A hundred and fifty hours of voice data, with a strong first-pass acceptance rate.
A speech program needed 150 hours of clean voice recordings across Polish, Dutch, and Australian English, captured to spec so none of it bounced back in QA.
150 hours - Polish, Dutch, Australian English - Strong first-pass acceptance
110,000+
native linguists and AI data contributors
· Founder-reported combined network · 4 Oct 2026
300+
languages across active service lines
4,500+
dialects and regional variants
110+
rare, indigenous and low-resource languages
1,000+
organizations served since 2015
Measured outcomes
Voice data recording
The project
Voice data recording
- Client
- A speech program (via a top-100 LSP)
- Service
- Voice data recording
- Languages
- Polish, Dutch, Australian English
- Volume
- 150 hours
- Quality
- Strong first-pass acceptance
A speech program needed 150 hours of voice recordings across Polish, Dutch, and Australian English, delivered through a top-100 LSP, with strict device-level audio specifications.
Voice data is expensive to re-record: a sample that fails QA means re-booking a speaker, so the cost of getting capture right the first time is high.
The problem to solve
Voice recording fails when speakers drift from the script, when audio quality varies across contributors, or when format compliance is checked only at the end.
The program needed every sample to meet the specification on the first pass, across three languages and a roster of speakers.
What MoniSa changed
MoniSa sourced ten speakers per language and ran QA on every recording for script accuracy, audio clarity, and format compliance before submission.
Per-recording QA
Every sample was checked for script accuracy, audio clarity, and format before it was submitted.
Speaker roster
Ten speakers per language gave the program voice diversity within a consistent spec.
First-pass discipline
Catching issues before submission meant fewer re-record cycles on the delivered set.
Results
Measured outcomes from this engagement.
The program received 150 hours of voice recordings across three languages with a strong first-pass acceptance rate on this engagement.
| Volume | 150 hours |
|---|---|
| Languages | Polish, Dutch, Australian English |
| Quality | Strong first-pass acceptance |
| Speakers | 10 per language |
What supported the result
Why the fit was real
Voice capture needs per-recording QA before submission, not a bulk delivery that bounces back for re-records.
What decided the result
A strong first-pass rate mattered because re-recording voice data is slow and costly.
What buyers can reuse
- Voice data economics turn on the first-pass rate: re-records mean re-booking speakers.
- Per-recording QA before submission is what keeps the accepted set clean.
- The evidence keeps the client and partner details confidential and attributes the metrics only to this engagement.
Continue from this proof
Useful comparisons for the same problem.
Use these links to compare the case with the matching service, buyer guide, and language coverage.
Services and guides
Related services
Languages named
Examples referenced in the engagement.
- Polish
- Dutch
- Australian English
More proof
Related projects
Compare this case with adjacent MoniSa proof before deciding whether the operating pattern fits your brief.
case evidence
Related projects.
These related cases keep the next click close to the same kind of work.
AI data servicesLong-form transcription held to project-scoped quality review over length and dialect, client details confidential.
Long-form transcription
The challenge. A model program needed 500+ hours of long-form transcription across four locales for AI training.
What we did. MoniSa used dialect-matched transcribers and full-file QA to hold accuracy over long files.
The result. The program received 500+ hours across four locales with project-scoped quality review.
Recognise your own project in one of these?
Send the language list and volumeAI data servicesThree annotation task types each held to standard in six weeks, client details confidential.
Multi-type annotation
Problem. An AI company needed 967 hours of object detection, sentiment, and NER annotation in six weeks.
Action. MoniSa ran each task type with its own guidelines and task-specific review.
Result. The company received 967 hours across three task types under project-scoped review.
AI data servicesLarge-language-model data coverage without client-name exposure.
LLM training data coverage
Problem. A model team needed multilingual training data across rare and indigenous language tracks.
Action. MoniSa built language-specific sourcing, annotation, and review paths for the program.
Result. The buyer received structured transcript output for model training across a broad multilingual scope.
Buyer questions
Common questions.
What was delivered on this engagement?
Volume: 150 hours. Languages: Polish, Dutch, Australian English. Quality: Strong first-pass acceptance
What control kept the work stable?
A strong first-pass rate mattered because re-recording voice data is slow and costly.
Where should similar work go next?
Use AI data services for the delivery model, the case studies hub for buyer-side evaluation, and the contact page for a scoped brief.
What happens if you cannot staff one of my language pairs?
For the proposed project, ask for pair-by-pair availability or a recruitment window in writing before agreeing a date. Define qualification and pilot approval for any new contributor before live work. A coverage claim should be checkable before the scope is signed.
Similar brief
Send the constraint behind the metric.
A useful follow-up to a case study names the language mix, review model, deadline, and what proof your buyer team needs before approval.
Send a brief