VCCV and CVVC (bridge+ending) differences in smoothness?

[HulderBulder]

So, I was going back and forth wondering what's the difference between them other than how you use them. Is VCCV better at handling consonants and clusters than bridge CVVC? If so why? What difficulties would CVVC face that VCCV can handle and such.

 

[Kiyoteru]

VCCV™ is literally CVVC, just CZ's "brand name" for it. There's no difference.

 

[HulderBulder]

VCCV™ is literally CVVC, just CZ's "brand name" for it. There's no difference.

Exept in VCCV you have [VC] [V C] and [V C-], Whereas in CVVC brindge theres only [V C] and [V C-].
VCCV seems to split up clusters a bit, whereas the CVVC doesn't.

 

[Kiyoteru]

CVVC isn't strictly one format, and one format only. It's a general term for the bank types that consist mainly of CVs and VCs, whatever those CVs and VCs may be. VCCV™ is simply what CZ wants to call her version of english CVVC, to differentiate it and to confuse people into thinking it's brand new and revolutionary.

 

[HulderBulder]

I'm just questioning why theres different vc's in VCCV

CVVC isn't strictly one format, and one format only. It's a general term for the bank types that consist mainly of CVs and VCs, whatever those CVs and VCs may be. VCCV™ is simply what CZ wants to call her version of english CVVC, to differentiate it and to confuse people into thinking it's brand new and revolutionary.

What I'm asking about is why does it have split clusters. Is it to help handling consonant clusters to sound better or something?
Sorry if my first post was hard to understand.

 

[Kiyoteru]

Well, lets start from the top, they're both CVVC lists but you're interested in the reasoning behind
- 2 variants of stop/ending VC
- Split clusters

Clusters were split up probably for the sake of recording and otoing efficiency, even if they would eventually create more work for the UST maker. They could be recorded all together (like kla kle kli kl3 kl@) but that would take up more recording time, otoing time, and file space. The goal of the reclist was to be easy to record so that lots of people could make voicebanks, wasnt it?

As for the two types of ending VC... really, they're not different. The [vc] type is sometimes pronounced a little bit faster than the [vc-]. Considering that we've been told to use consonant velocity on every note... differentiating them wasn't really a good idea, I think.

 

[HulderBulder]

Well, lets start from the top, they're both CVVC lists but you're interested in the reasoning behind
- 2 variants of stop/ending VC
- Split clusters

Clusters were split up probably for the sake of recording and otoing efficiency, even if they would eventually create more work for the UST maker. They could be recorded all together (like kla kle kli kl3 kl@) but that would take up more recording time, otoing time, and file space. The goal of the reclist was to be easy to record so that lots of people could make voicebanks, wasnt it?

As for the two types of ending VC... really, they're not different. The [vc] type is sometimes pronounced a little bit faster than the [vc-]. Considering that we've been told to use consonant velocity on every note... differentiating them wasn't really a good idea, I think.

So you have a generall guess of how the clusters work I take it? Well it's better than notthing. Looking at the VC otos, they're only slightly different (one ends withe the preputter at the end of vovel, the other in the middle of the consonant, and where they're taken in the wave file) but yeah, they would prodouse the same result with consonant velocity I guess.

 

[na4a4a]

Well that was a tad disrespectful and uncalled for...

---

Nope, that's about how it works.

VCCV™ is basically just CVVC.
The clusters are split up to make the list smaller at the expense of creating more work with usting. So instead of "asked" being [-@][@skd] you have to do [-@][@ s][s k][kd-].
The differentiation between a VC and a VC- isn't much since you'll be using consonant velocity anyways.
You can make a list with all the "features" of VCCV and it's still CVVC, nothing more than a brand name.
Of course now all I'm doing is restating what's already been said.

 

[HulderBulder]

Nope, that's about how it works.

VCCV™ is basically just CVVC.
The clusters are split up to make the list smaller at the expense of creating more work with usting. So instead of "asked" being [-@][@skd] you have to do [-@][@ s][s k][kd-].
The differentiation between a VC and a VC- isn't much since you'll be using consonant velocity anyways.
You can make a list with all the "features" of VCCV and it's still CVVC, nothing more than a brand name.
Of course now all I'm doing is restating what's already been said.

Ah, ok. I was a bit let down (? not surre if that the right term here) when Coasty seemed unsure about the clusters.

 

[Inkyuma]

VCCV is just a more complex version of CVVC. it has more vowels and smoother pronunciation. it's only called VCCV to prevent confusion. VCCV's best feature is the 'schwa' which is the vowel pronunciation used in the word 'the' (this was previously missing from older reclists, which is why they sound like they have a foreign accent).

but yeah, the constanant clusters are also very good and sound more natural

just think of VCCV as an updated CVVC list. the only downside is that the reclist has over 1000 sounds, so will take ages to record and oto

 

[Zoku]

Not really. Many people say the vowel in 'the' as (CZ) [u ] or [E].

VCCV only has three more vowels than CVVC. Smoother pronounciation always depended on the oto, not the list. If you blame the list for anything except for missing sounds, it's probably your fault.

The consonant clusters are kinda iffy because you need two or three notes for a single cluster, while some lists only need one.

VCCV is just CVVC with a label.

 

[Kiyoteru]

The most important point to make, I think, is that the term "CVVC" doesn't exclusively refer to Chezzie's 2011 CVVC English reclist. It's downright nonsensical to compare CVVC and VCCV™ as if they were completely separate things, because a CVVC list could have ALL of the "new features" of the english VCCV™ reclist and fall completely under CVVC. It's like saying "what's the difference between a rectangle with 3:2 proportions and any rectangle" when it IS a rectangle. Just one specific type.