Hi guys,
I have no knowledge about this software, but Gerard indicated that 'praat'
is GPL licensed and its source is available. The code was written in C, I
assume, as C99 is required to compile it.
Wouldn't benifits be much greater is support for other file formats in praat
was arranged for somehow?
Cheers!
Siebrand
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: commons-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:commons-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] Namens Gerard Meijssen
Verzonden: zondag 11 februari 2007 17:55
Aan: Gregory Maxwell
CC: Wikimedia Commons Discussion List; The Wiktionary
(
http://www.wiktionary.org) mailing list
Onderwerp: Re: [Commons-l] Sound files
Hoi,
The problem is that existing academic software like "praat" use .wav files.
I do sympathise up to a point that storage is used. However, the price of a
terabyte of storage is such that this is not that relevant.
Both an .ogg and a .wav file would be saved. The first is to enable science
to do its thing, the second is for our punters.
Thanks,
GerardM
http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/praat/
Gregory Maxwell schreef:
On 2/11/07, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hoi,
> I read this in digest mode so let me answer things together.
>
> The reason why .ogg files are not great is because indeed it is a
> lossy algorithm. There is some great software to analyse
> pronunciation files; a program called "praat" is worth mentioning it
> is even licensed under GPL. There is even functionality in there to do
with IPA
transcription.
Gregory's proposal to use Ogg/FLAC is not helpfull. This is not the
format that is used to analyse pronunciation files. The notion that a
specific quality was "the gold standard" at the time is indeed that.
It used to be, times have changed.
The Shtooka program that we are talking about CAN create both a WAV
and an OGG file. It just needs asking. It would be helpful if we
learn sooner rather than later what the outcome is of this request.
The Ogg/Flac is lossless, so it removes your concerns about lossyness.
It can be uploaded today, so it removes the problems of not being
uploadable. It is compressed (losslessly) so it's not quite so bad on
our storage and bandwidth. Shtooka already outputs Flac, and could be
trivially altered to output ogg/flac, if you'd like I will do this for
you. Any number of Ogg/Flac files can be quickly converted to wav with
a single command.
I am very hesitant and concerned about the prospects of permitting
uncompressed files: I think people will use them where they are
completely inappropriate because they are a bit easier to playback.
Flac or Ogg/Flac should be substantially smaller than wav and won't
drive people to use uncompressed formats for bad reasons.
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
Commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l