Speech-to-Text on Google Cloud is a tool used to convert speech into text using an API powered by Google’s AI technologies. The vendor states users can transcribe content in real time or from stored files; deliver a better user experience in products through voice commands; and, gain insights from customer interactions to improve service.
$0.02
per min
Zendesk Talk
Score 8.2 out of 10
N/A
Zendesk Talk is call center software built on the Twilio cloud communication platform that integrates with the Zendesk Support ticketing system. This allows customer service teams to provide phone support from the same platform they use to manage all other channels.
N/A
Pricing
Google Cloud Speech-to-Text
Zendesk Talk
Editions & Modules
Speech-to-Text V2 API
$0.016
per min
Speech-to-Text V1 API
$0.024
per min
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Google Cloud Speech-to-Text
Zendesk Talk
Free Trial
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
Speech-to-Text V1 API
V1 offers data residency for multi region only. Models include short, long, phone call, and video. V1 does not include audit logging. New customers get $300 in free credits and 60 minutes for transcribing and analyzing audio free per month, not charged against your credits.
Speech-to-Text V2 API
V2 offers data residency for multi and single region. Models include short, long, telephony, video, and Chirp. V2 does include audit logging and support for customer managed encryption keys.
Google low latency streaming api seems to be working best when compared to other cloud-supporting tools as this will help in realtime transcription for customer interactions. while comparing azure and amazon the google support more than 125 languages and ascents as we work with …
Earlier we were completely reliant on text pad or notepad, where we used to manually capture the information, which seems to be very hectic for the long-running meeting, because holding the information and capturing them and redocumenting it is very big process and it involves …
They just remind me of each other. Whenever I have a question, whether for personal or for professional reasons, I take out my smartphone, click the Gemini app, and then click the mic to ask my question and have the answer read back to me. I love Googles AI System.
Firefly is a great notetaker application that plus into meetings and organizes the data. However it comes presctured while the Google Cloud Speech-to-Text application you can better organized the data. Then have the option to plug it into other platforms to further organize the …
It delivered high accuracy in accented and noisy environments. Regarding its language support, it offers a variety of languages and dialects. Its's Api's are well-documented and easily integrated with our GCP-based stack. Also, its deployment is fast, and it is cost-effective. …
One major setback is the integration of multiple languages, where Google has support for more than 120 languages, and Amazon only supports approximately 30 languages. Regarding the transcription behaviour, Google Translate is very accurate, but Amazon Translate sometimes spells …
Descript is definetly less accurate than Google Cloud tool, while Google Cloud Speech-to-Text does have some troubles with overlapping and background noises, it still performs better than Descript. However Descript has some video editing functions which are not available in …
Otter is good for simple note taking and its UI is quite simple. But it seriously lacks in providing appropriate transcription as it is less accurate with Indian accents and being unresponsive in real time transcriptions. On the other hand Google Cloud Speech-to-Text excels in …
We use Google Speech to Text on the recommendation of a partner who uses it, in fact we do not evaluate other applications such as Amazon Transcript or similar
Google Cloud Speech to Text has a significantly cleaner and easier-to-use User Interface. If the user is already familiar with the Google Cloud product suite, then onboarding with this software will be an extremely smooth process. If a user has previously used other …
I like Google Cloud Speech-to-Text the most when it comes to other apps I have used so far. It have reduced my work, saved lot of time and made me less stress in meetings. It has also helped us in taking requirement gathering, knowledge transfer important notes to further …
While both Speechify and Google Speech-to-text do the job, certain elements that I find missing on Speechify are: it only works on Desktop with Windows OS, the customizations aspect is missing, there is no mobile app support (people these days want everything on their mobile …
I've also trialed IBM Watson Speech to Text for similar use cases. While both are highly capable, I find the Google Cloud Speech-to-Text software's accuracy and integrations to be a cut above. Harnessing Google's speech recognition prowess has elevated our firm's value …
Google Cloud Speech-to-Text outperformed its competitors significantly in terms of accuracy, surpassing any other product available. Additionally, its support for multiple languages was unrivaled in the market. Moreover, for clients with robust bandwidth, Google Cloud …
1. It's an efficient tool for improving efficiency by saving a lot of time in typing. 2. It saves at least 40-50% of our time, thus increasing efficiency. The amazing thing I liked about it is the accuracy with multiple accents & multiple languages. 3. It also takes …
The accuracy of Google Cloud Speech-to-Text is much better than any other tool. It has better API integration with 3rd party tools. The transcription is on at real-time basis with the best efficiency. It has good language support from across the globe. It provides better noise …
Google Cloud Speech-to-Text is better than these other services. The main driver is the cost for the service and what you get, the value proposition is very good. Also, the scalability of Google Cloud Speech-to-Text is great, so that down the line, as our needs change and …
It's natively built into the user experience, the others rely on outside apps to integrate into their platform. You can set up a Zendesk Talk account within minutes and have a phone number ready for customers to contact you.
Maintenance costs for ServiceNow are higher, so Zendesk Talk is a good option even if I think it could be improved in terms of integration with other apps/flows/systems.
Exotel has a fair advantage when it comes to telephony as it offers a wide range of products at a fraction of the price of Zendesk. But when it comes to premium content and ease of access. Zendesk takes away the trophy. We have been using this for a while now and clearly, it …
We were made aware of Zendesk Talk through good reviews from reputable sites. Zendesk Talk's ACD was very outstanding and this is what attracted us as this was what we needed. The other products mentioned they glitched a lot and caused multiple dropped calls.
Explanations behind switching to Zendesk: It comes up short on cutting-edge customization choices and this doesn't simply turn out for us. The given ticket that executive's arrangement presented by Zendesk is incredible, and it upholds the omnichannel commitment to clients. The …
Slack and Zoom phones cannot compare because they have no ticketing systems. Zendesk Talk was the only option we considered because we were already using Zendesk for our email ticketing with customer concerns. We then expanded to using Zendesk's chatbot and then the Zendesk …
Prior to using Zendesk Talk, we used standard hand held phones in the office. Zendesk Talk has made us 75% more productive and efficient and allowed us to reach a lot more customers to serve.
Zendesk Talk has been far more reliable and robust than Ring Central. We had a lot of unreliable instances with our old provider. We didn't have call recording before either.
Zendesk Talk has many of the features as the other phone systems I have used. My only reservation is their lack of focus on a feature that will allow their clients to remain PCI compliant.
So, I've had scenarios like when I collaborate with a team where the people are from around the world. So, I used it there, and we spoke to each other in their native language. That boosts everyone's confidence in our collaborative efforts. I've also utilized its model and the API in my projects, including a Virtual assistant and a multilingual application that allows us to learn languages from around the world. We tested it with a group of 12 people, and that's when it failed. I mean, it's not a failure, but it can't detect every person.
Zendesk Talk is a great partner that helps us in the customer care area by managing every type of contact with customers (both phone calls and emails). I know there is also the possibility to have integration with instant messaging apps (like messenger and WhatsApp but I have never used them in my experience). In my opinion, the best scenario for Zendesk Talk is represented by a context with a high amount of contacts/requests where a unique platform could be a help both on the external side (customers) and on the internal side (a lot of colleagues who are working in the same area and have to work in a coordinate way). For customers, they could benefit from tailor-made answers, also based on past contacts for the same topic, and avoid waiting times during phone calls, with an immediate follow-up. For internal work management, operators don't overlap in a single request, and even if the same operator is not available the one who manages the request later has complete visibility of the entire topic from the historical point of view. Last but not least, I think that Zendesk Talk helps a lot in the context in which the request's speed is a KPI to manage constantly.
The lag on the phone is by far the most annoying thing with Zendesk talk due to the voice over IP.
Using the Reporting feature in Zendesk has never been a walk in the park. We have to customize a lot of fields and when something doesn't seem to add up, it at times feels like pulling teeth to get to the final answer of what went wrong.
The reasoning behind my 10 is that the UI is very intuitive; I didn't require any formal training to use it. Google's speech-to-text is not just a conversion tool; it helps automate mundane tasks, saves time, and has an almost human-like understanding.
Everything about it works, as I have previously detailed. Coming from different companies and using other tools like Twilio or Aircall, those are VOIP tools that are built to be plugged into other tools, Zendesk Talk is natively built into Zendesk and feels correct in the user experience of Zendesk
In our experience, we have had to go through many support people then ultimately getting frustrated enough to go directly to our point of contact who then doesn't always seem to be able to assist. We tend to get the support we need when it is escalated up to me and I reach out to our point of a contact person to express our frustration.
Earlier we were completely reliant on text pad or notepad, where we used to manually capture the information, which seems to be very hectic for the long-running meeting, because holding the information and capturing them and redocumenting it is very big process and it involves human work we were looking for some automation which can fix this issue then we got Google Cloud Speech-to-Text which converts audio to text files easier and faster and also it support many languages there by helping to align with various different clients across the globe and make the discussion seamless.
Slack and Zoom phones cannot compare because they have no ticketing systems. Zendesk Talk was the only option we considered because we were already using Zendesk for our email ticketing with customer concerns. We then expanded to using Zendesk's chatbot and then the Zendesk Talk system to keep it all integrated and streamlined.
We were able to reduce global headcount by 20% in our call centers.
Allowing customers to leave voicemails creates the personal touch needed and really increases our customer connectivity score. We saw increases in our CSAT scores after the implementation of this solution.
Call handling time and case reopen rates both decreased. Y/y it decreased 18% and 60%.