Dataset specification · Production cohort
1,000 speakers of Telugu Conversational Speech
A production cohort build of 1,000 speakers of Telugu conversational speech. Generalisation across speakers, which is what actually drives real-world ASR robustness. Two speakers hold an unscripted conversation seeded with a scenario, recorded on separate channels so overlap and turn-taking survive into the delivered files.

- Volume
- 1,000 speakers
- Scale
- Production cohort
- Per speaker
- 20–30 minutes of accepted audio per speaker, in pairs
- Accepted yield
- 55–65% of recorded time is accepted
How Telugu conversational speech is captured
Two speakers hold an unscripted conversation seeded with a scenario, recorded on separate channels so overlap and turn-taking survive into the delivered files.
A 45–60 minute paired session with both speakers on isolated microphones, either in adjacent treated rooms or split-mic in one room with bleed measured and logged.
Yield at this style: 55–65% of recorded time is accepted. Overlap regions, crosstalk bleed and one-sided stretches all cost delivered time. The lowest-yield studio style we run, and priced accordingly.
The specification
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Language | Telugu (te-IN, Telugu) |
| Volume | 1,000 speakers |
| Equivalent | 500 hours at 30 minutes per speaker |
| Speech type | Conversational Speech |
| Per speaker | 20–30 minutes of accepted audio per speaker, in pairs |
| Channels | Two, one per speaker, never mixed down before delivery |
| Channel isolation | Bleed measured per session and logged; sessions over threshold are re-recorded |
| Overlap | Preserved, timestamped and labelled rather than edited out |
| File granularity | Per-channel session WAV plus a turn-level manifest with speaker IDs |
| Dialects | Telangana, Coastal Andhra (Godavari), Rayalaseema, Srikakulam |
| Transcription | Verbatim, native-speaker, second-pass reviewed |

Designing the scenarios for Telugu
- Scenario seeds rather than scripts — a disagreement to resolve, a plan to make, an experience to compare
- Pairing designed deliberately: familiar pairs produce natural interruption, stranger pairs produce polite turn-taking, and you need both
- Scenarios that invite disagreement, because agreeable conversation produces almost no overlap to train on
- Register mixed across pairs so the corpus is not uniformly formal
- Built against Telugu specifically: Vowel-length contrasts are phonemic and short/long confusion changes meaning outright
- Code-mixing handled explicitly rather than edited out — Hyderabad speech mixes Telugu, Urdu/Deccani, Hindi and English. A Telugu dataset for Hyderabad deployment must include Urdu-origin vocabulary.
Running a production cohort Telugu build
Nine to twelve weeks, with recruitment running continuously rather than in a front-loaded phase.
Six to eight batches, speaker-disjoint by construction so held-out speakers are genuinely held out.
Split cohorts explicitly between Telangana and Andhra Pradesh and tag every speaker; models trained without the tag cannot be evaluated per region.
| Parameter | At this volume |
|---|---|
| Cities | Six to eight — Hyderabad, Vijayawada, Visakhapatnam, Warangal, Tirupati |
| Studios | Eight rooms plus two mobile rigs |
| Recruiters | Eight coordinators, one regional manager |
| Audio yield | ~500 hours at 30 minutes per speaker |
| Sessions per day | 45–55 |
| Team | 1 programme lead, 1 regional manager, 8 coordinators, 14 engineers, 25 transcribers, 3 QA leads |
Cohort design
At 1,000 speakers the quota matrix is enforced per cell, not in aggregate. Every dialect, age and gender combination carries its own target and is signed off individually before final acceptance, because an aggregate 50/50 split can hide a cell that was never filled at all.
Effectively doubles recruitment load, since speakers are booked in matched pairs and a single drop-out cancels the whole session. Plan on 20–25% over-recruitment.
| Dimension | Typical split | Why it matters for Telugu |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | 50 / 50 | Pitch range differences change acoustic model behaviour; unbalanced cohorts bias recognition |
| Age | 18-25: 30%, 26-40: 40%, 41-60: 30% | Older speakers retain conservative Telugu forms that younger urban speakers have lost |
| Region | Andhra Pradesh / Telangana / parts of Karnataka and Odisha and others | Dialect spread across 4 recognised varieties |
| Education | Mixed, including below-graduate | Prompt-reading fluency correlates with education and skews prosody |
| Condition | Studio / quiet room / field | Match the noise profile of your deployment |
Telugu-specific considerations
- Vowel-length contrasts are phonemic and short/long confusion changes meaning outright
- Hyderabad speech mixes Telugu, Urdu/Deccani, Hindi and English. A Telugu dataset for Hyderabad deployment must include Urdu-origin vocabulary.
- Coastal Andhra read speech dominates. Telangana rural and Rayalaseema speech is thin, despite Hyderabad being the largest deployment market.
Quality gates for conversational speech
- Channel bleed measured on every session and rejected above the agreed threshold
- Diarisation labels verified against the isolated channels rather than inferred from the mix
- Turn boundaries and overlap regions checked by a native listener
- Speaking-time balance per pair audited, so a dominant speaker does not silently halve the session's value
- Telangana forms normalised to Coastal Andhra standard
- Long/short vowel marking errors under time pressure
100% technical QA, 10% content QA stratified by city and coordinator, with voice-based duplicate detection across the whole cohort.
What goes wrong on conversational speech sessions
- Crosstalk bleed that makes clean per-speaker training targets impossible to recover afterwards
- One speaker dominating, leaving a pair that delivers half the expected audio
- Unnatural politeness between strangers, producing clean but unrepresentative turn-taking
- Scheduling attrition — both speakers have to show up, so no-show rates compound rather than add
Risks at production cohort in Telugu
Cost at this band is driven by: Number of distinct demographic cells rather than total speakers.
- Speaker-disjoint splits are only trustworthy if duplicate detection is voice-based rather than ID-based, since one person can present two identities
- Coordinator-level demographic bias becomes measurable at this size and should be reported, not smoothed over
- Telugu carries 4 recognised varieties across Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, parts of Karnataka and Odisha, so the quota matrix is wider than the headline volume suggests
- Coastal Andhra read speech dominates. Telangana rural and Rayalaseema speech is thin, despite Hyderabad being the largest deployment market.
Deliverables
- WAV audio to your naming convention, with the per-file manifest
- Verbatim Telugu transcripts with utterance-level timestamps
- Speaker-turn segmentation with start and end timestamps
- Overlap regions marked with participating speaker IDs
- Backchannel and interruption markers
- Per-pair relationship metadata: familiar or stranger
- 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
What this trains, and what it does not
- Speaker diarisation
- Meeting and multi-party ASR
- Turn-taking and endpointing for voice agents
- Speaker separation and target-speaker extraction
Two-party conversation does not generalise to multi-party meetings with four or more speakers, where overlap statistics change substantially. Specify that case separately.
Frequently asked
Is 1,000 speakers of Telugu enough?
Enough for production ASR generalisation and for a speaker-verification corpus with meaningful negative pairs.
Why conversational speech rather than another speech type?
Speaker diarisation, Meeting and multi-party ASR, Turn-taking and endpointing for voice agents are what this style is the right input for. Two-party conversation does not generalise to multi-party meetings with four or more speakers, where overlap statistics change substantially. Specify that case separately.
How long does a production cohort Telugu build take?
Nine to twelve weeks, with recruitment running continuously rather than in a front-loaded phase. Six to eight batches, speaker-disjoint by construction so held-out speakers are genuinely held out.
What does 1,000 speakers of Telugu conversational speech cost?
Quoted per delivered hour against this specification. At this band the drivers are number of distinct demographic cells rather than total speakers. Send the spec and you get one fixed figure.
How much QA is applied at this volume?
100% technical QA, 10% content QA stratified by city and coordinator, with voice-based duplicate detection across the whole cohort.
Quote this Telugu dataset
1,000 speakers, conversational speech, Telugu — production cohort. Adjust anything and send it.