C: we saw that w it 's it 's not it 's not so necessary .
C: It it works as well f with with without , uh , a LDA or something .
G: OK .
G: OK . No , I was j curious .
C: Yeah .
G: Yeah , I don't think it 's a big deal for this application ,
F: Mm - hmm .
G: but but Yeah , it 's a C: Yeah .
D: Right .
F: Mm - hmm .
F: OK . But then there 's another thing that also Thilo 's involved with ,
F: which is , um F: OK , and and also Da - Dave Gelbart .
F: So there 's this this problem of F: and w and so we had this meeting .
F: Th - the <nonvocalsound> also Adam , before the the before you went away .
F: Uh we , um regarding the representation <nonvocalsound> of overlaps ,
F: because at present , <nonvocalsound> um , because <nonvocalsound> of the limitations of th the interface we 're using ,
F: overlaps are , uh , not being <nonvocalsound> encoded by <nonvocalsound> the transcribers in as complete <nonvocalsound> and , uh , detailed a way as it might be ,
F: and as might be desired I think would be desired in the corpus ultimately .
G: Mm - hmm .
F: So we don't have start and end points <nonvocalsound> at each point where there 's an overlap .
F: We just have the the <nonvocalsound> overlaps <nonvocalsound> encoded in a simple bin .
F: Well , OK . So <nonvocalsound> @ @ the limits of the <nonvocalsound> over of of the interface are such that we were at this meeting we were entertaining how we might either expand <nonvocalsound> the the interface or find other tools which already do what would be useful .
F: Because what would ultimately be , um , ideal in my my view
F: and I think I mean , I had the sense that it was consensus ,
F: is that , um , a thorough - going musical score notation would be <nonvocalsound> the best way to go .
F: Because <nonvocalsound> you can have multiple channels ,
F: there 's a single time - line ,
F: it 's very clear , flexible , and all those nice things .
G: Mm - hmm .
F: OK . So , um ,
F: um , I spoke I had a meeting with Dave Gelbart on on and he had , uh , excellent ideas on how the interface could be modified to to do this kind of representation .
F: But , um , he in the meantime you were checking into the existence of already , um , existing interfaces which might already have these properties .
F: So , do you wanna say something about that ?
C: Yes .
C: Um , I talked with , uh , Munich guys from from Ludwi - Ludwig Maximilians University , who do a lot of transcribing and transliterations .
G: Mm - hmm .
C: And they basically said they have they have , uh , a tool they developed themselves
C: and they can't give away , uh , f it 's too error - prone ,
C: and had it 's not supported ,
C: a a a and G: Yeah .
C: But , um ,
C: Susanne Bur - Burger , who is at se CMU , he wa who was formally at in Munich and w and is now at with CMU ,
C: she said she has something
C: which she uses to do eight channels , uh , trans transliterations ,
C: eight channels simultaneously ,
G: Excuse me .
C: but it 's running under Windows .
F: Under Windows .
F: Mm - hmm .
C: So I 'm not sure if if if we can use it .
F: Mm - hmm .
C: She said she would give it to us .
C: It wouldn't be a problem .
C: And I 've got some some kind of manual down in my office .
A: Well , maybe we should get it
A: and if it 's good enough we 'll arrange Windows machines to be available .
C: Yeah .
F: Mm - hmm . We could uh , potentially <nonvocalsound> so .
A: So .
F: I also wanted to be sure F: I mean , I 've I 've seen the F: this this is called Praat , PRAAT , <nonvocalsound> which I guess means spee speech in Dutch or something .
A: Yep .
C: Yeah , but then I 'm not sure that 's the right thing for us .
F: But G: Yeah .
F: In terms <nonvocalsound> of it being <nonvocalsound> Windows <nonvocalsound> versus F: But I 'm just wondering , is ?
A: No , no . Praat isn't Praat 's multi - platform .
C: No . No , Praat C: Yeah . Yeah .
F: Oh ! I see .
C: Yeah .
F: Oh , I see .
F: So Praat may not be C: That 's not Praat .