wrote:
>
> Walt wrote:
>
> <<Part of how they get such long record times is exotic sampling rates.
> The one I saw mentioned was 2 khz, presumably for very low frequencies
> only. That seems to be their standard sample rate for their marine
> versions, which are primarily being used on whales. They would have to
> up the rate quite a bit for birds.>>
>
> Their recorders are capable of at least 44/48k sample rates. The bird
> project I saw them used on recorded at 22.05k mono. For them it's a
> software-selectable option; for elephant infrasonic communications and wh=
ale
> songs they don't need the high end, and going with a lower sample rate ga=
ins
> them umpteen more recording hours.
That is actually what is unique about their system. Field settable
sampling customized to the job. Yet another use for microprocessors. I
expect we will see more of this sort of thing. Next step will be to have
a regular field recorder that can do this without having to tie it into
a laptop to program it.
> <<I'm not so sure they are recording to .wav files, I could not find that
> confirmed. How variable a sample rate will .wav files handle?>>
>
> The WAV standard is capable of sample rates well above current standards.
> You just have to have the encoders to generate the data. The cornell
> recorders can do 48 IIRC.
I was more asking if it was settable only in steps or in any arbitrary
rate, I was being too lazy to look it up. Doug has more or less
confirmed by testing it that it will store most any practical rate.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|