 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Fri, 29 May 2009 16:53:44 +0100, Invisible wrote:
>
>>>> (Much like, logically, there must exist software for the PC that
>>>> enables you to typeset music property, but I've yet to find it. Unless
>>>> you count all those insane TeX extensions...)
>>>
>>> What is wrong with (La)TeX? I mean other then you did not really try it
>>> because it has a learning curve?
>>
>> TeX is very good for its intended purpose - typesetting text and
>> mathematics. And it *not* very good for anything else. (Most especially,
>> trying to typeset musical scores with it just simply *painful*.)
>
> There are a few programs for Linux that do a good job with this -
> Lilypond IIRC does a good job with it.
I think that's what he was talking about.
Lilypond syntax is quite similar to LaTeX...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
> It sounds utterly *terrible* by the way. I'm probably imagining it, but
> I'm sure the Amiga did it better.
OS X does a much better job.
For some strange reason I can't figure out which youtube search keyword
I should use to find examples (as I know there are approximately one million
of them posted to youtube), but I found at least this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUcOv0Y4OIg
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> It sounds utterly *terrible* by the way. I'm probably imagining it, but
> I'm sure the Amiga did it better.
I think if you fed phonemes to the speech generator, it did better. If you
fed it plain text? Not so much better.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> It sounds utterly *terrible* by the way. I'm probably imagining it, but
>> I'm sure the Amiga did it better.
>
> OS X does a much better job.
That's pretty impressive. Still not *quite* right, but better than most
things I've heard.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> It sounds utterly *terrible* by the way. I'm probably imagining it,
>> but I'm sure the Amiga did it better.
>
> I think if you fed phonemes to the speech generator, it did better. If
> you fed it plain text? Not so much better.
The Windows speach generator sounds "crackly" and discontinuous. As I
remember, the Amiga's speach synth sounded like an American with a bad
cold, but the syllables were at least smooth.
(The quality of its phonetic guesses might well have been far worse. I
recall my sister's name being pronounced as "geNIFEr"...)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> The Windows speach generator sounds "crackly" and discontinuous.
Not in Vista, at least. It sounds pretty much exactly how I remember the
amiga sounding, along with the weird emphasis on the different words.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 29 May 2009 16:16:16 -0300, Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
>> There are a few programs for Linux that do a good job with this -
>> Lilypond IIRC does a good job with it.
>
> I think that's what he was talking about.
>
> Lilypond syntax is quite similar to LaTeX...
Hmmm, I was thinking it wasn't a syntax/interpreter but a notation
editor. But looking at the website, I see that that's not the case.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
