Dear all, although no conversation analist, I would like to support the question Magnus brings forward, to elaborate f4/f5 with some of the features of transcriber. This seems a task for the developer though. Check transana for that matter as well! Works on a mac as well.
Cheers
Jeanine Evers
Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad
Op 20 mrt. 2013 om 18:15 heeft Magnus Larsson <[log in to unmask]> het volgende geschreven:
> Hi all!
>
>
> This is a follow-up on this question that I posed a few months back.
>
> We now have started using f4 (or rather, f5 as the transcripters work on Macs) and it seems to work well. However, we all agree that thera are some features from Transcriber that we really miss:
>
> Most of all, the ability to visualize the audio, and be very specific in choosing a specific part of the audio file, for detailed transcription (to repeat and identify what is said, overlaps etc). For my conversation analytically oriented work, it is wonderful to be able to time pauses and transcribe details without turning to a sound editor.
>
> Further, the time-stamping is good in f4, but the segmentation in Transcriber were far better - much easier to find the right place in the transcription, to check or expand it.
>
> Now, what do the rest of you think about this? I cannot use Transcriber any more (the 1.5.1 is too old for the Macs, and it feels dangerous to rely on old software even in Linux, version 2.0 is not yet sufficently functional, and developmen seems to far to slow), but we really miss these feature, and would like a full and even better replacement for Transcriber. Anyone else that shares these concerns?
>
> If there happens to be more thinking along the same lines, there might even be a possibility to collectively raise funds to support development (I cannot develop myself, I am a psychologist....) - if someone is interested in taking up the work....
>
> Anyone else connecting to this?
>
> Best,
>
>
> Magnus
>
>
> 2013-01-17 17:29, Magnus Larsson skrev:
|