You're right, the software works on the Intel architecture. It runs on a PC
emulator but it is slow and not suitable for real-time. The windows
version, named SeaWave, is available for free downloading from a linked
site. The complete version , which extends to 192kHz and includes tools for
very special applications, is marketed just to cover the costs of
development and testing; though it is available for free within an
agreement with my lab.
I think that if a software really matches the user needs, it is worth the
adoption of a different platform, even if for that software only. With
1,3K$ you can buy a notebook and a UA5 suitable for the task.
At 18.37 04/04/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>Gianni Pavan wrote:
> > I very often use real-time spectrograms for research in the field (acoustic
> > surveys for marine mammals) but also for education and training. The
> > software we developed allows to "view" sounds in real-time with great
> > accuracy while recording to disk or while playing back a wav file.
> > Visit the page http://www.unipv.it/cibra/softw.html for knowing more about
> > that software and for downloading a free version you could use for
> > verifying if it matches your needs.
>If the person is using Canary, they are using a Mac. Your software is
>windows. We can run windows software on our macs using VirtualPC, but
>the emulation makes it slower. I don't know how well it would work. Even
>the soundcard is a emulator as windows does not know mac sound I/O.
>You did not seem to have a windows version, only a older DOS version for
>downloading. Is there a windows version other than the commercial
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Centro Interdisciplinare di Bioacustica e Ricerche Ambientali
Universita' degli Studi di Pavia
Via Taramelli 24, 27100 PAVIA, ITALIA
Tel/Fax +39-0382-525234 Laboratori
Tel/Fax +39-0382-526208 Segreteria
>From Tue Mar 8 18:22:12 2005
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 16:33:04 -0500
From: Walter Knapp <>
Subject: Re: Sonograms?/Using "Canary" and other software?
Daniel Edelstein wrote:
> I am using Cornell Lab of Ornithology's "Canary"
> software to create sonograms.
> My questions:
> Does anyone use Canary (or any other sonogram-creating
> software) with adult groups while presenting programs?
I would not use Canary for this. Canary produces some fairly dull
looking grayscale sonograms, I consider it pretty outdated. For keeping
interest you might want to work with programs that do color sonograms.
You may be doing it to teach something, but you have to hold the
Though it's very expensive, doing demo's with SparkXL's sonogram
capability would have a lot more impact. It's sonograms are in color,
the scaling is very adjustable on the fly, and most important for demo's
it will do sonograms in realtime while the call is playing. It can be
paused to look at what you got, of course. Nothing shows the power of
sonograms quite like listening to a track while watching the sonogram
scroll by. Note the program is not built with demo's in mind, it's not
one click sort of thing.
A good program for generating static sonograms beforehand to show thats
cheap is soundhack. The sonograms on my frog site are generated with it.
It's not a good one for demo's as setting up a sono is awkward with it.
Note that Sounhack has a facility of making a quicktime movie of the
sound. I tried it years ago, but my computer was not up to it. I should
check that out again.
> What are 1 to 3 group educational activities you do with the adults (using
> Canary or other software)?
> Suggest any sources that I use to learn more so I can
> create more activities while using "Canary" or other
> sonogram-creating software?
I would likely be showing off frogcalls. Either individual calls, or
groups. One demo of the power of sonograms would be to take a site that
has a half dozen or more species. Often you can't hear the softer calls,
but they show well on sonograms. Another use would be to show the
syncronous nature of many frogcall sessions. Frogs often precisely
overlap with other calling frogs. Sonograms are the way to see this.
I can't right off think of a general text on the uses of sonograms. They
are used all over, so you can get ideas for different things here and
there. Nothing substitutes for lots of personal experience recording and
doing sonograms, however. Few people will be able to pick up dissecting
a call with a sonogram at first glance. Just showing them how this is
done would probably make a good demo.