Dataset specification · Domain scale
250 hours of Gujarati Conversational Speech
A domain scale build of 250 hours of Gujarati conversational speech. Fine-tuning a production model for a specific domain, accent range or deployment condition. 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
- 250 hours
- Scale
- Domain scale
- Per speaker
- 20–30 minutes of accepted audio per speaker, in pairs
- Accepted yield
- 55–65% of recorded time is accepted
How Gujarati 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 | Gujarati (gu-IN, Gujarati) |
| Volume | 250 hours |
| Equivalent | 500 speakers at 30 minutes each, or 250 speakers at one hour each |
| 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 | Standard (Amdavadi), Surti, Kathiyawadi, Kachchhi-influenced |
| Transcription | Verbatim, native-speaker, second-pass reviewed |

Designing the scenarios for Gujarati
- 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 Gujarati specifically: Murmured (breathy-voiced) vowels are phonemic in Gujarati and are absent from most shared Indic acoustic models
- Code-mixing handled explicitly rather than edited out — Business and trade vocabulary is heavily English; Gujarati diaspora speech adds further English structure. Specify whether diaspora speakers are in or out of scope.
Running a domain scale Gujarati build
Six to eight weeks. Beyond three cities the bottleneck moves from recruitment to transcription throughput, which is why the transcriber count rises faster than the engineer count.
Four to five batches on a fortnightly cadence, sequenced so the dialects you care about most land first.
Surat and Rajkot recruitment is essential for dialect coverage; Ahmedabad-only cohorts sound uniform.
| Parameter | At this volume |
|---|---|
| Cities | Three to four — Ahmedabad, Surat, Vadodara, Rajkot |
| Studios | Three to four rooms plus one mobile rig |
| Recruiters | Four coordinators under one programme lead |
| Speakers | ~500–600 |
| Sessions per day | 25–30 nationally |
| Team | 1 programme lead, 4 coordinators, 8 engineers, 14 transcribers, 2 QA leads |
Cohort design
At 250 hours quotas are enforced per dialect and reconciled fortnightly. Aggregate demographics are reported per batch so drift is visible while there is still time to correct it.
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 Gujarati |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Gujarati forms that younger urban speakers have lost |
| Region | Gujarat / Daman & Diu / Dadra & Nagar Haveli and others | Dialect spread across 5 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 |
Gujarati-specific considerations
- Murmured (breathy-voiced) vowels are phonemic in Gujarati and are absent from most shared Indic acoustic models
- Business and trade vocabulary is heavily English; Gujarati diaspora speech adds further English structure. Specify whether diaspora speakers are in or out of scope.
- Very little spontaneous Gujarati audio exists publicly; nearly all of it is Ahmedabad read speech.
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
- Breathy vowels have no consistent orthographic marking
- Kathiyawadi lexical items replaced with standard equivalents
100% technical QA, 15% content QA with stratified sampling across city, dialect and transcriber, so no single team's output goes unchecked.
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 domain scale in Gujarati
Cost at this band is driven by: Transcription depth — verbatim with disfluencies costs materially more than clean-read transcription; Number of distinct dialect quotas rather than raw hours.
- Transcription becomes the critical path and stays there for the rest of the volume bands
- Coordinator turnover mid-build causes quota drift that is only visible in the final demographic report unless it is audited weekly
- Gujarati carries 5 recognised varieties across Gujarat, Daman & Diu, Dadra & Nagar Haveli, so the quota matrix is wider than the headline volume suggests
- Very little spontaneous Gujarati audio exists publicly; nearly all of it is Ahmedabad read speech.
Deliverables
- WAV audio to your naming convention, with the per-file manifest
- Verbatim Gujarati 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 250 hours of Gujarati enough?
Enough to shift word error rate meaningfully on a domain-specific deployment. For a general-purpose model in a low-resource language, still a starting layer.
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 domain scale Gujarati build take?
Six to eight weeks. Beyond three cities the bottleneck moves from recruitment to transcription throughput, which is why the transcriber count rises faster than the engineer count. Four to five batches on a fortnightly cadence, sequenced so the dialects you care about most land first.
What does 250 hours of Gujarati conversational speech cost?
Quoted per delivered hour against this specification. At this band the drivers are transcription depth — verbatim with disfluencies costs materially more than clean-read transcription and number of distinct dialect quotas rather than raw hours. Send the spec and you get one fixed figure.
How much QA is applied at this volume?
100% technical QA, 15% content QA with stratified sampling across city, dialect and transcriber, so no single team's output goes unchecked.
Quote this Gujarati dataset
250 hours, conversational speech, Gujarati — domain scale. Adjust anything and send it.