• IVR flows scripted with deliberate mis-entry and barge-in paths, since those are where deployed systems fail
• Handset spread specified up front — low-end Android, feature phone, landline — because handset variance is a real acoustic axis
• Background conditions varied on purpose: street, vehicle, indoor, since real callers are rarely in quiet rooms
• Built against Punjabi specifically: Punjabi is tonal: high, low and level tones distinguish words, and tone is not marked in Gurmukhi orthography
• Code-mixing handled explicitly rather than edited out — Punjabi speech mixes Hindi and English freely, with strong diaspora influence in urban registers.

Three to four weeks, almost entirely determined by how narrow the screening criteria are.

A single delivery with the full demographic report, since the cohort report is the point of a build this size.

Cover all three historic regions (Majha, Malwa, Doaba); tone realisation differs measurably between them.

At 100 speakers the cohort is deliberately simplified: two or three dialect groups rather than the full spread, with quotas enforced in aggregate. A build this size cannot support per-cell targets and should not claim to.

Recruitment must be stratified by handset and carrier as well as by dialect, which adds a screening axis the other styles do not have.

• Punjabi is tonal: high, low and level tones distinguish words, and tone is not marked in Gurmukhi orthography
• Punjabi speech mixes Hindi and English freely, with strong diaspora influence in urban registers.
• Tonal variation is essentially unmodelled in public Punjabi data, and Malwai/Doabi rural speech is scarce.

• Codec and sample rate verified per file, rejecting any studio audio that has been downsampled to fake a telephony path
• Echo and double-talk checked on both legs
• DTMF events verified against the call log
• Level normalisation applied per leg, since handset output levels vary far more than studio microphones do
• Tone is unrepresented in text, so pronunciation lexicons must be built from audio, not from spelling
• Shahmukhi vs Gurmukhi script decisions must be fixed per project

100% content QA, plus per-speaker demographic verification against the screening record.

• Studio audio downsampled to 8 kHz and passed off as telephony, which has none of the codec or packet-loss characteristics that matter
• Echo and double-talk that make the agent leg unusable
• Carrier and handset monoculture, producing a corpus that only represents one acoustic path
• Over-clean recordings from participants who move somewhere quiet to take the call, defeating the purpose

Cost at this band is driven by: Screening narrowness dominates; the recording itself is a minor cost at this size.

• Narrow criteria can make a cohort unrecruitable at any price, which is exactly what this band exists to find out
• 100 speakers cannot support per-dialect evaluation — treat the results as directional
• Punjabi carries 5 recognised varieties across Punjab, Haryana, Delhi, so the quota matrix is wider than the headline volume suggests
• Tonal variation is essentially unmodelled in public Punjabi data, and Malwai/Doabi rural speech is scarce.

• WAV audio to your naming convention, with the per-file manifest
• Verbatim Gurmukhi transcripts with utterance-level timestamps
• Call metadata: duration, codec, handset class, carrier, packet-loss events
• Intent label per call and per turn
• DTMF and hold, transfer and barge-in events
• Agent and caller leg identifiers
• Per-speaker metadata: age band, gender, region, dialect, education band
• Consent records mapped to speaker IDs
• QA report with pass rates, rejection reasons and agreement statistics
• Speaker-disjoint train / dev / test splits on request

• Contact-centre and IVR ASR
• Voice bots operating over the phone network
• Intent classification on narrowband audio
• Robustness to codec and packet loss

Narrowband telephony audio is the wrong input for TTS or any wideband model — the frequency content simply is not there. Use it for models that will be deployed on a phone line and nothing else.