Hi Rich,
I saved and uploaded a 10 minute part of the file -- there is another
screenshot of the waveform for this 10 minute section, and there is a link
at the very bottom of the web page
(http://www.geojeff.org/tmp_rockefeller.html) to the mp3 file. I also made
a 1 minute version. Listening to it again, the birds are doing a little
complaining about the frogs -- the "strange" call near the beginning is a
snowy egret I think.
Can you tell from the audio or from the waveform if it is clipped? (I
suppose that "clipped" just means that the recording level is set too high
and it "maxes" out, and thus doesn't record the full range of amplitude.)
Doesn't look like it to me, since the max peaks don't seem to line up.
Thanks,
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: richpeet
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2002 9:40 PM
To:
Subject: [Nature Recordists] Re: Vocalization intensity and speciesdensity
Check your frogs again Jeff. I can not listen to the graph you sent
but it looks like it may be cliped. Those frogs are loud and that is
very easy to do. I blew an hour on the 15th having done that same
thing.
Here is part of the second attempt version. both small downloads.
http://home.attbi.com/~richpeet/frog.jpg
http://home.attbi.com/~richpeet/frog.mp3
Good luck.
--- In geojeff <> wrote:
> I made a couple of hour-long recordings last week at Rockefeller
Wildlife
> Refuge on the Louisiana coast. I am a rookie at this, and am
curious about
> the start-stop pattern to the calling (bullfrogs, cricket, and
leopard
> frogs, at least, I think). When I look at the waveform it
looks "periodic"
> at least in parts of the 75 min recording (See
> http://www.geojeff.org/tmp_rockefeller.html). There certainly
aren't any
> long quiet intervals. Cricket frogs are the common callers at each
> "chorus."
>
> This recording was made at an egret/heron rookery near the
headquarters of
> the refuge.
>
> Jeff Pittman
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Walter Knapp
> Sent: Friday, April 19, 2002 11:59 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] Vocalization intensity and
speciesdensity
>
>
> Doug Von Gausig wrote:
> >
> > At 08:04 PM 4/18/2002, Mark Oberle wrote:
> > >Although it might make sense, I could only find a few papers
arguing
> that
> > >at low densities, such as at the edge of their range, species
might
> tend
> > >to vocalize less than at higher population densities, with a
lot of
> singing
> > >rivals nearby. Does anyone have any similar or counter
impressions?
> >
> > My observation is that most Passerines are stimulated to sing
by other
> > birds singing near them. Not just by their own species,
either . In fact
> > they are often stimulated to sing by almost any other sound -
which is
> why
> > so many good recordings are made just as airplanes fly by!
>
> Frogs do the same thing, sing like mad while the truck or car
passes,
> then clam up when it gets quiet again. Very annoying sometimes. I
swear
> I hear little tiny laughter in the quiet periods, that they are
doing it
> on purpose because I'm trying to record....
>
> They have scouts that watch and when you press the record they
signal
> quick quiet to everybody. Then when you hit stop they signal all
clear....
>
> Then there is the other game. Sit quiet as the recorder runs on
and on.
> Then time it so that just before you give up and stop they call.
> Briefly. It's a experiment they are conducting to see just how
little
> they can call and still have that hairless ape keep trying to
record
> continuously....
>
> On a slightly more serious note, frogs are definitely stimulated
to call
> by others calling. So you get much more continuous calling once
the
> population reaches a certain density.
>
> Walt
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|
