Dataset specification · Flagship cohort
2,000 speakers of Hindi Telephony Speech
A flagship cohort build of 2,000 speakers of Hindi telephony speech. Maximum speaker diversity, for foundation work or a reference corpus where per-cell statistics must hold. Speech captured over a real telephony path — a genuine call through the network, not studio audio downsampled afterwards to imitate one.

- Volume
- 2,000 speakers
- Scale
- Flagship cohort
- Per speaker
- 10–20 minutes of accepted audio per speaker
- Accepted yield
- 50–60% of recorded time is accepted
How Hindi telephony speech is captured
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.
The specification
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Language | Hindi (hi-IN, Devanagari) |
| Volume | 2,000 speakers |
| Equivalent | 1,000 hours at 30 minutes per speaker |
| Speech type | Telephony Speech |
| Per speaker | 10–20 minutes of accepted audio per speaker |
| Sample rate | 8 kHz narrowband, matching what a deployed contact-centre model actually receives |
| Codec | G.711 and AMR-NB captured explicitly, with the codec recorded per call in the manifest |
| Legs | Caller and agent recorded on separate legs, never as a mixed call recording |
| Network conditions | Handset type, network carrier and packet-loss events logged per call |
| Dialects | Khari Boli, Awadhi, Braj, Bhojpuri-influenced Hindi |
| Transcription | Verbatim, native-speaker, second-pass reviewed |

Designing the call flows for Hindi
- 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 Hindi specifically: Four-way stop contrast (voiced/voiceless x aspirated/unaspirated) that collapses in models trained on English-first acoustic units
- Code-mixing handled explicitly rather than edited out — Urban Hindi speech is Hinglish in practice. Expect 15-40% English tokens in spontaneous speech: numbers, brands, technology terms, and whole clause switches. Any Hindi corpus that excludes English tokens will not match production traffic.
Running a flagship cohort Hindi build
Sixteen to twenty-two weeks, run in waves so that recruitment in the harder catchments starts early rather than being left to the end.
Ten to twelve batches with rolling demographic reconciliation, since a quota gap discovered in week eighteen is very expensive to close.
Largest recruitment pool in the network. A 1,000-speaker Hindi cohort with balanced gender and 18-45 age bands is typically fielded across four cities to avoid a single-city accent bias.
| Parameter | At this volume |
|---|---|
| Cities | Twelve or more, including rural catchments — Delhi, Lucknow, Jaipur, Patna, Bhopal, Indore, Varanasi |
| Studios | Twelve rooms plus five mobile rigs |
| Recruiters | Fourteen coordinators, three regional managers, one programme director |
| Audio yield | ~1,000 hours at 30 minutes per speaker |
| Sessions per day | 90–110 |
| Team | 1 programme director, 3 regional managers, 14 coordinators, 24 engineers, 45 transcribers, 6 QA leads |
Cohort design
At 2,000 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.
Recruitment must be stratified by handset and carrier as well as by dialect, which adds a screening axis the other styles do not have.
| Dimension | Typical split | Why it matters for Hindi |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Hindi forms that younger urban speakers have lost |
| Region | Uttar Pradesh / Bihar / Madhya Pradesh and others | Dialect spread across 7 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 |
Hindi-specific considerations
- Four-way stop contrast (voiced/voiceless x aspirated/unaspirated) that collapses in models trained on English-first acoustic units
- Urban Hindi speech is Hinglish in practice. Expect 15-40% English tokens in spontaneous speech: numbers, brands, technology terms, and whole clause switches. Any Hindi corpus that excludes English tokens will not match production traffic.
- Public Hindi corpora skew heavily towards read newspaper text from educated urban speakers in Delhi and NCR. Rural Bihar and eastern UP speech, elderly speakers, and low-literacy speakers reading prompts aloud are largely absent.
Quality gates for telephony speech
- 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
- Inconsistent Devanagari vs romanised spelling for the same English loan word
- Nukta characters (क़ ख़ ग़ ज़ फ़) applied inconsistently by transcribers
100% technical QA, 7% content QA stratified across every axis, blind re-transcription audit, and per-cell demographic sign-off before final acceptance.
What goes wrong on telephony speech sessions
- 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
Risks at flagship cohort in Hindi
Cost at this band is driven by: Long-tail demographic cells, which dominate both cost and schedule at this size.
- The final 15% of the cohort — the rarest demographic cells — routinely takes as long as the first half and should be scheduled first, not last
- Speaker pool exhaustion is a hard constraint in all but the largest languages
- Voice-based duplicate detection across 2,000 speakers is a genuine engineering task, not a spreadsheet check
- Hindi carries 7 recognised varieties across Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, so the quota matrix is wider than the headline volume suggests
- Public Hindi corpora skew heavily towards read newspaper text from educated urban speakers in Delhi and NCR. Rural Bihar and eastern UP speech, elderly speakers, and low-literacy speakers reading prompts aloud are largely absent.
Deliverables
- WAV audio to your naming convention, with the per-file manifest
- Verbatim Devanagari 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
What this trains, and what it does not
- 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.
Frequently asked
Is 2,000 speakers of Hindi enough?
Enough for foundation-scale speaker diversity and for a reference cohort with statistically meaningful per-dialect and per-demographic cells.
Why telephony speech rather than another speech type?
Contact-centre and IVR ASR, Voice bots operating over the phone network, Intent classification on narrowband audio are what this style is the right input for. 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.
How long does a flagship cohort Hindi build take?
Sixteen to twenty-two weeks, run in waves so that recruitment in the harder catchments starts early rather than being left to the end. Ten to twelve batches with rolling demographic reconciliation, since a quota gap discovered in week eighteen is very expensive to close.
What does 2,000 speakers of Hindi telephony speech cost?
Quoted per delivered hour against this specification. At this band the drivers are long-tail demographic cells, which dominate both cost and schedule at this size. Send the spec and you get one fixed figure.
How much QA is applied at this volume?
100% technical QA, 7% content QA stratified across every axis, blind re-transcription audit, and per-cell demographic sign-off before final acceptance.
Quote this Hindi dataset
2,000 speakers, telephony speech, Hindi — flagship cohort. Adjust anything and send it.