The reason I took such a short extract is that I'm following Schaff's arrangement but where he doesn't give an English translation, I've gone and found one. So the marked text is just the English paragraph that he gives only in Greek and Latin. He does give some context as you can see via his notes but I agree that without them, it's truncated. Since we can't read his notes followed by the English translation in one files, if you want to give a fuller version, I'd suggest reading the entire thing (p.344-346).
Understanding better the context of the project after looking at the Schaff's arrangement, it appears more apt for me to simply conform to the indications given in each section.
OK, sorry that I am past due on my claims. Here are two of the shorter ones. May I have an extension on the others? I've been having trouble recording ... with travel, and a new cat, and work on the house. But I'm committed to getting these done.
The notes indicate reading the "First Formula" and the "Second Formula": is it desirable to include or exclude Schaff's introductory remarks to these formulae, for example? (otherwise I know that I am not meant to read the Greek originals in the left column, just the English translation)
A second clarification regards:
36 The Canons and Dogmatic Decrees of the Council of Trent Session 21 A.D.1563
Given the pattern of all the other sections corresponding to the Council of Trent, am I correct to assume that "Session 21" was meant to be "Session 21-22"?
mscllc wrote: ↑May 22nd, 2021, 12:53 pm
I would also be willing to record:
15 Creed of Epiphanius, of Cyprus A.D. 374
The notes indicate reading the "First Formula" and the "Second Formula": is it desirable to include or exclude Schaff's introductory remarks to these formulae, for example? (otherwise I know that I am not meant to read the Greek originals in the left column, just the English translation)
A second clarification regards:
36 The Canons and Dogmatic Decrees of the Council of Trent Session 21 A.D.1563
Given the pattern of all the other sections corresponding to the Council of Trent, am I correct to assume that "Session 21" was meant to be "Session 21-22"?
Thank you!
Just the creed and not Schaff for this project!
And you're right, it should say 21-22. I've now fixed this.
Following the chapter title in the book, "Two Creeds of Epiphanius A.D. 374", I recorded this as "Two Creeds of Epiphanius, of Cyprus A.D. 374", keeping the "of Cyprus" of the original section title, seeing that it appears in the book's initial index. Sorry for the "fait accompli"! mscllc
mscllc wrote: ↑May 21st, 2021, 11:11 am
Understanding better the context of the project after looking at the Schaff's arrangement, it appears more apt for me to simply conform to the indications given in each section.
Section 15,18,76 reading is fine. Love your accent. The volume is at 94.9dB for each of these which falls above the LV range of 86-92. If you're using audacity, you can use the Loudness Normalization effect set to -20 (Loudness Normalisation ('perceived loudness', -20 LUFS, the two checkboxes don't matter)) and that will automatically correct the volume.
InTheDesert wrote: ↑May 24th, 2021, 7:19 pm
Section 15,18,76 reading is fine. Love your accent. The volume is at 94.9dB for each of these which falls above the LV range of 86-92. If you're using audacity, you can use the Loudness Normalization effect set to -20 (Loudness Normalisation ('perceived loudness', -20 LUFS, the two checkboxes don't matter)) and that will automatically correct the volume.
Yes, I use Audacity (in one of its French versions, so I am not absolutely sure how "-20 LUFS" translates into the lingo over here); nonetheless, I did apply the normalisation feature with parameters that seemed to work, re-exported and re-uploaded, so please let me know if these now fall within the desired decibel range (then I will quality-control future contributions). Sections 15, 18, 41, 76 (there have been four so far). mscllc
mscllc wrote: ↑May 25th, 2021, 5:15 am
Yes, I use Audacity (in one of its French versions, so I am not absolutely sure how "-20 LUFS" translates into the lingo over here); nonetheless, I did apply the normalisation feature with parameters that seemed to work, re-exported and re-uploaded, so please let me know if these now fall within the desired decibel range (then I will quality-control future contributions). Sections 15, 18, 41, 76 (there have been four so far). mscllc
I checked the reuploaded ones and I think you may have used the 'Normalize' effect in Audacity which is different to the 'Loudness Normalization' effect (https://manual.audacityteam.org/man/loudness_normalization.html). 'Loudness Normalization' is only available in more recent versions. When i switched audacity to French, it called it this: