[hts-users:03358] Re: About getf0 and cmp data =?iso-2022-jp?b?ZmlsZRskQiEpGyhC?=

[Keiichiro Oura <uratec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

Please, tell me number of samples of your raw file.
It can be checked as follows.

x2x +sa yourfile.raw | wc -l

Regards,
Keiichiro Oura


2012/6/16 ArthurLeo <bin007.zhao@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
>  Yes,  I installed the SPTK-3.5, My training data have 4000 utterance, I do
> not checked any one of the training data, but I sample 100 utt, and all of
> them
> have the same problem that the mgc file have less two frames than the raw
> file.  the raw files are 16k sample rate, 16bit pcm, little endian  data
> format.
> the details command below:
>  FRAMELEN = 400 FRAMESHIFT=80 FFTLEN=512 WINDOWTYPE =1 FREQWARP=0.42 GAMMA=0
> MGCORDER=20
>> Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 00:55:28 +0900
>> From: uratec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [hts-users:03347] Re: About getf0 and cmp data file？
>
>> To: hts-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> CC: uratec@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Do you use SPTK-3.5?
>> Anyway, please let me know the number of *samples* of your raw file.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Keiichiro Oura
>>
>>
>> 2 012/6/9 ArthurLeo <bin007.zhao@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
>> > Thank you very much for detail answer, here is the further question：
>> > 1. Now assuming the F0 is 200Hz, acctually, the f0 can be varied from
>> > 60Hz
>> > to 400Hz generally, so even if 5ms waveform added to the head, the first
>> > frame also can not be located the start time of the raw file certainly.
>> > is it?
>> >
>> > 2. From the attached illustration, the mgc file should have the same
>> > frames
>> > as the raw file, but in my test, the mgc file have less two frames than
>> > the
>> > raw file,
>> > is it abnormal?
>> >
>> >> Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2012 17:43:40 +0900
>> >> From: tokuda@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> Subject: [hts-users:03344] Re: [hts-users:03342] RE: [hts-users:03341]
>> >> Re:
>> >> About getf0 and cmp data file？
>> >> To: hts-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> CC: tokuda@nit ech.ac.jp
>> >>
>> >> > 1. yes, I guess, but I am not sure about the snack a lgorithm of
>> >> > getting
>> >
>> >> > pitch, so I wander to know why the 5ms/25ms, not other length?
>> >>
>> >> We add 5ms to the file head in order to adjust the positions of "frame
>> >> center"
>> >> assuming the extracted F0 is always 200Hz.
>> >>
>> >> See the attached illustration.
>> >>
>> >> Keiichi
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2012/6/9 ArthurLeo <bin007.zhao@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> >> > 1. yes, I guess, but I am not sure about the snack algorithm of
>> >> > getting
>> >> > pitch, so I wander to know why the 5ms/25ms, not other length?
>> >> >
>> >> > 2. My raw file have 3104 frames，16k sample rate, FRAMELEN =
>> >> > 400 FRAMESHIFT=80 FFTLEN=512 WINDOWTYPE =1 FREQWARP=0.42 GAMMA= 0
>> >> > MGCORDER=20, but after mgc analysis, the mgc file have less two
>> >> > frames
>> >> > (3102
>> >> > frames) , and the lf0 file have the same number frames（3104） with the
>> >> > original speech raw file , maybe because of the added head/tail. when
>> >> > the< br>> > stage using the sptk tool merge function to compose the
>> >> > cmp
>> >> > file，mgc file
>> >
>> >> > inserted
>> >> > the lf0 file，so the final cmp file have the same frames with mgc file
>> >> > not
>> >> > the lf0 file，and lf0 file two more frames at the tail were discarded
>> >> > directly.
>> >> > So I was confused, and want to know the detail reason. is it
>> >> > reasonable?
>> >> >> Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2012 00:08:44 +0900
>> >> >> From: uratec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> >> Subject: [h ts-users:03341] Re: About getf0 and cmp data file？
>
>> >> >
>> >> >> To: hts-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> >> CC: uratec@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Hi,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > 1. Why added 5ms/25ms waveform to head/tail? why not other length,
>> >> >> > like
>> >> >> > 10ms head or the 5ms tail? I guess it must have some special
>> >> >> > reason,
>> >> >> > I
>> >> >> > read
>> >> >> > the getf0.tcl. the default minpitch/maxpitch for speech is
>> >> >> > 60/400Hz,
>> >> >> > so if the autocorrelation method is generally used to caculate the
>> >> >> > first
>> >> >> > frame pitch, it should be added (1/60)s=16.7ms waveform for the
>> >> >> > head
>> >> >> > at
>> >> >> > least, but now the numbe r is 5ms/25ms, so can you explain more
>
>> >> >> > detail?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Do you mean that the lower F0 limit affect the number of generated
>> >> >> F0
>> >> >> frames?
>> >> >> When I changed the lower F0 limit, the number of generated F0 frames
>> >> >> were not changed.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > 2. I checked the *.mgc file, it always have less two frames than
>> >> >> > the
>> >> >> > *.raw
>> >> >> > file, so my question is the discarded two frames is the raw file
>> >> >> > head
>> >> >> > two
>> >> >> > frame or the raw file tail frame ?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It's strange.
>> >> >> Please, let me know the number of samp les of your raw file, command
>> >
>> >> >> lines of mgc analysis, and the number of generated mgc frames,
>> >> >> respectively.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Regards,
>> >> >> Keiichiro Oura
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 2012/6/8 ArthurLeo <bin007.zhao@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> >> >> > Thank you for your answer, but I have some further questions about
>> >> >> > the
>> >> >> > details of the lf0 and mgc parameter extraction.
>> >> >> > 1. Why added 5ms/25ms waveform to head/tail? why not other length,
>> >> >> > like
>> >> >> > 10ms head or the 5ms tail? I guess it must have some special
>> >> >> > reason,
>> >> >> > I
>> >> >> > read
>> >> >> > the getf0.tcl. the default minpitch/maxpitch for speech is
>> >> >> > 60/400Hz,
>> >> >> > so if the autocorrelation method is generally used to cacu late
>> >> >> > the
>
>> >> >> > first
>> >> >> > frame pitch, it should be added (1/60)s=16.7ms waveform for the
>> >> >> > head
>> >> >> > at
>> >> > > > least, but now the number is 5ms/25ms, so can you explain more
>> >> > > > detail?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > 2. I checked the *.mgc file, it always have less two frames than
>> >> >> > the
>> >> >> > *.raw
>> >> >> > file, so my question is the discarded two frames is the raw file
>> >> >> > head
>> >> >> > two
>> >> >> > frame or the raw file tail frame ?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > &gt ; Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 09:01:56 +0900
>> >> >> >> From: uratec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> >> >> Subject: [hts-users:03339] Re: About getf0 and cmp data file？
>> >> >> >&gt ; To: hts-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>> >> >> >> CC: uratec@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Hi,
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> The number of frames generated by Snack (in ActiveTcl) is often
>> >> >> >> lower
>> >> >> >> than the number of frames generated by SPTK.
>> >> >> &g t;> The internal frame calculation is different between Snack and
>> >> >> SPTK.
>> >> >
>> >> >> >> Therefore, 5ms/25ms waveform are added to head/tail of the
>> >> >> >> utterance
>> >> >> >> before f0 analysis in the HTS demo script.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Regards,
>> >> >> >> Keiichiro Oura
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> 2012/6/7 ArthurLeo <bin007.zhao@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> >> >> >> > Hi all，
>> >> >> >> > When I prepared the cmp data for training， I found that the
>> >> >> >> > *.lf0
>> >> >> >> > file
>> >> >> >> > always have two more frames than the *.mgc file, and they are
>> >> >> >> > extracted
>> >> >> >> > from
>> >> >> >> > the same *.raw file. So I checked the ./data/makefile，and I
>> >> >> >> > foun d
>> >> >> & gt;> > the
>> >
>> >> >> >> > *.raw
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > file were added the 0.5ms head data and the 25ms tail data，I
>> >> >> >> > guess
>> >> >> >> > it
>> >> >> >> > maybe
>> >> >> >> > the reason，but I don not know why do this？why add the head and
>> >> >> >> > t
>> >> >> >> > he
>> >> >> >> > tail？
>> >> >
>> >> >> >> > why
>> >> >> >> > 0.5ms and 25ms，not others？ Can some one known about it？ when
>> >> >> >> > composing
>> >> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> > lf0 and mgc with the SPTK tool merge function，how deal with the
>> >> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> > extra
>> >> >> >> > lf0 frame？ discarded directly？
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >>
>>